US Politics Thread 2016-2020 [Archive] - Page 14

Bilge_Rat

06-29-17, 10:32 AM

All of those medals in the service of our country and yet he still lied knowing full well that he had received funds from the Russian government and failed to report it, plus lying to the VP was a big no no.

Fear of getting caught makes men and my ex-wife lie :haha:

well no, there you get into politics and splitting hairs.

Flynn was paid a speaking fee of $35,000 for appearing at an RT Gala. Technically, RT is a separate entity (more on that later). even more technically, he was being paid by the "speakers bureau", a U.S. based company that arranges speaking engagements, negotiates the fee, collects it and remits the fee, minus its commission to the speaker.

This might seem like a distinction without a difference, but that is the way the law works.

When Obama received the Nobel peace prize of $1 million in 2009, there was a discussion whether this would be allowed under the "emolument" clause which forbids gifts from "foreign governments". Ultimately, a legal opinion was issued saying the Nobel Foundation was not a "foreign government". However, if you look into the law governing the Foundation, you find out all 5 board members are appointed by the Swedish government.

Hard to legally justify that a payment from the Nobel Foundation is NOT a payment from a foreign government, but a payment from RT is when both entities are ultimately controlled by "foreign governments".

Another point, as Flynn has stated and no one has contradicted. He met with DoD officials both before the trip to advise them and after the trip for a debrief, so he was not hiding anything.

Mr Quatro

06-29-17, 01:31 PM

well no, there you get into politics and splitting hairs.

Flynn was paid a speaking fee of $35,000 for appearing at an RT Gala. Technically, RT is a separate entity (more on that later). even more technically, he was being paid by the "speakers bureau", a U.S. based company that arranges speaking engagements, negotiates the fee, collects it and remits the fee, minus its commission to the speaker.

This might seem like a distinction without a difference, but that is the way the law works.

When Obama received the Nobel peace prize of $1 million in 2009, there was a discussion whether this would be allowed under the "emolument" clause which forbids gifts from "foreign governments". Ultimately, a legal opinion was issued saying the Nobel Foundation was not a "foreign government". However, if you look into the law governing the Foundation, you find out all 5 board members are appointed by the Swedish government.

Hard to legally justify that a payment from the Nobel Foundation is NOT a payment from a foreign government, but a payment from RT is when both entities are ultimately controlled by "foreign governments".

Another point, as Flynn has stated and no one has contradicted. He met with DoD officials both before the trip to advise them and after the trip for a debrief, so he was not hiding anything.

I didn't know that, thank you for the input. Do you see what happens to a normal CNN viewer type of person (me) they receive the news while reading their mail or half looking at the screen and the thinking part gets twisted till they are for against something due to the wrong misconceptions.

We need more people like Bilge Rat and the rest of ya'll too that correct each other instead of berate each other.

vienna

06-29-17, 07:19 PM

This is a bit disturbing:

Trump’s voter-fraud commission wants to know voting history, party ID and address of every voter in the U.S. --

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/06/29/trumps-voter-fraud-commission-wants-to-know-the-voting-history-party-id-and-address-of-every-voter-in-america/?utm_term=.ad0ae25c549c

The chair of President Trump's Election Integrity Commission has penned a letter to all 50 states requesting their full voter-role data, including the name, address, date of birth, party affiliation, last four Social Security number digits and voting history back to 2006 of potentially every voter in the state.

Given the disarray and disorganization of the Trump administration, and given the recent breaches of data security, it does not seem the best of ideas to assemble such a mass of data in a centralized locale in what could be a highly questionable state of security and responsibility. Further, given the rather highly rabid partisan bent at the White House, turning over such data to such questionable entities is, at the least, seemingly unwise. At least one state's top election official seems to have this view:

Connecticut's Secretary of State, Denise Merrill, said she would "share publicly-available information with the Kobach Commission while ensuring that the privacy of voters is honored by withholding protected data." She added, however, that Kobach "has a lengthy record of illegally disenfranchising eligible voters in Kansas" and that "given Secretary Kobach's history we find it very difficult to have confidence in the work of this Commission."

Sad to say, there was little trust in the government before and there is muc less today...

<O>

Skybird

06-29-17, 08:17 PM

Preparing the black lists that later will be used. That is police states methods, no matter what those in defence of such means will say. Police states methods, nothing else.

Deeply worrying. Germans, Russians, Poles, Czechs, Romanians, and some others - we know such things, we have been there. Nasty stuff. Whenever the dictatorship started a progrom, it just had to pull the name lists just out of the drawers, in no time.

One more reason why I argue that states must never be trusted and must be dismantled instead.

Knowledge is power, and data is knowledge. Total data gives total power. Total power of the one - means total defencelessness of the other.

Mr Quatro

06-29-17, 09:28 PM

Another reason not to vote, uh? How many millions of people would that include?

Supreme Court can not be bought ... they are smart enough to see through this.

Fats Domino says it all: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbfMlk1PwGU

eddie

06-29-17, 09:35 PM

My state is against getting involved with turning this info over to them. I am glad of that! Apparently they want to make our info public too, great! No chance of identity theft there! They want to go back to check how a person voted too, since 2000, unreal,lol

em2nought

06-29-17, 10:26 PM

Just doing what he was sent there to do. Tired of getting fiscal responsibility beaten by the votes of dead people. :up:

em2nought

06-29-17, 10:32 PM

Maybe the question should have been "Will CNN make it to 2020?" :D

August

06-30-17, 06:30 AM

They want to go back to check how a person voted too, since 2000, unreal,lol

And just how would they do that? Ever put your name on a ballot? They're secret you know so while they may be able to tell who voted they can't tell HOW they voted.

Platapus

06-30-17, 07:04 AM

Since all this information is already given to the political parties as well as used in other social sciences research, I am not seeing a particular problem.

The only private thing about voting is who you vote for. When you voted,where you voted, your voting history and your voter registration information has been available.

But I agree. With the current paranoid attitude about the government, I am sure this will dissuade even more people from registering to vote. And that's not what we need.

VipertheSniper

06-30-17, 07:47 AM

Just doing what he was sent there to do. Tired of getting fiscal responsibility beaten by the votes of dead people. :up:

You gotta be joking..., I mean I haven't followed too closely, but IIRC the proposed budget had calculation error of 2 trillion $ in it. How can you be fiscally responisble, if can't even get the math right? Besides the GOP loves spending as much as the Dems, they just want to spend on different things

Jimbuna

06-30-17, 09:43 AM

US political thread reopened and two other related topics merged.

Can I respectfully ask that we all refrain from personal attacks etc. etc.

MaDef

06-30-17, 11:14 AM

This is a bit disturbing:

Trump’s voter-fraud commission wants to know voting history, party ID and address of every voter in the U.S. --

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/06/29/trumps-voter-fraud-commission-wants-to-know-the-voting-history-party-id-and-address-of-every-voter-in-america/?utm_term=.ad0ae25c549c

Given the disarray and disorganization of the Trump administration, and given the recent breaches of data security, it does not seem the best of ideas to assemble such a mass of data in a centralized locale in what could be a highly questionable state of security and responsibility. Further, given the rather highly rabid partisan bent at the White House, turning over such data to such questionable entities is, at the least, seemingly unwise. At least one state's top election official seems to have this view:

Sad to say, there was little trust in the government before and there is muc less today...
<O>
Don't go off just yet,
The letter, sent to the secretaries of state of all 50 states and obtained by The Hill, directs states to turn over “publicly-available voter roll data including, if publicly available under the laws of your state, the full first and last names of all registrants, middle names or initials if available, addresses, dates of birth, political party (if recorded in your state), last four digits of social security number if available, [and] voter history from 2006 onward.” most of that information they are requesting is not publicly avialable

Platapus

06-30-17, 12:14 PM

MaDef

06-30-17, 12:47 PM

I feel we do need some type of intra-state voter registration database. Especially these days when it is much more common for people to move around between states, the old state-centric record keeping may be obsolete.

Personally, I think the appropriate solution is for the individual states to develop their own inter-state data sharing schema without involving the federal government. But if the states are unable or unwilling to do so, I guess it is up to the Federal Government.

Protip to the state governments: If you don't come up with solutions for problems, the federal government will be more than happy to take that responsibility and power away from you.

It is not so much a case of the federal government taking power away from the states as much as a case of the states giving power to the federal government.That's the thing, there really isn't a problem, there are anomalies of course. but the inherent protection in our voter system is the fact that the system has over 3000 different points of control which makes it impossible (currently) to steal or effect anything beyond a county election.

This is why the brouhaha over the Russians hacking efforts are more amusing than alarming.

em2nought

06-30-17, 01:20 PM

Besides the GOP loves spending as much as the Dems, they just want to spend on different things

I absolutely agree, and that is probably a big part of why an "outsider" won the election. I even wish he was frugal in the vein of Warren Buffett, but what can you do.

Mr Quatro

06-30-17, 06:49 PM

That's the thing, there really isn't a problem, there are anomalies of course. but the inherent protection in our voter system is the fact that the system has over 3000 different points of control which makes it impossible (currently) to steal or effect anything beyond a county election.

This is why the brouhaha over the Russians hacking efforts are more amusing than alarming.

We should demand that Russia turn that information over right now, along with any list of hackers that already know that information or at least will know as soon as it is all in one unsafe place :arrgh!:

MaDef

06-30-17, 10:09 PM

We should demand that Russia turn that information over right now, along with any list of hackers that already know that information or at least will know as soon as it is all in one unsafe place :arrgh!:what good will that do? You may as well consider info from Illinois & Arizona public. And if you live in those states, you would be prudent to take what measures you need to to prevent ID theft.

Mr Quatro

07-01-17, 10:37 AM

what good will that do? You may as well consider info from Illinois & Arizona public. And if you live in those states, you would be prudent to take what measures you need to to prevent ID theft.

I was just kidding ... the Russians will do name matching though after they hack Trump's list and that's the truth. :yep:

Skybird

07-02-17, 04:02 PM

STEED

07-02-17, 04:21 PM

^
The originally clip is from 2007 WWE WrestleMania 23 match and it shows Trump body-slamming and repeatedly punching fellow billionaire McMahonhttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4659110/Trump-posts-wrestling-video-showing-beating-CNN.html

I don't know what to make of it apart from the fact the incident was years ago. :hmmm:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OA8JeVaYh_k

Mr Quatro

07-02-17, 04:27 PM

The Donald's latest stunt with that CNN thing must leave people wondering whether infantility really knows any limits. Even at elementary school level many little kids already are more adult, than this carricature of a man.

A disgrace.

Or a brain injury for which he cannot be held responsible then.

Do you mean this one or the one with NBC, both have brought the office of the POTUS to a whole new level. Trump is so sensitive to ridicule ... Surely they will continue to bait him :yep:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/07/02/trump-tweets-video-him-wrestling-down-cnn.html

President Trump on Sunday took his Twitter attack on CNN to a new level -- posting a video of himself apparently from his pro wrestling days in which the head of the person he tackles appears to have been replaced with a CNN logo.

Platapus

07-03-17, 06:39 AM

Wow, Trump is really an insecure person deep down.

Between this and the "mika" tweet, I really have doubts that he is emotionally ready to be PotUS.

vienna

07-03-17, 07:23 AM

Funny, I had the same feeling since the occurrences over the past few days. If this gets any worse, we may just see the implementation of Section 4 of the 25th. Trump had all the classic indicators of a narcissistic sociopath going onto office, but he is seemingly beginning to stray into the realm of the psychopathic. He is becoming less Presidential and more Capt. Queeg. Maybe its all an act: maybe he's come to the realization he doesn't really want the job, but his ego is so big he can't bring himself to quit, so he acts out in the hope he will be removed, making him less of a quitter and more of a "martyr" for his "cause". Either way we're in deep Bandini: if he is rounding the bend, who knows what damage he may do; if he's bucking to be ousted, we may have to deal with his messes even longer since removal would be a protracted process...

<O>

STEED

07-03-17, 11:51 AM

On Saturday, Donald Trump tweeted that he's redefining the social media behaviour of a "modern-day" president. On Sunday he once again proved it.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40475448

Buddahaid

07-03-17, 01:26 PM

"....not the same game anymore."

No it's not. It's childish, crass, undignified, crude, moronic, and low life. Great, we have a new president that has risen like the Phoenix from the ashes of the gutter. I'm so proud.

Méo

07-03-17, 06:07 PM

eddie

07-03-17, 09:22 PM

I can hear the chuckles from the G20 meeting coming up already! We should be so proud of him,lol

Buddahaid

07-03-17, 09:59 PM

He could make videos of himself wrestling all the other world leaders into line.....:arrgh!:

Méo

07-04-17, 12:26 AM

He could make videos of himself wrestling all the other world leaders into line.....:arrgh!:

If one of them dares to disagree, don't worry, it will come :Kaleun_Mad:

:O:

Catfish

07-04-17, 01:25 AM

"Two tribes", Frankie g.t.H.:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6-2b_3Dmxw

Maybe a real wrestling match between Putin and Trump? I'd love to see that.

Skybird

07-04-17, 05:06 AM

Rumour says that Disney plans to buy the White House compound and to build another Disneyland ressort around the WH. They want Trump as the funny clown at the entry greeting the visitors (or to scare them away, if the park gets too crowded).

eddie

07-04-17, 07:05 AM

I would laugh if Trump went to Hamburg! I could hear him trying to top Kennedy's famous speech in Berlin by declaring 'I am a Hamburger!':haha:

vienna

07-04-17, 04:37 PM

Don't give Trump any ideas...

<O>

Onkel Neal

07-04-17, 09:39 PM

Wow, CNN. Can't take it, don't dish it out.

How CNN found the Reddit user behind the Trump wrestling GIF (http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/04/politics/kfile-reddit-user-trump-tweet/index.html)

The apology came after CNN's KFile identified the man behind "HanA**holeSolo." Using identifying information that "HanA**holeSolo" posted on Reddit, KFile was able to determine key biographical details, to find the man's name using a Facebook search and ultimately corroborate details he had made available on Reddit.

CNN is not publishing "HanA**holeSolo's" name because he is a private citizen who has issued an extensive statement of apology, showed his remorse by saying he has taken down all his offending posts, and because he said he is not going to repeat this ugly behavior on social media again. In addition, he said his statement could serve as an example to others not to do the same.

CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change. :o

Man, that's really messed up. All that over a silly meme.

After posting his apology, "HanA**holeSolo" called CNN's KFile and confirmed his identity. In the interview, "HanA**holeSolo" sounded nervous about his identity being revealed and asked to not be named out of fear for his personal safety and for the public embarrassment it would bring to him and his family.
Haha, sounds like a lot of Internet warriors, when their mask of anonymity is pulled off they turn into little girls :haha:

vienna

07-05-17, 08:11 AM

It seems Trump isn't the only person with a less than stellar grasp of US history and the nation's foundations:

NPR Tweeted Declaration Of Independence, And Trump Supporters Flipped Out --

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/npr-declaration-of-independence_us_595c6525e4b0da2c7325bd50?ncid=edli nkushpmg00000313

Declaration of Independence tweets confuse Donald Trump supporters --

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/05/declaration-independence-tweets-confuse-donald-trump-supporters/

NPR tweeted the Declaration of Independence, and things got kind of awkward --

http://theweek.com/speedreads/709998/nrp-tweeted-declaration-independence-things-got-kind-awkward

Declaration of Independence: NPR Tweets Prompt Trump Opponents Into Talk of Revolution --

http://www.newsweek.com/anti-trump-resistance-ready-rise-after-reading-declaration-independence-tweets-631942

Well, you do realize, if the document was tweeted out by NPR, it must be a "fake document"... :haha:

<O>

Rockstar

07-05-17, 08:18 AM

The creator of the .gif may have buckled and apologized but I believe he did so under duress. In otherwords CNN threatened him in to doing so. He probably is underage and still lives with his parents, poor kid. Personally I thought the .gif was hilarious.

I say we start taking contributions for this kids lawsuit against CNN. Seems CNN can dish it out but cant take it.

https://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/16560/production/_96288419_kathygriffin-620x436.jpg

vienna

07-05-17, 08:41 AM

Actually, CNN was doing what any other major corporation or concern would do in a such a case, regardless of political inclination; whoever created the GIF used the CNN logo, a violation of trademark rights under the law and CNN is within its right to demand what is basically a "cease and desist" regarding the GIF. This is done all the time, in all kinds of situations, mainly for the protection of trademark rights and to firmly establish the extents of those rights; not actually actively enforcing those rights can lead to a sort of assumption of a form of analogy similar to a "grant of easement" in real estate laws; if you don't scrupulously enforce your rights in all cases, you stand to lose some of the ability to enforce those rights. There is also the issue of the possibility of the creator of the GIF being able to profit in some way from the distribution of the GIF with the CNN trademark attached, or the possibility of as even more egregious use made of the work which may adversely affect CNN. Whoever made the GIF is getting off easy: there has been no material damage done as of now and his potential liability is lessened by his acceptance of the CNN complaint...

<O>

u crank

07-05-17, 09:33 AM

I think that CNN's on air faux outrage at Trumps' tweets and other stuff is somewhat disingenuous. They should be thanking him at least once a day, every day.:yep:

CNN hit a ratings milestone this quarter, with the network posting its most-watched second quarter on record in total viewers, and its best second quarter among adults 25-54 in 14 years (since 2Q 2003) in Total Day. In prime time (M-Su and M-F), CNN averaged its highest 2Q delivery since 2003 (in both total viewers and among 25-54). During daytime (9am-4pm), CNN had its highest quarterly 25-54 delivery since 4Q 2008 and second highest total viewers level since 1Q 2003.

http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2017/06/27/cnn-has-most-watched-second-quarter-on-record/

Rockstar

07-05-17, 10:36 AM

Mr Quatro

07-05-17, 10:51 AM

Haha, sounds like a lot of Internet warriors, when their mask of anonymity is pulled off they turn into little girls :haha:

That's the biggest put down I've seen Neal do :yep:

This CNN and Trump's tweet is old news ... Hasn't it always been a practice that when the POTUS is out of the country that the opposition goes to work on talking trash about the president?

