I wouldn’t have thought that a Trump Administration employee’s unethical conduct could make my head explode. I thought I was safe. After all, my hopes may be too high, but my expectations are so low. But there are my brains, dripping off the ceiling.
President Trump has a ludicrous burning crisis of chaotic management, undisciplined leadership, incompetent subordinates and mass competition for the National Foot-Shooting Championship. I suggested that months ago that this could only be addressed by the President appointing an experienced political professional with proven management skills and leadership ability to whip the White House into shape. President Trump had a better solution to the burning crisis: throw the human gasoline named Anthony Scaramucci on it!
Brilliant!
What an idiot.
Yes, the Incompetent Elected Official of this post is President Donald J. Trump.
But the rest is all Scaramucci, the new White House Communications Director with no experience or acumen in the field of communications and public relations. This was immediately evident from his first substantial communication with the news media, a vulgar, unprofessioal, undignified, embrrassing and vicious phone interview with the New Yorker’s Ryan Lizza unlike any interview by any White House figure ever.
Highlights, or rather points of signature significance, each showing that a) the man is an arrogant asshole and 2) President Trump possesses no judgment in his choices of staff whatsoever. Negative judgment.
1. He said, “I’m not [Trump advisor] Steve Bannon, I’m not trying to suck my own cock … I’m not trying to build my own brand off the fucking strength of the President. I’m here to serve the country.”
2. After Lizza asked Scaramucci about a private dinner that he had with President Trump, Scaramucci boasted: “I fired one guy the other day. I have three to four people I’ll fire tomorrow. I’ll get to the person who leaked that to you. Reince Priebus—if you want to leak something—he’ll be asked to resign very shortly.”
3. Scaramucci imitated what he thought Priebus would sound like while leaking the news to the press: “Oh, Bill Shine is coming in. Let me leak the fucking thing and see if I can cock-block these people the way I cock-blocked Scaramucci for six months.’”
4. He said, “What I want to do is I want to fucking kill all the leakers and I want to get the President’s agenda on track so we can succeed for the American people.”
5. He threatening to extort other White House aides: “O.K., the Mooch showed up a week ago … This is going to get cleaned up very shortly, O.K.? Because I nailed these guys. I’ve got digital fingerprints on everything they’ve done through the F.B.I. and the fucking Department of Justice.”
6. Describing Trump Chief of Staff Priebus as “a fucking paranoid schizophrenic, a paranoiac.” He then said that he was prepared to aggravate him, saying, “Yeah, let me go, though, because I’ve gotta start tweeting some shit to make this guy crazy.”
After this was published, Scaramucci tweeted that he often used colorful language but would not speak in such terms in the future, and suggested that he thought the interview was either off the record, or that Lizza would quote him without the obscenities. Then he said that he wouldn’t trust the news media again.
That’s right: this macho-talking frat-boy posturing, preening mega-jerk is in charge of public relations, and he’s shocked that he can’t trust a news media that is out to destroy his boss not to help him sound revolting in an interview.
This fool used gutter language while representing the White House, the President and the United States. He lapped his boorish and uncivil boss in boorishness and incivility. He denigrated not one but two of his White House colleagues in disgusting terms. He threatened and postured. To say that the interview was unprofessional is an undeserved compliment. It was professionalism anti-matter. I don’t even want to think about the damage a Type A power-mad egomaniac like Scaramucci might do in a position of influence. Nobody who speaks like this to a journalist can be trusted in any way whatsoever.
Here is what would happen in an ethical, professional, competent White House…which, of course, we don’t have:
- Steve Bannon and Reince Priebus would demand that Scaramucci be fired, and resign if he is not.
If their boss wouldn’t stand up for them and properly punish a member of the staff who undermines colleagues, embarrasses them, threatens them and does so in public at a time when the White House already has so many fires flaming out of control that it looks like Bambi’s mother’s death scene, then he is not worth their loyalty.
- The President would fire Scaramucci immediately. No apology is sufficient or should be accepted. The Mooch embarrassed everyone, especially the President. It would not have been worse if he had stumbled on stage drunk during a Trump press conference and vomited on the lectern. Someone like Scaramucci is death, and I mean cold, dark, stinking rotting death, to the culture of any organization. He will poison every one and everything that comes in contact with him. I have worked in organizations large and small, famous and obscure, powerful and meek, and not one of them would tolerate an executive who, to take just one example from the interview, publicly described a colleague as “trying to suck his own cock.” If I were Scaramucci’s superior, he would find his possessions in a cardboard box on the White House lawn and his office door bolted with a Marine in front of it today.
