Trump is a weak man. His Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, is even weaker still. And now we have this man, who can barely stand in the space of the Department of State and make any sense at all. They know little, but do a lot of damage.
My hope is that Trump reaches what Is the floor of his support, reportedly about 32 percent, within the month, and those staying silent can be silent no more. Then mass demonstrations will have great meaning. But as Peter Wehner said in The Atlantic, “It didn’t have to be this way. There are 77,302,580 co-authors of this catastrophe. They have left a stain on this Republic.”
He sounds an awful lot like the rest of THEM. They are loyalists NOT qualified to do anything but boast about what they know which is little. Unless it's with regards to religion I guess. But apparently they never heard of the separation of Church and State that our ancestors insisted upon. Church should never have any place in government and government should never has any place in Church. They are two separate entities.
"There is no president but the president, and we are his diplomatic agents under the supreme law of the land.”" Bears a resemblence to "There is no God but Allah, and Muhammed is his prophet". Except Trump is the Allah figure. The Trumpist idolatry is stunning
Just sending a fan note to say how valuable Will’s reporting has been (and I was a big fan even before he joined the Bulwark). Today is the perfect example of something going on in the background of the administration that is crucially important to understand, but not the major headlines and would be buried in the back pages of other media outlets.
From my point of view as a recently retired 30-year foreign service veteran, the only context in which the appointment of this individual as director general (DG) makes sense is as a deliberate insult to the diplomatic profession, a calculated expression of disdain for what diplomats do, the skills they possess, the objectives they pursue, and the ideals they represent. The DG position is designed by law (foreign service act of 1986) to be occupied by a seasoned Senior Foreign Service officer typically with ambassador-level experience in multiple tours.
Generally speaking, diplomats serve to explain Washington to the world--an essentially impossible task in the current environment--and the world to Washington--a matter of perfect indifference to the Trump regime. The imposition of across the board tariffs on treaty partners and rivals alike, without prior communication much less consultation or coordination, is one of countless early examples of this fact. It would appear the Trump regime believes the United States has the power to go it alone, to pursue its own interests in haphazard, scattershot, nonsensical fashion while systematically trampling the interests of just about every other country in the world in so doing. To speak bluntly, this is not how things work and is unlikely to end well--least of all for us, whatever bombastic nonsense is invoked to justify it. As such, this DG appointment appears to fit perfectly into the Trump regime's broader plan to destroy all professionalism in government (including diplomacy) and to wreck our relations with the rest of the world. To what end?
Importantly, like military officers and all other career federal government professionals, the only oath foreign service personnel swear is to the constitution, to defend it against all enemies foreign and DOMESTIC (emphasis mine). To me, American diplomats now face a classic democratic dilemma (which I have witnessed before in other countries but never imagined we might face at home). Namely, does their oath to the constitution require that they resist the regime's trampling of the constitution? Or, as the current entry level director general suggests, do they owe their loyalty to a democratically elected tyrant bent on destroying our democracy along with its constitutional foundations? From outside, the choice seems clear. Which explains the regime's war against career professionals across the board.
It seems odd to me that the analogy we now have between positions of leadership and showmanship eludes the analysis of most commentary which I have encountered. Why is it not demonstrated the we have spokes-people of the people-infosys by which most people have non- speaking positions for communication i n the voice of the people? and therefore are stunned by its sudden appearance; Its a new language.
This administration is infested with grifter and Bible thumpers
Maga is a collection of low IQ mediocre or incompetent clowns
Trump is a weak man. His Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, is even weaker still. And now we have this man, who can barely stand in the space of the Department of State and make any sense at all. They know little, but do a lot of damage.
My hope is that Trump reaches what Is the floor of his support, reportedly about 32 percent, within the month, and those staying silent can be silent no more. Then mass demonstrations will have great meaning. But as Peter Wehner said in The Atlantic, “It didn’t have to be this way. There are 77,302,580 co-authors of this catastrophe. They have left a stain on this Republic.”
He sounds an awful lot like the rest of THEM. They are loyalists NOT qualified to do anything but boast about what they know which is little. Unless it's with regards to religion I guess. But apparently they never heard of the separation of Church and State that our ancestors insisted upon. Church should never have any place in government and government should never has any place in Church. They are two separate entities.
"There is no president but the president, and we are his diplomatic agents under the supreme law of the land.”" Bears a resemblence to "There is no God but Allah, and Muhammed is his prophet". Except Trump is the Allah figure. The Trumpist idolatry is stunning
“There is no president but the president” Is it just a stupid sentence or reference to “There is no God but God”
Those who worship Trump do not truly worship God. A man cannot serve two masters.
I got stuck at the section with there is no president but our president. Right out of Christian scriptures. The whole thing was the felon is God.
Wow. Crazy speech.
Gibberish but like goes to like.
A f…ing clown show
clowns with flamethrowers.
Just sending a fan note to say how valuable Will’s reporting has been (and I was a big fan even before he joined the Bulwark). Today is the perfect example of something going on in the background of the administration that is crucially important to understand, but not the major headlines and would be buried in the back pages of other media outlets.
From my point of view as a recently retired 30-year foreign service veteran, the only context in which the appointment of this individual as director general (DG) makes sense is as a deliberate insult to the diplomatic profession, a calculated expression of disdain for what diplomats do, the skills they possess, the objectives they pursue, and the ideals they represent. The DG position is designed by law (foreign service act of 1986) to be occupied by a seasoned Senior Foreign Service officer typically with ambassador-level experience in multiple tours.
Generally speaking, diplomats serve to explain Washington to the world--an essentially impossible task in the current environment--and the world to Washington--a matter of perfect indifference to the Trump regime. The imposition of across the board tariffs on treaty partners and rivals alike, without prior communication much less consultation or coordination, is one of countless early examples of this fact. It would appear the Trump regime believes the United States has the power to go it alone, to pursue its own interests in haphazard, scattershot, nonsensical fashion while systematically trampling the interests of just about every other country in the world in so doing. To speak bluntly, this is not how things work and is unlikely to end well--least of all for us, whatever bombastic nonsense is invoked to justify it. As such, this DG appointment appears to fit perfectly into the Trump regime's broader plan to destroy all professionalism in government (including diplomacy) and to wreck our relations with the rest of the world. To what end?
Importantly, like military officers and all other career federal government professionals, the only oath foreign service personnel swear is to the constitution, to defend it against all enemies foreign and DOMESTIC (emphasis mine). To me, American diplomats now face a classic democratic dilemma (which I have witnessed before in other countries but never imagined we might face at home). Namely, does their oath to the constitution require that they resist the regime's trampling of the constitution? Or, as the current entry level director general suggests, do they owe their loyalty to a democratically elected tyrant bent on destroying our democracy along with its constitutional foundations? From outside, the choice seems clear. Which explains the regime's war against career professionals across the board.
Thanks for your perspective--and service.
please post the speech transcript so so we can see for ourselves what you are commenting on, in all its profundity or lack thereof thanks
At its core MAGA has the ethos of the 13 year old boys in Lord of the Flies
It seems odd to me that the analogy we now have between positions of leadership and showmanship eludes the analysis of most commentary which I have encountered. Why is it not demonstrated the we have spokes-people of the people-infosys by which most people have non- speaking positions for communication i n the voice of the people? and therefore are stunned by its sudden appearance; Its a new language.
Truly some weird shit.