Maybe he will beat them to it and pull off another fumble in front of the whole world. Remember it's Putin vs Trump come this Friday.

vienna

07-05-17, 06:07 PM

...

Maybe he will beat them to it and pull off another fumble in front of the whole world. Remember it's Putin vs Trump come this Friday.

The chance of a fumble is always very high with Trump...

As far as Trump meeting Putin, isn't it a bit early for Trump's six-month performance review?. Hope Putin doesn't go to hard on the probie... :03: :D

<O>

vienna

07-06-17, 01:05 AM

I think that CNN's on air faux outrage at Trumps' tweets and other stuff is somewhat disingenuous. They should be thanking him at least once a day, every day.:yep:

http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2017/06/27/cnn-has-most-watched-second-quarter-on-record/

But, Trump is always saying CNN is failing , is way, way down in the ratings, spreads stories with little basis in fact or truth, and can't be trusted by the American people...

...Oh..wait..., maybe he was talking about himself... :hmmm:

...

Man, that's really messed up. All that over a silly meme.

Haha, sounds like a lot of Internet warriors, when their mask of anonymity is pulled off they turn into little girls :haha:

I think that is precisely what has happened in this case. The guy who posted the GIF has openly acknowledged he was actively trolling, seeking to stir up conflict and, after he posted the GIF and the Bandini came showering down, he realized he was in way too deep and pulled up stakes. But I give him props for owning up and trying to do right: he actually contacted CNN before they tried to contact him and apologized for what he had done, to me an act of a basically ethical person, regardless of what the media has been saying about him. He could have gone to ground, but he made the first move. Perhaps that is why CNN decided not to heap more troubles on him, make his true identity public, and make his life even more of a mess...

Trademark infringement, really? where did you see that? Im no lawyer but I'm not too sure trademark infringment applies. Call me crazy but it's probably why CNN didnt threaten anyone or Reddit with a lawsuit for tradmark infringment. Instead they threatened to expose the .gif creators indentity.

CNN didn't need to threaten an infringement lawsuit; it is pretty much implicit; you use the trademarked logo or name of a business in a less than appealing manner and you're facing the potential of a lawsuit. As far as threatening anyone, the statement of a fact of the rights of CNN in this is not really a threat, but it does serve to demarcate there is a limit to what will be tolerated should some one else think, just because CNN did not exercise their rights and options in this case, they now have 'carte blanche" to pull a similar stunt without consequences. Not a threat, just cold, hard fact...

From the detailed news reports about the situation, it seems both CNN and the 'troll' have reached an wholly amicable state regarding the disposition of the matter. He owned up and CNN didn't press the matter any further; smiles all around. The only people who seem to be put out are those, from both ends of the political spectrum, who seek to make political capital out of, as Neal put it, "a silly meme":

CNN Story About Source of Trump Wrestling Video Draws Backlash --

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/05/business/media/cnn-trump-tweet.html

Your dismissal of the trademark infringement shows a very narrow view. Defense of a trademark is very serious business; some companies have faced financial ruin because they didn't actively defend their 'mark':

'Genericide': Brands destroyed by their own success --

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-27026704

In the CNN case, the potential for loss extended to other liabilities other than just the trademark. For example, let's say CNN didn't try to take action at all regarding the GIF and let it slide, giving the impression they were 'okay' with the posting; now, say a brain-dead Trump supporter decided to use the 'implied' approval by Trump of taking violent against journalists as a rationale for posting new and, perhaps, more incendiary, CNN logo based memes that result in some other brain-dead Trump guy actually beating a reporter, causing severe injury or worse. The reporter sues and the attorney files not only against the attacker and the poster of the meme(s), but also CNN. Why? The attorney could argue CNN holds some liability because they did not act to deter or stop the original meme, giving the meme poster or attacker, or anyone else, the impression there might well be no consequences to the posting and the assault, contributing to an atmosphere in which the crime could take place. Farfetched? Not really; stranger arguments have been made in litigation and, in jury trials, have resulted in very large financial judgements. Now, say, the poster of the inciting meme(s) and the attacker haven't the financial means to pay a large judgement; here's where a concept known as "deep pockets" comes to bear: since the other parties to the payment of the judgement can't pay, CNN, with its "deep pockets" will have to bear the brunt of satisfying the judgement. All that because they chose not to pursue a 'trivial' matter. "For want of a nail, the shoe was lost..."...

Now that I've bored the bejusus out of everybody, including myself, here is a bit of funny video I found; the finding of this video was due to a to a post by Sailor Steve (credit where credit is due) in another thread of another video by this duo:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJY_5rnEilY

<O>

u crank

07-06-17, 07:56 AM

But, Trump is always saying CNN is failing , is way, way down in the ratings,

That's easily proven to be false.

..spreads stories with little basis in fact or truth,

The amount of retractions, corrections and dismissals lately prove that to be true. When Breitbart News is fact checking CNN the worm is beginning to turn.

and can't be trusted by the American people...

And of course which American people? Trump's supporters don't trust the media and why would they?

The truth is that President Trump and CNN/MSNBC etc. are co enablers. It is no secret that the MSM gave Trump a ton of free publicity, some estimate it at $5 billion worth.

I hesitate to use the term “free media”, because Donald Trump earned his media coverage. He earned it from his bombastic and insulting statements, he earned it from pulling in massive crowds to his rallies, and he earned it from winning primary after primary. Whether by design or accident, he bypassed paid advertising to bask in the attention and validation of a 24-hour news cycle.

https://www.mediaquant.net/2016/11/a-media-post-mortem-on-the-2016-presidential-election/

Dr. Frankenstein meet your monster. And of course for CNN it's all gravy.

CNN’s revenue has topped $1 billion for several years, but this is the first time in its 36 years it could see $1 billion in profit.

http://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/cnn-could-see-its-first-billion-dollar-year/309457

And the future is not good.

The 2016 election pointed to something we already knew, but needed confirmation on a national and global scale: earned media, both social and traditional, is significantly more effective in driving market awareness then paid media (advertising). During the GOP primary, anti-Trump groups within the GOP spent nearly $30 million in advertising to unseat Donald Trump as the party’s potential nominee! But during the same period Trump drove $400 million in high-stakes news coverage – without spending a dime.

Yea...Good night, and good luck.:D

eddie

07-06-17, 04:23 PM

And what does our fearless leader do when speaking with the President of Poland? He bitches about CNN!!:haha::haha::har::har:

Acts just like a spoiled brat who needs his butt kicked,lol

August

07-07-17, 07:01 AM

And what does our fearless leader do when speaking with the President of Poland? He bitches about CNN!!:haha::haha::har::har:

Acts just like a spoiled brat who needs his butt kicked,lol

Uh huh, because answering media questions in a press conference is just not something that a President should ever do. :roll:

Unless of course it's a Democrat attacking Fox news right?:

“Attacking the news media is a time-honored White House tactic,” says media critic Brian Stelter, but “to an unusual degree,” this administration has “narrowed its sights to one specific organization,” which it has deemed “part of the political opposition.”Stelter quotes a top White House staffer: “We’re going to treat them the way we would treat an opponent,” she says. “We don’t need to pretend that this is the way that legitimate news organizations behave.”

Stelter didn’t write those words about President Donald Trump, and the rogue media organization isn’t Stelter’s current employer, CNN. Nor is the White House aide defending the strategy of open hostility from Sarah Huckabee Sanders or Kellyanne Conway.

Stelter wrote those words in 2009, for The New York Times, and he wrote them about President Barack Obama, who was then in the midst of furious battle with Fox News. In many ways, it was a protracted fight that presaged the one Trump is now waging against CNN and the rest of the mainstream media.

http://www.newsweek.com/when-obama-went-war-fox-news-632424

August

07-07-17, 07:13 AM

I found this article from the right leaning PJ Media interesting:

After sixteen years of listening to CNN and the networks and WaPo and the New York Times attack the honest George W. Bush relentlessly, then coddle the corrupt Barack Obama; after listening to Middle-American values disdained and the Tea Party movement denigrated; after being told their opinions were only a backlash to the progressive genius of the elites; after being told they must not say what was right in front of their eyes whether it was Islamic terrorism or that boys aren't girls or that cops make black neighborhoods safer... after sixteen years of snarling contempt from the fancy-pants mouthpieces of large media corporations, the American people elected Donald Trump, in part at least, to send the media a message.
The message is: Go to hell. It's about time the press received it loud and clear.

https://pjmedia.com/andrewklavan/2017/07/06/doin-the-cnn-two-step/

Mr Quatro

07-07-17, 01:36 PM

Do we have a miracle in progress? Donald Trump hasn't made a mistake yet ... I wonder what happen in his 2 and 1/2 hour meeting with Putin?

Catfish

07-07-17, 03:04 PM

Rockstar

07-07-17, 03:13 PM

What i like is that he accepts Russia/Putin, instead of ignoring as it happened with Obama.

I still wonder why this is so, because while Obama was the leftist antichrist he sure had an anti-russian cold war attitude, while the right-wing reds hater Trump treats Russia as a partner.
The roles have somehow changed.

Sorry for posting here, i really should refrain :O:

It would seem by this article Trump and his associates may threaten the other party's objectives in Ukraine. It also leads me to believe why the airwaves and our minds were recently flooded with get Trump and anti Russia rhetoric.

http://www.westernjournalism.com/the-democrats-are-lining-their-pockets-in-ukraine/

Catfish

07-07-17, 03:33 PM

^ following that article and logic Obama did all to grant US companies advantages and eliminate competitors, certainly with the CIA's and certain companies' advisors. That plans can go wrong is not reserved to "democratic" or "republican" politics.

So Trump is against US companies investing and making profit in the Ukraine, because this was a "democratic" idea? I guess I am completely out of understanding who accuses who for what reason :hmmm:

Rockstar

07-07-17, 05:12 PM

Oh I dont think for a moment Trump is against business in Ukraine. But when he indicates a desire to make friends with Russia. I bet it encourages Ukraine to forsake their democrat business overlords in favor for him.

Honestly its just my imagination. "Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men?"

http://s71.podbean.com/pb/2e1a70d02b9706785d2683451a95ffb9/59600733/data3/fs23/296127/uploads/The-Shadow-Knows.jpg. :D

Skybird

07-08-17, 07:01 PM

Criminalization of free speech in the US. https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10544/criminalize-free-speech Comparable developments in Europe.

Buddahaid

07-08-17, 09:58 PM

I wonder just how a minority is defined. As a white male in California, I'm a minority now.

ikalugin

07-09-17, 11:15 AM

Ukraine is not in the best state in terms of rule of law and health of institutions so making legitimate buisness there would be -hard-.

vienna

07-10-17, 01:17 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6_ckWZCHW4

...Amen...

<O>

Jimbuna

07-10-17, 01:39 PM

^ Interesting and thought provoking :yep:

August

07-10-17, 02:20 PM

I see President Trump is still pissing off all the right people! :up:

August

07-10-17, 03:35 PM

Yes, They Really Do Despise Their Civilization

By Rod Dreher (http://www.theamericanconservative.com/author/rod-dreher) • July 7, 2017, 8:49 AM (http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/yes-they-really-do-despise-their-civilization/)

You can say this for Donald Trump: he’s great at useless provocation, but sometimes his provocations are helpful by what they force his opponents to reveal. The Warsaw speech was stunning in this way. I’m glad I read it before I read any of the left-liberal comment on it, else I might have thought it had been drafted by Dr. Goebbels.
Here’s a transcript of the entire speech. (https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/07/06/remarks-president-trump-people-poland-july-6-2017) Go read it yourself. It won’t take long.
I thought it not a bad speech, if somewhat anodyne in the way all such speeches tend to be. It is risible to hear Donald J. Trump talk about how we need “strong families” and “strong values” to survive as a civilization, but the hypocrisy of the speaker doesn’t negate the truth of what he has to say, any more than the great personal virtue of a speaker makes his own claims true (see Jimmy Carter).

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/yes-they-really-do-despise-their-civilization/

eddie

07-10-17, 04:45 PM

^ Interesting and thought provoking :yep:

And spot on too!

Rockstar

07-10-17, 06:49 PM

August

07-10-17, 08:14 PM

Now this is really "spot on".

A Miserable Week For The Left

https://media.townhall.com/townhall/ColPics/Hunter.jpg (https://townhall.com/columnists/derekhunter)
Derek Hunter (https://townhall.com/columnists/derekhunter)
|
Posted: Jul 09, 2017 12:01 AM
What a miserable week it’s been for Democrats. Not that they’ve had many good weeks of late, nor have Republicans for that matter. But for the political left it’s been deliciously bad…and a whole hell of a lot of fun to watch.
The week was capped off by dueling hypocrisies from the radical progressives of the party. After days of breathless condemnation of a joke tweet from President Trump about CNN, the pearl-clutching claims that a few seconds of video will lead to violence against their employees gave way to insistence that words don’t matter.
Anti-American progressive hero Linda Sarsour declared her desire for “jihad” against Donald Trump. Conservatives, mistakenly acting as if the same rules liberals impose on others apply to them, rightly pounced. But the rules don’t apply to the left, and they won’t stand idly by as they are held to their own standards.
Curiously, multiple defenses quickly popped up across the media for a woman who had helped organize the Women’s March, opened only to liberal women then claimed to speak for all women. (Misogyny much?)
The responses evolved quickly, with hive-minded precision, from “her words were taken out of context” to “jihad doesn’t mean jihad,” to being dismissed as what one prominent liberal pundit might call a “nothingburger.”
Under normal circumstances they would be correct. But these aren’t normal circumstances. We live in a world where leftists police speech with Nazi-efficiency. Say anything their twisted liberal minds can distill as racist, classist, homophobic, etc., and no holds are barred. Say the word “crusade” on a college campus – those who don’t flee to the safety of their coloring books and Play-Doh will call the police to report a hate-crime.
The context doesn’t matter, nor does the fact the Crusades were a response to Muslim barbarism. The word is verboten by leftists as anti-Muslim hate-speech. Yet, jihad can mean anything, and thinking it may mean one particular thing, especially when uttered by someone with a radical anti-American ideology, is the highest form of bigotry.
Meanwhile, President Trump delivered a passionate speech defending western civilization and its accomplishments, which have benefited all mankind, and progressives proclaimed it problematic.
He pointed out the civilized world wrote symphonies; the Washington Post declared it a racist dog whistle. Since the Muslim world created “the lute, musical scales and the ancestor of the violin” hundreds of years ago, it is unjust to acknowledge Beethoven and Mozart existed. One can only imagine the rage-spiral that author would go into if we focused only on advances from the last millennia.
No liberal insanity happens on its own, and The Atlantic wasn’t going to allow the Post to cannonball into the deep end of the stupid pool alone. It countered with a piece that’s worth mentioning only to point out the unhinged nature of the title, “The Racial and Religious Paranoia of Trump’s Warsaw Speech.”
Just to clarify: “jihad” is a misunderstood term of peace and “the West” is a racist term just this side of genocide? Interesting.
Apparently hearing dog-whistles all day rots the brain and causes the afflicted to believe references to “the West” and “our civilization” as meaning only white people. Another known side-effect is hearing “welfare” or “poor” and thinking “black people,” even though more white people are poor and on welfare than anyone else. Hopefully someday there will be a treatment for the affliction.
It’s enough to make one wonder if these people realize there are flights leaving this wasteland of hate and oppression on a daily basis. I know if I lived somewhere I so thoroughly despised I’d bolt in a heartbeat.

But they don’t really hate this country. They don’t love it either. They use it and their propaganda to pad their cushy lives by leeching off the uninformed and the victims of the actions they get passed into law. There’s a lot of attention and money in absolving people of responsibility for their own lives.
Speaking of propaganda, no one had a worse week than CNN.
After the president tweeted a video of him body slamming the CNN logo, the once-great (OK, passable) news network expended more journalistic energy hunting down the maker of that clip than it did investigating anything to do with the Obama administration for the last eight years.
Once CNN found him, it didn’t identify him. The network claims it was because it just wanted to make sure he wasn’t in touch with anyone at the White House, and once this was confirmed, it decided not to ruin his life.
Seems he’d posted other things CNN deemed racist and anti-Semitic. Maybe he did; maybe he didn’t – they’ve all been deleted. But CNN appointed itself the arbiter of the suitability of those things and reserved the right to expose him should he ever dare to post anything it deems offensive in the future.

It’s not blackmail, the network says, just a clarification it made no deal with him to keep his name private. And it’s true that is not blackmail … it’s closer to extortion.
But the real problem is CNN thinking it needed to track him down in the first place.
Who cares who made the video? It had been on the Internet for some time and shared a lot. After having to retract a story last week and unburden itself of three employees involved, CNN should’ve turned its jaundiced eye toward its own newsroom, not some anonymous dude with too much time on his hands. Journalists are supposed to have standards and ethics; they’re not supposed to harass some guy for mocking them. There aren’t Pulitzers for making .gifs.
It’d be nice if the people throwing their shoulders out patting themselves on the back for how important their work is took that work seriously enough to do it properly.
Instead we get a team of reporters tracking down Reddit posters and fresh-out-of-college “journalists” complaining about decades old dress codes in the House of Representatives like they just discovered the Pentagon Papers.
It’s a pathetic group of people running around with media credentials these days. The delicate snowflakes are graduating and getting jobs alongside those who pioneered their defective self-importance. This week they all repeatedly soiled their sheets…and it was hilarious.

https://townhall.com/columnists/derekhunter/2017/07/09/a-miserable-week-for-the-left-n2352323

vienna

07-11-17, 12:27 AM

China and Russia the new world leaders? Lol. China's goals are regional. Let's keep in mind too how media portrays Russia and reality is two different things. Russia with a crap economy, debt out the wazoo and a 10th of the U.S. GDP can lead what?