Trump won’t do any of this, of course. I can hardly believe it, would be possible but the conclusion is becoming unavoidable that he is even a bigger idiot than I thought he was. I didn’t think anyone could be a bigger idiot than I thought he was.
* Referring, once again, to this post…
Ethics Alarms 
Is this what we’re in for?
More like this
Leaked footage of Scaramucci warning WH staff of further leaks:
Thunderbolt and lightning, very very frightening.
Indeed! You stole the song from my lips.
snort
Ya’ gotta love high-speed photography. Looks like all three engines have failed.
A long time problem with aviation photography.
How is this jerk all that different than the similarly foul-mouthed an abusive Rahm Emmanuel, who was only sacked because he crossed Valerie Jarrett, Obama’s puppet mistress?
I don’t remember Rahm Emmanuel ever saying he wanted to “kill” others like this guy did. Share some links to some equivalent statements.
Dunno about death threats, but how about tearing up contribution checks in front of donors because they weren’t big enough and sending dead fish heads through the mail?
Steve-O-in-NJ wrote, “…how about tearing up contribution checks in front of donors because they weren’t big enough and sending dead fish heads through the mail?”
Not even close to Scaramucci’s Animal House School of Thought.
I’ll give you one for pre-Obama Rahmisms. http://foreignpolicy.com/2008/11/06/the-five-most-infamous-rahm-emanuel-moments/
So what, though? We know the Clintons hire thugs. He was their star thug. He’s also smart enough not to talk like a thug in front of the news media, and he also knew how to do his job, and never attacked a team member in public.
The dead fish was a firing offense. Hillary probably was amused. The knife episode in the link is a gag. He was quoting “Animal House.”
Bullseye. Rahm is a thug, plain and simple, but he crossed a bigger thug.
He’s not an idiot? Rahm spoke this way in one reported “tough guy” conversation that did not involve the news media. We know plenty of people in high places have potty mouths and make vicious comments in private conversations. Truman, LBJ, Nixon, Clinton and staff members we don’t even know about probably blistered that paint off the walls. Why do you think that’s even relevant? This wasn’t an open mic—this was a complete jackass full of himself and drunk with power making the White House look like the monkey house it is, and making it even worse in the process.
I’m torn, as someone who has both privately and not-as-privately “blistered the paint off the walls.” Normally, of course, the rule is not to say or write anything you don’t want ending up in a certification that will go in front of the Court, although the courts frequently have little patience with those kind of certifications. There are, however, times I grow tired of looking the other way on the fact that my opponent is acting like an ass and want to just cut loose, particularly when the chance comes to exact some well-deserved revenge.
But you don’t make your real name public here, do you? This already puts you 50 IQ points ahead of “Mooch.”
You ain’t seen nothing yet. It hasn’t even been a year.
I saw the story about Sacramucci and said to myself “boy I can’t wait for Jack’s post.” I’m sure I’m not the only one.
Ditto!!!
Same.
yup
You would think that this is a big story (though not as big as the dramatic denouement of Obamacare repeal last night in Congress). But as I’m taking a break from CNN and MSNBC this morning to watch our President’s favorite show, Fox & Friends, the silence is deafening.
Apparently the only newsworthy things happening in FoxWorld are Ohio State Fair rides, sharks jumping on fishing boats, and MS 13. At Faux News, denial is just a river in Egypt.
Charles,
Why the heck would you subject yourself to any of the morning “news” TV talk show, they ALL suck! That stuff is just garbage television.
But the Fox girls today are so curvy and blonde! How can Charles NOT watch? It’s hypnotic! It’s like the Victoria Secret show without the angel wings and with sorta newsyness!
Not surprised. Pathetic.
Oh no Charles, you didn’t say faux news, did you? You’re better than that.
Bills succeed and fail. It’s not a big story except to those who want to mock the Republicans. In ethics terms, the Mooch’s outburst is 500% more important. Do people really think the GOP will be worse off NOT substituting their own bad law for the Obama bad law, NOT eliminating an expensive entitlement that people now think they are entitled to, and NOT making their mess the focus of criticism? All this is is another example of politicians lying in campaigns by arguing that extremely difficult tasks can be done on “day one.” Bernie and Hillary vowed to get rid of Citizens United. It was bullshit. Democrats believed them. Morons. Same here.
