you know, it's one thing when trump says stupid things, and it's another when pompeo does.

the line of thinking is that if trump decides to occupy the white house in protest then the military will come in and drag him out, but under who's orders? trump is commander in chief, pompeo is the secretary of state and he just fired the defense secretary. pompeo is also deep state...

if some troika of trump, pompeo and the new defense secretary starts ordering troops around, they are in theory supposed to continue to listen to them. 

when's the breaking point, here? 

and what does it look like?

again: it's one thing if trump is running his mouth off, and it's another one altogether when his support staff is repeating it.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/pompeo-biden-smooth-transition-1.5796934

that migraine's not done yet, after all.

i've been unable to wake up or do anything for about 36 hours, now. my finalized breakfast post should be done by now. i've barely eaten. i had things to do this week that look like they're going to get canceled, too.

and, it's all because somebody decided to smoke something too close to my house.

i don't really see what the ethical problem here is.

i mean, i grasp that the rules are what they are, but this strikes me as fairly trivial. if somebody has information about money laundering or something, then out with it. 

but, if you're telling me that hiring your sister as a secretary in and of itself is unethical for some reason then i'm not following you on that.

i would hope the ethics commissioner pens a recommendation that the rule be altered, rather than come down too strictly on somebody for giving her sister - a potentially close advisor - a job in her office.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/yasmin-ratansi-liberal-mp-quits-hired-sister-1.5795407