First off, look at the photo with this article. Looks like Senator Lindsey Graham just greeted the fleet and they gave him a facial. The article tells you:
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) pulled off a flip-flop in near-record time Wednesday, dismissing a litany of misconduct allegations against Pete Hegseth that just a day earlier he called “very disturbing.”
Hegseth, who President-elect Donald Trump says he intends to nominate for defense secretary, was accused of sexually assaulting a woman in a hotel room in 2017, which he denies.
Just a day earlier? Yes, we noted it this week. What's going on? Ewan Palmer (NEWSWEEK) reports:
A number of MAGA figures have criticized Republican South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham after he expressed concerns about allegations against Pete Hegseth, President-elect Donald Trump's pick for defense secretary.
A recent New Yorker report, citing a whistleblower report and interviews with former colleagues, said Hegseth had been forced out of leadership positions at
two veterans' organizations—Veterans for Freedom and Concerned Veterans
for America—amid accusations of mismanagement, alcohol abuse, and
sexual misconduct. Hegseth, a military veteran and former Fox News host, has also been accused of sexually assaulting a woman in Monterey, California, in 2017, an allegation he denied and for which he was never charged.
I hope that's all it was -- MAGA screaming.
But
let me raise the issue everyone seems afraid to. It applies to Hegseth
as well because he's on marriage number three and per his own mother's
e-mails he sleeps around while married.
Security risk.
Lindsey?
We all know he's in the closet. We've known it for years. It used to
be a joke but now it's just a sad, sad observation.
I
hope that Laura Loomer didn't do another Tweet about Lindsey's true
nature. Because if she did? He needs to be kicked out of the Senate.
If he's open to blackmail, he can't serve in the Senate. I suppose he
could possibly save his seat by immediately coming out but I don't see
that happening. So if he is gay, as we all suspect, then he's also a
security risk since he's hiding in the closet and since he'll do
anything to keep hiding.
Pete Hegseth? Again, too many marriages too many affairs that should raise the issue of whether or not he's a security risk.
"Iraq snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):
Thursday, December 5, 2024. Trump and his embarrassing nominees --
including the little bitty boy who needs to hide behind his Mommy.
Satan's
set to return to the White House January 20th. He was supposed to be
prepared and this was going to be a drama free transition -- or at least
as drama free as mincing Queen Bone Spurs could manage. Project 2025
in hand, he was going to show something different. He even agreed to
tone down the ridiculous orange foundation that had been his beauty
trade mark for a decade or so. But just as the last weeks have
demonstrated how old and tired Trump actually is, lessening his orange
make up has also emphasized his age, revealing facial skin akin to Mae
West in SEXTETTE. He's older -- 78 -- he's fatter -- 319 pounds -- and
he's dumber.
And it's really showing.
Under bipartisan pressure to clear the way for more extensive vetting of his administration picks, President elect-Donald Trump's
transition team announced Tuesday they entered into an agreement with
the Department of Justice for background checks and security clearances.
Of
course he is. The people he says he's going to nominate when he's
president are disasters. He won't be sworn in for his term for over
another month and the whole world is laughing at him -- un gran idiota
in Mexico. This is a way for him to try to spread the blame around.
Already,
alleged sex trafficker and rapist Matt Gaetz has been forced to flee.
Gong are his dreams of being Attorney General of the United States.
There are others in peril but let's zoom in on one that is especially
illustrative of just how deeply stupid Donald Trump is. Zachary Folk (THE DAILY BEAST) reported yesterday:
Sheriff
Chad Chronister, President-elect Donald Trump’s pick to lead the Drug
Enforcement Administration, withdrew himself from consideration to lead
the federal agency on Tuesday night, instead adopting to remain sheriff of
Hillsborough County, Florida.
In a statement post on social media on Tuesday, Chronister thanked the president-elect and called the nomination an “honor of a lifetime,” but said he was withdrawing his name from consideration.