Jack Marshall wrote, “All this is is another example of politicians lying in campaigns by arguing that extremely difficult tasks can be done on “day one.” Bernie and Hillary vowed to get rid of Citizens United.”
Can’t hardly wait for the next election cycle to get fully underway. I can already feel the rumble of the propaganda machines warming up. How about “I will impeach the President on day one!” or maybe “I will never quit until this President is gone!” I can already hear the incitement drones ginning up the hate in the crowds chanting, “Never quit! Never quit! Never quit! Never quit! Never quit!”
I’m “really” looking forward to this.
At least with Vermin Supreme, we knew we were never actually going to get our ponies.
“All this is is another example of politicians lying in campaigns by arguing that extremely difficult tasks can be done on “day one.” Bernie and Hillary vowed to get rid of Citizens United. It was bullshit. Democrats believed them. Morons. Same here.”
No snark, Jack, but real questions on your comment here, as I am confused:
Does #1/1A, Ethics Surrender, apply?
Does #36 and/or #36B Victim Blindness?
Every time I read the List I also see other that might apply to a situation, to a lesser extent, like (in this case) #11, #2, and #2A .
Again, just trying to learn how to apply these rules consistently and routinely (my family is starting to quote some of these when they see them in use, from my discussions with them)
Anthony Scaramucci has a serious case of Foot-In-Mouth Syndrome.
Even thought I am not a Spicer fan, this does puts a new perspective on the recent his resignation.
Proof read after editing Zoltar, proof read. 😦
Indeed. I was thinking the same thing.
As commander in chief of the military, can there not be an impeachable standard built around Conduct Unbecoming an Officer?
Nope.
No, but I’m sure Charles Blow and Maxine will argue it does.
Well, we already know that people on the left will consider just about anything, from Trump breathing to Trump opening a door, as a reason to chuck him out of office. However, those of us who are rational and deliberating will want to ponder what constitutes serious enough offenses or what actually is an offense before considering the procedure.
As a random aside, I would love to see a man on the street poll that asks the “chuck-him-out” bloc:
When he’s impeached and removed, who moves into his position:
1) Hillary Clinton
2) Mike Pence
3) a new election is held
4) Nancy Pelosi who would have to be speaker before there’s any chance impeachment moves forward. If it’s Russiagate, there’s no reason it can’t take Pence too.
Nancy Pelosi could lose her job in DC if some in California have their way.
http://www.sacbee.com/latest-news/article163629198.html
Maybe she could be Queen of a new country called California.
We could kick California out of the United States, build a border wall around California and accept Puerto Rico in as a new state, even the flag won’t have to change. 😉 😉 😉
They’re Catholic, they speak Spanish and they’re a shade or two darker than your typical Republican voter. So where would you get enough votes to accept them as a state?
valkygrrl wrote, “They’re Catholic, they speak Spanish and they’re a shade or two darker than your typical Republican voter. So where would you get enough votes to accept them as a state?”
No little winkie or smilie with that so should I take you seriously?
Yes their language and religion are sticking points, yes Americans are more racist than they’ll admit and skin color would make it a harder sell even if people won’t say so openly.
Next time someone publishes a poll on the idea, check the crosstabs.
So valkygrrl answer this for me; why in the first comment did you talk about only Republicans and in the second you talked about Americans in general, were you trying to white wash over your bad attitude towards Republicans?
If you want to talk just about Republicans; you might consider that since pompous ass Democrats have abused things for so long that they might just take Puerto Rico as a state and dump California just to get rid of those cesspools of Liberals in California. (snark) 😉 😉 😉
I don’t think that would work:
Impeachment requires a 2/3 vote of the Senate. Absolutely impossible absent actual criminal activity. And by the time Pelosi is Speaker, she’ll be pushing a grocery cart full of plastic bags and toy puffins, mumbling to herself and talking about President Ford.
Jack Marshall wrote, “…by the time Pelosi is Speaker, she’ll be pushing a grocery cart full of plastic bags and toy puffins, mumbling to herself and talking about President Ford.”
What’s sad about that is that Californian’s would STILL vote for her.
Just San Francisco, Z. She’s their Representative, not a Senator. Although my bet…if she ran for the Senate, she’d win.
At least you accidentally reveal how far the Left will probably take their republic destroying attitudes.
texagg04 wrote,
“As a random aside, I would love to see a man on the street poll that asks the “chuck-him-out” bloc:
When he’s impeached and removed, who moves into his position:
1) Hillary Clinton
2) Mike Pence
3) a new election is held”
Oh My GOD! That would be freaking hilarious!!!!!!!!!!!!
