Monday, January 30, 2017

CNN — Donald Trump fired on Monday US Acting Attorney General Sally Yates for refusing to enforce the president's immigration order.


"You're fired."

CNN
Donald Trump fired on Monday US Acting Attorney General Sally Yates for refusing to enforce the president's immigration order.
Tyler Durden

56 comments:

Penguin pop said...

Just what I thought he'd do. Expect way more firings in the future. The real life Apprentice is on.

I want to see Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell get their shit kicked in more in the future.

Ryan Harris said...

Goldman Sachs, Starbucks, Google, tens of thousands of college professors around the world, thousands of Hollywood stars... all the elite classes came out swinging because this is only nominally about terrorism in these 7 countries and the couple hundred travelers affected.

At some level the elite understand this is a bigger issue and they themselves are being stripped of the right to dictate policy.


Tom Hickey said...

The New York Times Editorial Board (the honchos) is out with an editorial entitled, "President Bannon?"

You betcha their heads are exploding, especially with polling indicating that the majority of likely voters have Trump's back on this.

Their world is crumbling.

Bob said...

The Attorney General was correct to oppose the immigration order.

Malmo's Ghost said...

Trump had no choice but to fire her. She was an Obama holdover until Sessions gets confirmed and a shameless political hack. She gave a political speech on why she didn't support Trump's action yet failed to offer even one legal argument to defend her actions. Of course fake news, MSNBS in particular, are liking this to Nixon's "Saturday Night Massacre", which is simply laughable. It'll be red meat for the numbskulls nevertheless.

These Depts are infested with hyper partisan folks who will certainly work to undermine Trump at every move. Once the cabinet is confirmed these insubordinate actors will be summarily fired or moved to inconsequential positions.

John said...

At the same time, however, it shows an administration that's already a shambles. The State Department's *management* resigned en masse, with no attempt to find a way of keeping some of the most important civil servants. The Attorney General could have been replaced earlier, knowing in advance what her legal ruling would be, leaving Trump looking like a man who doesn't care for the rule of law, which is true. Rick Perry being made secretary of state for energy, the department he couldn't remember that he'd close down if he ever became prez. A time-lapse video that proves Trump's lying about his inauguration. Alternative facts. Initiating an unnecessary argument with Mexico. Telling the Chinese that they're enemy number one and then signing it off with that phone call with Taiwan. Declaring his desire to break up the EU. Declaring that the Iran treaty needs to be renegotiated, which has gone down very badly with the other negotiators (UK, Russia, China, France, Germany and the EU) who thought it was an excellent deal. Enraging his Middle East allies by declaring his commitment to move the US embassy to Jerusalem and his strong backing for recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. And what's this week two? Shamfuckingbolic and we've got four years of this to look forward to. The "You're Fired" headlines tomorrow will try to cover up what is a staggeringly inept start to a presidency. I don't think Trump has it in him to unfuck himself, but if he doesn't this administration is going to lurch from crisis to crisis, and simply because his cabinet is full of numbskulls, maniacs and shysters.

Again, like all the bumbling that has preceded it, this is being spun as brilliant strategy to keep everybody off balance. We'll soon be hearing that Trump is Sun Tzu and von Clausewitz all rolled into one. The master tactician, with advisors who could kill legions of Sith Lords before breakfast and the business of the day. What else could it be, other that the work of unimaginable genius? Earlier in the week, I too thought there might be something to Trump flooding the field with so much mayhem that nobody would be able to keep their eyes on the real prize, and that his was some clever hypnotic sleight of hand. Well, that isn't it. All that's happening is that there are so many fuck ups that nobody can keep count! No president wants the whole planet thinking "chaos" and "clowns", but everybody is starting to think something's up. And apparently it's all a necessary part of his mater plan to piss off the PC brigade? That's what all this is about? This is all a gigantic masquerade to fool the world into thinking that this administration is one of bumbling idiots. It is what it is, and that's a shambles, and more than that, behind the scenes Trump is tearing someone, perhaps not Bannon, a giant new asshole.

Penguin pop said...

John, well said. It's Occam's Razor. I like going with simpler explanations for these things. Trump is just a fucking idiot and a disinterested dullard who got lucky some of the time throwing darts blindfolded at the wall. He has no idea what the hell he's really doing IMO and leaving a lot of that work to Bannon and others.