Huh? What did this nut job do? His job. Ariano Baio (INDEPENDENT) explains, "President-elect Donald Trump admitted that he un-nominated Chad Chronister from Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) administrator after learning the sheriff publicly scolded and arrested a Florida pastor for hosting large church services during the pandemic." He probably would have been Trump's best nominee.
Notice
just how stupid Trump is: He should have known this. His cult wasn't
going to go for it. But no one did their damn work -- not fat ass, not
any of them. So after his name is released to the press, they learn
what they should have known already.
That
goes to how stupid Trump is and it goes to how much danger he's already
putting the country in. Nut job Tulsi Gabbard? Trashy Garbage, as Trina's
dubbed her for years, has held hands and played footsie with Bashar
al-Assad. She's a psycho nut job who can't be trusted with national
intelligence -- let alone to become the Director of National
Intelligence. While she was part of the DNC, it is rumored she leaked
the Hillary Clinton data to WIKILEAKS. She didn't get her way in 2016
-- she backed Bernie -- so she leaked data to WIKILEAKS. That's that
accusation.
She's going to
be in charge of national intelligence. Someone credibly accused of
leaking information because she didn't get her way?
Wow.
Imagine how many times, as DNI, she might not get her way -- hint, that
would be several times on a daily basis. If we're 'lucky,' she'll only
be leaking to the press and only about employees and officials who've
upset her. If we're not so lucky, she's on the phone with Putin or RT
(they love her at RT) leaking national intelligence. Trump doesn't take
her advice on bombing Generic Muslim Country That He Hates and she's on
the phone to Russia to tell them a strike's about to take place.
How do you trust anyone like that -- anyone credible charged with leaking private documents?
The
thing with crazy crooked Tulsi is, she wouldn't be confirmed if a vote
were taken today. The cult is just too much. Republican senators are
hearing from their constituents that 'this is a Christian nation and
she's a member of a cult.' They can't fight for Tulsi. They'd also
look like hypocrites because of them have used that very argument ('this
is a Christian nation') as an argument for their vile and racist
policies. I guess the party that's killing DEI (Diversity Equity and
Inclusion) now has a patch of road they can't cross when it comes to
backing cult member Tulsi and 'guru' Chris who she owes everything too
and has pledged to share everything with since he's the head of her
cult. Everything. That would presumably include national security
information. Guru Chris must be seeing the prospect of DNI Tulsi as a
rainmaker and finally he can have the cult do something other than
harass people at airports.
And then there's Pete Hegseth who Trump wants to make Secretary of Defense.
As
Lawrence O'Donnell notes in the video above, in an attempt to rescue
him, Pete's had to deploy his Mommy to go make the case for him.
A 44 year old man needing to hide behind Mommy.
Community
member Sabina made a point in a roundtable we did Monday. She works
for city government. There was a total loser -- F G -- that worked with
her at the City of Dallas government. He wasn't married. He had
multiple children. He was in his late 30s. He lived at home with his
parents. (Not with any of his children living there, just FYI.) He
blew every check on himself and he rarely came to work. When he did --
doesn't say a lot for the City of Dallas supervisors -- he'd disappear
for four hours or more and he'd do that by transferring his calls to his
cell phone so people didn't know he'd left. He scanned building plans
into the system. And no one apparently ever checked on him. He was
constantly just refusing to go to work. After he went two weeks without
showing up, his mom came to the job to please with his supervisor not
to fire him. He kept his job -- shouldn't have, but he did -- but he
lost all respect in the workplace. People who didn't even know him
before this went down heard about him as a result of Mommy going to his
job to plead and beg with his boss not to fire him, to promise that
she'd make sure he showed up for work.
That's really where we are now with Pete Hegseth.
An overgrown, immature boy who is hiding behind Mommy.
"I
Won't Back Down" -- Lawrence notes that's the title of the column Pete
Hegseth wrote for THE WALL STREET JOURNAL this week. I guess it's only a
matter of days before Mommy Hegseth writes the follow up column "I
Won't Let My Little Boy Back Down."
