I think Trump’s sudden lurch into rational skepticism at a socially inappropriate moment is hilarious, but I’m not going to pretend the whole “don’t tell the kids Santa is a story” routine makes any sense.

What’s the point of telling one’s children a lie that you know they’ll find out is a lie long before they’re out of childhood? Why not just tell them it’s a story? Adults don’t tell children pumpkins are the personified Spirit of Halloween, so what’s with all the “Shh shh don’t spill the beans” silliness? Apart from anything else I don’t see why parents would want to give their children reason to think Mommy and Daddy make a habit of lying to them.

Like so:

Hey, kids under 8 years old, thanks for reading The New York Times. But this time, please don’t. Maybe go play Minecraft or something instead.

… O.K., are they gone now? Cool. Here’s what President Trump said to a child about Santa Claus on Monday.

Jokey [as if kids under 8 read the Times!] but still referring to a real taboo. What Trump did is hilarious because of the taboo.

Sadly, we do not know how the 7-year-old, named Coleman, responded to the president of the United States’ suggestion that his parents had been lying to him all his life and that he would probably get wise to it soon. The president made the comments from the White House while he and the first lady, Melania Trump, fielded calls from a hotline for children wondering where Santa was.

Mr. Trump’s faux pas was roundly mocked on social media, where he was criticized for breaking the covenant in which we have all agreed to deceive our children.

Exactly; why has everyone agreed to do that? It’s kind of a bully move, and I remember being annoyed about it when I was a child.

I’m with Katha on this.

https://twitter.com/KathaPollitt/status/1077414771065004033

Claire McCaskill tells us what we already suspect – Senate Republicans know Trump is many cards short of a deck but they keep shtum because Republicans.

In the interview, the blunt-speaking Missouri Democrat, reflecting on her election loss to Republican Josh Hawley — a political novice whom she also referred to as a “bright shining object” — also didn’t mince words for the Republican Party.

While she warned that history “will judge some of my colleagues harshly that they didn’t stand up to this President at some of the moments where he has been unhinged about particularly the rule of law,” she also said that GOP senators have privately conceded they can’t speak out against Trump because of backlash they’d receive from their base.

“Now they’ll tell you, if it’s just the two of you, ‘The guy is nuts, he doesn’t have a grasp of the issues, he’s making rash decisions, he’s not listening to people who know the subject matter,’ ” she said. “But in public if they go after him … they know they get a primary, and they know that’s tough.”

So it’s all about them, and not the good of a country of 327 million people. “Gee, I don’t know, Marv, which is it gonna be, the welfare of 327 people plus to a considerable extent the rest of the 7 billion on the planet, or…me? Tough choice but I’m gonna hafta go with me, because me. Me and my job. That’s the important thing here.”

We knew this, but that doesn’t make it any less disgusting.

Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice in the Times yesterday:

This country’s national security decision-making process is more broken than at any time since the National Security Act became law in 1947. Nothing illustrates this dangerous dysfunction more starkly than President Trump’s reckless, unilateral decisions to announce the sudden withdrawal of all 2,000 United States troops from Syria and to remove 7,000 from Afghanistan.

These decisions went against the advice of the president’s top advisers, blindsided our allies and Congress, and delivered early Christmas presents to our adversaries from Russia and Iran to Hezbollah and the Taliban. The costs of this chaos are enormous, starting with the blunt, unnerving resignation of Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, one of the last senior administration officials committed to preserving American global leadership and alliances.

…

Cutting and running from Syria benefits only militants, Turkey, President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, Russia and Iran. We are abandoning our Kurdish partners, leaving them vulnerable to Turkey’s offensive, after they did the hard work of undermining the Islamic State.

But Turkey, Russia and Iran are going to be our new best friends. Aren’t they?

The near simultaneous order to withdraw half of the American troops in Afghanistan shocked our NATO allies, who have served alongside United States forces since Sept. 11, and shook the Afghan government in advance of precarious presidential elections next year. This arbitrary and precipitous withdrawal will strengthen the Taliban and undermine diplomatic efforts to jump-start reconciliation talks, while opening the field to greater Russian and Chinese influence.

But it will save money, which we can spend on Wall.

If our national security decision-making process were even minimally functional, there would have been a carefully devised plan to execute moves, including wrongheaded ones. The plan would have included strategies for mitigating risks to our partners on the battlefield and to friendly governments; advance consultations with allies; briefings of Congress; and a press strategy.