Whats Australia doing? Germany, France and the rest of Europe? Every time the US acts all they ever do is complain. Damned if we do damned if we dont.

Here's the G19 big chance to shine to show the world their plan to lead to confront their perceived threats. Instead of behaving like little spoiled holier than thou children.

All this aussie media drama queen could produce was a bad case of butthurt. While Hamburg burned.

Losers the whole lot of them.

The US has far more assets and net worth than debt, and we don't really owe much to the outside world.

Yes, and Trump, purportedly, has 'billions and billions' in personal wealth and he's still a chump. Wealth is like intelligence: it's useless unless you know how to use it properly. At the G20, Trump was like the doddering old uncle in a family, who patters about, spouts gibberish, and from whom the family makes a note to hide the car keys. Trump has not made "America Great Again" and he can't because he doesn't know how and the brown-nosed sycophants surrounding him haven't got a clue, either. At home in the US, instead of showing leadership, the Twit, er, Tweeter-In-Chief spends all his time pursuing petty personal grudges and fabricating wildly inaccurate "facts" (in some cases, outright lies) in a failed effort to bolster his "Administration", which is little better than a house of cards built on a foundation of sand. Trump could have completely missed the G20 and he would have had the same effect: absolutely none at all. He was so totally out of his depth, the rest of the nations basically just barely tolerated or ignored him. Even with the worst of our Presidents, the presence of the Chief Executive at an international conference or meeting was an event; now its more like "Oh, dear, here comes poor, old Uncle Donald. Well, just smile politely and maybe he'll tire and just move on". No one takes him seriously, as a serious leader, and by extension, neither is our nation now viewed seriously...

Case in point: U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross was speaking in Germany, via video conference, at an international business conference prior to the G20 on Tuesday 27 June 2017; his speech was so meandering (much like Trump's foreign and economic "policies") and aimless and slow, he was cut off in mid speech, something that would have been unthinkable under other, respected, administrations. In fact, when Ross was cut off, the action was met by cheers, applause, and laughter from the other conference attendees:

Germans Cut Off Commerce Secretary in Mid-Speech --

http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/06/28/germans-cut-off-commerce-secretary-in-mid-speech/

The current administration and its actions are not something the US can be proud of and Trump has not made "Trump has not made "America Great Again": he has diminished the nation, both at home and abroad...

Speaking of things America cannot be proud of, the Trump club of chumps has been busy digging themselves even more holes over the Russian election-tampering mess:

Before arranging a meeting with a Kremlin-connected Russian lawyer he believed would offer him compromising information about Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump Jr. was informed in an email that the material was part of a Russian government effort to aid his father’s candidacy, according to three people with knowledge of the email.
Trump Jr. Was Told in Email of Russian Effort to Aid Campaign --

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/10/us/politics/donald-trump-jr-russia-email-candidacy.html

I can already hear Trump blaming Obama, the Clintons, the media, moon-wobble, and anyone/anything else other than his and his minions ineptitude and criminality. This is not really a surprise: a very large majority of the US voters saw the probability of the debacles and wisely voted for some one, any one, else...

<O>

vienna

07-11-17, 02:47 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anAYFvvYO40

<O>

August

07-11-17, 07:13 AM

All this Trump bashing is hilarious given the fact that no matter what dirt they throw at him the American people still dislike the Democrats more than they do Trump and they can't fix it. :har:

Since early June, when voters in Georgia’s sixth congressional district rubbed yet more salt in their 2016 election wounds, Democratic pols and sages have been pondering why, as Ohio congressman Tim Ryan put it, “our brand is worse than Trump.” That’s a low bar, given the president’s nearly subterranean approval ratings, but so far the Blue party has mostly been turning to an inside-the-box set of policy and political memes: jobs programs, talk of a mutiny against House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, and better marketing—or, in Ryan’s words, “branding”—of the Democratic message.

What’s missing from this list is the most important—and most challenging—item of all: solving the liberal “deplorable” problem. The white working class that hoisted Donald Trump to an unexpected victory may not always admire the man, but they know that he doesn’t hate “people like me,” in the pollsters’ common formulation. And they have good reason to think that Democrats, particularly coastal and media types, do hate them: consider Frank Rich’s snide and oft-cited article, “No Sympathy for the Hillbilly (http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/03/frank-rich-no-sympathy-for-the-hillbilly.html).” It’s possible that white working-class voters would back a party filled with people who see them as racists and misogynists, with bad values and worse taste, because they all want to raise taxes on Goldman Sachs executives, but it seems a risky bet.

https://www.city-journal.org/html/can-democrats-make-nice-deplorables-15313.html

Rockstar

07-11-17, 07:21 AM

more emotional butthurt and drama. :haha:

Mr Quatro

07-11-17, 08:33 AM

August

07-11-17, 08:59 AM

Yea! August is back from the G20 conference in Germany :)

How did it go August? It's good to have both sides on here for sure. :yep:

Oh yeah gotta represent, or is that testify. :hmmm:

Platapus

07-11-17, 03:46 PM

more emotional butthurt and drama. :haha:

No kidding. They won the election and they are still whining.

Platapus

07-11-17, 06:05 PM

August

07-11-17, 06:53 PM

Solid proof of collusion with the Russian Government:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsFR8DbSRQE

Buddahaid

07-11-17, 07:57 PM

No kidding. They won the election and they are still whining.

:haha:

MaDef

07-11-17, 11:03 PM

I am sure we are all reading about Donny Jr's E-mails with Russia.

Let's assume what what is being reported is true

Let's, for a moment ignore the failure to report/lying as that is a different issue.

Was Jr, communicating with Russian nationals, in this context, in violation of a federal law?

I don't care if we did not like it, or if it was a poor decision. I just want to know if there was anything illegal about what he did.

I can't find any federal statutes that address this (other than the concealment and lying). None of the news media is citing any actual laws that Jr might have broken.

Which raises the question that if what he did was not illegal, why did he conceal it?

Whether his contact was legal or illegal is a pretty important issue. And if what he did was illegal, then an actual federal law should be cited.
As a private citizen, Trump Jr. is under no obligation to report foreign contacts. If he truly was "negotiating" with a foreign government, you might charge him under the Logan Act. That's a long shot though, the law is 218 years old and only 1 person has ever been indicted (1803), and the charges were dropped. Besides that, there is some feeling that the law is so vague that it might not be constitutional as it is currently written.

vienna

07-12-17, 01:35 AM

Some views:

Trump administration: There's no evidence of collusion. 12 legal experts: Yes, there is. --

https://www.vox.com/2017/7/11/15952232/donald-trump-jr-lawyer-russia-manafort-kushner-clinton-2016-election

What Donald Trump Jr. did was wrong and maybe illegal. But it wasn’t treason. --

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/7/11/15953854/donald-trump-jr-treason-no

These are the laws Donald Trump Jr. might have broken --

https://news.vice.com/story/these-are-the-laws-donald-trump-jr-might-have-broken

A bit of humor about Trump's preparedness for and 'stellar' performance at last week's G20 meeting :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tq2vQVBqsvA

<O>

vienna

07-12-17, 02:47 AM

Regarding Trump Jr. releasing the content of his emails as an act of "transparency", it seems he was 'transparent' only because it was 'apparent' the New York Times had obtained the text of the emails and was about to publish the texts; in fact, the Times actually contacted Junior, told him about the imminent disclosures and asked him for a comment on the texts:

Donald Trump Jr. purposefully scooped the New York Times by publishing his own Russia bombshell emails --

http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-jr-new-york-times-email-2017-7

New York Times story triggered the release of Trump Jr. emails --

https://news.google.com/news/search/section/q/NY%20times%20was%20about%20to%20publish%20Trump%20 jr%20emails%20about%20russia/NY%20times%20was%20about%20to%20publish%20Trump%20 jr%20emails%20about%20russia?hl=en&ned=us

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3EY8aLutbg

<O>

Skybird

07-12-17, 06:16 AM

It should come as no surprise that the accused only reveals what he must. Transparency? I did not believe in that for even just one second.

Rockstar

07-12-17, 08:00 AM

Oh no not the dreaded panel of experts! :haha:

I always keep in mind the originator of these stories happens to be the NYT. A company struggling hard to keep their readership.

Now for these questions

Let's assume what is being reported is true. THAT right there is the problem. IMO what we are witnessing now is no different than the birther idiots and the other group of idiots who proclaimed the former president ad-Dajjal. You would think accusers could have the common courtesy to present atleast one piece of compelling evidence. But no, instead we are inundated with links to Steven Cobert comedy skits and panels of self proclaimed experts throwing darts. Neither prove anything but are filled with 'might haves' and 'maybes' and too be honest a good laugh all intended to sway opinion.

Which raises the question that if what he did was not illegal, why did he conceal it?

That doesnt make any sense. If what he did is not illegal then what is the concern of concealment? Last time I checked everyone in this country including the President of the U.S. has a reasonable expectation of privacy. Somethings are simply none of our business but there are some who really hate that part of our constitution and love to abuse it. In the name of freedom of the press of course.

I heard it said Jr. was corresponding via email with people who might have some dirt on the competition. What I find amusing is the pooring out of accusations and outrage that anyone would do something like that. Surely it must be illegal maybe even treason! But then we read stories from our own media finding this dirt on Jr.'s search for dirt and the public is tuning in to get dirt on Jr. Doing the same thing they're accusing him of. I think thats called hypocrisy.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dYTfzfsbiUI

August

07-12-17, 09:46 AM

..instead we are inundated with links to Steven Cobert comedy skits and panels of self proclaimed experts throwing darts. Neither prove anything but are filled with 'might haves' and 'maybes' intended to sway opinion.

That's all the Democrats have come up with ever since Trump began his campaign. Wait and see how loud the whining will be when he gets reelected.

Last time I checked everyone in this country including the President of the U.S. has a reasonable expectation of privacy. Somethings are simply none of our business but there are some who really hate that part of our constitution and love to abuse it. In the name of freedom of the press of course.

C'mon you know that the right to privacy only extends to registered Democrats...

Rockstar

07-12-17, 10:06 AM

Warning this video contains vulgar language and hate speech.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BXpi3F0E5ro

Onkel Neal

07-12-17, 10:31 AM

I am sure we are all reading about Donny Jr's E-mails with Russia.

Let's assume what what is being reported is true

Let's, for a moment ignore the failure to report/lying as that is a different issue.

Was Jr, communicating with Russian nationals, in this context, in violation of a federal law?

I don't care if we did not like it, or if it was a poor decision. I just want to know if there was anything illegal about what he did.

I can't find any federal statutes that address this (other than the concealment and lying). None of the news media is citing any actual laws that Jr might have broken.

Which raises the question that if what he did was not illegal, why did he conceal it?

Whether his contact was legal or illegal is a pretty important issue. And if what he did was illegal, then an actual federal law should be cited.

I agree. I agree!

This could be a real windfall, take out Trump and if investigation reveals evidence of the Clinton corruption and ties to the Russians, two birds one stone. Win win.

Of course, you know, there was a lot of corruption by the Democrats during the election and the left and media don't seem as concerned. There was a member of the CNN staff feeding questions to the Clintons and who is asking federal law to be cited in that case? When Comey admited last summer that Hillary broke federal law, the whole thing was swept under the rug by Obama. Wheres the outrage?

I don't care if this leads to kicking Trump out of office, that would be fine by me. But I am amazed by the shock and outrage of some that Trump/Trump Jr tried to dig up dirt on Hillary to win the election yet can ignore their hypocrisy.

eddie

07-12-17, 12:53 PM

Warning this video contains vulgar language and hate speech.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BXpi3F0E5ro

Should be a number of videos about the morons who voted for Trump too!:haha:

Catfish

07-12-17, 12:57 PM

[...] But I am amazed by the shock and outrage of some that Trump/Trump Jr tried to dig up dirt on Hillary to win the election yet can ignore their hypocrisy.

On one hand i guess every side has always tried to lie about the political enemy, like with Obama's birth certificate, being a muslim, the antichrist blah. In the same vein heaping dirt on H. Clinton also consisted entirely of lies and accusations, without evidence. It is just that the people were so peed off with the political circus that they voted for Trump.

I wonder why people wonder, that the democrats try to do the same :03:

Regarding lieing, while Clinton is probably "the norm" for a politician, Trump is completely off the charts, Borderline pathological, as someone here said. By all means, they are really not in the same league.

August

07-12-17, 12:58 PM

Yet more Dem/Rus collusion:

http://dailysignal.com/2017/07/10/lawmakers-cite-evidence-russia-colluded-with-u-s-green-groups-to-block-frackin/

The Daily Signal obtained a copy of the June 29 letter (https://science.house.gov/sites/republicans.science.house.gov/files/documents/06_29_2017%20CLS%20%26%20Weber%20-%20Mnuchin.pdf)to Mnuchin from Reps. Lamar Smith and Randy Weber, both Republicans who chair energy-related House panels. (See the full letter below.)
Smith and Weber quote sources saying the Russian government has been colluding with environmental groups to circulate “disinformation” and “propaganda” aimed at undermining hydraulic fracturing. Commonly called fracking, the process makes it possible to access natural gas deposits.
The sources include a former secretary-general of NATO, who is quoted by the GOP congressmen as saying:
Russia, as part of their sophisticated information and disinformation operations, engaged actively with so-called nongovernmental organizations—environmental organizations working against shale gas—to maintain dependence on imported Russian gas.
This anti-fracking campaign seizes upon environmental issues and health concerns that could be used to constrain U.S. drilling and fracking exercises, the letter explains.
Gazprom, a large Russian oil company, stands to benefit if Russian-funded environmental activism results in reduced levels of fracking and natural gas production in the United States, Smith and Weber tell Mnuchin. They write:
It is easy to see the benefit to Russia and Gazprom that would result from a reduction in the U.S. level of drilling and fracking—a position advocated for by numerous environmental groups in the U.S.
Smith, chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, joined Weber, chairman of that panel’s energy subcommittee, in calling on the treasury secretary to investigate whether Russia works with American environmental activists to prevent the U.S. from developing its natural gas resources.
Top U.S. government officials who have acknowledged the connection between Russian and environmental groups include former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee for president in 2016.
In 2014, Clinton delivered a “private speech” in which she discussed Russia’s financial support for environmental groups, the letter says. The speech was included in documents released by WikiLeaks, it says.
An Oct. 10, 2016, report in The Washington Times quoted (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/10/clinton-blames-russians-anti-fracking-groups/) Clinton as saying:
We [the State Department and the U.S. government] were up against Russia pushing oligarchs and others to buy media. We were even up against phony environmental groups, and I’m a big environmentalist, but these were funded by the Russians to stand up against any effort, ‘Oh that pipeline, that fracking, that whatever will be a problem for you,’ and a lot of that money supporting that effort was coming from Russia.
Contrary to what Russia’s propaganda machine and its environmental allies have told news consumers in Europe and America, fracking is safe, effective, and enormously beneficial, Nick Loris, an economist and energy policy analyst with The Heritage Foundation, said in an email to The Daily Signal.
“If successful, an anti-fracking campaign is depriving Americans of good-paying jobs and affordable, dependable energy,” Loris said. “Despite smears and outright lies from environmental activists, smart drilling and energy extraction technologies have been proven to be safe.”
“It feels like every week a new study is published, confirming what we already know,” he said. “Hydraulic fracturing does not contaminate drinking water. The facts and history of hydraulic fracturing, a history that dates back more than half a century and over 1 million fracked wells, indicate that many of the fears associated with the process are grossly exaggerated or flat-out unsubstantiated.”
Loris added:
The good news, however, is that the anti-fracking campaign really hasn’t been all that successful in ‘keeping it in the ground.’ The U.S. is the world’s largest petroleum and natural gas producer, and we can thank fracking and American energy companies for it.
The result is that money is going back into bank accounts of hardworking families through lower energy bills, and American businesses are more competitive because of lower input costs. And we’re in a position to supply our allies with power, significantly reducing the ability of any one nation’s ability to manipulate energy markets for political gain.
In their letter to the treasury secretary, Smith and Weber also say the Russians have been able to advance their strategy without “a paper trail.”
They pass along reports that Russia apparently funnels the money through a Bermuda-based “shell company” known as Klein Ltd.
Tens of millions of dollars are moved from Russia through Klein “in the form of anonymous donations” to a U.S.-based nonprofit called the Sea Change Foundation.
The money, the congressmen write, then is moved in the form of grants to U.S. environmental organizations.

Rockstar

07-12-17, 02:24 PM

Should be a number of videos about the morons who voted for Trump too!:haha:

My intention was to post those too for a side by side example. I looked, but if you can find some that are as entertaining please do post :haha:

mapuc

07-12-17, 03:03 PM

Onkel Neal

07-12-17, 03:09 PM

On

Regarding lieing, while Clinton is probably "the norm" for a politician, Trump is completely off the charts, Borderline pathological, as someone here said. By all means, they are really not in the same league.

True. But the way the media and left is acting, wow, they're losing their minds. it's not like Donny Jr was selling uranium rights to the Russians for personal profit while sitting as Secretary of State. That's a little worse than pathological lying, don't you think? I don't remember your bursts of outrage over that.