It's reckless behavior, just like with what I'd imagined happened with some of his other businesses in the past, not listening to accountants and others in the know about the financial health of those companies who tried to warn him about it. There really is not much. If there's a method to any of this madness or what any of this is supposed to accomplish, I'd like to know, and I don't understand even some people on the left who talk about the badness of open borders becoming apologists for this guy and every single fuck-up he does.

Penguin pop said...

I also guess it's the same illusion a lot of people were under when Trump University was still a thing. See some guy on TV tell people they're fired and play some savvy businessman on a show makes it easier for a PR clown like this guy to convince others that he's some kind of brilliant genius. That's largely what this guy has always been. Hot air, bullshit and promotion and a ton of people fell for it hook, line and sinker. If it weren't for that small loan and all the media attention he's gotten, he wouldn't be that far from being another Peter Schiff or Robert Kiyosaki or a washed-up Tony Robbins without any of the success or notoriety.

Detroit Dan said...

Well said John and Penguin.

The big question is, will Trump be able to get the GOP in Congress in line with his program? At what point does the dam break and Trump becomes more toxic than the alternative threat of being primaried? He's playing with fire and the financial markets are likely to melt down. That should do it.

John said...

Penguin, exactly right. As I said, I don't think Trump has it in him to do things differently, but if he wants to save his presidency from permanent disarray and incompetence, he has to overhaul his cabinet and more important his closest advisers. Trump should be smart enough to know his limitations, rather than boast about his genius in every area, and find the people to give him good advice, not just be yes men. As to be expected, the highest officials in the EU have reacted extremely badly to Trump and his close advisers comments on breaking up the EU. So the union that the US has moulded and been its most important ally for seventy years has been declared an enemy that needs to be broken up, and the EU has replied in kind to Trump's administration. Not bad work for someone who's been in the job for ten days, fewer when you take out the weekend balls. And now we hear of Trump's meeting of minds with Wahhabi jihadism over Iran. No doubt this will be spun as "Art of the Deal" thinking in using "leverage" to get Iran to accept Trump's terms. Apparently, everything is going according to plan!

Obama groupies could never bring themselves to accept that Obomba was a Wall Street stooge, a corporate crony, a war criminal and no different to those who preceded him. Similarly, Trumptards will never accept that he's making unforced mistake after unforced mistake, and this at a time when the going is easy. Imagine when times get hard! The libruls hate him no matter what, and they should be ignored, but that doesn't mean everyone else should shy away from the truth. I've never cared what librul opinion is, other than to gauge how depraved the world has become, but the left, whose analysis has always been near perfect, because they have a plague on both your houses attitude, are finding Trump's presidency by turns clownish, bungling and dangerous, and this is still January!

Malmo's Ghost said...

LOL. With each liberal tear and feigned outrage I feel safer.:)

Imagine the horror when the only dam breaking is the one erected by the Establishment and their useful idiots on the left and neocon right.

And to those who claim the multi-billionaire, Trump, is an idiot, clown and dullard as a businessman, I suggest getting out in the sun for some free vitamin D. It's clears up the effects of propaganda and it's attendant brainwashing effects.

John said...

Dan, yes, quite right, I don't buy the GOP's meekness in the face of Trump. They're not going to put up with any more of this clownish bungling. Why start a war with words with the EU? I mean, what the fuck? What possible gain is there in that? None, it's just stream of bilious consciousness let loose on your unsuspecting allies, just like when he asks whether it is wrong to be sexually attracted to your own daughter than to your wife. The GOP top brass will be visiting him soon to tell him to get his act together. Trump's put himself in a position of weakness for no reason whatever. Now the GOP, who detest everything about him, will feel empowered to make demands if things carry on like this.

Malmo's Ghost said...

John,

Stop with the DNC/Soros talking points. You're reciting the same erroneous junk that was demonstrably false throughout the campaign. I get it that you don't like Trump. But your hate blinds you to the political reality of Trump, same as the rest of his haters. You're smarter than that.

Penguin pop said...

Dan, I'd be amazed if somehow he did convince the GOP to go along with his agenda lock stock and barrel for the next 4 years, but one also can't deny the sheer incompetence and bungling that's been seen so far.

"And to those who claim the multi-billionaire, Trump, is an idiot, clown and dullard as a businessman, I suggest getting out in the sun for some free vitamin D. It's clears up the effects of propaganda and it's attendant brainwashing effects."