One reason our national security decision-making process is not minimally functional is because Bolton doesn’t talk to people and is always flying off somewhere instead of sticking around to talk to people.

The other, of course, is Mister Shit-for-brains.

The president couldn’t care less about facts, intelligence, military analysis or the national interest. He refuses to take seriously the views of his advisers, announces decisions on impulse, and disregards the consequences of his actions. In abandoning the role of a responsible commander in chief, Mr. Trump today does more to undermine American national security than any foreign adversary. Yet no Republican in Congress is willing to do more than bleat or tweet concerns.

Happy holidays.

https://twitter.com/waltshaub/status/1077309430084059137

Once again Peter Tatchell steps in to patronize women and tell us how to do better.

Martina #Navratilova tweets (& then deletes) rant about #trans athletes She promises to educate herself. Her tweet was wrong but she's apologised. Plus one misguided tweet does not cancel out her decades of equality activism. Time to forgive & move on https://t.co/twOuT4KISq

— Peter Tatchell (@PeterTatchell) December 23, 2018

There was no “rant.” She doesn’t need to “educate herself” (Peter Tatchell, on the other hand…). Her tweet was not wrong and she shouldn’t have to apologize. Her tweet was not “misguided” and she doesn’t need to be “forgiven” by Peter Tatchell.

Patronising forgiveness. Navratilova must be so grateful that you have decided to forgive her. She must have been worried that she had upset you.🙄
Any woman questioning trans ideology is now 'ranting'. Were you always such a misogynist and we just didn't notice?

— Goody Soup Dragon/Dr Heinz Kiosk/Dinosaur (@Jessie_XL) December 24, 2018

https://twitter.com/Jsoosty/status/1076990940236132353

https://twitter.com/Leadinglady0609/status/1076942116708904961

I scrolled through the replies for a long time and didn’t find a single one that wasn’t a variation on these.

The Treasury Secretary causes the Dow to plunge.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average opened sharply lower Monday after U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin shocked investors worldwide over the weekend by tweeting that he had spoken to the CEOs of the six largest U.S. banks to ensure they were liquid.

He really did – he tweeted it.

Today I convened individual calls with the CEOs of the nation's six largest banks. See attached statement. pic.twitter.com/YzuSamMyeT

— Steven Mnuchin (@stevenmnuchin1) December 23, 2018

The Post was predicting it last night.

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin startled financial analysts, bankers and economists on Sunday by issuing an unusual statement declaring that the nation’s six largest banks had ample credit to extend to American businesses and households.

…

Several analysts said Sunday night that his outreach to the banks and subsequent statement were likely to backfire and drive even more concern.

“Panic feeds panic and this looks like panic in the administration,” said Diane Swonk, chief economist at Grant Thornton. “Suggesting you might know something that no one else is worried about creates more unease.”

Panic in the administration? Surely not!

The message came after a week in which many U.S. stock market sectors were down 20 percent from their peak. The market decline has raised concerns about whether the economy is slowing faster than widely appreciated, and Trump has put enormous pressure on Mnuchin to try to stop the slide, people briefed on the discussions said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the topic’s sensitivity.

Trump’s anger at the stock market’s sharp drop has been directed at numerous people. The Washington Post and other outlets reported Saturday that Trump has discussed whether he could fire Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome H. Powell, who has steadily raised interest rates this year despite howls from the president.

Astute observers have been pointing out that increases in interest rates mean Trump has to pay more on his his huge loans, so that’s a conflict of interest right there.

Mnuchin had enjoyed a relatively close relationship with Trump until recent months. Trump has blamed Mnuchin for recommending Powell to the Fed job, and Trump has also fumed at Mnuchin over the stock market’s poor performance this year.

Because Mnuchin has total control over the stock market and he’s making it fall out of sheer spite.

The current public meltdown.

Mitch McConnell just told a group of people, and me, that he has been in the U.S. Senate for 32 years and the last two have been by far the best & most productive of his career. Tax & Regulation Cuts, VA Choice, Farm Bill, Criminal Justice Reform, Judgeships & much more. Great!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 24, 2018

The most important way to stop gangs, drugs, human trafficking and massive crime is at our Southern Border. We need Border Security, and as EVERYONE knows, you can’t have Border Security without a Wall. The Drones & Technology are just bells and whistles. Safety for America!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 24, 2018

“The President has been remarkable. I do not doubt that he will thrive in this new environment, and he will be a constant reminder of what populism is.” Thank you to Tammy Bruce and Steve Hilton. Presidential Harassment has been with me from the beginning!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 24, 2018

Oh well if Tammy Bruce and Steve Hilton say so it must be true! (Who? No idea.)