Secretary of Defense? He can't even defend himself.
Hiding behind Mommy his whole life. And he can't see the strength of women?
Defense Secretary Lloyd
Austin praised female members of the armed forces, while his potential
replacement, Pete Hegseth–who has said women have no place in combat–tries to shore up confirmation support among Republican senators.
In a West Point address Wednesday, Austin recalled one experience while serving in Iraq in 2003, in which he positioned his command post near the action.
“I told my team, ‘Look, we need to win this fight, so I need to be at the front,’ Austin told
the audience. ”‘I know what will happen to me if I’m captured. I have
no intention of being captured, and I will fight to the last bullet. But
the risks are serious. I am enormously proud of all of you, and that
won’t ever change. So, if anyone here thinks that they can’t deploy
forward, I fully understand, and no one will ever think any less of
you.‘"
Austin continued: “The women and men of that incredible team looked at me, and finally one of the women popped up and said, ‘Sir, what are you talking about?’”
You know
what I'm remembering too? In 2009, when then President Barack Obama
nominated Tammy Duckworth to a VA position, not only did that Iraq War
veteran get confirmed, she did it without ever asking Mommy to go on TV
and to visit with senators to try to get her the job she was to weak to
fight for herself.
Women are more than strong enough to handle the military.
It
appears the weak sister here is Pete Hegseth and maybe that explains
the many public episodes of Little Petey being drunk and maybe it
explains how, at 44, you are now on marriage number three. That really
doesn't indicate the stability required to be Secretary of Defense.
Mike's the main one covering Pete in this community:
Last
night, he noted that they're testing the waters to see if Ron DeSantis
or Joni Ernst could replace him because that's how embarrassing Pete
Hegseth has become.
Let's note Satanic Trump's unqualified nominees. Pete Hegseth is
not qualified to be the secretary of any department. You didn't have to
go left to find a qualified candidate. There are people serving in
leadership of the military that could have been elevated. There are
people in the Senate who are Republicans who would be qualified -- Joni
Ernst, Mike Rounds, Roger Wicker, Bill Cassidy, etc.
They
have the knowledge base. Hegseth doesn't have the knowledge base or
the experience. What he does have is a sad and drunken assault. It was
seven years ago. It is not the distant past. He was 37 years old. David Kurtz (TPM) notes:
More details emerged over the weekend about the sexual assault claim against Pete Hegseth, President-elect Donald Trump’s choice for secretary of defense.
The WaPo was first with extensive new information about the circumstance of the alleged sexual assault, based on (i) a memo it obtained that was provided to the Trump transition team late Wednesday by a friend of the victim; and (ii) a statement from Hegseth’s lawyer, Timothy Parlatore.
The woman later reported the alleged assault to police, but no charges were ever filed:
According to the police statement, the complaint was filed four days after the encounter, and the complainant had bruises to her thigh. The police report itself was not released.
Hegseth settled the woman’s claim for an undisclosed amount, and she signed a nondisclosure agreement.
Trump is standing by Hegseth in the face of the undisclosed settlement of the sexual assault claim.
That's reason enough not to confirm him.
But he's also not qualified for the job.
He shouldn't be confirmed. He shouldn't even be
nominated. He's not fit to oversee the Pentagon -- he does not have the
background. If the nomination was to be Secretary of Veterans Affairs,
I'd have a few problems -- mainly around the issues of female
veterans. And I would also question his ability to oversee any
department because he just doesn't have that experience -- not in his
military service and not in his civilian experience.
This is a huge department that is taxed with many, many duties including ensuring the US military is prepared.
What in Hegseth's past experience argues that he knows a thing about hiring or recruiting, for example?
The last Senate hearing on military readiness was eleven months ago.