I'll think about it after that upcoming war with Iran happens and we get that trade war with China over with. The signs are pretty evident to me neocons or not. I want to be more optimistic, and I've expressed those feelings earlier on this blog, but with each passing day, I'm not so sure and I'll remain cynical and skeptical.

I only bring up his past as a means to put what we're seeing now into perspective. I sure wasn't that keen on Mr. Community Organizer Obama's bullshit either. I'm pretty much done with so many of these politicians and I see Trump the same way. I'll call him out and the idiots that have bought into the whole "Russia!" thing too.

John said...

Malmo, if my daddy left me a staggering fortune, I'd be rich too, and according to independent business sources if he had indexed the fortune daddy left him he'd be three times richer, if he is worth what he claims he's worth, although even then forensic tax accountants deduce that he may not even be a billionaire. It takes talent to lose money like he has. Those are the facts. The myth is of the amazing businessman. Ask Buffett, the greatest business genius in history, what he thinks of Trump.

I've never seriously claimed Trump was an idiot. I've never seriously claimed that Dubya was an idiot, although he did any number of stupid things. You won't see me claiming that McCain, Ryan and Boehner are idiots: they're ideologically wedded to an extreme view of the world. They're not up to the job. Trump is making mistakes for zero gain. Perhaps can explain to me why Trump has declared that the EU needs to be dismantled, eliciting unusual anger from the EU, then I'd love to hear it. If you can explain why Trump has decided to that the future is Wahhabi jihadism, I'd like to hear that too. Trump's just a man, not a religious icon to be defended with life and limb.

Detroit Dan said...

Trump's a courageous truth teller!

Obama was not born in U.S.
Climate change is not real.
Mexico will pay for the wall.

This guy is the real deal. Much more serious than Obama and Clinton.

There is no truth. All is post modern. Long live Trump.

Malmo's Ghost said...

John,

Trump's dad did not leave him anywhere close to a "staggering fortune". Where do you get your information? Might want to read Trump's autobiography, which he wrote in 1987 to get up to speed.

Penguin pop said...

"Obama was not born in U.S."

Oh yeah, how could we forget about that. I never forgot about that stunt he pulled years ago.

Or appointing such establishment appointments like ideologue Betsy DeVos.

All more reason for me to remain skeptical. The current Establishment is leaking and have its dams break, only to be replaced by a new one. Yes, everything old is new again.

John said...

Malmo: "Stop with the DNC/Soros talking points."

Never read either, I'm sorry to tell you. I'm more of a CounterPunch and trade unionist literature kind of guy. It's not about blind hate, Malmo. I was saying very similar things about Obama from the beginning. Facts are facts. If Trump does good, I'll say so. When on occasion Obummer did something sensible I said so, but that didn't deflect from the fact that he was an appalling president, so I can't be lumped in with all the other libruls, and neither can anybody else here. MNE doesn't attract dumb liberals; it's a home for free thinkers who've freed themselves from any number of Matrixes, economic, financial, political, etc.

As I've said before, Trump could be a good president because he's resilient and a tough son of a bitch. But he needs cooler heads around him and much better advisers. I do not believe that Trump is looking back at his first ten days in office, and saying, wow, hit that one out of the park! He knows that he's made some unnecessary mistakes. He has to stop, otherwise the GOP are going to get their teeth into him and then he's finished. I'd happily give him advice! He does have some half decent ideas, unlike Obummer who had none. I do think that if Trump surrounds himself with good advisers he can do a lot of good, because some of his instincts are in fact good. What he has to do is temper the bad side with a lot more of the good. That's it. I don't know why that should be controversial, or considered abusive. Four years is a long time, and there is plenty of time to make unbelievably bad decisions. So far his decisions have simply been the kind you see on slapstick comedies.

Malmo's Ghost said...

John,

Reasonable people can opine that the EU should be dismantled. That sentiment isn't native to Trump.

As for what Trump thinks about Wahhabi jihadism at the moment doesn't much concern me, but I hope it's a negative view at any rate. I do think, however, that Trump is no Muslim hater. In fact he likely has much respect for Muslims ( the non radical Muslims) even if their culture isn't his cup of tea.

As for trump's experience relative to Obama's? No contest. Trump has forgot more than Obama ever knew in the rigors of day to day combat in the workplace. Obama's claim to fame was community organizer, US Senator because of Jack Ryan scandal and Editor of a law review in which he wrote exactly zero academic pieces. Obama was and is the ultimate lightweight, and yet I voted for him twice cause his competition was worse. :)

Penguin pop said...