Catfish

07-12-17, 03:22 PM

MaDef

07-12-17, 05:44 PM

To put it into one word - Confused

On one side I read comments by Platapus, MaDef, August and other of my friends

On the other hand I also hear and see the news and I hear and see these journallist and political expert on USA standing in front of the White House or are in the studio saying -mostly saying stuff that goes against what some of you have written.

Let me give you an example, last night I read Platapus latest comment in this thread about 3-5 minutes later I saw this Journalist who's an expert on American politics saying

"It's pure simpel it is not allowed for a person/government from a foreign country to get involved/take part in the American election and it's not allowed for a candidate or their "crew" to take contact to a person from another country if it's a part of the ongoing election
(I Can't remember exact phrase he used, it been some hours since I heard him saying these things)

So who's correct or have I misunderstood it all ?

Markus
You understood correctly, however in this case as far as I'm aware, Trump jr was not involved in his Dad's campaign, nor did he hold any government position that would require him to report any foreign contacts. (I could be mistaken about him being part of the election campaign though).

As for the foreign interference, well that's a 2 edge sword. the U.S. has been doing it worldwide since the end of WWII. Back during the 96' election it came out that the Chinese were "buying" influence in U.S. elections. There was a big dust-up over campaign finance reform that never went anywhere. Obama tried to influence the Brexit vote with his speech. So what the Russians did this time out isn't really unprecedented or a surprise.

Mr Quatro

07-12-17, 05:55 PM

In hindsight: Who's deplorable's or should I say, which deplorable's were the one's that Hillary Clinton was referring to in her famous last attempt to gain control of the National Election?

Trump's or the Russian's?

Surely the Russian's knew they would get caught after the election. :hmmm:

They left enough clues. :yep:

August

07-12-17, 06:56 PM

^ Probably because i did not believe it.
http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-uranium-russia-deal/
Read it til the end.

Also: http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/16/trump-claims--falsely--that-clinton-gave-russia-20-of-us-uranium.html
http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/article/2017/feb/16/donald-trump-repeats-his-mostly-false-claim-about-/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/10/26/the-facts-behind-trumps-repeated-claim-about-hillary-clintons-role-in-the-russian-uranium-deal/?utm_term=.c4dff68fdc01

The fact that Trump said a hundred times "she did it" does not make it true. This man is a notorious liar, doing anything to put himself into the spotlight. this is what his campaign all about, lie and throw dirt, and it will stick if you only repeat it a hundred times.

The other fact that alt-right to racist media like Breitbart are now regarded as "respectable" or "socially acceptable" really gives me the creeps.
The last good example was that "imperial wizard" (KKK) defending the southern honour publicly. Nope, not with me.

Then how about this 2015 article from no less than the NYT that supports what Trump has said? Maybe it's this article published when the NYT still pretended to be neutral that President Trump was thinking about:

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html

Beyond mines in Kazakhstan that are among the most lucrative in the
world, the sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium
production capacity in the United States. Since uranium is considered a
strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal had
to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number
of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually
signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife,
Hillary Rodham Clinton.

As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three
separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow
of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman
used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35
million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the
Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama
White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to
the company made donations as well.

And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a
majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a
Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin
that was promoting Uranium One stock.

So none of this happened? The Russians didn't get controlling interest in Uranium One? The Clinton foundation never got those donations? Bill never got half a million bucks from the Russians for a speech? I think you pick your sources but one thing is for sure. Clinton herself claimed to be dead broke when she left the White House (maybe that's why they tried to steal the furniture) but now she is worth millions. Pretty good for a poor public servant just trying to help people...

Platapus

07-12-17, 07:25 PM

So who's correct or have I misunderstood it all ?

Markus

It is quite simple, actually. If someone claims that an action is not allowed, simply ask them to cite the law/regulation that was violated.

During the Bush Jr, Obama, and now the Trump administration there are people claiming that each has been doing wrong stuff. Often the word treason is improperly bantered about along with claims that impeachment is imminent. I have always asked the same question

What is the citation to the federal/state law or regulation what was broken. Still waiting for the answer.

Not liking the president
No agreeing with the president
Having a president that is a moron
Having a president that makes decisions contrary to our opinion
Having a president that is an embarrassment to our country
... about a hundred more lines

None of these are grounds for impeachment. The president has to violate federal law.

So if an article discusses how unfit a president is but does not cite a law being violated, or if you are talking to someone who claims that the president needs to be impeached but can't cite a federal law --- it is safe to ignore them. They probably don't know what they are talking about and are confusing their opinion with facts.

Catfish

07-13-17, 01:57 AM

So the New York Times criticized a democrat for alleged corruption, can this be even possible :hmmm:. Seems they are not so "left" then?

[...] So none of this happened? [...]

Exactly. At least not as the Donald perpetrated that in his tweets and speeches. Mr Clinton gets money of such an amount for speeches all the time, to pick that one out only seems to support a connection with the the "uranium deal", where there is most probably none.

Regarding the "deal" itself i do not know why it was considered at all if it was so "treacherous", but the whole US made the deal – why? There will be a reason, but do you really think even the democrats want to shift power and resources to Russia just so, for a bit of personal benefit?

And among (! – there were others) all those agencies that eventually signed off the deal was indeed the State Department, then headed by Mrs. Clinton. But just because she was the head of said agency, she was not allowed to interfere, and had no say in the matter. See first link above.

You can e.g. make Trump responsible for anything happening in America since he is the president, but it is neither reasonable nor true.

Where exactly did H. Clinton break the law?

Mr Quatro

07-13-17, 05:50 AM

Where exactly did H. Clinton break the law?

Her husband Bill Clinton broke the law ... it's called a moral law of power and money influenced by the position he once held. They were both corrupt and never fully prosecuted by the law just the voting public.

All three Bill, Hillary and Trump should not be lumped together, but judged separately by their coats of many colors. America is not waiting for the FBI to give it's final verdict ... they are deciding everyday based on the media. The media is not in business to white wash Trump due to the business of making money off of "breaking news".

Three years, three months and one week till the next National Election ... I still don't think Trump will make it that far ... His own party is at stake here in just one year and three months. I'm really not that good at guessing, but VP Pence looks like the front runner in 2020 to me. :yep:

Onkel Neal

07-13-17, 06:17 AM

All this just shows one thing: people will believe what they want to believe. :03:

August

07-13-17, 07:06 AM

Exactly. At least not as the Donald perpetrated that in his tweets and speeches. Mr Clinton gets money of such an amount for speeches all the time, to pick that one out only seems to support a connection with the the "uranium deal", where there is most probably none.

All the time? Just how many half a million dollar speeches has he given to the Russians since his wife lost her political influence? I also notice that you ignore the two plus million the Russians paid to the Clintons money laundering sche..., er I mean the "Clinton Foundation". The whole thing stinks to high heaven and you know it and if they were Republicans you'd be singing a much different tune.

Where exactly did H. Clinton break the law? When has she not? Taking bribes from foreign governments, perjury, deliberately mishandling classified documents, illegal destruction of government documents to avoid oversight, shady investment schemes, stealing furniture Heck the lhe list goes back almost 4 decades.

Sailor Steve

07-13-17, 11:22 AM

The whole thing stinks to high heaven and you know it and if they were Republicans you'd be singing a much different tune.
And so would you. That's the problem with partisan politics.

When has she not? Taking bribes from foreign governments, perjury, deliberately mishandling classified documents, illegal destruction of government documents to avoid oversight, shady investment schemes, stealing furniture Heck the lhe list goes back almost 4 decades.
How much of that is actually proven? I don't like Hillary, but then I don't like The Donald either. The problem I have is that it's easy to divert problems with a POP (Person Of Power) by bringing up the other side, but it doesn't really address the problems that person is having, or causing. It also doesn't help at all.

August

07-13-17, 12:47 PM

And so would you. That's the problem with partisan politics.

Hey Catfish was the one who is claiming that nothing could possibly be wrong with Bill getting 500k for a speech to the Russians (and don't forget another 2.3 million to their foundation) while his wife is deciding on an issue that directly affects them. Am I supposed to just accept that because you don't think I'm unbiased enough to point it out?

How much of that is actually proven?By her own admission and that of Comey there's enough that she should be in jail right now, and if she was a regular person (or a Republican) she would be for mishandling classified information alone.

August

07-13-17, 02:21 PM

http://theresurgent.com/breaking-that-russian-lawyer-has-ties-to-the-group-that-prepared-the-trump-dossier/

Were Democrats Working With Russia Against Trump? That Russian Lawyer Has Ties to Democrat Oppo Researchers

By Erick Erickson (http://theresurgent.com/author/erick/) | July 13, 2017, 05:00am | @ewerickson (http://www.twitter.com/@ewerickson)

This will not get nearly as much coverage as Donald Trump, Jr. meeting with Natalia Veselnitskaya, but it does raise the issue of whether Democrats and Russians were as collaborative as the Democrats claim the Trump team was. There is a remarkably small degree of separation between Natalia Veselnitskaya and Fusion GPS, the Democrat opposition research firm that came up with the Trump dossier.
In 2012, the Russian government started hiring hordes of Washington law firms, lobbyists, political strategist, and others to get the Magnitsky Act repealed. The act, named for Sergei Magnitsky, sought to hold the Russian government accountable for the man’s death. Mr. Magnitsky was a lawyer who uncovered massive tax fraud in Russia. He was arrested, tortured while in prison, and died.
One of the law firms hired by Russia to work on repeal is Baker Hostetler, which also has ties to Glenn Simpson’s Fusion GPS. According to Senator Chuck Grassley, who wants Fusion GPS officials to testify before the Senate, Fusion GPS was also involved with the Russians over the Magnitsky Act. Senator Grassley’s office notes “Despite the reported evidence of their work on behalf of Russian interests, neither Fusion GPS nor Akhmetshin are registered as foreign agents under the Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA).”
Grassley continued, “Fusion GPS was apparently simultaneously working on the unsubstantiated dossier alleging collusion between Trump presidential campaign associates and Russia” while helping Russia with the Magnitsky Act. It also appears the FBI was willing to pay Christopher Steele, the former spy, who helped Fusion GPS compile the dossier.
Now, let me quote directly from the Chuck Grassley press release on Fusion GPS with the major, relevant portions highlighted:In 2013, the Justice Department opened a case to seize the U.S. assets of Russian-owned Prevezon Holdings, which received millions of dollars from the theft and used it to purchase real estate in New York, according to the department’s complaint. In response, Prevezon Holdings and the Kremlin launched a campaign to undermine the Magnitsky Act and discredit Magnitsky’s claims of corruption, according to a 2016 complaint by Hermitage CEO William Browder. Fusion GPS and Rinat Akhmetshin, among others, were involved in the pro-Russia campaign in 2016, which involved lobbying congressional staffers to attempt to undermine the Justice Department’s account of Magnitsky’s death and the crime he uncovered, repeal the Magnitsky Act itself, and delay efforts to expand it to countries beyond Russia, according to Browder’s complaint. Akhmetshin, a Russian immigrant, has reportedly admitted to being a “soviet counterintelligence officer,” and has a long history of lobbying the U.S. government for pro-Russia matters. Fusion GPS was reportedly tasked with generating negative press coverage of Browder and Hermitage.

You know who else worked for Preveson Holdings? Natalia Veselnitskaya.

According to Russian propaganda outlet Sputnik News, Veselnitskaya had “evidence showing that the grounds for the Magnitsky Act are based on lies perpetuated by UK millionaire of US origin William Browder.”
In addition to working for Prevezon Holdings and working against William Browder, just like Fusion GPS was doing, Veselnitskaya also had dealings with Rinat Akhmetshin, the founder of the Human Rights Accountability Global Initiative FoundationOh yeah, things are sure getting interesting!

Sailor Steve

07-13-17, 02:35 PM

Am I supposed to just accept that because you don't think I'm unbiased enough to point it out?
Not at all. That said, the fact that everything said about Trump gets turned around to be about some Democrat or another and the idea that every accusation against Trump must be because of some Democrat's sour grapes does indeed show a bias.

By her own admission and that of Comey there's enough that she should be in jail right now, and if she was a regular person (or a Republican) she would be for mishandling classified information alone.
I agree that's true. As you pointed out, if Bill and Hillary were Republicans the Democrats would be all over her. My point was that if they were Republican you would be defending them right now. That's how obvious the bias is.

Platapus

07-13-17, 02:50 PM

All this just shows one thing: people will believe what they want to believe. :03:

I read a paper about Confirmation Bias. Nothing I did not already know. :D

Onkel Neal

07-13-17, 04:47 PM

I read a paper about Confirmation Bias. Nothing I did not already know. :D

Haha, love it.

August

07-13-17, 07:12 PM

My point was that if they were Republican you would be defending them right now. That's how obvious the bias is.

Well then you are making an incorrect assumption Steve. I'd never defend an anti-gun politician regardless of their party.

Mr Quatro

07-13-17, 09:20 PM

What do y'all think will happen when the FBI is finished investigating the Russian/election scandal (no matter whose names are on the list)?

Plus how long do you think the FBI is going to take in it's investigation before they report to the US Congress?

How long will the special counsel’s investigation of Russia take? Possibly years.

Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein’s appointment of former FBI director Robert Mueller to act as special counsel investigating Russian meddling into the 2016 election is an unexpected development in the issue that’s roiled the early days of Donald Trump’s administration. While it’s also a relatively unusual step in recent history, we do know one thing about it: The odds are good that it will take a while.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/05/17/how-long-will-the-special-counsels-investigation-of-russia-take-possibly-years/?utm_term=.c64e418b8f1b

Platapus

07-14-17, 11:42 AM

I hope it takes as long as it takes to do it right.

August

07-14-17, 12:50 PM

I hope it takes as long as it takes to do it right.

I guess that depends on what your (actually their) definition of "it" is.

If "it" is just to keep the administration hamstrung with potential legal troubles throughout it's term of office then the sooner we get this dog and pony show over the better. If here is something actually there then I need more than just the innuendo and dark implications we've gotten so far if they expect me stay patient about it.

Platapus

07-14-17, 02:12 PM

That's why it is an investigation -- to find evidence.

If there were already evidence, we would be in Impeachment.

August

07-14-17, 02:32 PM

That's why it is an investigation -- to find evidence.

If there were already evidence, we would be in Impeachment.

It would be nice if it actually worked that way but Democrats have already introduced articles of impeachment.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/house-democrat-introduces-article-of-impeachment-against-trump/article/2628428

August

07-14-17, 03:27 PM

This was interesting. Given the source one might think that someone has not gotten with the program but still it illustrates the hysteria with which Trumps enemies operate. You will probably recognize a few of the meme's that were posted by folks on this forum.

http://www.snopes.com/2017/07/12/trump-lies/

Buddahaid

07-14-17, 06:01 PM

I guess that depends on what your (actually their) definition of "it" is.

If "it" is just to keep the administration hamstrung with potential legal troubles throughout it's term of office then the sooner we get this dog and pony show over the better. If here is something actually there then I need more than just the innuendo and dark implications we've gotten so far if they expect me stay patient about it.

I seem to recall you liking a hamstrung government during the last administration.

August

07-14-17, 07:50 PM

I seem to recall you liking a hamstrung government during the last administration.

Indeed I was. When they will do no good then it's better that they do nothing all, but I'm all for draining the swamp so I want Trump to be allowed to do it.

Buddahaid

07-14-17, 09:19 PM

Indeed I was. When they will do no good then it's better that they do nothing all, but I'm all for draining the swamp so I want Trump to be allowed to do it.

The problem there, as I see it, is not everything in a swamp is bad. I doubt Trump has the foresight to know the difference, and even the good is lost without the bad as a weather gauge. So it still boils down to how one defines progress, and that will always be contentious.

I personally do NOT want to see the USA become a one party system regardless of how any one person feels about what is right. That would be the end of civil liberty so hurray for hamstrings.

Catfish

07-15-17, 03:09 PM

:doh:

http://www.iflscience.com/editors-blog/scientist-arrives-in-us-to-research-cancer-but-is-sent-back-to-iran/

Well we don't know whether he would have found anything :hmmm:

Méo

07-15-17, 07:03 PM

FWIW, this made me chuckle a bit, Trump doesn't really seem to appreciate Daft Punk :D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKDxlorf6p4

August

07-15-17, 10:02 PM

The problem there, as I see it, is not everything in a swamp is bad. I doubt Trump has the foresight to know the difference, and even the good is lost without the bad as a weather gauge. So it still boils down to how one defines progress, and that will always be contentious.

I personally do NOT want to see the USA become a one party system regardless of how any one person feels about what is right. That would be the end of civil liberty so hurray for hamstrings.

I don't see how not wanting these investigations to drag out for years equals support of one party systems or the end of civil liberties.

As for good things in a swamp, maybe you're average everyday swamp but this is the Federal Government we're talking about. It can stand a heckuva lot of draining before we risk loosing anything valuable.

vienna

07-15-17, 10:52 PM

FWIW, this made me chuckle a bit, Trump doesn't really seem to appreciate Daft Punk :D

https://i0.wp.com/ajournalofmusicalthings.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Donald-Trump-6.png?fit=364%2C309

(Trump thinking to himself at ceremony: "'Daft Punk'!?! I've really got to plug up those leaks in my administration; somebody's leaked the code name the Secret Service gave me!!"...)...

<O>

Buddahaid

07-15-17, 11:29 PM

http://martinmwh2011.wikispaces.com/file/view/mussolini.mug.jpg/224665984/mussolini.mug.jpg
https://i0.wp.com/ajournalofmusicalthings.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Donald-Trump-6.png?fit=364%2C309

:hmmm:

u crank

07-16-17, 07:28 AM

^
That's the exact look I have when my wife asks me if I want to go 'shopping'. :O:

vienna

07-16-17, 08:46 AM

So, then,...

