If Pat Buchanan had Trump's charisma he probably would've won, but point taken. Amazing to think that's where we've moved in such a short time, although Buchanan definitely had people in media willing to legitimize him (burn in hell John McLaughlin).

One of Nixon's enduring legacies was that he infected us with a group of completely amoral hacks like Buchanan, Ben Stein, Saffire, John McLaughlin, etc. who AIDSed up the political discourse for a generation.

LOL you don't read...


https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...56989542457344

Anti-semite, homophobe, lost causer, fascist Buchanan not really amoral.

We did get Win Ben Stein's Money* out of it which in turn launched Jimmy Kimmel's career, so it's been a solid trade, imo.

I always forget that Kimmel was on that. I always think of the Man Show when I think of early Kimmel.

Remember when Sean Spicer quit the WH and then was seen palling around with Colbert and other media celebs like he was one of the gang? Same thing basically happened to Nixon's cronies. You'd think working for the sleaziest administration in history would make you a pariah, but instead the media treated them like they were elder statesmen or whatever and gave the whole pack of slimeballs jobs on TV and op-ed pages. At least G Gordon Libby had the decency to go full pants-on-head crazy and disappeared into the AM radio derposphere.

Just wait till the post-Trump era when Huckabeast has her own CNN show.

But can we coin new words for him?:

[ ] dysmoral
[ ] malmoral

Buchanan was a raving Neo-Confederate clown who should have spent his career leading Klan rallies, but instead we put him on frickin' PBS with John McLaughlin as though the two were grown-up adult people with sensible things to say and not racist dingbats. You can see how this sort of thing led to Fox News.

With the official shift of diplomatic headquarters to Jerusalem, it raises the question:

How many of the companies who will be contracted for construction, security, transportation, etc. will have ties to Trump's cronies and minions?

Roughly 115% give or take 15%.

Roger Stone, too.

I was wondering "Whatever happened to scumnag G. Gordon Liddy?", so I wikipedia'd him, and

JFC Al, thanks for helping complete slimeballs get into the media business!

Mark my words, every one of Trump's cronies will be able to get a cushy job in the political media as a guest analyst or a show host.

Of course they will. The ownership and upper management of these media companies stand to gain every bit as much as every other rich **** who supports Trump. They just have to do so subtly (like the NYT's "maybe he's not so bad" op-eds) rather than overtly (like Breitbart).

The mainstream US media is in no way, shape, or form liberal, but simply repeating that lie often enough over the years has driven it into the consciousness of seemingly every American (including some liberals who really ought to know better).

So PBS featuring Marketplace^tm brought to you by Koch Industries is amoral. Yep.

(NPR/PBS tomato/tomahto)

Depends if it actually happens on Trump's watch. They bought the site for the new London embassy down in Battersea in 2008, didn't break ground till 2013 and they're still finishing the building.

FYP. And yes, that is exactly the advice he received from his attorneys. These people have no morals or shame.

I wondered about this too, the embassy may not even be close to finished by 2020. It's a government facility so it may take a year or two before they even decide on a few locations that are acceptable. They then have to purchase the land and start construction. There's a decent chance the incoming Dem president just cancels the whole thing and tells the government to sell the land if it has even been purchased by that point.

Unless the construction is dictated from the top as a priority, pretty tiny chance anything happens on it in the next 3 years

Devin Nunes spoke to Erik Prince about House Intel testimony despite recusal from the Russia probe

They probably won't have broken ground by 2020. I think they did acquire and clear a site many years ago -- the Jerusalem Embassy Act was, after all, passed in October 1995 as an effort to pre-empt the Oslo Accords and prevent a two-state solution by recognising the occupying power's dominion over all Jerusalem -- but I'm not sure if they still have that site or still consider it suitable.

Even with a suitable site in hand, they've got to commission an architect and then approve the design and award the various contracts for construction and fitting out and maintenance. Look at the London project to see how long that takes, and the US mission in Israel is a fairly major one and security-sensitive beyond the norm. And Israel is notoriously corrupt, with one president and one prime minister jailed for graft in recent times, so legal oversight of the contract awards may not be an entirely smooth and untroubled business.

this guy needs to go to jail immediately

Fredo needs to go fishing.

Must be fun to be the party with no morals or shame.

Sigh it doesn't matter to their supporters and the Dems already (probably) have everyone who is going to base their vote off it, so I don't really see the point in continuing to beat a dead horse?