Yes I think most of us could agree that Obama was clueless at negotiation and was weak on many issues. That was something I've been saying. He governed like a New Democrat and often lacked balls and real direction to push many of the things he claimed he wanted to do when he ran as this super progressive candidate back in 08 and ultimately let a lot of people down with what he did. I have also made it clear HRC would have been no blessing of her own and would have come with her own unique problems and degree of bullshit too.

I love reading MNE and other blogs like it and publications like The Intercept, Jacobin and CounterPunch because I feel I'm getting much more into the meat of these issues compared to what pathetic CNN or MSNBC could muster for the record.

John said...

Malmo: "Might want to read Trump's autobiography, which he wrote in 1987 to get up to speed."

He didn't write it. Tony Schwartz wrote it. And I don't believe what people say, just like I don't believe anything Soros or Icahn say. I look at what they do, and what can be proven from independent sources. I had almost zero interest in what Obama used to say. I looked at what he did, and that was nearly all bad. I judge Trump with the same standard as I judge everybody in business or in politics. If Soros, by some miracle, became president, I'd be talking about his insider trading, his malign influence and his meddling in the domestic and foreign affairs of many countries around the world. Libruls would then be condemning me for putting down a brilliant "philosopher" and one of the greatest businessmen in history. Perhaps you'll appreciate the quandary that people like me, Penguin, Dan, Greg, etc find ourselves in! We tell it how we see it, without fear or favour. Perhaps you remember that during the election campaign I was far more damning in my criticisms of Killary than I was of Trump, and I did so more often. Did that make me a dumb Trumptard who was blind to the brilliant humanitarian work and legal brilliance of Killary? Apparently so, because I got those criticisms plenty of times.

Tom Hickey said...

Reasonable people can opine that the EU should be dismantled.

I am not aware of any MMT economist that doesn't think the sooner the better. It's turning into a failed wanna-be super-state made up of a lot of failed and failing states.

Enough with that ill-conceived experiment.

Malmo's Ghost said...

John,

He wrote it in 1987, long before his presidential run. You can quibble with it if you like and say you don't believe anything that was written. But then you're being intentionally obtuse, which doesn't exactly help your argument on his veracity one way or the other.

Penguin pop said...

"I am not aware of any MMT economist that doesn't think the sooner the better. It's turning into a failed wanna-be super-state made up of a lot of failed and failing states.

Enough with that ill-conceived experiment."

Speaking of the EU, I never understood why Yanis Varoufakis became all for it now. What happened to him? I feel it was because he sold out.

Malmo's Ghost said...

Varoufakis genuinely believes absent the EU there will be another brown shirt movement exacting unspeakable violence in the region. He's not a sellout.

lastgreek said...

It takes talent to lose money like he has. Those are the facts. The myth is of the amazing businessman. Ask Buffett, the greatest business genius in history, what he thinks of Trump.

Oh c'mon, John! Who are you kidding? Like you never lost billions running casinos into the ground? "Yeah, right." Sheeesh!

Trump was told by experts who knew the casino business that it's not the time or place to invest in casinos. But no, he wouldn't listen. You see, he was a man of action. So he opened one casino after another ... and they all flopped :(

John said...

Malmo: "US Senator because of Jack Ryan scandal and Editor of a law review in which he wrote exactly zero academic pieces."

i didn't know that! I'll add that to my list to use against Onummer groupies. You see, I'm an equal opportunities hater. Everybody gets the same treatment. Actually, that isn't true. I do have a special hatred for libruls.

"...and yet I voted for him twice cause his competition was worse."

You see, Malmo, someone without standards would use that against you! I never would, understanding that with the options before you your vote was not necessarily one in favour of Obama but was one against the other candidate. It also has nothing to do with the fact we're internet friends and that I respect a lot of your analysis: who else called it for Trump almost a year before the vote? I have political arguments with my closest friends all the time, and we can agree to disagree, but I don't think that it's reasonable on your part to take criticisms of Trump are diabolical. After all, you're the one who said on another thread that there will be many opportunities for legitimate criticism. I do not believe that Trump right now is thinking he's had a good week, and that he may be thinking to himself that he needs to dial a lot of this stuff down. You can't govern without allies, whether in congress, the country at large or the wider world. That's the first law of governing. He's the president, not a nominee.