President @RT_Erdogan of Turkey has very strongly informed me that he will eradicate whatever is left of ISIS in Syria….and he is a man who can do it plus, Turkey is right “next door.” Our troops are coming home!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 24, 2018

Oh well if he told you that it must be true! He can’t possibly be lying to you.

Virtually every Democrat we are dealing with today strongly supported a Border Wall or Fence. It was only when I made it an important part of my campaign, because people and drugs were pouring into our Country unchecked, that they turned against it. Desperately needed!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 24, 2018

To those few Senators who think I don’t like or appreciate being allied with other countries, they are wrong, I DO. What I don’t like, however, is when many of these same countries take advantage of their friendship with the United States, both in Military Protection and Trade…

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 24, 2018

….We are substantially subsidizing the Militaries of many VERY rich countries all over the world, while at the same time these countries take total advantage of the U.S., and our TAXPAYERS, on Trade. General Mattis did not see this as a problem. I DO, and it is being fixed!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 24, 2018

And yet you used to call him “Mad Dog” with that tender gleam in your eye.

For all of the sympathizers out there of Brett McGurk remember, he was the Obama appointee who was responsible for loading up airplanes with 1.8 Billion Dollars in CASH & sending it to Iran as part of the horrific Iran Nuclear Deal (now terminated) approved by Little Bob Corker.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 24, 2018

Says Stupid Donnie Trump.

AMERICA IS RESPECTED AGAIN!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 24, 2018

Mein Führer, I can valk!

The only problem our economy has is the Fed. They don’t have a feel for the Market, they don’t understand necessary Trade Wars or Strong Dollars or even Democrat Shutdowns over Borders. The Fed is like a powerful golfer who can’t score because he has no touch – he can’t putt!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 24, 2018

And so the Stock Market takes another plunge.

Another patronizing “here’s how you be perfect like me” thread from some authenticated woke genius, a thread full of glib claims that fall apart if you breathe on them and smug instructions on how high to jump when we’re told to jump.

Hello cis friends, here is a reminder that it's okay to feel confused about trans rights. It's something very much outside of our experience and therefore hard to imagine.

Do you know what our role is when we feel confused like this? It's to shut the hell up and listen.

— Fiona Longmuir // Looking for Emily is out now! (@fionalongmuir) December 22, 2018

Bad beginning, taking “cis” as 1) a meaningful and useful descriptive and 2) an obviously privileged and dominant group that needs to check itself. I don’t recognize “not thinking I’m the sex I’m not” as a form of privilege, any more than I recognize “not thinking I’m a bird” as a form of privilege. The word “cis” is pretty much designed to make people feel guilty and defensive simply for not having a bizarre delusion. Granted, it’s convenient not to have a bizarre delusion, but convenience isn’t exactly the same thing as privilege.

And then also being told to shut up and listen right at the outset…no, I don’t think so.

It is okay not to understand at first. It is okay to have questions, as long as we are considerate of when and how we ask those questions.

We turn our confusion into curiosity. Google is our friend. Shutting the hell up and listening is our friend.

— Fiona Longmuir // Looking for Emily is out now! (@fionalongmuir) December 22, 2018

We’re “cis” whether we agree we are or not, we’re confused, we have to shut up and listen…listen, apparently, to this dogmatic and unpersuasive twerp who is herself “cis” but feels entitled to tell us to shut up because we’re…not cis in the correct perfected way she is? I guess? I can’t say I feel inclined to do either.

After much shutting the hell up and listening, we realise it's not confusing or complicated at all.

Do we believe that trans people know themselves ✅
Do we believe that trans people are worthy of our love and respect ✅
Do trans people owe it to us to justify their existence ❌

— Fiona Longmuir // Looking for Emily is out now! (@fionalongmuir) December 22, 2018

Ah, finally, a semi-substantive claim, or trio of claims. But such stupid claims…

First: do we believe that trans people know themselves? What, all of them? Of course not. How could we believe such a wild claim. People mostly don’t know themselves all that well, because there are all kinds of cognitive flaws and self-protecting motives to block and distort self-knowledge, so no, there’s no reason at all to “believe” that all members of a particular group know themselves.