...unbridled enthusiasm?... :D

<O>

em2nought

07-16-17, 03:34 PM

eddie

07-16-17, 04:58 PM

If it ever came to another civil war, it's nice to know that those who support Trump would not only shoot snowflakes for free, but they'd bring their own arms and ammo to do it. The people the other side would expect to do the fighting for them are so ingrained to receiving money for nothing, who knows how much you'd actually have to give them. :D

What an ignorant statement, Only way the Trump supporter's would do anything like that, would be when they are loaded on booze! Otherwise they wouldn't have the brass to do anything.

August

07-17-17, 03:08 PM

Another Clinton whistleblower found dead.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-16/haiti-official-who-exposed-clinton-foundation-found-dead

Eberwein was a former Haitian government official who was expected to expose the extent of Clinton Foundation corruption and malpractice next week.
He has been found dead in Miami at the age of 50.
The circumstances surrounding Eberwein’s death are also nothing less than unpalatable. According to Miami-Dade’s medical examiner records supervisor, the official cause of death is “gunshot to the head.“ Eberwein’s death has been registered as “suicide” by the government. But not long before his death, he acknowledged that his life was in danger because he was outspoken on the criminal activities of the Clinton Foundation.
Eberwein was a fierce critic of the Clinton Foundation’s activities in the Caribbean island, where he served as director general of the government’s economic development agency, Fonds d’assistance économique et social, for three years. “The Clinton Foundation, they are criminals, they are thieves, they are liars, they are a disgrace,” Eberwein said at a protest outside the Clinton Foundation headquarters in Manhattan last year. Eberwein was due to appear on Tuesday before the Haitian Senate Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission where he was widely expected to testify that the Clinton Foundation misappropriated Haiti earthquake donations from international donors. But this “suicide” gets even more disturbing…
Eberwein was only 50-years-old and reportedly told acquaintances he feared for his life because of his fierce criticism of the Clinton Foundation. His close friends and business partners were taken aback by the idea he may have committed suicide. “It’s really shocking,” said friend Gilbert Bailly. “We grew up together; he was like family.

MaDef

07-17-17, 04:58 PM

That's a bit disingenuous isn't it? Eberwein was facing allegations of fraud and corruption himself, so the more plausible explanation is. he took his own life.

August

07-17-17, 07:45 PM

That's a bit disingenuous isn't it? Eberwein was facing allegations of fraud and corruption himself, so the more plausible explanation is. he took his own life.

Hey i'm making no claims, politics is a rough business. I'm just checking off the score. :)

vienna

07-17-17, 10:06 PM

So, then, is this death attributable to Trump? GOP activist who colluded with Russian hackers in an effort to boost Trump's election and who most likely would have had some knowledge of possible Trump campaign/Russian connections and dies 10 days after going public in an interview with the Wall Street Journal:

The Wall Street Journal: Details emerge in suicide of GOP activist Peter W. Smith who sought Hillary Clinton emails --

http://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/The-Wall-Street-Journal--Details-emerge-in-suicide-of-GOP-activist-Peter-W--Smith-who-sought-Hillary-Clinton-emails-5581627

I don't know; it all sounds convenient and shady to me... :hmmm:

But hey:

Hey i'm making no claims, politics is a rough business. I'm just checking off the score. :)

Mr Quatro

07-17-17, 11:10 PM

Hey i'm making no claims, politics is a rough business. I'm just checking off the score. :)

HBO movie of the week in 2025 "Clinton Chronicles"

Read all about the theory that men in black were seen knocking on all of the doors of the men and women that stood in the Clinton's way.

In other news today: www.funnyfakemedia.com

Washington Times report the findings of two men dressed in black without their shoes on laying beside the Potomac River in an attempted double suicide.

eddie

07-21-17, 12:57 AM

Trump running scared now!?! Wants to get rid of Mueller maybe, Sessions too, then pardon everybody involved. What a complete asshat he is,lol Poor Donnie boy, getting too close to the truth, as far as he's concerned. Paranoid delusional, bests describes Trump.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-team-seeks-to-control-block-mueller%E2%80%99s-russia-investigation/ar-AAows5X

em2nought

07-21-17, 01:38 AM

Somebody has been watching "The View" too much. :03:

vienna

07-21-17, 03:57 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Outf5grkOUc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYTw_R3UxZk

The real tragic comedy is the real life interview Trump gave to the New York Times (yes, the very same Trump-described "failing New York Times") in which Trump exhibits again his remarkable lack of knowledge of any subjects of import one would expect of a US President and his penchant for giving himself enough rope to hang himself; after denying, in past statements, that he ever demanded a 'loyalty pledge' from former FBI Director James Comey, he now goes on record saying he would never have appointed Jeff Sessions as Attorney-General if he knew Sessions was going to recuse himself fom the Russian investigation(s):

Excerpts From The Times’s Interview With Trump--

(Note: The link is to the NYT transcript of the Trump interview and the term "Excerpts" refers to the fact the transcript is not complete in the fact it does not include portions of the interview that were deemed as off the record by the Trump Administration and non-interview topic asides; all other text is intact.)

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/19/us/politics/trump-interview-transcript.html

SCHMIDT: Was that [Attorney General Jeff] Sessions’s mistake or [Deputy Attorney General Rod J.] Rosenstein’s mistake?

________

TRUMP: Look, Sessions gets the job. Right after he gets the job, he recuses himself.

BAKER: Was that a mistake?

TRUMP: Well, Sessions should have never recused himself, and if he was going to recuse himself, he should have told me before he took the job, and I would have picked somebody else.

HABERMAN: He gave you no heads up at all, in any sense?

TRUMP: Zero. So Jeff Sessions takes the job, gets into the job, recuses himself. I then have — which, frankly, I think is very unfair to the president. How do you take a job and then recuse yourself? If he would have recused himself before the job, I would have said, “Thanks, Jeff, but I can’t, you know, I’m not going to take you.” It’s extremely unfair, and that’s a mild word, to the president. So he recuses himself. I then end up with a second man, who’s a deputy.

HABERMAN: Rosenstein.

TRUMP: Who is he? And Jeff hardly knew. He’s from Baltimore.

________

TRUMP: Yeah, what Jeff Sessions did was he recused himself right after, right after he became attorney general. And I said, “Why didn’t you tell me this before?” I would have — then I said, “Who’s your deputy?” So his deputy he hardly knew, and that’s Rosenstein, Rod Rosenstein, who is from Baltimore. There are very few Republicans in Baltimore, if any. So, he’s from Baltimore. Now, he, we went through a lot of things. We were interviewing replacements at the F.B.I. ...

[Italics mine]

Trump views the recusal by Sessions as "very unfair to the president" and " It’s extremely unfair, and that’s a mild word, to the president", a rather blatant declaration that Trump expects loyalty to Trump as paramount and the fact Sessions was merely acting in an ethical, moral, and even legally obligated manner, obeying the rule of law and the value of ethics and morality over the political demands of the President as being traitorous, the law and ethics be damned. I've said it before: I do not believe (yet) Trump was complicit in the actions of his campaign staff (or his family) in the matter of collusion with Russia; if he had just shut the hell up, he would not be in the mess he's in today and he would not be facing the threat of impeachment for what he did afterwards by injecting himself into the matter in such a way as to give serious fodder for charges of obstruction of justice; now, he has also faces problems of conflict of interest over his and his business 'empire's' many ties to Russian interests and his refusal to cede control of his domestic business interests. When he goes down, it will not be because of collusion with Russia in the 2017 Presidential Campaign; he will either be impeached for obstruction, at the very least, or he will resign rather than see the dismantling or forfeiture of his holdings. Either way, the US will be the better for it, come what may...

<O>

August

07-21-17, 06:40 AM

MaDef

07-21-17, 06:46 AM

vienna

07-21-17, 07:54 AM

Hmm...

Oddly, no one seems to complain about 'anonymous sources' when some one like, say, Hannity, Fox News, Breitbart, Jones, et al, cite 'anonymous sources' in their varied claims against Obama, DEMs, Trump critics, etc.; there must be some reason for the hypocritical inconsistency... :hmmm:

Hey an anonymous source told me that the snowflake Righties and Trump-apologists like to lick garbage cans and howl at the moon. Must be true right?

:haha::haha::haha:

<O>

Mr Quatro

07-21-17, 09:02 AM

Breaking news!

Trump is looking into his power to pardon his cabinet and family: http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/will-republicans-draw-red-line-trump-powers-n785171

Two stories in The New York Times and The Washington Post — that the Trump White House is looking to discredit special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation, and that the president himself has asked advisers about his powers to pardon aides and family members —

Spells guilty to me ... :yep:

“The possibility that the president is considering pardons at this early stage in these ongoing investigations is extremely disturbing,” Senate Intelligence Committee Vice-Chairman Mark Warner, D-Va., said in a statement last night. “Pardoning any individuals who may have been involved would be crossing a fundamental line."

Aktungbby

07-21-17, 09:42 AM

The precedent is: Gerald Ford pardoned Nixon?? https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-nixon-pardon-in-retrospect-40-years-later/ (https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-nixon-pardon-in-retrospect-40-years-later/) A pardon is an act of grace, proceeding from the power intrusted with the execution of the laws, which exempts the individual on whom it is bestowed from the punishment the law inflicts for a crime he has committed. It is the private though official act of the executive magistrate, delivered to the individual for whose benefit it is intended. A private deed, not communicated to him, whatever may be its character, whether a pardon or release, is totally unknown and cannot be acted on. Burdick v. United States, 236 U.S. 79 (1915): A pardoned person must introduce the pardon (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pardon) into court proceedings, otherwise the pardon must be disregarded by the court.
To do this, the pardoned person must accept the pardon. If a pardon is rejected, it cannot be forced upon its subject. Naturally, anyone who accepts a pardon carries the implication of guilt for whatever the pardon is bestowed :doh: :oops: :shucks:

August

07-21-17, 04:59 PM

Breaking news!

Trump is looking into his power to pardon his cabinet and family: http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/will-republicans-draw-red-line-trump-powers-n785171

Spells guilty to me ... :yep:

So your basis is a report by a hostile media organization citing unnamed sources and the opinion of a partisan democrat? :)

Jimbuna

07-22-17, 07:33 AM

Sour grapes because he didn't get the job or simply a case of another former Team Trump member becoming disenfranchised/disillusioned with the way things are going in the White House?

White House press secretary Sean Spicer has moved to minimise talk of divisions within the Trump administration after announcing his resignation.
Mr Spicer is reportedly stepping down because he is unhappy with President Donald Trump's appointment of a new communications director.
But he told Fox News he had "no regrets" about his six-month stint.
Wall Street financier Anthony Scaramucci has been picked for the role that Mr Spicer had partially filled.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40690501

August

07-22-17, 08:12 AM

Sour grapes because he didn't get the job or simply a case of another former Team Trump member becoming disenfranchised/disillusioned with the way things are going in the White House?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40690501

Here's his own words, judge for yourself.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/07/21/spicer-says-trump-didnt-want-him-to-quit-but-too-many-cooks-at-white-house.html

Jimbuna

07-22-17, 09:28 AM

Here's his own words, judge for yourself.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/07/21/spicer-says-trump-didnt-want-him-to-quit-but-too-many-cooks-at-white-house.html

I'm slightly inclined to believe there are sour grapes involved but the guy is showing a bit of class.

No doubt the spin doctors (press) will soon start publishing differing opinions.

Skybird

07-22-17, 10:01 AM

There was an essay in some German paper about Spicer's background.

First, personally I do not like him, I am highly antipathic to him.

Fact is, however, that during the Republican race for candidacy, he was against the Donald, and supported somebody else. Not before the Donald had dfeated all rivals, he joined the Donaldinarium.

Fact also is that he never seemed to have been happy with his job. Caught between loyalty to the job's duties, and an AH of a boss who demanded him to tell lies to the public and make them appear as facts, part of his aggressiv appearances may have been born out of frustration, and growing disgust over the fact that his own boss behind the curtian mocked him and laughed about him when putting new lies on his table he then had to sell as facts. When this latest finance boy then was brought into play days ago and put right before his nose, this was one offence too much. Showing the little that has remained of his self-esteem, he pulled the consequences, and left. He even has the loyalty still to not openly blame his cheating boss, showing some kind of - however questionable - class.

If he is clever, he learns the lessons from this dance of his with the devil - and in the future is more picky regarding for whom he is willing to work. You do not only get judged by your loyalty's single-mindedness, but also by your choice to whom and to what you chose to be loyal. That he willed to work for Trump, under these despicable conditions, does not speak for Spicer.

In general, everybody willing to serve the Donald, imo deserve no compassion when he finds out that he gets consumed by the Donald.

With Spicer leaving, the White House Donaldinarium show crew surely has lost some significant entertainment value. I will miss the press conferences with him. :D

vienna

07-22-17, 04:54 PM

The new guy coming in to replace Spicer seems to have the same 'two-face-itis' disease so prevalent in the Trump administration:

Read Anthony Scaramucci’s old tweets. You’ll understand why he deleted them. --

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/07/22/read-anthony-scaramuccis-old-tweets-youll-understand-why-he-deleted-them/?utm_term=.f6baecf96844

I find it amazing how Trump rails against leaks and apparent 'disloyalty' among his staff when he seems to routinely appoint people who would have a rather high inclination to turn on him if push comes to shove; it all shows a rather high lack of proper judgement. Could it be the same Trump who railed against "Wall Streeters" during the campaign as being part of the US problems now finds it beneficial to himself to get into bed with them?...

<O>

Platapus

07-22-17, 07:57 PM

Honestly, I don't understand why anyone would want the job of WH press secretary

Onkel Neal

07-22-17, 10:17 PM

Especially for this President.

ValoWay

07-22-17, 10:36 PM

damn, man, he was my favourite comedian.. RiP Sean Spicer, we hardly knew him.. :wah: :/\\chop:wah:

Rockstar

07-22-17, 10:42 PM

Don't worry plenty of scandle, rumor, leaks, headlines filled with hyberbole and investigators just digging up dirt will continue until November 2018. IMO Americans are being played like a fiddle.

vienna

07-23-17, 02:12 AM

An interesting op-ed analysis of Scaramucci in the New York Times:

The Mooch and the Mogul --

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/22/opinion/sunday/spicer-anthony-scaramucci-mooch-trump.html

Anybody else, besides me, see this guy's name and think:

Scaramucci, Scaramucci, will you do the fandango...

<O>

Jimbuna

07-23-17, 06:39 AM

Mr Trump says he has "complete power to pardon"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40693249

Nothing beats being the actual jury at your own trial :doh:

Rockstar

07-23-17, 07:57 AM

There has been no crime, no trial, no conviction therefore there is absolutely no need to pardon anyone. Why then is the media and the sheep even bleating on about pardons? :har:

https://media.tenor.co/images/65bc3ade1032d7a5a60349109c3a9823/tenor.gif

Rockstar

07-23-17, 08:02 AM

Anybody else, besides me, see this guy's name and think:

Scaramucci, Scaramucci, will you do the fandango...

<O>

Probably not.

vienna

07-23-17, 08:39 AM

There has been no crime, no trial, no conviction therefore there is absolutely no need to pardon anyone. Why then is the media and the sheep even bleating on about pardons? :har:

Oh, I don't know why... :hmmm:

Maybe it all has to do with the Bleater-In-Chief tweet-bleating all about how he has the "complete power to pardon"; could that be the reason?. The really interesting thing about the whole pardon issue is when the press started to report about Trump seeking to determine the extent of his pardon powers, even to the extent of being able to pardon himself, he really hasn't denied doing so; Trump just trotted out his old bleating about "fake news" in a tweet-bleat in which he tacitly admitted to the reported stories of his seeking legal info on pardon power, so basically he was saying 'It's fake news, but, yeah I have been looking into pardons". In the same tweet he alludes to leaks he described as 'crimes'. If he is trying to say the press has committed a crime by reporting information, he is way, way off base. The press gets whatever info it reports from those who may actually be criminally releasing info and those persons are most very likely inhabitants of the West Wing or other offices of Trump's administration. Consider this: Trump Jr. released the content of his email regarding his contacts with Russians only after The New York Times told him they had copies of the messages, were going to publish them, and wanted to give Trump Jr. the opportunity to comment on the record. The Times did not steal those messages, they were given to The Times. Now, given that those were emails to and from Jr., personally, the only other persons, other than Jr., who would have copies of the messages and replies are those who either sent or received those emails to or from Jr. and those who were cc'd or bcc'd. Also given is those persons are very much likely to be rather high up in the Trump administration hierarchy, the leaks have been coming from well within the administration. In trying to lay false blame on the press, Trump is trying to deflect from the fact his Oval Office and environs are leaking like sieves and he is apparently either absolutely powerless to stop the leaks or unwilling to admit he and his minions are the problem, not the press. If he really wants to stop the leaks that get his Pampers in such a bunch, he should start by seeking out those in his circle who are 'betraying' him and file charges against them. It really is the most obvious and logical solution, one wonders why it hasn't already happened; maybe its because his inability to govern his own administration is very close to his inability to govern this nation...

There has been no crime, no trial, no conviction therefore there is absolutely no need to pardon anyone.
...

That's a good point. Since there "has been no crime, no trial, no conviction", why then is Trump so fired up about the pardon process; if the is nothing to be guilty about, why has he fixated on finding ways to avoid possible punishment(s)? He's kind of like a kid who knows he gonna get a whupping and is grasping around to find some way of hiding the birch switch. For a guy who isn't guilty of anything, he sure acts guilty...