At that hearing, US Army Maj Gen Johnny Davis spoke on a number of topics including the statements below:
Today's youth are far more likely to pursue education beyond high school. Currently,
high school seniors and recent graduates account for more than 50% of our annual
contracts. However, they only represent 15-20% of the labor market. We will transform
our prospecting to expand into a greater representation of the labor market and enter
the larger prospect pool. In addition to the high school market, we will target those with
more than a high school diploma, this includes a college degree, some college, or a
technical certification. By FY 2028, it is our goal for one third of new recruits to have
more
than a high school diploma. We are growing our analytical capability
to incentivize and position our recruiting force, tailor marketing based
on segmentation, and place our recruiters in the right place with the
right training, products, and tools. Our quarterly Industry Engagement
Program allows us to identify new tools to improve operations across the enterprise.
As we transform how the Army prospects for talent, we will continue to innovate and
leverage data analytics, artificial Intelligence (AI), and Machine Learning (ML) to quickly
identify the right talent and provide tailored messaging to potential talent. We are
expanding our presence on both social media and digital job boards to communicate the
Army's Employee Value Proposition (EVP). Expanding our market is critical to
accomplishing the mission today and in the future.
What does Hegseth know about hiring practices, recruitment and
retention? Nothing. Can he address, off the top of his head, the
issue of evidence-based learning capability? Does he know what a
command wide retention surge is? If so, does he approve or does he
think it's a waste of time. Each of the four branches needs to be
adequately staffed (the Air Force didn't make the goal in 2023). How
does Hegseth plan to address this. Does he have an overall plan or is
he going to propose piece meal strategies?
He wants this office why? How does he see himself delivering in this office?
Where does he stand on waivers?
Due
to his plethora of body markings, I'd assume he is okay with tattoos.
But what about age restrictions -- what his top end for someone serving
in combat? On drug tests, what's his wait window on retesting -- 60
days, 90 days, less, more? And why? Drug testing does include testing
for alcohol.
ESaR has
been a semi-successful recruiting tool for the Navy (Every Sailor a
Recruiter). Is that a policy Hegseth agrees with? Why or why not?
The
Navy's "Make Your Name" series has been successful in recruiting --
noting women's roles and experiences serving in the Navy. It's a fairly
inexpensive recruiting tool and it has been successful. Does he
endorse this recruiting tool? If not, why not? If not, is it because
he has a limited view of what women can do in the military?
Grasp
that -- without him -- women have been moving up in the ranks in the
military. Are these women going to hit a glass ceiling if he becomes
the Secretary? How is he planning to address these issues? How is
going to maintain the US military's competitive edge?
Guess
what, those are very basic questions about basic duties and that's
before we get beyond workforce issues. I see nothing in his background
that demonstrates experience with those type of issues.
Again,
we still haven't gotten to other issues that include oversight, combat,
military exercises and partnering with the VA to improve the transition
from veteran to soldier. On that last one? I don't think he has
expertise but I think his experience -- personal -- could compensate for
the lack of expertise. I do not feel that way about any other
responsibility that he would be tasked with should he become the
Secretary of Defense.
The
US Army is supposed to be refocusing with an emphasis on LSCO
(Large-Scale Combat Operations). That is one of the defined 2025
goals. Hegseth will pursue that how?
These
are not minor details. And you can't learn it on the job, not as
Secretary of Defense. That means being over the defense of this country
so Americans are entitled to expect someone in that role to have actual
experience.
Hegseth has none.
Again,
this isn't a right-or-left issue. There are Republicans who are
qualified for this post. Hegseth is not one of them. Any sitting
senator on the Armed Services Committee is qualified for the post.
They would know the issues needing to be addressed before they were even sworn into office.
Hegseth
doesn't know the issues, he's never overseen any workforce -- let alone
a workforce as large as the Defense Dept -- and he would put military
readiness at risk as the whole world had to wait for him to learn on the
job and familiarize himself with tasks and concepts that he's honestly
not suited for.
--------------
End of excerpt.