It would probably be sad too. 😦
Or, you know, he’s lying when he claims he thought it was off the record. He doesn’t exactly have credibility.
Axios reports https://www.axios.com/trump-loved-scaramuccis-quotes-but-he-hates-being-upstaged-2466546181.html
Scaramucci language was signature significance and no one should let him weasel his way out of this. Scaramucci should be fired immediatly and demoted to being a cargo stabilizer in planes full of rubber dog shit flown out of Hong Kong.
That would be a good job for him.
Arbys test kitchen taste tester. Sylvester Stalone’s diction coach. Nudie booth squeegie technician.
Not so fast: do any of those jobs require a job interview? Working with others?
Hardly needs to be said, does it? An official unloads that after calling a reporter, and assumes its off the record? Who’s stupid enough to believe that? Some other journalists have said that Mooch is used to talking like that and having the reporters clean his language up for publication.
You’re not going to find me, of all people, criticizing the press for reporting accurately for a change.
It takes away even his fig leaf if he asked for one part of the conversation to be off the record. The point of both spin and ass-covering are to tell the truth from a certain point of view, outright fabrications give a second chance to nail you.
He’s a complete amateur, that’s all. At public relations! His job!
Gotta rest, my head is threatening to explode again.
Can you imagine, given how bad his on-the-record statements were, what was in the part that he asked to be off the record??
It’s a funny question, isn’t it? You’re right. But I have to watch out for my still sensitive head..
He calls himself “The Mooch?” Does he know what a mooch is?
(I realize this isn’t the point of the story, I just can’t wrap my brain around that.)
He’s an idiot. What else do you need to know?
As a point of interest, you’re a non-Italian, non-urban Mid-westerner, S. Shortening Scaramucci to “Mooch” is jock-y, macho, neighborhood bonhomie. If his name had been “Ameche,” is knick-name would be “Meech.” So Mooch reasonably strikes you as tone deaf, but it’s just conventional, proper, neighborhood argot.
Understood. But, you know, if my name shortened into a cute nickname like whore, slut, mooch, etc., I think I would fight it. But even if I couldn’t, I wouldn’t volunteer that as my nickname as an adult! And this adult is the voice/face of the White House!
And an adult who refers to himself in the third person several times in the interview. Blech.
Jack seconds that blecch.
You can take the boy out of the frat house, but you can’t take the frat house out of the boy. These guys never grow up, S. Big difference between you and them.
Not attempting to excuse his conduct, but can’t we give a little of the credit for a dope like Scaramucci to James Carville, Paul Begala, and their ilk? Isn’t the macho, gun-slinging, questionable-quip-tossing, (“drag a hundred dollar bill through a trailer park…) political operative a fairly recent, unwelcome development?
Actually, my wife and I discussed this many years ago. We were wondering, then, what Bill Clinton’s legacy would be. I don’t think either of us expected either Donald Trump or the “Resistance” and certainly not the Mooch.
#22 at best.
I think I read somewhere that Trump had long wanted to get this guy a position in his administration. If this is true, then that’s another point in my favor when I continue to declare that Trump has no business in the White House and needs to either be removed or resign.
UGH. There is no support whatsoever for that position. You are incredibly stubborn. “Trump has no business in the White House” is false, he was elected. That gives him authority and reason to be there.
“and needs to either be removed or resign”: also false. He cannot be “removed.” We have a Constitution. And nothing he has done or said compels him to resign.
Would we have better leadership if Trump resigned and Pence became the president?
Probably so.
Would we have a hyperventilating media and Leftwing insurrectionist infrastructure finally settle down and get to the business of a stable republic if he resigned and Pence became the President?
No.
I differ. I say yes.
valkygrrl above, who seems to be a reliable bellweather of Leftist sentiment, definitely hints at being cool with Pence becoming the next target of the Burn It All Down caucus.
“Leftwing insurrectionist infrastructure finally settle down and get to the business of a stable republic ”
In case you haven’t noticed, Republicans control all three branches of the government. If the republic isn’t currently stable, can you really blame the opposition party for that?
Did someone assert the Republic wasn’t stable?
Absolutely. Only one party is actively trying to overturn an election.
Certainly we would, Chris. I might be against his policies, but not the man. I am very much against Trump the man and the majority of his policies.
“has no business” is not meant literally, but figuratively.