:har::har::har:

<O>

Rockstar

07-23-17, 08:45 AM

Damn good questions Vienna what is anyone guilty of, who needs a Presidential pardon? Please do tell.

So he makes a tweet that says he, just like every other chief executive, has the power to pardon. Then watch the media frenzy ensue over absolutely nothing. Go ahead and spin it anyway you like. But whats to pardon when there has been no crime, no trial, no conviction?

Watching some get their panties in a wad over it and the spin being spewed. Now thats funny. :har:

Rockstar

07-23-17, 09:00 AM

Oh, I don't know why... :hmmm:

<O>

Exactly

Platapus

07-23-17, 09:03 AM

Mr Quatro

07-23-17, 09:16 AM

I've said it before, "Someone on the inside of this investigation is feeding information straight to the WH" That is why Trump is worried ... he has inside information on what they are doing and what they are after.

Faith and fear are a lot alike, especially in the small amount of time that they take to replace each other ... then they are just alike.

Trump will make a deal to save his family and his company and his honor, but first the un-affordable health care plan will have to fail and his budget plan to give the rich 35% more tax monies back to them will have to fail (you can't tell me they will spend that money to hire more people that pay more taxes) all of his failures will start to drag the GOP down with him. A point in time will be reached that enough is enough with Trump and the GOP Senators and Congress will turn on him.

I still like him better than Hillary that's for sure, but this is my day of rest and now my blood pressure is rising and I will take my leave of absence.

Rockstar

07-23-17, 09:23 AM

That is the cogent question.

What has Trump done that is illegal?

Immoral, stupid, illogical, short-sighted, mean, (add a yugely list of other words) are all a matter of interpretation, opinion, and viewpoint and none of them are impeachable offenses.

Just like with Bush Jr and Obama, Trump needs to actually do something illegal before any charges can be levied against him. Illegal means being able to cite a specific law that was broken.

And that has not, at this time, been demonstrated.

Thats right.

"Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) says that Democrats, not Russia, are to blame for Hillary Clinton’s loss to President Trump.

“When you lose to somebody who has 40 percent popularity, you don’t blame other things - [James] Comey, Russia - you blame yourself,” Schumer said in an interview Saturday with The Washington Post.

I see it like the Senator from NY does too. However rest assured the dirt digging.. err I mean investigation, headlines filled with hyberbole, doubt, presumption of guilt, what ifs and maybes will most likely keep chipping away until the mid-terms. People with no life love that stuff and it sells papers. Such reporting may very well do the same thing the Russians are accused of and sway an election. Its what they do.

vienna

07-23-17, 09:27 AM

Please note that I never said he has committed a crime or that he is guilty of anything; I merely stated his actions really do make him look guilty and "stupid, illogical, short-sighted" as he is, he seems to be incapable of grasping even that simplest of concepts. I have long maintained and noted in more than a few of my previous posts that I do not believe (yet) Trump personally colluded with Russian individuals or entities during the Presidential campaign. I have also stated he would have been far better off to have just kept his mouth shut and his thumbs still and stayed above the fray as his predecessors have done in the past...

...

So he makes a tweet that says he, just like every other chief executive, has the power to pardon. Then watch the media frenzy ensue over absolutely nothing. Go ahead and spin anyway you like but whats to pardon when there has been no crime, no trial, no conviction?

Amazingly disingenuous. So, Trump made his tweet-bleat just out of the blue, with no other context or provocation? It had noting, at all, to do with the reports of him seeking legal counsel on the very subject of pardons? He just woke up that morning with a start, bleated out "Pardons!" and jumped on Twitter to share his sudden revelation with world... Yeah, right...

Not a very convincing explanation ...:har:

However, watching some get their Pampers in a wad trying to explain the inexplicable... now that's funny. :har::har::har:

<O>

Rockstar

07-23-17, 09:46 AM

:yawn:

vienna

07-24-17, 02:23 PM

A couple of interesting views:

Trump Barrels Down a Road of No Return --

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-07-23/trump-barrels-down-a-road-of-no-return?utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=bd&utm_campaign=headline&cmpId=yhoo.headline&yptr=yahoo

Russian Documents From Trump Jr Meeting May Have Had a Big Impact --

https://medium.com/@TrickFreee/donald-trump-jr-f6a725a75d8a

<O>

Rockstar

07-24-17, 02:35 PM

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fa/Joseph_McCarthy.jpg/501px-Joseph_McCarthy.jpg

mapuc

07-24-17, 02:53 PM

^ Isn't it or wasn't it Macarthur ? Can't remember his first name-He was the leader of a group in Washington who was hunting down every person who was mistaken for being or supporting communism or something like that.

Markus

Rockstar

07-24-17, 03:16 PM

Yep, that's Senator Joseph McCarthy he's the father of drawing a conclusions without evidence.

Rockstar

07-24-17, 03:24 PM

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vEvEmkMNYHY

August

07-24-17, 04:37 PM

Yep, that's Senator Joseph McCarthy he's the father of drawing a conclusions without evidence.

Although apparently he was right about Alger Hiss...

Rockstar

07-24-17, 04:38 PM

circa 1954

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mbm52ch9Bv1qaw2tq.jpg

Platapus

07-24-17, 04:43 PM

The 2016 election was not won or lost by only one issue. Many issues added and subtracted from both sides and in this instance, the electoral result tilted in favour of Trump.

That being said, the Democrats really need to recognize that their selection of Hillary was a big factor. In my opinion, it will go down as a worst decision since the RNC's decision to put Palin on the McCain ticket.

If the DNC had put up anyone other than Hillary, I don't believe Trump would have won.

If the RNC had put anyone other than Trump up, I am very sure that Hillary still not have been elected.

Hillary's legacy is being probably the only person who could have lost to Trump.

But just as the RNC is still not admitting that putting Palin on the 08 ticket was a mistake, it is not surprising that the DNC is not admitting that Hillary was a mistake.

So all this talk about rebranding the DNC is great and something that needs to be done. What does the Democratic Party stand for other than being "Anti Republican Party"? And in order to save face, I don't expect the DNC to come out and admit that they messed up by putting Hillary up. But I hope that inside the closed meetings, that the risk of putting Hillary up is being discussed. History has shown that it is possible to lose an election even if the other side does not necessarily win.

And the same applies to the RNC. Even as a Recovering Republican, I can't tell what the Republicans stand for other than being "Anti Democratic Party" and specifically anti-Obama. The RNC better work on their branding. They also need to recognize that they did not win the last election, the Democrats lost it.

Counting on more people disliking Hillary than disliked Trump is a lousy way to run a campaign. They were lucky this time.

Maybe some good can come out of this mess if it forces both parties to fix their brand and actually come up with something that the citizens can actually vote FOR instead of voting against the other bums.

Rockstar

07-24-17, 04:44 PM

Although apparently he was right about Alger Hiss...

Alger Hiss atleast had the opportunity to defend himself in a court of law. He was brought to trial and convicted of being a spy because there was actual evidence of a crime.

mapuc

07-24-17, 05:29 PM

Yep, that's Senator Joseph McCarthy he's the father of drawing a conclusions without evidence.

Thank you and sorry for misspelling his name.

Markus

Platapus

07-24-17, 05:49 PM

Although apparently he was right about Alger Hiss...

A broken clock is correct twice a day too.

Rockstar

07-24-17, 06:38 PM

Obviously some have forgot but also I suspect a vast majority of Americans aren't even aware of this time in our history.

McCarthy rose to prominence in 1950, when he declared that he had a list of names of Communists in the State Department. He spent the following years fervently trying to root out Communists in the government through Senate hearings. His tactic of making unproven accusations against political opponents, by questioning their allegiance to the United States and saying their Communist ideology or sympathy, became known as “McCarthyism.”

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oc6Yo3A7CC8

emphasis mine

Onkel Neal

07-25-17, 07:43 AM

What a spectacle, Trump tearing down Jeff Sessions. I wouldn't trade 1 Sessions for 100 Trumps. I would say trump is losing it but I'm pretty sure he never had it in the first place.

Rockstar

07-25-17, 08:56 AM

"And my concern, Martha, is what the hell are we investigating?".

All I see is a team of Obama Hillary donors investigating every aspect of a sitting president that they detest. It started with collusion in the election and there wasnt any. There hasnt been one ounce of evidence the Russians had anything to do with our election process. But hey with no limits to the investigation. All they’ve gotta do is continue every day advancing the narrative that Trump is in bed with Russians to cast doubt in the mind of the voters and increase their chances for a successful mid-term election outcome.

Doesn't seem to me Russians are the problem. Reminds me of Ken Starr, he went dig dig dig and in the end after spending 70,000,000 dollars of taxpayer money all he could come up with was a made for TV drama, an intern, a cigar and a stained dress. If President Clinton hadnt lied under oath about the 'sexual relations' there wouldnt have been anything to report.

Pathetic.

Like Trump I ask who's next Jareds eleven year old son?

https://cdn.meme.am/instances/54494951.jpg

Mr Quatro

07-25-17, 11:06 AM

What a spectacle, Trump tearing down Jeff Sessions. I wouldn't trade 1 Sessions for 100 Trumps. I would say trump is losing it but I'm pretty sure he never had it in the first place.

I am just starting to think the same way Neal :yep:

You don't have to be a physiologist to detect something is wrong in the white house. Did you see his latest tweet: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-says-senate-should-grill-11-year-old-barron/ar-AAoOnGi?OCID=ansmsnnews11

Donald Trump appeared to mock the Senate investigation into Russian electoral interference Tuesday, joking that after finishing with Jared Kushner, the probe should move on to his 11-year-old son Barron.

“Jared Kushner did very well yesterday in proving he did not collude with the Russians,” Trump tweeted, adding “Next up, 11 year old Barron Trump!”

mapuc

07-25-17, 11:26 AM

When reading your comments and hearing and watching the news I get a kind of Deja vu from an old classic sitcom

"- Are you still confused turn in next week to see the next episode of Soa..... Trump in the White House.

Markus

Jimbuna

07-26-17, 09:42 AM

US President Donald Trump says transgender people cannot serve in "any capacity" in the military.
He tweeted that he had consulted with military experts and cited "tremendous medical costs and disruption".
The Obama administration decided last year to allow transgender people to serve openly in the military.
But in June, Defence Secretary James Mattis agreed to a six-month delay in the recruitment of transgender people.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40729996

Looks like another 'hot potato' is added to the fire but this time I suspect there will be support from both sides of the divide.

eddie

07-26-17, 11:58 AM

I would think disruption would be a big problem with that Jim. Transgenders make up such a small part of the military, but look at the problems it will cause.

Skybird

07-26-17, 12:41 PM

No need to actively ban strange people, but what should be ended indeed is serving them a special Bratwurst, made just for them.

It is not popular these days, but in the end soldiers have to be warriors and one must need them to focus on learning and trianing how to kill and wage battle and win wars. Its not their job to be the latest test tube added to the political correctness circus to experiment with gender roles outside the definition of X-X and X-Y. For that, enemies are laughing at you/us. There is feminization enough in miltaries throughout the West already, we need not to add "very exceptionnel beings" or three dozen of undecided wannabethisorthatorsomethingcompletelydifferent gender identities to the brimborium that already is boiling in the kettle. Humanity is a heterosexual species. Lets not forget that.

You have a mimi, you enter the military as a girl. You have a willy, you enter the military as a boy. End of discussion. Girls have to keep up physically with the boys in endurance and strength, the toughest standards rule for assessement and notes scoring, since the toughest standard for a warrior must be the challenge set up by the enemy. The weak must adapt to the stronger, no the other way around. This is about war, not just some spelling bee.

Did I hurt somebody's sensible special sentiments? Serves you right.

cj95

07-26-17, 12:50 PM

You have a mimi, you enter the military as a girl. You have a willy, you enter the military as a boy. End of discussion. .

I think the presence or absence of a 'Y" chromosome should be a better determinant than the actual "equipment" .

There are a few people with messed up anatomies or chromosome arrangements, but once a "Y" chromosome pops up....you're a dude.

.

Skybird

07-26-17, 05:19 PM

I think the presence or absence of a 'Y" chromosome should be a better determinant than the actual "equipment" .

There are a few people with messed up anatomies or chromosome arrangements, but once a "Y" chromosome pops up....you're a dude.

.
Sure. I pointed at the chromosome thing as well.

X-X and X-Y.

However, consider the social environment the military is, or any other closed social system: the effect if physical girl walks naked into the men's showers (or gets a separate shower and extra treatment) because girl says by genes she is a boy. The other men - most are men in the military, still - see the one thing, and do not know the other thing. What concerns people is what they see. Not some complex scientifical background story.

Keep it practical. We already spend huge sums on rebuilding qwuarters aboard ships and submarines to separate men from women. To me, on certain platforms like small submarines already this leads too far. Lets mix only there where women can stand their man - then I have absolutely nothing against it, zero - and the net effect in the widest meaning (may it be a raise in special expertise and knowledge or indeed an addition to combat power) justifies the additional complication and investment.

The role of the military, its reason to exist, is defined by the needs of war, not by wishes of civiul right smovements to use it as a platform to propagate interest group'S rights - may they be justified or just pipe dreams, it doe snot matter. The next war is the criterion. And its the only one.

I recommended this book in a separate thread, and I do it again here:

Manfred van Crefeld: (https://www.amazon.com/Pussycats-Rest-Keeps-Beating-About-ebook/dp/B01GQRGA2M/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1501107524&sr=8-1&keywords=pussycats)Pussycats. Why the Rest beats the West, and what can be done about it. (https://www.amazon.com/Pussycats-Rest-Keeps-Beating-About-ebook/dp/B01GQRGA2M/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1501107524&sr=8-1&keywords=pussycats)

I try to speak on grounds of healthy reason only. He speaks with far more factual insight, authority and expertise. And he says basically the same like me, at least where his book covers the matter in these postings.

vienna

07-27-17, 03:11 AM

Kristin Beck, transgender Navy SEAL hero: 'Let's meet face to face and you tell me I'm not worthy' --

http://www.businessinsider.com/kristin-beck-trump-transgender-ban-2017-7

Beck is not just your average service member. Born Christopher Beck, she served for 20 years in the Navy with SEAL Teams 1, 5, and, eventually, the elite 6. She deployed 13 times over two decades, including stints in Bosnia, Iraq, and Afghanistan. She received the Bronze Star award for valor and the Purple Heart for wounds suffered in combat.

"I was defending individual liberty," she said. "I defended for Republicans. I defended for Democrats. I defended for everyone."

Kristin shouldn't have high hopes of a face-to-face: even if one were arranged, Trump would probably cancel due to a foot 'boo-boo'... :haha:

<O>

vienna

07-27-17, 05:33 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Dj-nIH0fP8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1PvIJjpPvE

An interesting bit of tragicomedy regarding Trump's first tweet regarding the transgender troop ban; when the first tweet went out, Trump let ten minutes pass before he sent the second part (I guess its kind of difficult tweeting with such small hands), so all anyone saw was this:

http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170726092110-trump-tweet-transgender-military-nr-00000822-exlarge-169.jpg

Apparently, some people at the Pentagon, not knowing about the subject of Trump's tweet-storm (and it appears that was everyone at the Pentagon), kind of freaked because they feared Trump had finally gone 'round the bend and had unilaterally initiated some sort of military action, probably against North Korea, causing not a little bit of tension at the top levels of the military...

Sleep easy America: your security is in tiny hands... :haha:

<O>

Onkel Neal

07-27-17, 06:39 AM

If our people at the Pentagon freak that easily, we have real problems.

vienna

07-27-17, 06:47 AM

Can't really blame them. The real problem is the Freak-In-Chief who is the human equivalent of UXO: liable to go off at no notice, with the slightest provocation, and capable of inflicting real and severe damage...

<O>

August

07-27-17, 07:56 AM

It is short-sighted to call Trump anti-LGBT. Supporting LGBT rights does not mean that you have to be an LGBT Santa Claus who continually stuffs the stockings and leaves presents under the tree. Trump has to make decisions for the nation, not one group, and sometimes that means you don't get what you want.When it comes to LGBT politics it is sexuality first, country second. It is just the opposite when you are POTUS. Trump's decision may be unfair, but it was not incorrect.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/07/26/trump-trans-ban-prioritizes-national-security-joseph-murray-column/513373001/

vienna

07-27-17, 09:29 AM

Still, that opinion piece doesn't refute the fact Trump, who campaigned as a defender of LGBT rights even to the point of declaring he was more of an advocate the Hillary Clinton, has once again turned on those who gave him support and has again proved he is incapable of telling the truth or keeping his promises. It is also very apparent Trump's sudden avid interest in the transgender issue is mainly because he knows he is steadily losing his base constituency and is becoming even more mired, by his own actions and words, in the increasing web of scandals and very serious doubts of his ability to govern, if he ever had any; what else does a conservative politician do when backed into a corner other than find some 'hot button' non-issue to try to fire up his base?. Trump, the snake-oil salesman, hopes while the hicks are busy fretting over the baubles he dangles, they won't notice he's fleecing them blind. "Ya got trouble, folks, right here in River City. Those trans people are fixing to do us harm!"...

Once a con man, always a con man...

<O>

Skybird

07-27-17, 09:44 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLgAbgEjMG0 Couldn't resist. :D

vienna

07-27-17, 09:45 AM

Well, we don't know yet if Scaramucci can do the Fandango, but he is certainly moonwalking backwards away from his previous tweet, which he has since deleted:

Scaramucci deflects questions on White House leaks to Priebus --

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/scaramucci-tweets-deletes-cryptic-message-leak-financial-disclosure/story?id=48877830

Still, Scaramucci is impressive: it must be difficult to dance like that with one foot in his mouth...

