Mueller not being an idiot I am sure that there are provisions made for dumping everything he has into the laps of the various interested state AGs. Will the Republicans in Congress do anything? Fuck no. But they will feel the impact come November, when they lose both houses of Congress and a mess of state houses should Mueller get canned.
*Would *they even be legally enforceable? I can’t see how they could be, but IANAL.
You are assuming that the Trumpists will not see Mueller as being “out to get” Trump and then rallying to Trump, yet again, in droves to keep his fellow twerps in office. They will not blame Trump for Mueller getting canned; they will say that it’s Mueller’s own fault because he did not support Trump.
For once, my optimistic self overpowers my cynical self and disagrees with you. I think that a large part of the reason why Trumpists support this idiot and the Republican party is because they feel they have the luxury of doing so. At some point, when people struggle to keep the lights on and to put food on the table, they do actually begin asking deeper questions, like, ‘Wait a minute, who’s been controlling the government the last few years? And why ain’t American great agin’ like he promised?’ In one sense, people are no different than puppies: when they shit on the carpet, they sometimes just need to have their noses rubbed in it.
It’s just unfortunate that it requires sniffing turds to learn the lesson to begin with.
Indeed.
Going beyond Trump, the bigger concern is apathy and the calibration of political norms. I don’t expect Trumpists to change, but it would be nice if the rest of us were a little more alarmed. Sadly, though, I suspect that most people will shrug this off as just another day in a new era, but otherwise, no biggie. We’ve got college basketball and another episode of The Bachelor to watch.
What if they actually enjoy that lovely, lovely turd smell?
Anyway, point of order. If Mueller is to be fired, doesn’t that have to be done by a senior Justice department official (per the “Saturday Night Massacre” of Watergate days), not the President? Can’t be Sessions; he’s recused himself. Isn’t it likely that Trump would have to go through the circus of firing several layers of JD staff before he found one willing to do his bidding?
Procedurally, yes, but in practice there’s no real difference between firing someone yourself and firing the people with the authority to do it, down the ladder until you reach somebody willing, somebody who puts loyalty to party or person above loyalty to country, someone like Robert Bork. Trump would have to start already below the level on the org chart that Nixon finished at, though - Sessions can’t unrecuse, Rosenstein won’t do it, the #3 person already quit.
That’s already the case. The New York AG has been working side by side with him.
This isn’t the passive voice, because there is an actor, if a vague one. And anyway, the verb is active.
I’m talking about sentences like, “Mistakes were made,” where there is no one named as responsible for the action in the sentence. Or “Objections to the use of passive voice were expressed.” It’s a way of not naming names. These days, on these hot political topics we MUST name names. (Yeah, you can name the doer with a “by ThelmaLou” at the end of the sentence, but the impact is diminished.)
I used to work with a woman who would come back from staff meetings and say things like, “The rules were changed. A decision was made to <blahblahblah>. Mary Lou was fired.” You’d have to grill her to find out WHO changed the rules, WHO made the decision, and WHO fired Mary Lou. She didn’t want to name names.
We gotta name names. No one gets to hide in the passive voice and then peek out in a wimpy “by–” prepositional phrase. No siree!
Yabbut in the dependent clause there is an example of passive voice.
“One sees that…”: active voice, subject “one”
“…the passive voice has been spoken”: passive voice, subject “passive voice”
True.
However, as you point out, it’s in the dependent clause, so not exactly my point, which is how the p.v. can be used to hide the person responsible for the action.
“It has been seen that the passive voice was used”
Moving on… :rolleyes:
Shouldn’t that be “it has been heard that the passive voice was used”?
The passive voice was used, and it was noted.
Eyes were rolled.
A notation was made on someone’s permanent record.
Practically speaking I don’t think this matters to Trump.
If Mueller’s backup plan is handing the files to a state Attorney General, then in theory Trump could be charged with state crimes. This will make almost no political difference; Trumpists and the GOP will simply claim the AG is a liberal and it’s all lies.
So can they march over and arrest Trump? It simply will not happen. New York cops aren’t going to fight past the Secret Service; the matter will be taken to court, and Trump, for all his stupidity and weakness, knows how to snarl stuff in the courts. His legal beagles will bark “executive privilege” that Presidents should not be subject to legal hassles while in office, an argument that isn’t a new one, and he’ll seek to tie it up for years, and he’ll succeed. They can pick off any number of his supplicants, but Trump doesn’t care. He’s a sociopath. If they arrest Don Jr., Trump will tweet “Third rate son arrested today. Barely knew this “Don Junior” character - loser will not be missed! I prefer children who don’t get arrested! #sad” and he’ll carry on.
It all comes down to the impeachment process. In the past, two things prevented Presidents from this sort of awful behavior;
- Shame and respect for the norms of a constitutional republic, and
- Impeachment.
Neither applies anymore. Trump doesn’t care about the United States, or about Americans. Its constitutional norms and the health of its democracy do not matter to him. Its citizens don’t matter to him. What the hell does he care?
As to impeachment, that obviously ain’t happening. The Republicans are hopelessly compromised and have for the most part totally surrendered even the appearance of caring. They will not impeach, not for any reason whatsoever. If there was slam-bang evidence that Donald Trump personally gave Russia the highest state secrets, nuclear codes and stuff, with photographs and eyewitnesses and tapes, Devin Nunes and his ilk would not impeach. They’d say it was all a liberal plot, even though they would know it was true. Trumpists would completely believe this. I am being totally literal here.
After the midterms the House impeachment process could happen, but there will still be (quite a lot) more than 33 Republicans in the Senate. They will all vote to acquit Trump no matter what, and he will remain President.
Let’s run these posts through the pacifier.
What if the lovely, lovely turd smell was actually enjoyed?
The case already is. He has been worked with side by side.
Names must be named. Passive voices and wimpy “by–” prepositional phrases must not be used to hide people. No siree!
I demand equal time discussing the subjunctive mood!
We would, if it were equally interesting!