Who Is the Biggest Republican That Will Give Trump the Bird



When the President's cabinet meets each member present takes a turn at lauding the President. There are a very few Republicans in Congress who criticize him. Readers know most prominent Republicans speak no ill of him. The news day after day is about his mistake after mistake. 

Following the news like our readers here do, I noticed something curious. After the bombing of Iran and the chest beating about how successful it was, Trump said Iran would call an end of its attacks in other countries and would turn over its uranium to the U. S. The political theater of such a development requires Trump or someone he assigns the task to to meet with Iranian officials, draw up such an agreement and come home to announce and brag about it. 

Suppose you were one of Trumps cabinet members and knew Iran would not agree to this nor could be forced to agree. In other words, you knew it was not in any way possible. There had to be two men Trump would logically turn to to meet with Iran and pull this off. One is the Secretary of State, Marco Rubio. The other Vice President JD Vance. Rubio is the most logical. It would be logical for Trump to have asked Rubio. 

I think Rubio turned Trump down and somehow escaped the noose of a political disaster. JD Vance must have been unable to escape or decided his political future was not so great and went through the motions of "negotiations." This effort predictably came up with nothing because there was no way for it to be successful. Now the President is not taking calls from Vance.

Vance has the potential to take the President down. The Republican Party needs to have Trump removed and Vance seems the one in a position to do it.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ancient God, Bel (Baal), the Main Character in an Ancient Play

Image
In a British museum is a preserved stone tablet from Babylon. It dates to about 2,000 BCE. Someone labored patiently to inscribe an entire passion play featuring the god Bel. I reiterate this is a stone tablet, not a recopied papyrus. The play begins with the god Bel arrested by soldiers and taken off the stage. He reappears at a trial in the Hall of Judgement. Bel is innocent but is sentenced to death. In the next scene Bel is accosted by a mob. He is despised and rejected. The actor playing Bel is then taken by guard to a hilltop in a sacred grove. Two criminals are taken with him. One of these is released. The the audience then leaves the theater and follows the actor Bel and his guards to the top of a hill where the death scene is enacted by hanging from a tree. The audience returns to the theater for the dramatic final scenes. The dead Bel is stripped and prepared for burial. On a theatrical hill to the side of the stage is a tomb where the body is placed. A stone is rolle...
Read more

Will We Ever Know How Accurate Current Bibles Are

Image
When I discuss the many times the Bible was copied and recopied by scribes over a couple of thousand years, the reply is often, "I have a book by this (or that) expert who says the Bible is 99% accurate to its original writers." The 99% claim appears in various places defending the Bible. There is one thing we know absolutely: There is no surviving original copy of the Bible. Even the oldest surviving material is a generation or two after the time some of the Bible was written. This means no one can claim he has, or ever will, compare the current Bible to the original Bible and find the two are 99% the same. We cannot claim either that it is not 99% accurate. For the sake of discussion, however, assume the current Bible is 99% accurate. That would mean the one word out of every 100 was inaccurate. It could still mean an important misreading of the original text. An example is the passage referring to punishment for a man who kills a fetus. In the oldest know materia...
Read more

What Was the "Argument" in the Election

Image
I hate to add my blog to the piles of blogs and pundits analyzing and pondering the meaning of the just passed election. But that's what I feel like doing today. I've always like Senator Ted Cruz's summary of politics. He once said, "First, win the argument. Then, win the election." I think there is a way of applying that to anti abortion Catholics and Protestants. The link talks of Catholics who now feel they have no political home because Republicans let them down with Trump but they remain against abortion rights. Taking Cruz's win-the-argument thesis, I'd call the past election about an argument between two groups. One group's argument was, "Trump's a jerk." The other's argument was, "Abortion is wrong." The group, "Trump's a jerk," won the argument and then the election.  While one can argue the election, or any election, it about more complex issues, I believe in the end elections hinge on very simple ar...
Read more