<O>

Rockstar

07-27-17, 09:50 AM

Oh god here we go again with 'facts'.

Look, if a man wants to wear a dress, thinkhimself and behave as a woman, take HRT or surgically remove his penis so his panties fit. I don't think Trump, like me, really gives a rats arse what you do, go for it. But its not the militaries job to order their personnel to view and accept gender dysphoria as if it were a normal condition or some civil rights group. Nor do I have any desire that my tax money be spent by the Pentegon paying for gender reassignments and appointments with a shrink.

What about those who are considered Gender nonconforming (GNC) people who feel that they are neither only male or only female who identify themselves "genderqueer".

Where does it stop?

The real issue here is the FACT that some estimates are that 71% of people with gender dysphoria will have some other mental health diagnosis in their lifetime. That includes mood disorders, anxiety disorders, schizophrenia, depression, substance abuse, eating disorders, and suicide attempts. Fix the ACA so it can provide the right and affordable assistance. Dont dump it on the Pentegon's lap. Let the military spend its allotments on weapons and training warriors.

Mr Quatro

07-27-17, 09:59 AM

Maybe we will all meet again ... till then this song will have to do.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHcunREYzNY&index=4&list=RDjDNDELFF1ok

Whoops! I put it in the wrong thread. Oh well I'll let it stay.

Rockstar

07-27-17, 10:19 AM

1980 interview by Rona Barrett: "Why wouldn't you dedicate yourself to public service?"" Donald Trump: "Because I see it as a mean life.....and I also see it that somebody as someone with strong views, and somebody with the kind of views that are maybe a little unpopular even tho they may be right, but maybe unpopular, wouldn't necessarily have a chance at getting elected against somebody with no great brain, but a big smile."

I guess some people got tired of the brainless smiles. hehe

em2nought

07-27-17, 10:57 AM

I guess some people got tired of the brainless smiles. hehe

Helps to run against a toothy crocodile that's for sure. :03:

August

07-27-17, 12:58 PM

Interesting article.

Same Old “New” Democrats

Trying to reclaim lost voters, the party rolls out a derivative slogan to promote old, failed ideas. Steven Malanga
July 26, 2017 Politics and law

Seizing the opportunity created by a stumbling president whose White House seems incapable of fulfilling his biggest campaign promises, Democrats counterattacked this week, touting a new slogan and policies as they look ahead to the 2018 midterm elections. The slogan—“A Better Deal: Better Skills, Better Jobs, Better Wages”—was quickly derided by Twitter wags as reminiscent of Papa John’s Pizza marketing (“Better ingredients, better pizza”). And the policies rolled out a day later were retreads of Hillary Clinton’s policy positions in her failed presidential campaign. It’s tempting to speculate, given this uninspired effort, that Democrats are coasting on the assumption that President Trump is so toxic that their victory in the midterms is assured. But this is the second reassessment the party has performed on itself after devastating political losses in the last three years, and in each case the message to America seems to be: “Don’t worry so much about our ideas: just trust that we’re on your side.” Maybe the Democrats’ ideas really are the problem. It’s worth remembering that Trump’s surprise victory last November was not the first major setback that Democrats have suffered since Barack Obama won his historic election in 2008: other than his reelection four years later, it’s pretty much been all downhill. Democrats lost control of the House of Representatives in 2010 and the Senate in 2014. At the state level, the party faced a sustained run of bad results that included losing some 900 local legislative seats, while watching Republicans capture 31 governorships. Republicans now boast 25 state “trifectas”—in which they control the legislature and the governor’s office—compared with just six for Democrats. To comprehend the magnitude of Democratic losses, consider that Republicans hold more power in the states than at any time since the Civil War.

https://www.city-journal.org/html/same-old-new-democrats-15364.html

August

07-27-17, 01:05 PM

Even more interesting:

The Bizarre Hacking Scandal That Democrats And The Press Are Happy To Ignore

Scandal: When federal officials arrested Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz's IT aide, Imran Awan, as he tried to flee for his native Pakistan, it was the latest twist to an already twisted scandal involving several House IT workers who possibly stole highly sensitive information from several Democrats. Stranger still has been the Democrats' nonresponse to this unfolding scandal.

Back in February, the Capitol Hill police opened a criminal investigation into Awan and four other House employees who provided IT services for several Democrats, including those serving on the House intelligence, foreign affairs and homeland security committees.
Investigators were looking into whether these employees, who had access to emails and official documents of dozens of Democratic lawmakers, had stolen equipment and sent information to an off-site server. The police immediately shut off their access to the House network.
From there, the story got weirder with every new revelation.
It turned out that the other four being investigated were relatives of Awan — two brothers, his wife, and a sister-in-law. Then we learned that Awan's bothers owed money to a Hezbollah-connected fugitive, and a friend of Awan's had been working at McDonald's before getting hired as an IT professional by Congressional Democrats.
What's more, they were pulling down unusually large salaries of around $160,000, according to the Daily Caller, which is the only news outlet that has been actively pursuing this story. Together, Awan and his family raked in $4 million between 2009 and 2016, the DC reported, for what at times appeared to be "no show" jobs.
Then, a month after the investigation was made public, Awan's wife took her children out of school and fled the country for Qatar. Earlier in the year, Awan wire transferred $283,000 to two people in Pakistan. More recently, the FBI found smashed hard drives and other equipment at Awan's home.
How these people were able to get high-paying, highly sensitive jobs with dozens of House Democrats over the years is a mystery.
Then there's Schultz's odd reaction to these events. After learning of the investigation, Schultz kept Awan on her payroll. In fact, she didn't fire him until this Tuesday, the day after he was arrested at the airport.
Also, after the Capital Police seized a computer related to their investigation of Awan — which Awan apparently hid in a crevice of the Rayburn House Office Building — Schultz demanded that they return it. She even spent several minutes of a Capital Police budget hearing hectoring the police chief to return the laptop and threatening "consequences" if he didn't. Only recently did Schultz's attorney begin negotiating with the police over access to that laptop.
Other Democrats have been utterly indifferent to the whole affair. At one point, Rep. Gregory Meeks suggested the police targeted Awan and his bothers because of Islamophobia, the DC reported. That led some congressional staffers to wonder if Awan and company were blackmailing House members with data they'd pilfered.
And, of course, since Democrats don't want this story in the news, the mainstream "news" media have entirely ignored it. Neither the New York Times, the Washington Post nor CNN appear to have published a single story on this case since it broke five months ago.
What does this all add up to? Nobody knows at the moment. Once the FBI is able to examine the equipment Awan tried to destroy, we might learn more about the parameters of this strange and troubling case. Until then, it would be helpful if Democrats and the press were to take it seriously and start pressing for answers.

Platapus

07-27-17, 02:30 PM

You don't need to be straight to fight and die for your country. You just need to shoot straight. -- Barry Goldwater

eddie

07-27-17, 02:39 PM

Now the so called Bad arse Zinke is threatening the Senators from Alaska because they didn't vote the way Donnie boy wanted them to on healthcare!?!:haha::haha::haha:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/report-trump-admin-threatens-retaliation-against-alaska-for-obamacare-repeal-opposition/ar-AAoUDU0?OCID=ansmsnnews11

mapuc

07-27-17, 03:15 PM

You don't need to be straight to fight and die for your country. You just need to shoot straight. -- Barry Goldwater

Didn't Patton say something similar

....you let the enemy die for his country"

Can't remember the exact phrase

Back to topic

Markus

Onkel Neal

07-27-17, 03:30 PM

More and more Republican Congressmen are drawing a red line over Sessions. I would love it if they would join the Democrats and impeach Trump. He needs to go.

August

07-27-17, 03:36 PM

You don't need to be straight to fight and die for your country. You just need to shoot straight. -- Barry Goldwater

Sounds good but:

How are you going to shoot straight when you are in the hospital getting your private parts cut off.

Why should we the taxpayers be forced to fund it?

I don't care what a person does to themselves but don't demand that I fund the lunacy. Nor do I want to see other soldiers putting themselves at risk to take up the slack for one of these people while they are off reinventing themselves or are too depressed to function over having not reinvented themselves yet, or any other reason that puts their personal issues over the needs of their unit.

August

07-27-17, 03:37 PM

More and more Republican Congressmen are drawing a red line over Sessions. I would love it if they would join the Democrats and impeach Trump. He needs to go.

If he is forced from office it could cause a civil war. Is subverting the will of the voters really that important?

Skybird

07-27-17, 04:49 PM

The climate where riots and violence between different opinion camps in the US is possible, has been created and did form up over the past couple of years, if not decades already. Trump coming, staying or being kicked, is just a symptom of it. Not the cause of the mess. And if he goes, whenever and however that will be, the problems will remain - and maybe become obvious more evidently than ever before.

A tornado moving through the countryside, is bad. A tornado without any attractor making it moving in one straight line, so it zig-zags unpredictably, is even more dangerous for those in its vicinity. Trump may be the attractor making it moving in a straight line.

The tornado itself - the climate and energy in the air creating it - you already have had before him.

The "old white men" in the US are loosing their voter base, the massive immigration wave form Latin America votes by majority for socialism braking out even more powerfzul in America. The - left-leaning - Democrats benefit from that, the Republicans will either turn socialist too, or get pushed out of the game for power. In the end, the differences between both parties will vanish, and all will turn into a one-party state. Like we already have in Germany by Merkel's net effect.

mapuc

07-27-17, 05:51 PM

Skybird

07-27-17, 06:20 PM

Some thoughts after have read some of your comments

I doubt it will be a civil war if Trump is removed or impeached-There will be some demonstration and perhaps some riots. If there is a civil war it will be fought on the Internet.

I understand that people don't like Trump, but should this be a reasonable reason to remove or impeach him ?
(Here I'm thinking on some of the comments Platapus has postet. Doing a bad job, acting like a jerk and so on is not a criminal act)

Markus

Not even me would impeach a Donald just because I "do not like it". Although this Donald's hair sometimes is tempting to be used as a valid argument to impeach it. - But nepotism, failure in duties, braking laws, corruption - that should be reason to impeach somebody for sure. When I did read an explanation longer time ago with what wide range of offences - in my book - you can get away with when you are POTUS, I was quite shocked and wondered whether the authors of these rules really had not lost any of their marbles. Protection for the POTUS imo goes too far in quite some of the examples explained. I post it when I can find it again.

Platapus

07-27-17, 06:21 PM

Sounds good but:

How are you going to shoot straight when you are in the hospital getting your private parts cut off.

Why should we the taxpayers be forced to fund it?

Probably the exact same way when current military members get vasectomies, ED treatments, appendectomies, hair-loss treatments, C-sections and a multitude of other operations that we have been funding for decades and decades and decades.

They get put in the hospital and get discharged when they can resume their duties. Nothing is going to change. Just like all military members do.

No one asked my permission for that new $13,000,000,000 aircraft carrier nor was I asked about the F-35 at $100,000,000 per copy, but my taxes pay for that. Why am I forced to pay taxes for those?

There are a lot of things my taxes are used for that I don't agree with. A relatively small number of trans-gender surgeries does not make even the top 1,000 tax expenditures concerns in my book.

Platapus

07-27-17, 06:23 PM

More and more Republican Congressmen are drawing a red line over Sessions. I would love it if they would join the Democrats and impeach Trump. He needs to go.

If they can prove that Trump violated the law to the extent that impeachment is appropriate, I am sure the majority of the citizens would accept that.

But he has to violate the law first.

August

07-27-17, 07:24 PM

Probably the exact same way when current military members get vasectomies, ED treatments, appendectomies, hair-loss treatments, C-sections and a multitude of other operations that we have been funding for decades and decades and decades.

They get put in the hospital and get discharged when they can resume their duties. Nothing is going to change. Just like all military members do.

First off medically unnecessary elective surgeries like vasectomies and hair loss treatments should never be equated with life or death ones like appendectomies. Secondly just because a wrong has been committed for "decades and decades and decades" does not mean it should be allowed to continue. I'm kind of surprised you'd attempt to make that argument Platapus.

No one asked my permission for that new $13,000,000,000 aircraft carrier nor was I asked about the F-35 at $100,000,000 per copy, but my taxes pay for that. Why am I forced to pay taxes for those?

There are a lot of things my taxes are used for that I don't agree with. A relatively small number of trans-gender surgeries does not make even the top 1,000 tax expenditures concerns in my book.

Lowering unnecessary costs and limiting the loss of duty time versus your 1,000 more important expenditure concerns are not an either or proposition. It is just another straw on the camels back and is no less valid than any other readiness destroying wasteful social experiment.

Why am I forced to pay taxes for those?

Maybe because you and your fellow citizens didn't object to them strenuously enough, but should that stop you, us, from continuing to try?

eddie

07-27-17, 08:09 PM

Trumps new communication directer is a class act!:D

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/anthony-scaramucci-reince-priebus-new-yorker_us_597a5766e4b0da64e877f30e

Onkel Neal

07-27-17, 08:31 PM

If he is forced from office it could cause a civil war. Is subverting the will of the voters really that important?

If he stays in office it could start a civil war. He's a loony, he served his sole purpose (keeping Hillary out of the office) and we have a much better man in the #2 role. Why are you defending him?

The "old white men" in the US are losing their voter base, the massive immigration wave form Latin America votes by majority for socialism braking out even more powerfzul in America. The - left-leaning - Democrats benefit from that, the Republicans will either turn socialist too, or get pushed out of the game for power. In the end, the differences between both parties will vanish, and all will turn into a one-party state. Like we already have in Germany by Merkel's net effect.

No doubt, it's just a matter of time. The US is doomed to slide into a Hispanic socialist country. May be delayed but it cannot be stopped, not with the level of laziness and entitlement growing here.

August

07-27-17, 10:02 PM

If he stays in office it could start a civil war. He's a loony, he served his sole purpose (keeping Hillary out of the office) and we have a much better man in the #2 role. Why are you defending him?

If he is shown to have broken a law then I wouldn't defend him but until that happens I want him in there because I believe he has more purpose than just keeping her out of power. What she represented is still very much alive and well and makes up the majority of his opposition. As I have said to me Trump pisses off all the right people but I don't know if Pence can do that.

vienna

07-27-17, 10:26 PM

If he is forced from office it could cause a civil war. Is subverting the will of the voters really that important?

There is one big fallacy in the above: subversion of the will of the voters. It is undeniable, except to the loon Trump, that a majority of the voters, exercising their rights of one person one vote, did not vote for Trump; he is a minority leader; if the US were a parliamentary form of government, Trump would have to form a coalition with his adversaries in order to maintain his rule. Plain and simple: more Americans voted against Trump than for him and the actual, unfiltered will of the voters would be someone other than him would be in the White House. In considering the actual number of votes cast for Trump, what would happen if we deducted the number of voters who cast votes for Trump not because they actually supported him and his "ideals", but, rather because they just didn't want to vote for Hillary, who, in fact, actually did earn more votes than Trump; and let's see what would happen if a deduction were made for those voters who just automatically vote for whoever their party puts up for election, regardless of whether they actually agree with their party's candidate. Somehow I think the percentage number would shrink to just about where Trump's polling numbers have been hovering, in the mid to low 30th percentile; having at least two-thirds of the American voting public openly against Trump speaks volumes about the "will of the voters": there actually is no will to subvert...

As far as a civil war is concerned, the whole idea is utter nonsense. As it is now, Trump supporters have been glaringly unable to muster anywhere near the crowd sizes of anti-Trump protests; and given the US is a nation of laws, any Trumpette who got their Pampers in enough of a bunch to actually and illegally attempt to enforce their will violently would be made very quick work of by the authorities while the rest of us grown-ups breathe a collective sigh of relief Trump is gone and get on with our grown-up lives and concerns...

<O>

Skybird

07-28-17, 03:09 AM

First off medically unnecessary elective surgeries like vasectomies and hair loss treatments should never be equated with life or death ones like appendectomies. Secondly just because a wrong has been committed for "decades and decades and decades" does not mean it should be allowed to continue. I'm kind of surprised you'd attempt to make that argument Platapus.

Lowering unnecessary costs and limiting the loss of duty time versus your 1,000 more important expenditure concerns are not an either or proposition. It is just another straw on the camels back and is no less valid than any other readiness destroying wasteful social experiment.

Again I need to agree with August.

No doubt that the cost argument used to decide against genderism allowed to enter services was only brought up as a strawman. The point the Donald is about is genderism itself. And I agree even with that.

I have ead a comparison of various costs for medical programs provided by the US armed forces. An unbelievably high sum of money gets paid for - Viagra. Erectile dysfunction that resulted, as diagnosed by the treating doctors, from PTSD and other experiences during active military duty.

I see it like this: the state service should pay servants - armed forces but other services as well - such medical treatment that focusses on problems resulting from the service itself. Which in case of the PTSD-Viagra example above is true. But health problems resulting not from anything linked to the service time, should be paid for by a regular health insurrance that the subject pays into.

Also, it is not okay I think if you can enter a service, or the armed forces in this case, and bring your personal health issues with you and then demand the service in question to finance the curing of it. Its not even about the money that much, but about the principle. Who wants to see for example depressive patient without a therapy place or money for a doctor entering the army, and then telling the army that he is depressive and demands psychotherapy paid by the army? Or a high-pregnant women that enters service on one day and the next day leaves for motherhood leave? A depression somebody forms out after having done one tour in a war zone, having seen bad things and not being able to get along with his painful memories all by himself - that would be somethign else. But the army having to pay for health issues you bring along with you from all beginning of your service time on - that would turn the army into kind of a secondary health care insurrance itself. There is also a chance that people enter it not because they want to serve, but because they accept to serve as a payment for getting access to the wanted treatment. Is that really the audience one wants to attract for the armed forces?