Do we believe that trans people are worthy of our love and respect? What, all of them? Again? Who is calling whom “confused” here? Fiona Longmuir seems to be confusing human rights with universal love; they’re not the same at all. We don’t have to love or respect people to respect their rights. Human rights are not supposed to be contingent on our favorable emotions that way; they’re supposed to be independent of personal feelings, a birthright as opposed to an earned right. The question should be “Do we believe that trans people are worthy of human rights?” to which the answer would be of course. Demanding universal love is insanely greedy; it’s fatuous of Longmuir to be that greedy on behalf of others.

Do trans people owe it to us to justify their existence? Wrong question yet again. The issue is not existence, nor is it justification of existence.

(You may notice that the principles for understanding trans rights are the same as for understanding all other rights, i.e. everyone deserves to live happily and fully as their most authentic self, regardless of how different their experience is from our own.)

— Fiona Longmuir // Looking for Emily is out now! (@fionalongmuir) December 22, 2018

Yet another hyperbolic, absurd, unreasonable claim. “Everyone deserves to live happily and fully as their most authentic self” – oh really? What about people who decide their most authentic selves are rapists? What about white people who decide their most authentic selves are Native Americans? What about people who decide their most authentic selves are engineers when they know nothing about engineering and failed math in school every year?

Anyway, thanks for the schooling.

Julie Bindel on the potential peak trans moment:

The latest target in the vicious and often violent war being raged by extreme trans activists is one of my all-time heroes – the world tennis champion and LGBT rights campaigner, Martina Navratilova.

Navratilova has been accused of being ‘transphobic’ as a result of a tweet responding to a question from a follower about transgender women in sport.

‘Clearly that can’t be right. You can’t just proclaim yourself a female and be able to compete against women. There must be some standards, and having a penis and competing as a woman would not fit that standard’, tweeted Martina.

‘For me it’s all about fairness. Which means taking every case individually… there is no cookie cutter way of doing things.’

Julie notes how reasonable that sounds, and how predictable it is that some fanatic would pick a fight over it.

Martina’s main accuser is Dr Rachel McKinnon, an academic philosopher, transgender activist and competitive cyclist who won a women’s event at the UCI Masters Track World Championship, earlier this year. McKinnon, who I will refer to as ‘he’ and ‘him’ as his behavior appears to me to be classic male machismo, demanded that Navratilova apologize and criticized the comments.

Precisely. That’s why I did, too. Demanding to be called “she” and “her” while brandishing all the weapons in the macho bully playbook in the faces of women is not social justice but a fucking insult.

If anything gives us a clue as to the narcissistic element of the trans activist campaign it is this tweet from McKinnon:

‘You…realize I’m a world champion trans woman athlete who happens to publish and speak worldwide on trans athlete rights … right?’

That is correct, dear readers. McKinnon did the, ‘Don’t you know who I am’, to MARTINA!

McKinnon is kind of turning out to be the Trump of trans activism.

Finally, the world is waking up to the fact that the extreme transgender activists are nothing but men’s rights vigilantes, that hate women, but that unfortunately had the majority of well-meaning liberals in the palm of their hands.  Never has any so-called social justice movement in the past commanded such authority and instilled such fear. Coming after Navratilova was one bad move too many.

Come on out, the air is fine.

Freedom Caucus dude tells unpaid federal workers they chose this.

To the hundreds of thousands of federal employees who will work without pay or be furloughed over the holidays if there is a government shutdown, Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) says it is just part of the risk of working in public service.

Meadows, the chairman of the House Freedom Caucus and a leading conservative voice urging President Trump not to accept a short-term spending bill absent funding for a border wall, was responding to reporters who asked about Transportation Security Administration and Border Patrol agents who would be required to continue working on Christmas without getting a paycheck.

Takes some gall, doesn’t it – requiring people to work without getting paid (which is otherwise known as “slavery”) and then telling them it’s what they get for doing a government job.

“It’s actually part of what you do when you sign up for any public service position,” Meadows said.

Oh? It’s not part of what he did when he signed up for his public service job. Then again Freedom Caucus people think public service is a left-wing conspiracy.

[I]f the government does shut down, Meadows, unlike more than 800,000 federal workers, would still receive his pay on time. In past years, lawmakers in the Senate and the House have introduced “No Budget, No Pay” legislation, which would withhold lawmakers’ salary if they didn’t get a budget resolution and all 12 appropriations bills finished on time.

It passed once in 2013 as part of a deal to raise the debt ceiling, but it only applied for one year and wasn’t brought for a vote in subsequent years.

Oh well, at least we can say “Merry Christmas” again.