2020 Presidential Election

[bundabergdevil]

Update on the yard and bumper stick signs: Andrew Yang wins. I was in a parking garage and came across the sing below, which stopped me dead in my tracks so I could laugh and take a picture.

Math.jpg

[CrazyNotCrazie]

“Nearly two-thirds of Americans believe President Donald Trump's encouragement of a foreign leader to investigate Trump's political rival and his family is a serious problem, but only 17% said they were surprised by the president's actions, according to a new ABC News/Ipsos poll.”

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/17-a..._twitter_abcnp


This is bad news for the trump team. Very bad.

Yes and no. I still think that a very large percentage of those who think this is a serious problem and/or were not surprised are still planning to vote for Trump in 2020 regardless of the Democrat candidate - even this does not rise to the “shoot someone on 5th Avenue” level for many people, and I’m not really sure what does, particularly if it is reported by the mainstream media and refuted by Trump.

[LasVegas]

Yes and no. I still think that a very large percentage of those who think this is a serious problem and/or were not surprised are still planning to vote for Trump in 2020 regardless of the Democrat candidate - even this does not rise to the “shoot someone on 5th Avenue” level for many people, and I’m not really sure what does, particularly if it is reported by the mainstream media and refuted by Trump.

But the needle doesn’t have to move that much for Trump to lose. We are talking about 70k votes total in 3 states.That’s it. Not saying you didn’t but a large number of people just never grasped how narrow that victory was.

[luvdahops]

Don't fall prey to fake news stories. The only reason that form was revised was because the first hand knowledge part of the form was there by mistake. There is nothing in the whistleblower statute about first-hand knowledge.



The debate in the right-wing media about whether the whistleblower complaint was proper (or the motives of the complainant) is really silly in my mind. If you heard from a friend of a friend that Person X killed a man and buried the body in his back yard... and then the police found the body... they are not going to dismiss your statement as being worthless because you did not see the murder and burial of the body yourself. The whistleblower complaint has now led us to actual evidence. Trying to defame the complaint seems ridiculous at this point.

-Jason "I still say that without someone coming forward with evidence that the military aid was withheld as a carrot to make Ukraine look into Biden, this will never be a serious threat to Trump " Evans

Except that trying to defame the complaint fits perfectly into the Deep State conspiracy narrative that is all but dogma within most right-wing media circles these days.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

Wow, they just reported on 60 Minutes that the whistleblower is now under federal protection because s/he fears for his/her life.

And apparently there is also reference to a possible $50K bounty for the whistleblower’s identity. Some day this could be the script for quite a movie.

[CameronBlue]

Except that trying to defame the complaint fits perfectly into the Deep State conspiracy narrative that is all but dogma within most right-wing media circles these days.

And Trump is now the chief spokesman for this narrative by demanding that he be able to confront his accuser, per CNN this evening.

[PackMan97]

And apparently there is also reference to a possible $50K bounty for the whistleblower’s identity. Some day this could be the script for quite a movie.

If someone wants to name me the whistleblower, I'll split the money with you!

[LasVegas]

FWIW, trump just tweeted a quote from Pastor Jeffress (no clue who that is) that said there will be a civil war if he is removed from office. Yikes. All of this stuff just adds up continuously. I honestly believe that if he didn’t tweet he would increase his chances of re-election dramatically.

[YmoBeThere]

If someone wants to name me the whistleblower, I'll split the money with you!

Watch 3 Days of the Comdor and then let us know if it is worth it.

[dudog84]

Oh my! Naive? At least I have had the advantage (real or imagined) of working both on Capitol Hill and in the Executive Branch. I would say that rather than filing a written report where their names would inevitably be revealed, they would use private verbal means of communication. No way would someone at their levels file a whistleblower report. Are you seriously insisting they might have?

In a word, yes. What's so wrong with the word "might"? It's the absolutists in the world that cause all the trouble. Congratulations on your experience, and you can pull rank on me, but it doesn't mean that you're right. And if your experience in D.C. is over 5 years ago, it appears a lot has changed.

I documented a timeline and threw out an idea. What's the big deal?

[sagegrouse]

In a word, yes. What's so wrong with the word "might"? It's the absolutists in the world that cause all the trouble. Congratulations on your experience, and you can pull rank on me, but it doesn't mean that you're right. And if your experience in D.C. is over 5 years ago, it appears a lot has changed.

I documented a timeline and threw out an idea. What's the big deal?

OK, the time line is interesting; have it your way. But it's funny to think that the Director of National Intelligence (or the Principal Deputy) would file a whistleblower complaint to the IG for national intelligence, who reports to him. Or, for a company CEO to file a complaint against his or her own company with its auditing firm. Or, for the president of a university sending an accusation of wrong-doing to the NCAA against his own school. We are living in weird times, but...

BTW, Chuck Todd's nod on Friday's MTP program indicated to me that he knew who the whistleblower was. And if he knows, a lot of people probably know...

[dudog84]

Don't fall prey to fake news stories. The only reason that form was revised was because the first hand knowledge part of the form was there by mistake. There is nothing in the whistleblower statute about first-hand knowledge.

Thanks for this. It's really quite sad that we can't consider Fox News a real news source. I only looked at the first google page, saw a Fox News link and thought it might have some validity. Lesson learned.

[dudog84]

OK, the time line is interesting; have it your way. But it's funny to think that the Director of National Intelligence (or the Principal Deputy) would file a whistleblower complaint to the IG for national intelligence, who reports to him. Or, for a company CEO to file a complaint against his or her own company with its auditing firm. Or, for the president of a university sending an accusation of wrong-doing to the NCAA against his own school. We are living in weird times, but...

BTW, Chuck Todd's nod on Friday's MTP program indicated to me that he knew who the whistleblower was. And if he knows, a lot of people probably know...