He cannot be “removed.” We have a Constitution. And nothing he has done or said compels him to resign. We differ here. Based on my readings from some, I would venture, distinguished though left leaning publications, there is no definitive answer yet agreed upon.
As for stubborn, yes, I can be quite stubborn. Take yesterday for example. I insisted on preparing chicken puttanesca for our guests. This morning Stella is still raving about the eats. It’s so good that our guests requested we eat the leftovers tonight. https://medium.com/@FarkleUp/i-apologize-3e3ee7910bbc
You might enjoy this discussion:
https://www.cato.org/multimedia/cato-daily-podcast/dont-stop-impeachin
Which approaches this entire debate not from a “it’s improper to impeach Trump” angle, but from a “sure, impeach Trump, but we ought to have been impeaching a whole lot more presidents throughout history, and it’s a tool that ought be used more often” angle.
I’ll check it out, Tex. For the record, Obama should have been impeached. Bush Junior also.. others I have no record reading to comment on.
I liked it. Agree with it.
Are you a true anarchist or just a minarchist?
Anarchist, although the term has too many meanings to be worth taking the time to delineate the options. Go here for an interesting look at your question. http://www.davidmcelroy.org/?p=1532
Then what value does impeachment even hold with you?
It’s a *non-legitimate* function of a *non-legitimate* invention…
I’m a rule breaker.
I am the Keymaster!
Or is it The Walrus? I forget…
fattymoon wrote, “Anarchist, although the term has too many meanings to be worth taking the time to delineate the options.”
Nonsense.
At the very core of the Anarchist is the very definable anarchy; a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority, absence of government and absolute freedom of the individual. With absolutely zero governing authority there is utter chaos. Thinking like an Anarchist is ignorant and child-like.
And Jesus said… https://www.compassion.com/poverty/what-the-bible-says-about-children.htm
fattymoon,
Using Jesus as a reference doesn’t fit within your trolling mantra; Jesus is/was (whatever) an authority figure, you’re bastardizing your own Anarchist belief system. 😉
I get very confused with the “Reply” thing here. Mr. Z. In some unknown way, I am replying to your comment which happens for fuck’s sake to be below my reply. I do not have the time or the will to figure this out. So let me cut to the chase.
Fucking A man! Jesus was an authority figure. But his authority only circumscribed a small circle of followers. Within the larger realm of his time, he was a pesky biting gnat.
Sir, I am not bastardizing my own Anarchist belief system. You, sir, are putting words in my mouth. Or my head. Not really sure which. Almost finished the bottle. Maybe I’ll share a pic of me sucking an empty tequila bottle. Would you like that.
BTW, when I drink I love everybody.
I love chicken puttanesca.
I followed the recipe in the Medium post I linked to.
You have good taste in food, Jack, but not in presidents. Exactly how does one threaten Alaska?
Can you smell it? I’ve added a touch of white wine and some fresh oregano and basil from the garden. I’m drinking tequila and wondering when you will come around and admit that Trump is a dangerous man to occupy the presidency. Evidence… https://twitter.com/LawyerRogelio/status/891055508743798784
Why do you keep saying things like that? I’ve never wavered from the obvious conclusion that he is unqualified in every way, temperamentally, by ability, by instinct and knowledge. It always dangerous to have unqualified people in power. It’s also dangerous to allow doctrinaire totalitarians to overthrow elections because they think the man elected is dangerous. Apparently the Left currently thinks democracy is dangerous. And that makes it a lot more dangerous than Trump.
Which is why he could get a second term.
I’m neither left nor right. I an anarchist at heart. You don’t need to lecture me about the left or the right. I am neither. I want revolution. I’ve stated that here several times. Please keep that in mind.
Jack, I do understand your constitutional view. I respect that. However, if the above link to Trump’s speech to police doesn’t ring any alarm bells, I may have to give up on you. (I’ll still be here. Still barfing when I feel like it, still tweeting the columns I agree with, and sometimes those I take issue with). Am I out of line in postulating that Trump is taking something out of Hitler’s playbook? http://elitedaily.com/news/politics/nazi-expert-trump-hitler-rise-to-power/1783479/
That wasn’t the lecture, fatty. The lecture is that you and everyone else are bound by the law and the rules. You can cite “but he’s a pig!” and “but he’s a creep” or “but he picks his nose” forever, as well as “he’s dangerous” don’t change the reality, and constantly saying otherwise over and over and over is just pointless.
Does perceived danger ever trump constitutional law?
BREAKING NEWS: Scaramucci removed as White House communications director.