His comments about the EU are in that category of unforced errors. Many people believe what he said - so do I - but no high government official would dare say it, for the very good reason that nothing positive comes out of it. All that's happened is that the US's closest allies and friends now view Trump as a total menace, if not an enemy who needs to be brought down a peg or two. Is that a good outcome? No, it isn't. That's an objective political standard, not a I-Hate-The-Man-With-The-Orange-Hair standard. As for the Wahhabi jihadism that's coming out of Saudi Arabia and is being funded to the tune of billions of dollars a year, Trump has said nothing. NOTHING! Trump has, however, declared Iran - Iran, the country that has done more than any in helping the US in combating the jihadis - the major problem in the region! If that's meant to be a negotiation strategy to defang the Saudis worldwide terrorist financing, then it leaves everyone baffled.

We're going to see problems galore in the next four years, just as we see problems galore for any president. I more than anyone want to keep this as friendly as possible, so the Trump supporters shouldn't see criticisms of Trump as anything more than the same standard that was applied to Obummer and the rapist Bubba.

John said...

Malmo: "You can quibble with it if you like and say you don't believe anything that was written. "

I didn't say that! I said he never wrote it, and that Tony Schwartz did. I didn't say that I didn't believe anything that was written. I basically said that actions speak louder than words. People can say what they like, but it doesn't make it true. I made a business example and a political example. In the former I said Soros and Icahn can SAY what they like, but it doesn't make it true. I look at the facts. Similarly, in the latter category Reagan, Dubya, Bubba and Killary can SAY what they want, but actions and facts on the ground speak louder than words. Why is that controversial?

Trump, to his minor credit, has been saying a lot of the same things since the eighties: trade and budget deficits are going to kill the US, every president and administration that he's seen have been "losers" and "stupid". Trump did, however, have lots of very good things to say about Bill Clinton, defending him from "losers" like Paula Jones who claimed he was a rapist and the impeachment of a "great president".

John said...

Malmo: "Varoufakis genuinely believes absent the EU there will be another brown shirt movement exacting unspeakable violence in the region. He's not a sellout."

That is true. If you listen to Varoufakis, his position is extremely well argued. I don't accept it because the counter arguments are more plausible, but you can't say he's a sellout and an economic illiterate, which is what he's been accused of. What Varoufakis is inexplicably missing, given that he was subject to Germany's machinations for the time he was finance minister, is that Germany is not going to budge, and so it is better to get out as soon as possible.

John said...

Tom: "I am not aware of any MMT economist that doesn't think the sooner the better. It's turning into a failed wanna-be super-state made up of a lot of failed and failing states."

But you'd grant that there's a difference between an economist saying that and the President of the United States, who has to guarantee what are called national and strategic interests? After all, the United States has nurtured and helped mould the EU from inception. It is its most important ally and a key trading and strategic partner. Is it in US interests to say what he said? Can somebody, anybody explain how it benefits US interests to make enemies of the highest officials in the EU, who are now openly hostile to this new administration and have the capacity to make life more difficult for Trump in particular and the US more broadly? The US always counts on EU support in many negotiating positions, but has now, for zero gain, spat in their faces! It's weird, just plain weird. This wasn't a zero sum calculation. It ended up being a negative sum mistake. Trump, get it together, pal, or the GOP will take full control of you before long (and don't think the GOP isn't rubbing its hands in glee). And supposing the EU was dismantled, would it in fact be in US interests?

Andrew said...

What possible real benefit could it be to the US to turn people with visas away at the airport after months or years of vetting? Whether people approve or disapprove of the policy (most don't really understand what changed) isn't particularly relevant in my mind. We elect and hire people to consider policies and issues for us because there's no way we have the time or expertise to do much of this ourselves.

You may think elites are self-serving of condescending. In many ways they are, but that doesn't mean that all issues should be decided through on online poll. Much of the problem with the rule of the elites is that they forget about people not like them and that they tend to overcomplicate. It's VERY easy for ANYONE serving in a government position to become quickly isolated and forget how their actions impact the country or to overestimate their importance. This is made even more difficult by the easy accumulation of money and power which is fostered by inequality and the influence of rich individuals and corporations.

John said...

Detroit Dan: "Obama was not born in U.S."

Trump knew from the off that it was a malignant lie, and deliberately ratcheted up a lot of unpleasant hostility towards the then president. It shows very poor taste and judgement, and that is going to bite him in the ass every day. Anytime he or his minions complain about unpleasant and unfair abuse, they'll respond with Obama not being American.