Serious question: In your experience, has the head of a federal department (or whatever the DNI is) ever told their chief deputy that they had to resign with him? Even weirder that Gordon was a lifer and Coats was a politician who was appointed to the post (I'm not saying he wasn't qualified, just saying their paths were different). Gordon was giving up a career. That really struck me at the time and I guess it's still residing in a corner of my brain. Seems very odd.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

Thanks for this. It's really quite sad that we can't consider Fox News a real news source. I only looked at the first google page, saw a Fox News link and thought it might have some validity. Lesson learned.

I think most understand that Fox News is heavily biased toward the conservative end of the reporting spectrum. But many may not realize how poorly rated they are for “factual reporting.” I share this link again through which any news source can be searched to determine not just its degree of bias but also its commitment to factual reporting.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/

And to be clear, this is not my attempt to discredit Fox News. While I have filtered them out from my google news feed, I have also filtered out sources like Vox, Slate and others that are equally as biased toward the left (although both named sources actually score very well with respect to factual reporting).

[OldPhiKap]

I think most understand that Fox News is heavily biased toward the conservative end of the reporting spectrum. But many may not realize how poorly rated they are for “factual reporting.”

While this is true, I think Chris Wallace is perhaps the hardest and fairest interview in Washington. His refusal to just let Stephen Miller dodge this weekend, for example, was masterful. Worth a view if you missed it.

I don’t otherwise watch Fox, but I don’t miss Wallace’s show on Sunday.

[alteran]

While this is true, I think Chris Wallace is perhaps the hardest and fairest interview in Washington. His refusal to just let Stephen Miller dodge this weekend, for example, was masterful. Worth a view if you missed it.

I don’t otherwise watch Fox, but I don’t miss Wallace’s show on Sunday.

I know we’re afield of the central topic somewhat, but currently there appears to be a pretty significant conflict at Fox News between the commentary folks (Hannity, Carlson, etc) and the news division (Wallace, Smith, et al). Historically, Shep Smith has been willing to tangle from time to time with the commentary folks when he felt they were getting away from the facts, but Chris Wallace getting in this game is unusual.

Speculation is that this comes down to the Murdoch’s wanting some daylight between Fox and 45.

Bringing this home, a Fox News that isn’t 100% behind Trump mitigates a major weapon in the Trump arsenal both in messaging and the election.

[sagegrouse]

Serious question: In your experience, has the head of a federal department (or whatever the DNI is) ever told their chief deputy that they had to resign with him? Even weirder that Gordon was a lifer and Coats was a politician who was appointed to the post (I'm not saying he wasn't qualified, just saying their paths were different). Gordon was giving up a career. That really struck me at the time and I guess it's still residing in a corner of my brain. Seems very odd.

Coats hired Sue Gordon and presumably was her sponsor within the Administration. Coats seemed like a good guy and, after discussing his departure, asked about the likely fate of Sue and perhaps others. I thought Coats did her a favor by telling her that the White House was not going to retain her. Otherwise, she would probably have heard from Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney or one of his henchmen. Sue has worked for the government for 39 years and is in her early 60's. The Principal Deputy to the DNI was the capstone of her career. Prior to the ODNI appointment, she was the well regarded Director of the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency. NGA is the single source across the Intelligence Community for geospatial information, mostly satellite-based. She's had a great career. She will do very well on corporate statutory and advisory boards from here on.

[OldPhiKap]

I know we’re afield of the central topic somewhat, but currently there appears to be a pretty significant conflict at Fox News between the commentary folks (Hannity, Carlson, etc) and the news division (Wallace, Smith, et al). Historically, Shep Smith has been willing to tangle from time to time with the commentary folks when he felt they were getting away from the facts, but Chris Wallace getting in this game is unusual.

Speculation is that this comes down to the Murdoch’s wanting some daylight between Fox and 45.

Bringing this home, a Fox News that isn’t 100% behind Trump mitigates a major weapon in the Trump arsenal both in messaging and the election.

Yup, and there is some talk that Paul Ryan's recent affiliation with Fox (he is now a board member of Fox Corp.) has brought his view that they need to start thinking of a post-Trump world. Business Insider had an interesting article on this a few days ago but cannot link at present.

Related note, Trump spent a bunch of time Saturday tweeting against Fox anchor/reporter Ed Henry because {gasp} Henry apparently called BS on a Trump supporter just going through discredited talking points. I did not see the clip, just the Twitter eruption from the President in response.

[OldPhiKap]

Coats hired Sue Gordon and presumably was her sponsor within the Administration. Coats seemed like a good guy and, after discussing his departure, asked about the likely fate of Sue and perhaps others. I thought Coats did her a favor by telling her that the White House was not going to retain her. Otherwise, she would probably have heard from Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney or one of his henchmen. Sue has worked for the government for 39 years and is in her early 60's. The Principal Deputy to the DNI was the capstone of her career. Prior to the ODNI appointment, she was the well regarded Director of the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency. NGA is the single source across the Intelligence Community for geospatial information, mostly satellite-based. She's had a great career. She will do very well on corporate statutory and advisory boards from here on.

Thanks for all of your input on this issue, Sage. Very informative.

[Nick]

Wow, they just reported on 60 Minutes that the whistleblower is now under federal protection because s/he fears for his/her life.

And apparently there is also reference to a possible $50K bounty for the whistleblower’s identity. Some day this could be the script for quite a movie.

60 minutes reported that, but it's not true:

An attorney for the whistleblower in the Trump-Ukraine scandal said Sunday that CBS’ “60 Minutes” had “completely misinterpreted” a document from his legal group, after the news outlet tweeted that the whistleblower was now under federal protection.

What's the source on the bounty claim? Hadn't heard that one.