AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL ASSOCIATION. Dominic McIver Lopes elected new APA board chair.

Dear DAVID, Today I am pleased to announce that at its meeting last month, the APA board of officers elected Dr. Dominic McIver Lopes the association’s next board chair. Lopes, who will succeed Dr. Cheshire Calhoun of Arizona State University, will begin his three-year term on July 1, 2020.   Dominic McIver Lopes is distinguished university scholar and professor in the Department of Philosophy at the University of British Columbia. He was secretary-treasurer of the Pacific Division from 2008 until 2016; he has served on and chaired the Pacific Division program committee; and he previously chaired the communications and publications task force and the ad hoc subcommittee on National Office IT operations. Lopes has also served on the Pacific Division executive committee; the committee on lectures, publications, and research; the governing committee of the Journal of the American Philosophical Association; and the 2011 executive director search committee. In 2018, he was awarded the APA’s Quinn Prize. Lopes is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada, president of the Canadian Philosophical Association, past president of the American Society for Aesthetics, and a member of the editorial boards of the Journal of the American Philosophical Association, the Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, Estetika, Cognitive Semiotics, and Imaginations.   Please join me in welcoming Dr. Dominic McIver Lopes as the incoming chair of the APA board of officers.   All the best,   Amy E. Ferrer Executive Director

ESQUIRE: Kevin McCarthy Conjures Up the First-Term Rule in Defense of Trump.

Apparently, the president can do whatever he wants in his first term and Congress can do nothing to stop him.

BY JACK HOLMES

DEC 9, 2019

As Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee attempt to disrupt Monday's impeachment hearings with random Parliamentary Inquiries and demands for a vote on whether the committee can take a 15-minute break, it's starting to feel like years ago that Ted Cruz so embarrassed himself on Meet The Press that you could hear people on set laughing at him. It was just yesterday, however, that the Texas senator so eagerly defended Donald Trump—the man who insulted his wife's appearance and suggested his father was involved in the JFK assassination—by spreading the evidence-free conspiracy theory that Ukraine interfered in the 2016 election. Anything to defend the most glorious leader.

But it seems others were determined to match Cruz's wraith status in defense of the president's clear abuse of power. Well, they mostly don't defend Trump's behavior on the merits, or even talk about that specific behavior much at all. There's always some galaxy-brain sideshow rooted in conspiracy theories—like The Ukrainian Intervention—or some bizarro interpretation of the Constitution's impeachment clause, or a genuinely horrifying view on the limits to presidential power (mostly, that there are none). But the House minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, debuted a whole new one on The Fox News Channel this morning.

Aaron Rupar

✔@atrupar

"In modern history, we've never gone after impeaching a president in the first term" -- Kevin McCarthy argues that there's a precedent against impeaching presidents before their second term

5,057

8:12 AM - Dec 9, 2019

Twitter Ads info and privacy

3,841 people are talking about this

The first term's a freebie! Do whatever you want! Congress can't do anything without overturning an election! The only way to hold a president accountable for abusing his power is to wait for the next election, even if he's abusing his power to ratfuck the next election. Of course, President Andrew Johnson was impeached in his first term, but don't get caught up in the details. Al Green! Democrats have always wanted to impeach!

None of this is a defense of the president's actual conduct, but why do that when you can just make stuff up? Introducing the First-Term Rule, which allows the president to, presumably, dissolve Congress and the courts as long as it's wrapped up before November 2020. Certainly, it seems to include extorting a foreign government into attacking American democracy. McCarthy made peace with all of this long ago, though. He's one of Trump's most ubiquitous apparatchiks, even after, according to the Washington Post, he said this leading up to the 2016 election:

“There’s two people I think Putin pays: Rohrabacher and Trump,” McCarthy (R-Calif.) said, according to a recording of the June 15, 2016, exchange, which was listened to and verified by The Washington Post. Rep. Dana Rohrabacher is a Californian Republican known in Congress as a fervent defender of Putin and Russia.

House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) immediately interjected, stopping the conversation from further exploring McCarthy’s assertion, and swore the Republicans present to secrecy...

Some of the lawmakers laughed at McCarthy’s comment. Then McCarthy quickly added: “Swear to God.”

Ryan instructed his Republican lieutenants to keep the conversation private, saying: “No leaks. . . . This is how we know we’re a real family here.”

Last week, McCarthy claimed this was a joke. Funny stuff. Considering this is also the guy that blabbed on national television that Republicans held the Benghazi hearings to lower Hillary Clinton's poll numbers, you might be sensing a pattern here. Keep up the good work, Kev.

 Related Story

Ted Cruz Was Laughed at On 

Meet the Press

JACK HOLMES Politics EditorJack Holmes is the Politics Editor at Esquire, where he writes daily and edits the Politics Blog with Charles P Pierce.

NPR BREAKING NEWS: DOJ Watchdog Finds No Evidence Of Bias In Russia Inquiry.

