US Politics: Maniac Manchin

[Week]

Heavy on the Mike Lindell drip -- I'm not sure that logic, facts, or honesty are going to have an impact on an implacable dunce.

[IheartIheartTesla]

Judging by the election results maybe we should conclude that most of the petition signatures were fraudulent. I think this makes infinitely more sense than [insert whatever Republicans are claiming about the California results]

[DMC]

Man California is slow counting votes.  Wake up this morning and they're still only at 70% of the expected vote.

Alexander Vindman - Ukranian-born NSC staffer that Trump viciously attacked for testifying against him during his first impeachment - has called on Mark Milley to resign due to the revelations reported in the new Woodward/Costa book (mentioned upthread):

Quote

"If this is true GEN Milley must resign. He usurped civilian authority, broke Chain of Command, and violated the sacrosanct principle of civilian control over the military," Vindman tweeted on Tuesday. "It’s an extremely dangerous precedent. You can’t simply walk away from that." [...]

Others have called for Milley's resignation, including Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), who suggested on Fox News Tuesday night the general was involved in "the essence of a military coup." 

 

[Ran]

The Woodward stuff is being wildly blown out of proportion, I suspect. The breathless reporting makes it sound like he went rogue and took it upon himself to make this call, but as Jennifer Grififin reports, there was a State Department rep on hand for all communications, plus a bunch of other staff, and full transcripts and so on that were properly shared out to the intelligence community and so on.

https://mobile.twitter.com/JenGriffinFNC/status/1437994304849514498

[DMC]

I don't think resignation, or any punitive action, is necessarily needed.  However, I do think Milley and all those involved have a responsibility to explain their actions publicly.

[Tywin et al.]

9 hours ago, Martell Spy said:

If you were a Seattle sports fan, you would assume this at all times. I mean I witnessed the Utah Jazz fans throwing fing ice at the noble and heroic Supersonics, huge bricks of the stuff. And the refs refused to see it.

Still better than having bags of piss thrown at you at Estadio Azteca. 

[Ormond]

11 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

And I am an irrational pessimist who assumes the worst case scenario must be the most likely one.

Well, at least you have good self-insight.

P.S. Sorry I didn't see DMC had said the same thing before I posted this. This thread just moves too quickly for me.

[Centrist Simon Steele]

10 hours ago, Martell Spy said:

A shocking result. I guess Senator Feinstein does not need to retire now?

 

Newsom beats California recall
The governor will remain in office after crushing a conservative-driven effort in the blue state.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/09/14/california-recall-election-newsom-511858

 

I think she likely should. These conversations have been happening behind the scenes since long before the recall. Now, it's about her health and ability to perform as opposed to the ocllective fear that Republicans can be put in a position to take advantage of this. Ever since the climate debacle with the kids, I've thought her understanding of the moment in which we live had passed her by. I don't care if she's a 100 or if she's 50--people like her can't be in power anymore when we are on a 9 to 10 year countdown.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

21 minutes ago, Centrist Simon Steele said:

I think she likely should. These conversations have been happening behind the scenes since long before the recall. Now, it's about her health and ability to perform as opposed to the ocllective fear that Republicans can be put in a position to take advantage of this. Ever since the climate debacle with the kids, I've thought her understanding of the moment in which we live had passed her by. I don't care if she's a 100 or if she's 50--people like her can't be in power anymore when we are on a 9 to 10 year countdown.

“People like her”?

[Centrist Simon Steele]

36 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

“People like her”?

Yeah, I'm not sure what you're getting at.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

5 minutes ago, Centrist Simon Steele said:

Yeah, I'm not sure what you're getting at.

What do you mean when you say “people like her”?  People from California, older people, women with brown hair?  

[Centrist Simon Steele]

Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

What do you mean when you say “people like her”?  People from California, older people, women with brown hair?  

I thought it was pretty clear from the context of my post that it doesn't matter if someone is 50 or 100 (so age is not the point), that it is people who are not seeing climate change as a problem that needs drastic action now. Where you came up with the rest of your list is beyond me.

[DMC]

Personally I'd rather see Feinstein serve out her term so the voters can choose her replacement rather than Gavin Newsom.  She is very unlikely to be the pivotal vote on, well, much of anything, and she has been removed from any leadership positions committee-wise, so it's hard to see what damage she's actually going to do.

[Larry of the Lawn]

Can't wait to see all the pragmatist rage against the Big-Pharma House Dems on the energy and commerce committed.  

[The Anti-Targ]

I guess congratulations to California for not recalling Newsom. Though I think it is not so much about Newsom staying, as it is about having avoided Larry Elder as the new Governor. That guy seems very... hmmmm... eccentric.

[Jaxom 1974]

13 hours ago, DMC said:

I don't think resignation, or any punitive action, is necessarily needed.  However, I do think Milley and all those involved have a responsibility to explain their actions publicly.

What is it you're looking for? Maybe I misunderstanding what happened, but I walked away with the impression he was inserting a brake of sorts within the chain of command to ensure another voice. Not sure it's correct, but it seems like he had legitimate reasons for wanting to do so...

[DMC]

1 minute ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

What is it you're looking for?

An explanation for what exactly he did following 1/6.  There is a lot of focus on the calls with his Chinese counterpart, but I'm more interested in the allegations he ordered military officials to ensure he was "part of the procedure" for launching nukes.  I understand the circumstances were extraordinary, but if this were a Democratic president and the Chair of the Joint Chiefs took such action, I strongly suspect most here would be concerned enough to require an explanation.  Because, of course, the CJCS is explicitly an advisory role and by law does not act in an operational capacity.  So, we'll see what he says when he testifies in a couple weeks.

[Jaxom 1974]

23 minutes ago, DMC said:

An explanation for what exactly he did following 1/6.  There is a lot of focus on the calls with his Chinese counterpart, but I'm more interested in the allegations he ordered military officials to ensure he was "part of the procedure" for launching nukes.  I understand the circumstances were extraordinary, but if this were a Democratic president and the Chair of the Joint Chiefs took such action, I strongly suspect most here would be concerned enough to require an explanation.  Because, of course, the CJCS is explicitly an advisory role and by law does not act in an operational capacity.  So, we'll see what he says when he testifies in a couple weeks.

That's fair. But I suspect that these extraordinary circumstances aren't the only things that went down with any number of individuals to keep Trump from throwing everything into even more chaos.

Let's hear what he has to say, yes. But then let's not overreact. 

[DMC]

5 minutes ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

Let's hear what he has to say, yes. But then let's not overreact.

I don't think asking for an explanation is overreacting.  While Trumpists and even non-Trumpist GOP members are going apeshit about it and will continue to, to not ask for an explanation would be underreacting.

[Ran]

2 hours ago, DMC said:

Because, of course, the CJCS is explicitly an advisory role and by law does not act in an operational capacity. 

This is true, but not quite so straightforward See the US Government Manual (PDF) put out by the Federal Registrar. 

Quote

The operational chain of command runs from the President to the Secretary of Defense, to the commanders of the combatant commands. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff functions within the chain of command by transmitting the orders of the President or the Secretary of Defense to the commanders of the combatant commands.

His duty of transmitting orders is not the same as operational control -- he's supposed to be just a mouthpiece -- but it means that he can choose not to transmit an order if he considers it illegal or otherwise in conflict with his oath of service.