Hey,
maybe if Trump puts US troops on the ground in another country and the
losses mount, Pete's Mommy can go over there and beg for a do-over for
her little boy?
Tuesday,
the African American Policy Forum had a roundtable entitled "Views from
the 92%:
Black Women Reflect on 2024 Election and Road Ahead." Professor of law
Kimberle Crenshaw observed at the start, "Conversations
are going forward with us being relegated to a time out space." Black
women were largely silenced before the election and this
has continued. Now when it came to trashing the first Black woman to
seriously run for president, DEMOCRACY NOW!, THE NATION, THE PROGESSIVE,
IN THESE TIMES, COMMON DREAMS, etc. Along with Kimberle, the
participants included THE
WASHINGTON POST's Karen Attiah, iONE DIGITAL's Kirsten West Savali,
Black Voters Matter Fund's LaTosha Brown, the National Coalition on
Black Civic Participation and Convener of Black Women's Roundtable's
Melanie Campbell, the National Council of Negro Women's Shavon
Arline-Bradley, the Transformative Justice Coalition, Atlanta Alumnae
Chapter of Delta Sigma Theta's Fran Phillips-Calhoun and Higher Heights'
Glynda Carr.
Excerpt:
Melanie
Campbell: But the reality is that we've got to figure out how we build
our political power in this country where we're not beholden to a party
or to anyone else. The late Dr Ron Walters
always used to talk about how we have to unite. We have to figure out
how we fund our politics so that we're not beholden to those who pull
the funding streams. The other thing is that we do write checks.
There's got to be -- One of the things that's disturbing for me is that
you don't see -- right now, we're talking about four people who they're
talking about who are up for the position to be the head of the
Democratic Party. Why don't we see a woman? Why is there not a Black
woman? If we voted 92% for the [presidential] candidate, why are we not
even seeing one Black woman in the running or in the discussion? So
that's one of the things that I see that we have to address. And that's
how we deal with our money and make demands because we do write checks,
right? And the other has to do with how we find ways to fund our
politics. Until we do that, I think we'll always be in that position.
Kimberle
Crenshaw: Yeah. And thank you so much. This is also the-the
recognition that we need to support our institutions, our own
institutions. There was a lot of fund raising that was done, you know,
by Black folks but it didn't necessarily target Black institutions that
have greater capacity to reach our own people. So on that note, let me
toss it for a moment to our correspondent Dr Kaye who's going to uplift
some of the comments in the chat and also talk about Black institutions
on Giving Tuesday. So, Kaye, take it away.
Kaye
Wise Whitehead: Thank you so much, Kim. Like everybody, all I'm doing
is hearting and thumbs up throughout the conversation. The chat has
been absolutely on fire. People are really engaging in real moment. I
want to lift up some of the things that people have said so far.
Shirley said that this reminds us that like VP Harris said we aren't
going back. If our detractors think that for one minute that Black
women are going to hide under a rock, they've got another thing coming.
Loretta followed it up and said look every White pundit denies the
persistence of White supremist thinking while they blame Harris'
campaign -- a blame the victim strategy they always employ. Suzanna
came in and built on that and said that when the media says "working
class," they mean White working class. Yes, Suzanna, absolutely. Kim,
you talked about you're waiting for someone to call the boycott on
Walmart [Walmart donated exclusively to Trump, donated to Project 2025
and announced the end of diversity int heir employment]. In response to
that, Hermaine said look I like the idea of voting with our
pocketbooks. We need to make sure we circulate all those companies we
need to target and not support. And then Bonita, we'll end with her,
she shared as Democrats we must demand changes in the Democratic Party
from top down. Joy Reid's analysis shows us that our money -- their
money -- went to big ad buys not to Black media and not to Black
community organizations or organizers. So there has been some amazing
comments to our very important and significant and heartfelt
conversation that is only happening here thanks to the wonderful work
that's being done by AAPF -- the African American Policy Forum -- and
all the organizations on this call especially during these challenging
times. This is how we build community. The work has never been more
urgent. I'm happy we're here on Giving Tuesday, Kim, because what
better way to move forward and plant those seeds is supporting all the
organizations that we are hearing from tonight as well as supporting
AAPF by donating so that we can continue to make good trouble. Alright,
Kim, I'll toss it back to you.