DOJ Watchdog Finds No Evidence Of Bias In Russia Inquiry Inspector General Michael Horowitz's report about Russia investigation found no evidence that politics improperly influenced the probe, but enumerated many problems with the Carter Page FISA application. Read More

RELATED STORIES READ: DOJ Inspector General's Report On The Russia Investigation

2016 PRE- ELECTION EVALUATION OF DONALD TRUMP..

BLAST FROM THE PAST...
FEATURE ARTICLES. MESSAGE TO ALL PROGRESSIVES: DON'T YOU SEE IT, EVEN NOW? PARTS 1-8, SELECTED PASSAGES.

Before the November, 2016 election, I PUBLISHED AN ARTICLE WITH THE TITLE:  
MESSAGE TO ALL PROGRESSIVES: DON'T YOU SEE IT, EVEN NOW? 
THIS ARTICLE HAD 8 PARTS, AND FOCUSED ON DONALD TRUMPS CANDIDACY, AND SPECULATED ABOUT THE TYPE OF PRESIDENT HE WOULD BE.

HERE ARE A FEW EXCERPTS TO COMPARE AND CONTRAST ABOUT WHAT WE KNEW THEN,
AND WHAT WE KNOW NOW.   


FROM PART 1.
With him, it has never been a matter of Intellect, Emotional Stability, or even a Coherent Political Platform.
The people who got Trump to where he is now, understand that getting him elected counts on the following...
...That Offensive Speech, along with a Lack of Knowledge, means very little if your Supporters
could care less, as long as it serves Their Political Agenda.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

FROM  PART 4.

The most amazing thing about Donald Trump claiming the Presidential Election is Rigged, is not that it is completely unexpected, but that anyone who really studies the problem couldn't see it coming.

It is a Strategy that fits in perfectly with those who already support him, for it requires none of the following:

-  An understanding of the Rules of Logic.

-  The Ability to separate Gossip, Rumor, and Innuendo
    from Factual Data.

-  The Understanding that you do not start any Investigation,
    be it Science, Law, Politics.,etc with a CONCLUSION, and
    then try to Shape the Evidence to Support it. BAD EVIDENCE
    DOES NOT CHANGE THE TRUTH, NO MATTER
    WHAT YOUR AGENDA IS.

  -  The REALIZATION THAT  BASELESS ASSERTIONS ARE
      MEANINGLESS, NO MATTER HOW OFTEN YOU REPEAT
      THEM.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

FROM PART 5.

So what Type of Voter would find someone like this appealing? Could it be the Type of Voter who sees the Writing on the Wall, with a set of beliefs and attitudes that no longer wields the Political Influence they once did?

Beliefs and Attitudes such as;

-  Religious Intolerance.

-  Patriarchal Rule.
-  Racial and Ethnic Divisions
   enforced by law.

Among others...

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

FROM PART 6.

Let us make a short list that could explain the rise of Donald Trump.
#1- The Affordable Care Act has allowed Millions of Americans access to Health Care.     
       However, on a case by case basis, there may be those who have fallen through the
       cracks, and have suffered economic distress because of the Law.
       The President and Progressive Democrats suggest altering parts of the ACA to provide
       relief for such cases.
      
       The Republicans- Repeal the Law.

#2-  Immigration.
       The President and Progressive Democrats propose:
       To Provide Assistance, and an Opportunity, for Refugees and Immigrants to Live and
       Work in the U.S. This includes Extensive Background Checks, Waiting Period,
       Possible Sponsorship, and Obtaining Legal Employment for Tax Purposes.

       The Republicans- GET OUT, AND STAY OUT.
       ONLY CHRISTIANS FROM SPECIFIC COUNTRIES NEED APPLY.   

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
FROM PART 7.
TAX BREAK INCENTIVES, WHICH ALLOWS THE RICHEST AMERICANS

TO RETAIN MORE OF THEIR WEALTH, WITH THE HOPE THAT THEY WILL

 PUMP THAT MONEY BACK INTO THE ECONOMY.

TO RECEIVE THIS INCENTIVE, ARE THEY

REQUIRED TO:

-  INVEST IN SPECIFIC INDUSTRIES THAT ARE STRUGGLING?- NO.

-  FINANCIALLY SUPPORT CORPORATIONS WHO PROVIDE A LIVING

   WAGE, OR A MEDICAL PLAN FOR THEIR EMPLOYEES?- NO.

-  ONLY SUPPORT AMERICAN BUSINESSES, INSTEAD OF TAKING THE

    FINANCIAL WINDFALL OVERSEAS?-  NO.

THESE TAX BREAKS ARE BASED ON THE "HOPE" THAT THEY WILL BE USED

TO BENEFIT THE COUNTRY AS A WHOLE.

However, don't worry. If these incentives are used unwisely, and the MONEY DISAPPEARS,

ALL IS NOT LOST. CORPORATIONS FORMED ARE PLACED INTO BANKRUPTCY,

MEANING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE FOOTING THE BILL FOR POOR MONEY

MANAGEMENT.  WHAT ABOUT THE WEALTHY INDIVIDUALS WHO RECEIVED THE

TAX BREAK BENEFITS, AND LOST THE MONEY? THEY WILL JUST DECLARE THESE

LOSSES ON THEIR INDIVIDUAL TAX RETURNS, AND BASICALLY GET IT ALL BACK.

THE REPUBLICANS- WHO ARE THEY FIGHTING FOR AGAIN?