Let's see how he takes the abuse that he so happily threw around for years. Given his record to date, he won't. Trumpistas and the rightwing media complain about the smear about golden showers or the FACT that he has said very many sexual innuendoes about his daughter. They can sure dish it out, but they can't take it. Four years is a damn long time to take this kind of abuse, and it's going to be a bitch. The right will soon be turning into librul pussies who cry about every time someone says boo!

John said...

Andrew,

Spot on. Too many people are making this about being for or against Trump. Good government is good government, and as you say, government is not about ratcheting up tension and then perversely demurring that it's what the people want!

Bob said...

Europe joining Russia in an alliance would be good for the world. It would limit US meddling in the entire region. Too bad the current leadership is incompetent.

Tom Hickey said...

John, I don't know exactly what is running through DJT's mind when he makes the statements he does. Some of it may be personal, as many people seem to think it all is, but IMHO Trump generally knows where he is going and how is going to get there.

It generally boils down to leverage and manipulation with a lot of intimidation thrown in.

He has a worldview that the ROW is still trying to figure out. Socially and politically, Steve Bannon might be the best guide to it.

Economically, I would say that Trump is used to relying on an understanding of business and finance or real assets. I don't see him as a "where's your model?" type. That means he has an overall strategic plan and is flexible regarding tactics depending on changing conditions. I would say his guiding principle economically is getting the best deal for America that is also the best deal for him, too. So he is into other countries ponying up after years of what he views as unfair advantage. That means he will be putting the screws on tights to improve the US position.

Tom Hickey said...

What possible real benefit could it be to the US to turn people with visas away at the airport after months or years of vetting?

This is all stuff that DJT ran on and won. He is delivering on campaign promises to the people that elected him.

They are ecstatic so far. They are his power base.

This is completely rational from the political POV and DJT just registered for reelection in 2020.

Andrew said...

Tom,

I think you give Trump much more credit for coherence and a plan than I do. I just can't see what his plan might be. It never makes any sense to me. I don't even know what he sees as success. What would count as "getting the best deal for America"? I just have no idea what that means.

You must remember that this is a guy who has a gold toilet. I have a hard time thinking that such a person is truly rational.

Tom Hickey said...

I think you give Trump much more credit for coherence and a plan than I do. I just can't see what his plan might be. It never makes any sense to me. I don't even know what he sees as success. What would count as "getting the best deal for America"? I just have no idea what that means.

Steve Bannon didn't come out of nowhere to be by Trump's side. He is the real vice-president. Trump hasn't said much about his understanding of policy or the world. So the next best thing is to look at Bannon's POV that he has made public.

Getting a better deal for America means other countries picking g up what DJT sees as their "fair" share.

"The swamp" for DJT and his backers constitutes those who are taking rather than contributing their share. His cohort views this a corruption, or at least manipulation, therefore, "the swamp."

John said...

Tom: "Economically, I would say that Trump is used to relying on an understanding of business and finance or real assets."

Trump said somewhere that one of the reasons he dislikes the Iran deal, and wants to replace it, not repeal it like the neocons and GOP wish to, is that there is no guarantee that in unfreezing Iranian assets Iran will spend the money buying American! It's difficult to tell because there's so much incoherence from day to day, but there may be some truth in that a lot of Trump's world thinking is simply along these lines. There is no geopolitical or defence strategy, no grand foreign policy, none of the usual government thinking, but a simple mercantilist approach to the world. As I said, it's near impossible to figure out what's going in in that noggin of his because he says so many contradictory things.

lastgreek said...

Tom,

I think you give Trump much more credit for coherence ...


Well, what can one expect from a tv reality host from Queens?

Let's see ...

Trump picked Giuliani for his cybersecurity expertise —

But many in the cybersecurity industry aren't familiar with Giuliani's work in that area, or his company, Giuliani Partners — leading some to conclude he may not have the expertise the Trump team believes he does.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/donald-trump-us-cybersecurity-expert-rudy-giuliani-partners-1.3934296

Security experts say Trump cybersecurity advisor Rudy Giuliani's website is incredibly insecure

But some experts are finding his consultancy site, giulianisecurity.com, lacking on the security front. It runs a version of Joomla! (a content management system) that is four years out of date and plagued with security flaws, according to Phobos group founder Dan Tetler.