Kimberle
Crenshaw: Thank you, thank you, Kaye. And at the bottom, we are going
to list all of the organizations that were part of this consortium --
research consortium -- that led to many of the talking points and
efforts that if folks were serious about reaching Black voters we
suggested from our research, this would be the way that they talk to
them. So let me come back to Karen to talk a little bit as the sole
Black woman op-ed writer at THE WASHINGTON POST. So one thing that
stood out looking back at that reel [of coverage of sexist and racist
tropes deployed throughout the lead up to the general election] in the
face of that, THE WASHINGTON POST's decision not to endorse the first
Black woman presidential candidate symbolize at least neutrality with
respect to the misogynoir that we saw. Let's remember THE POST endorsed
[Barack] Obama, the first Black man who won, Hillary Clinton the first
woman. So now we have a Black woman running against Trump and having
endorsed his opponents two times in the past, they flinched. So much
like Elon Musk's purchase of Twitter, we now see billionaires using
their influence to effectively disable the fourth estate. As you wrote recently,
"The way democracy dies in darkness, is if journalism is left to die in
cowardice." So I want to combine two questions to you. First, how do
you assess the damage that was done not only to Harris' campaign but
also to democracy. And then, more importantly, what do we need to know
now about the make up of the media, who's in it, and, more importantly,
where are we in it -- so we have a sense of where we need to fight in
our future.
Karen
Attiah: [Laughing] What do I say without getting fined out? Obviously,
the decision to -- and as I wrote in my op-ed -- as I joined my
colleagues in the letter sent that we published with other columnists.
The decision to effectively block the planned endorsement for Harris
came as a media strike. Again, you know, and as I said, and as I said
on Twitter, it was a betrayal and a stab in the back for many of us in
the course of our jobs who put our reputations and, frankly, our safety
and our lives sometimes on the line to be able to stand up to
authoritarians. And so understandably with the outrage -- and I've seen
it in the comments that there is -- this does not lead to trust in the
media. Right? The flip side of this is an uncomfortable truth: It's
that when people own the paper, they frankly can do what they want.
Right? I think part of this is -- and I think that coupled with Elon
Musk and Twitter, I think that back to back in a back to back shocking
way perhaps laid bare the realities of raw power and oligarchy in our
society. And there's been a reason why, for the longest time, from
William Randolph Hearst to the big oligarchs, it's always been thus.
It's just laid bare in real time for a lot of people. So what does that
mean? That is going to mean -- and frankly, you know, in a city that
has for so long been a majority Black city, Washington, DC, it is hard
for me to see how the community, the Black community, the residents of
Washington, D.C. would ever forget this.
Now let's note BLUESKY.
Danielle says it all about the nonsense attacks on trans people. On BLUESKY, Daniel Villarreal (LGBTQ NATION) reports:
The anti-LGBTQ+ social media account Libs of TikTok, run by Chaya Raichik, has allegedly been banned from the microblogging platform Bluesky.
The account — which has inspired death threats against children, educators, and medical professionals — is just one of several anti-LGBTQ+ accounts that have found themselves unwelcome on Bluesky. Progressive social media users have increasingly flocked to it as an escape from the increasingly right-wing site X, owned by transphobic Republican billionaire Elon Musk.
Yet another reason to abandon Twitter and move to BLUESKY.
The following sites updated:
Thank you, Joe
7 hours ago
Kash Patel and his enemy list
7 hours ago
Marshall Brickman
7 hours ago
Loaded Tex-Mex Tater Tots
7 hours ago
Satan finds his role model
7 hours ago
Hegseth keeps hitting the fan
7 hours ago
