We know that Trump isn't getting bad advice because he has, from the beginning, assured us that he knows more than all the generals, that his own morality is what keeps him inside the guardrails, and that he's a genius, a stable one. He brags about how much he knows, and that he doesn't need advice because he's smarter than everybody. That's all you need to say.
The “bad advice” defense is flaw reframing in a suit and tie. When a failure cannot be denied, it can still be relocated — away from the man who decided, onto advisers who are rarely named and never answer for it. Choosing advisers and judging their advice is not a side task of the presidency. On most days, it is the presidency.
Naive monarchism is exactly the right comparison, and it gives the game away. “If the king only knew” was how subjects protected a ruler they needed to keep believing in: the king can do no wrong, so the ministers must have betrayed him. A republic is not supposed to have that sentence available. Its whole premise is that the officeholder answers for the office.
The defense also works because it serves two different groups at once. For true believers, it preserves the one belief that cannot be surrendered — that the leader is on their side. For officeholders who can see the failure plainly, it is cover: a way to register a complaint without paying the price of a conclusion. One group is blind. The other finds blindness useful.
And that is how accountability disappears without anyone defeating it. The president was misled. The advisers are unnamed. Congress stays loyal and leaves its own constitutional levers untouched. The voters are reassured. A decision that everybody participated in ends up owned by nobody.
Anyone who has worked in a toxic work environment should recognize the "vibes" of working for an executive who is never wrong and takes all the credit for success and shifts the blame to others.
I once provided a work paper to my boss- as confidential - which indicated a major technology strategy thrust was not working - and he circulated it under my name to the top people.
I was let go a week later.
Eventually, I found I was right (but had gone on to other things) and my contacts told me the next few years were the worst work environment they had ever gone through. I learnt the company got broken up and the pieces sold off.
I think the next two years in US politics will be even worse than the last two as recriminations and finger pointing over the policy failures will create an even more toxic political environment as the Democrats (if they win majorities) try to put the Humpty Dumpty government structure back together.
You ain't seen nothing yet as they say - the beginning of the end for the American structure/style of government?.
Unless it makes Trump money or makes him look good, advice just washes over him. As the Commanding officer, the buck stops with Trump no matter what his "advisors" tell him.
We know that Trump isn't getting bad advice because he has, from the beginning, assured us that he knows more than all the generals, that his own morality is what keeps him inside the guardrails, and that he's a genius, a stable one. He brags about how much he knows, and that he doesn't need advice because he's smarter than everybody. That's all you need to say.
What struck me:
The “bad advice” defense is flaw reframing in a suit and tie. When a failure cannot be denied, it can still be relocated — away from the man who decided, onto advisers who are rarely named and never answer for it. Choosing advisers and judging their advice is not a side task of the presidency. On most days, it is the presidency.
Naive monarchism is exactly the right comparison, and it gives the game away. “If the king only knew” was how subjects protected a ruler they needed to keep believing in: the king can do no wrong, so the ministers must have betrayed him. A republic is not supposed to have that sentence available. Its whole premise is that the officeholder answers for the office.
The defense also works because it serves two different groups at once. For true believers, it preserves the one belief that cannot be surrendered — that the leader is on their side. For officeholders who can see the failure plainly, it is cover: a way to register a complaint without paying the price of a conclusion. One group is blind. The other finds blindness useful.
And that is how accountability disappears without anyone defeating it. The president was misled. The advisers are unnamed. Congress stays loyal and leaves its own constitutional levers untouched. The voters are reassured. A decision that everybody participated in ends up owned by nobody.
I simply blame every damn one of them that didn't stop him, Tillis included.
This town needs some new sherrifs.
Anyone who has worked in a toxic work environment should recognize the "vibes" of working for an executive who is never wrong and takes all the credit for success and shifts the blame to others.
I once provided a work paper to my boss- as confidential - which indicated a major technology strategy thrust was not working - and he circulated it under my name to the top people.
I was let go a week later.
Eventually, I found I was right (but had gone on to other things) and my contacts told me the next few years were the worst work environment they had ever gone through. I learnt the company got broken up and the pieces sold off.
I think the next two years in US politics will be even worse than the last two as recriminations and finger pointing over the policy failures will create an even more toxic political environment as the Democrats (if they win majorities) try to put the Humpty Dumpty government structure back together.
You ain't seen nothing yet as they say - the beginning of the end for the American structure/style of government?.
Unless it makes Trump money or makes him look good, advice just washes over him. As the Commanding officer, the buck stops with Trump no matter what his "advisors" tell him.
Day after day you keeping hitting the nail on the head!
It's the typical good czar bad officials cope. "If the czar only knew, this wouldn't be tolerated.... they serve him poorly!"
And let's talk about the "unitary executive"...I mean, isn't that just another name for "The buck stops here"?
So what is it, DonOld? Are you the boss man, making the ultimate decisions? Or are the flunkies just feeding you bad advice?
I'll hang up and wait for my answer.
I have heard this said about as horrible a person as Josef Stalin. "If only Papa Joe knew how bad the local bureaucrat was, he'd fix it!"
We all see how that turned put, Comrade.