"Giuliani is running a version of PHP that was released in 2013, and a version of Joomla that was released around 2012," Threat Intelligence director Ty Miller told The Register.


http://uk.businessinsider.com/trump-cybersecurity-advisor-rudy-giuliani-website-insecure-security-experts-2017-1

:(




Tom Hickey said...

Trump's political appointment are all gifts to different cohorts of those that supported him early. It's part of the deal, just like honoring major campaign promises right away. DJT is already running for 2020.

US politics is highly politicized. Doh.

lastgreek said...

Right, Tom -- but how is this "getting a better deal for Americans," as you reminded us above, when your picks are either ill-suited for the job (another example,Perry for Energy. Perry, for atoms sake!), or snakes like Mnuchin who has a record of screwing grandmothers for the sake of a few bucks?

John said...

Truth be told, Mnuchin is an unusually awful choice. Like unusually unusual even for Washington! The man's got a reputation that makes Hank Paulson look good. There is an argument that these are poachers turned gamekeepers, and that you need shysters to stop other shysters, if you buy into this old excuse of appointing criminals in all but name. In a few months, or perhaps even a year, people will be looking back and asking themselves how they didn't see that scandal coming! It happens again and again: someone with a dodgy record is appointed and then is mired in controversy in no time. The President or Prime Minister's judgement is called into question. Prez or PM stands by their man until he has to cut them loose after weeks or months of debilitating revelations.

I've never understood dishing out jobs to unsuitable people for "loyalty". You're the fucking President of the fucking United fucking States! Fucking act like it and get your shit together, otherwise you're gonna get covered in it because the unsuitable flake/shyster you put in a position of authority is a waste of space at best or a fraud at worst. Remember how Michael Brown, the expert on Arabian horses, was given the job at FEMA? You can just see Trump saying: "Perrier, you're doing a heck of a job" or "Munchie, you're doing a heck of a job" before having to fire them.

Tom Hickey said...

Mnuchin is an unusually awful choice

Mnuchin had the good fortune to pick the winner early in the game. He committed publicly to Trump when almost no one in the financial community was willing to do so. So he gets the golden ring.

Malmo's Ghost said...

Paul Craig Roberts wrote an informative piece on how difficult it is for Trump to pick a cabinet. A cabinet cannot function without so called Beltway insiders comprising much of it. The tightrope act is in picking anti-Establishment persons, who are Establishment themselves, but also malcontents within that framework. What Trump did pick wise might or might not be perfect in achieving his goals, but you can't have it both ways in bitching about what he's done the first ten days of his presidency and then complain he picked folks who will work against him simply because they're insiders. Hint: Trump is leading and the cabinet is following, insiders or not.

John said...

Malmo, what I'm saying is that there is no reason to pick these particular individuals. Would Trump's world collapse if Rick Perry wasn't in the cabinet? That there was no better candidate? Purlease. Mnuchin could have been given a minor job and told that he'd be promoted in a few months, in the safe knowledge that he is incapable of keeping his nose clean and could be dispensed with. I'm talking about picking serious, hardworking, no-nonsense real conservatives who are loyal to the president's policies and won't be caught in a scandal months from now. As for that son in law of his, that's scandal written all over it.

As for anti-Establishment people who know how things work, there are loads of anti-Washington conservatives or apolitical tough sons of bitches who have been insiders, know how the cesspool operates and are now working elsewhere. I don't buy the line that there aren't enough of them out there. There are many decent conservatives or decent apolitical types who want to change the way things are and who have seen something of the light like Paul Craig Roberts or Bruce Bartlett, and are full-square behind Trump. PCR may be too old or may not wish to serve, but he or others could give you a phone book of anti-Washington, anti-PC, anti-crony conservatives who'd jump at the chance of serving in a Trump administration. It'd be a dream come true. Mike Lofgren knows plenty of competent people who would gladly serve. Andrew Bacevich's expertise could be called upon to help form a national security team and a DoD team that takes national security seriously.

There are plenty of smart but hard anti-Washington bastards, who know how to get things done, and they'd happily break every bone in a PC-librul, lobbyist and/or corrupt politico's body before going to bed, and they won't get caught with their fingers in the cookie jar. Presidents get the scandal they deserve. They are your proverbial God-Emperor, at least when it comes to handing out jobs, and they should remember that when they walk past those corridors of portraits of previous presidents and consider how poor choices and unforced errors scuppered their presidencies. Jus sayin, baby.

John said...

lastgreek, Giuliani is making a name for himself as something of a wacko and something of a shady business character. There's another scandal waiting to erupt. Trump should play safe and find some tough Bannon-types who'll concentrate on the job. I say Bannon-types, as in no-nonsense and willing to break bones if the need arises, not Bannon with his "Leninism" and questionable outbursts. We see it time and time again in government: good government by uncorruptable tough bastards is underestimated, unwanted or considered boring by the insiders. The people don't want sexy government. It's only the insiders who want macho grandstanding and high-risk government because they think there's something radical and sexy about it. Trump should copy Putin in this and only appoint tough bastards!

John said...

Before anyone gets the wrong idea of my appeal for tough bastards, I should say that if Ralph Nader, a personal favourite of mine, had ever become president, he'd have had to find tough bastards too. Nothing will get done if you have pussies like Robert Reich, which is exactly why Bubba appointed him and it's good red meat or tofu, as the case may be, to the gullible librul-PC brigade out there who'll happily watch a Democratic president drone a Yemeni family but raise a furore if a Republican does it.

Andrew said...

John,

It's not about being a tough bastard. It's really not. It's about being empowered to make decisions. This doesn't mean being a bastard or even being tough. It's about being able to say "no." It's not that hard and in the end, people will respect you for it. Most of my experience in government tells me that people are more concerned about things that don't matter. Do you have any idea how much time is spent in meetings without agendas where people just talk and talk and talk. Or how much time senior people spend worrying about office remodels? Or worrying about who's going to get INVITED to a meeting. The amount of time spent INTERNALLY on awful policy stuff makes any business regulation look like small potatoes.

Most government workers are relatively smart and dedicated to their jobs. But there is little incentive to do the work more effectively and many policies in place to deter. Not that this doesn't happen in private business. It does. But the policy bureaucracy is worse in govt. and much of that is the fault of Congress and reactionary legislation protecting the taxpayer or whomever. It's really not about political correctness.

Tom Hickey said...

Trump is addressing several issues and potential problems simultaneously in his appointments — throwing red meat to the base, rewarding early supporters, and bringing in enough establishment insiders to make his administration work rather than only appointing the most qualified and suitable people for the job.

The transition team was clearly aware of this at the time and the choices reflect this.

These are strictly political appointments, as they usually are. The difference is that usually party regulars are appointed as a matter of seniority. Trump obviously could not do that and retain credibility with his base or even survive politically.

This is a dicey game he is playing.

John said...

Tom: "This is a dicey game he is playing."

I suppose that's all can be said with absolute certainty at this point. If he pulls it off, then he's played a blinder. If he fails, it'll be an unholy mess, and the GOP will tear him apart and feed off his liver.

That's why he has to get his shit together NOW! I may not particularly care for a lot of his politics and behaviour, but I can be objective in my criticisms and where I think he's making unnecessary mistakes. I mean, he must know the GOP are praying he'll fail and then enforce changes on him that'll make him no different to any previous GOPher prez.

Bob said...

John, are you turning into an optimist? Stop that!

Tom Hickey said...

All I can go on is that Trump was smart enough to get himself elected against huge odds right up to the very end. He did it in large part by choices in hiring and firing advisers as conditions changed.

I assume he will do the same as president.

Once on the inside, DJT will have information that no one else has and a lot of power to leverage it. He has also surrounded himself with chosen advisers and no one has any doubt that he will continue to hire and fire as he deems necessary.

DJT has set himself a huge task against enormous odds against succeeding based on the power centers that are opposing him and trying their utmost to delegitimize and overthrow him.

It's going to be an awesome reality show.

After the show's over and he becomes an ex-president, he'll likely cash in big by writing his memoirs.

John said...

Bob, as the man said, pessimism of the intellect, but optimism of the will.

Tom, those are the only memoirs I will genuinely look forward to reading. They're going to be the most fascinating political writing in decades. Forget Cicero and Marcus Aurelius, Trump's is going to be the go-to book!

Dave said...

Tom, he got elected during a period of imperial decline. This is also Trumps business MO, he looks for political and economic decline and instability, comes in and makes huge promises, and convinces everyone that the Golden Age is back. At the end of it all, everyone is left holding the bag except for teflon Donnie. Also, he lost the popular vote by a lot. And many people held their nose and voted for him because they hated Hillary, understandably so.