The costs of genderism, is a strawman argument here, but I nevertheless agree with the real thing behind it: to now allow a thousand "Extrawürste" being roasted for a thousand special client groups. Your gender feeling is of no interest for armed services, what is of interest is your ability to fit in and to serve the duties that come with "soldiering". That necessarily comes with the temporary limitation of certain basic rights you enjoy as a private citizen, as well as the need of the candidate to fulfill certain demands and physicla conditions that the ordinary citizen must not be so much concerned of. You meet the criterions, you fulfill the same standards like everybody else: you can come in. You want extra treatment and demand special roles or think this is the place to improve your spirituality - you are out. Thats why I think claimed genderism shall have no place in the state's services, army or else. Solve your life issues and get your balance BEFORE you enter service. Your mission has to be to win the battle ahead. Your religion, your gender feelings, are your private stuff. Keep them private. If service and private stuff collide, either do not enter service in the first, or do service first, put private stuff second - this order, not the other way around.

No special treatment for lobbying subgroups. No quotas for this religion, that skin colour, this food habit or that or the other gender. And no complaining, please.

Don't like it? Don't enter service. Currently there is no drafting.

Rockstar

07-28-17, 09:50 AM

Was listening to NPR while I was getting my coffee this morning. There was a transgender advocate whos argument was, if I understood it correctly wasnt so much about how a transgender can shoot as well as any other soldier and therefore should be allowed entry into the armed services. But instead she was advocating entry so that those diagnosed with gender dysphoria can recieve the care they need while serving.

Sorry but thats not what the military is for. There has to be standards if you meet them then welcome aboard. But if as some estimates show that 70 percent of those diagnosed with gender dysphoria suffer from depression, anxiety, sucidal thoughts, and schizophrenia. Then maybe blanket permission to serve isnt such a good idea. I remember during my entrance exam nobody not even once asked me how well I could shoot. All anyone I saw ever wanted to know was if I was physically and mentally fit to serve. Marksmanship was not a prerequisite for military service. The big concern was my blood pressure which almost prevented me from going any further. In the end I was granted the priviledge to serve this country 24 years. It was some of the best times of my life.

Catfish

07-28-17, 12:13 PM

Trumps new communication directer is a class act!:D

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/anthony-scaramucci-reince-priebus-new-yorker_us_597a5766e4b0da64e877f30e

I guess the Donald and his whole entourage are gaga, maybe with two exceptions including Spencer :hmmm:

eddie

07-28-17, 12:29 PM

I guess the Donald and his whole entourage are gaga, maybe with two exceptions including Spencer :hmmm:

Seems like there is a serious melt down going on in the White House, whole thing is so unreal!

Platapus

07-28-17, 02:26 PM

So has everyone ordered their copy of Hillary's new book?

https://s14-eu5.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Ft0.gstatic.com%2Fimage s%3Fq%3Dtbn%3AANd9GcQy6zzROO2TiAdvaUJXadHYBN0sekRv IDlQkOk-n4-yHOVvxQsJ&sp=9dc88c88df8cc9b3961874163eecaa23&anticache=268648

Evidently in her book she reveals why she lost the election

It was not because of her expensive but poorly run campaign
It was not because she has the charisma of a bowl of tapioca
It was not her demonstrated below average successes as a Senator and SoS
It was not because of her shady business dealings
It was not because of her pay to play shenanigans with foreign "contributions" to the CGI (that coincidentally faded away once she lost)
It was not because of her lack of being able to speak eloquently and be able to persuade people
It was not her lack of ability to make political deals even among her own party
It was not because she was generally disliked by citizens from both parties
It was not because she alienated large sectors of the voting population
It was not because she failed to appeal to the working classes
I was not because of her failure of judgment when it comes to handling classified information
It was not because of her questionable judgment in approving IT systems
It was not because (insert multiple reasons)

The real reason she lost the election was

(drum roll)

She was too powerful a woman and the "system" was against her.

(facepalm)

In other words, it was not her fault. It probably never is.

She just does not get it. Hillary' legacy is that she was probably the only candidate that could possibly lose against Trump.

No hurry to order this book, I am sure there will be plenty of copies on the shelves for a long long time.

Rockstar

07-28-17, 03:33 PM

And how that pesky electoral college subverted the will of the people and prevented her from winning the election.

Skybird

07-28-17, 06:22 PM

Mercilessly turns the wheel of life, who was hip now is hop, who was yesterday now is history, and on the grand stage in Washington the Donaldinarium's cast is being reshuffled once again for shooting another successful season like a shaker filled with dice all showing one point on each side (because only the Donald may use the one big golden die with only sixes on it, golden, of course). Great entertainment! I think even in Game of Thrones they did not die this fast, and so many in so short time. My bet for this year's academy awards, best actor, best screenplay, best hair cut, best soap opera, best comedy, and of course: biggest, best and greatest POTUS ever. Period! :har:

What sweaty feet! Great! Tremendous!
http://www.tagesspiegel.de/images/kabinett_ts/19929782/2-format140.jpg

Buddahaid

07-28-17, 07:19 PM

I wish he would just fire himself, but all this hoopla just feeds his ego and publicity is publicity.

Onkel Neal

07-28-17, 11:59 PM

So has everyone ordered their copy of Hillary's new book?

Evidently in her book she reveals why she lost the election

It was not because of her expensive but poorly run campaign
It was not because she has the charisma of a bowl of tapioca
It w...
In other words, it was not her fault. It probably never is.

She just does not get it. Hillary' legacy is that she was probably the only candidate that could possibly lose against Trump.

No hurry to order this book, I am sure there will be plenty of copies on the shelves for a long long time.

Yes, an amazing level of hubris to publish a book of excuses like that.

Michael Bloomberg, this is all your fault for not getting in the race. :wah:

August

07-29-17, 02:08 PM

Yes, an amazing level of hubris to publish a book of excuses like that.

Michael Bloomberg, this is all your fault for not getting in the race. :wah:

You just named the other person who couldn't have beaten Donald Trump. The guy is a bigger fascist than hillary even.

Mr Quatro

07-29-17, 02:08 PM

CNN has another un named source from un named friends of Rex Tillerson.

Rexit? Rex Tillerson 'to quit as Donald Trump's secretary of state before the end of the year'

https://www.yahoo.com/news/rexit-rex-tillerson-apos-quit-202336340.html

Mr Tillerson has found himself undermined by the president, who openly contradicts him and appears disinterested in the work of Mr Tillerson's team of career diplomats at the state department.
Friends of Mr Tillerson's had previously believed he would ride out the roller coaster at Foggy Bottom - home of the state department. But CNN on Monday reported that the friends had noticed "a change in tone," and thought that he could well be planning on leaving Washington.

August

07-29-17, 02:13 PM

CNN has another un named source from un named friends of Rex Tillerson.

Some friends these republican officials have eh? It's almost like they hang out with a bunch of closet democrats.

Mr Quatro

07-29-17, 02:58 PM

Found this note of a post I saved last year from the long gone Presidential thread we had before this one. Don't cheat and scroll to the bottom to see who it was, but it was from his heart.

Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach. Those who can neither do nor teach are leftist comedians.

Why should they be the goto source of wisdom in defending a position? That fact alone screams lack of validity for a hyperbolic position.

You have to redefine the meaning of the word to call Trump hypocritical. His weakness is that he is too honest, that he fails to filter out positions that might offend some, that he speaks his mind regardless of the consequences. Of course that got a lot of help when "some of the immigrants are criminals who must be expelled" became "all Mexican immigrants are criminals" in the press, shame on the "objective" (another word that has been redefined) press.

Hypocrisy is being head of the State department, sending memos to your people telling them now to handle e-mail in a secure manner and in a way that preserves historical records, but violating those guidelines for yourself, ensuring that the enemies of the US have access to the country's most sensitive top secret and above information. Hypocrisy is denying that you had more than one cell phone when you had at least 10 different ones, denying that any top secret e-mails went on your server when many did, denying that any wrongdoing was done and that at most an inconsequential mistake was made.

Hypocrisy is claiming to work for women's rights when the 1990's was spent destroying women who claimed sexual relations with her "husband" in direct opposition to her "women don't lie. They have the right to be believed" nonsense. Hypocrisy is paying your women 70% of what the men working in the campaign are paid and claiming to stand for equal pay for equal work. Hypocrisy is handing out crumbs to the residents of our inner cities for their votes while doing not one thing to bring them true opportunity and bring them out of their economic plight. Hypocrisy is blaming the deficit on the top 1% of taxpayers not paying their share when they already pay over half of federal revenues. Hypocrisy is a plan to increase corporate taxes on companies who are already paying the highest corporate taxes in the world, effectively paying them to leave our country and relocate to one with lower expenses.

Finally, hypocrisy is taking a tens of millions of dollars from the same countries that finance ISIS, the same countries where women can't vote, can't leave the house without escort, are not allowed to get an education, cannot drive a car and are strictly treated as property: toys to be taken out of the closet to play with and when you're done they go back in the closet. 90% of that 70 to 100 million dollars went to the Clintons. The other 10% went to the purposes of the Clinton Foundation.

That's the short list. You do not have to redefine the term to attach "hypocrisy" to its correct owner here.

Oh, hypocrisy is stiffing your supporters on the night of your predictable loss of the presidency, for selfish reasons not thanking them for their support, sending the message that this defeat is final, that an unspeakable wrong has been committed, that THIS defeat is final and that somehow her supporters, as evidenced by her absence, are to blame, in her mind. It was a horrible act of selfish hypocrisy. Being better than Hillary, they still came back and cheered her the next day.

Hillary has had plenty of object lessons that the universe is not all about her, but has steadfastly rejected each opportunity to become a better person and take responsibility for her own shortcomings, which all, thankfully, cost her the Presidency.

I'm not saying Trump will fare any better or be a great President. He's a bit of a crapshoot. But if he fails, it will be because of his forthrightness, not because of his parsing and redefining of formerly well-understood and shared values and terms. He's not a professional politician. That is both his primary strength and his greatest weakness.
__________________
11-18-16
subsim forum
rockin robbins

eddie

07-29-17, 05:58 PM

Old Donnie boy, is now making threats against Congress over health care,lol Does this idiot know how hard they can make life for him!?! He's a first class chump! :D:D

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/07/29/trump-threatens-to-end-health-care-bailouts-for-insurers-lawmakers.html

vienna

07-29-17, 11:34 PM

Instead of trying to chase down non-existent 'millions of duplicate votes' in an vain effort to appease the Great Yellow One and make his fantasy of having won the 2016 Presidential Election popular vote, perhaps the time, effort, and money would be better spent dealing with very real and very relevant election problems:

Hackers break into voting machines in minutes at hacking competition --

http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/344488-hackers-break-into-voting-machines-in-minutes-at-hacking-competition

It took DEF CON hackers minutes to pwn these US voting machines --

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/07/29/us_voting_machines_hacking/

A real problem needing a very real solution...

<O>

Platapus

07-30-17, 09:12 AM

One of the many reasons I am very happy my state went back to paper ballots.

There are some instances where newer technology is not necessarily better than older technology.

August

07-30-17, 01:50 PM

I like this guys take on things:

Monster swamp vs. swamp monster: A D.C. allegory

July 29, 2017 at 7:00 pm | By FRANK MIELE

Politically speaking, I’m caught between a rock and a hard place, or more appropriately between a monster swamp and a swamp monster.
The swamp is the bipartisan disaster known more formally as the federal government. The monster is President Donald Trump, whose out-sized self-caricature approach to life makes him more of a tormented DC Comics superhero (or supervillain?) than a D.C. politician.

There is no way I am going to support the swamp and its bureaucratic morass, which has a bottomless national debt and the moral code of a toothy gator. But accepting Trump on his own terms means you have to accept him as a “muck-encrusted mockery of a man,” as the original Swamp Thing was characterized. Sure, he means well, but he is so elemental and so alien from what we are familiar with that he is terrifying not just to the Fake News Media whom he battles for control of the swamp, but also to the rest of us who are just distant observers on dry land.
No one likes the Twitter bombs that Trump dumps on the unsuspecting swamp creatures every morning. They are untidy and reckless. But no one liked the real bombs dropped on Dresden, Berlin or Hiroshima either. They were anything but tidy, but they got the job done.

If you know anything about Trump, it is that he is at war, and like Gens. George Patton, Ulysses S. Grant and Douglas MacArthur, he cares less about winning a popularity contest than winning the war.

The swamp creatures in Congress and the media pretend they like things nice and tidy, but that’s only because they are so deep inside the mud that they have no idea just how dirty they are. I guess we’d all like things nice and tidy at some level, and that’s why the swamp has survived so long. By keeping our eyes closed, we can pretend the muck doesn’t stink. We can pretend that senators and congressmen are statesmen instead of power-grubbing pigs living in the muck and feeding at the public trough.

It would be awesome if someone would clean the mess up, we tell ourselves, but we forget that cleaning up a swamp means getting your hands dirty. In some measure, Trump disappoints us not because he fails, but because he makes us confront our own part in allowing the swamp to exist.

To reference a superhero who pre-dates comic books by a couple millennia, it was Hercules who was tasked with cleaning up the filthy Augean stables that housed 3,000 head of cattle. According to Greek mythology, the stables had not been cleaned in over 30 years, a strangely fitting number since it also closely approximates the time period since Ronald Reagan tried to clean up Washington in the 1980s.

Hercules used his strength and his cunning to accomplish the seemingly impossible task of cleaning up the stables. It remains to be seen whether or not Trump will have similar success in draining the swamp, but it should be pointed out that Hercules did not get credit for his remarkable labor. Nor may Trump, but I venture to say that he will leave Washington, D.C., a fresher place than when he found it.
http://www.dailyinterlake.com/article/20170729/ARTICLE/170729875

mapuc

07-30-17, 04:54 PM

Don't know if it have been mentioned before.

A friends friend told me that an American who's unemployed and homeless does not have the right to vote in an election or referendum.

Markus

Skybird

07-30-17, 05:28 PM

Don't know if it have been mentioned before.

A friends friend told me that an American who's unemployed and homeless does not have the right to vote in an election or referendum.

Markus
Which is reasonable. Nobody should have any option to vote for forcing others to generate him an income. No representation without contribution, to lend a bit from the famous slogan of the Boston Tea Party (no taxation without representation).

I think prison inmatess cannot vote in the US, or some US states, too, but I am not certain. If true, I would agree with that as well.

None of the two points mean that I stopped arguing against elections and "democracy" in general. I'm just a little pedantic on those two points.

MaDef

07-30-17, 06:37 PM

Which is reasonable. Nobody should have any option to vote for forcing others to generate him an income. No representation without contribution, to lend a bit from the famous slogan of the Boston Tea Party (no taxation without representation).

I think prison inmatess cannot vote in the US, or some US states, too, but I am not certain. If true, I would agree with that as well.

None of the two points mean that I stopped arguing against elections and "democracy" in general. I'm just a little pedantic on those two points. the Homeless and unemployed are allowed to vote in U.S. elections.

the following people cannot vote in U.S. elections:
mentally disabled
Resident non-citizens
residents of U.S. territories (American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and Virgin Islands).
Most convicted Felons.

Sailor Steve

07-30-17, 10:48 PM

I like this guys take on things:
I posted on his blog. It was just to question the veracity of someone knowledgeable enough to know about a character from Greek mythology but obtuse enough to use the Roman form of his name. The "Greek" character was Herakles.

Skybird

07-31-17, 04:55 AM

the Homeless and unemployed are allowed to vote in U.S. elections.

the following people cannot vote in U.S. elections:
mentally disabled
Resident non-citizens
residents of U.S. territories (American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and Virgin Islands).
Most convicted Felons.
If so, then take my words for like it better should be. :03:

August

07-31-17, 06:56 AM

I posted on his blog. It was just to question the veracity of someone knowledgeable enough to know about a character from Greek mythology but obtuse enough to use the Roman form of his name. The "Greek" character was Herakles.

You did?, really?

In the model railroading community we call you people Rivet Counters. Someone who will trash a beautiful scale model that took months to create from scratch because the engine tender had 115 rivets on the side in real life but the builder only put 100 of them on.

Didja ever think the author was trying to talk to more than just fans of Greek mythology? How many people outside of that small collection of nerds do you think would recognize the alternate spelling of Hercules?

Sailor Steve

07-31-17, 10:59 AM

Yes, I am a rivet counter. On the other hand, when someone tries to use a particular subject to make a point, how does it help his point if he doesn't actually know the subject?

August

07-31-17, 11:27 AM

Yes, I am a rivet counter. On the other hand, when someone tries to use a particular subject to make a point, how does it help his point if he doesn't actually know the subject?

My point is maybe he does know the subject but wouldn't use some obscure alternate spelling of a popular historical figure when he's addressing a broad audience.

If you really want to be accurate how come you're using the English version of Ἡρακλῆς? hmmmm? Do you really know your subject if you can't read and write ancient Greek?

Rockstar

07-31-17, 11:28 AM

Once I realized the subject presented in the article had nothing to do with Greak or Rowman mythology. It turned out to be just another opinion about the current state of U.S. politics and a fairly decent one at that.

http://westchestertownhall.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Straw-Man_500.gif

August

07-31-17, 11:29 AM

Once I realized the argument presented in the article had nothing to do with Greak or Rowman mythology. It turned out to be just another opinion about the current state of U.S. politics and a fairly decent one at that.

I thought so too...

Catfish

07-31-17, 02:55 PM

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/31/us/politics/anthony-scaramucci-white-house.html

Platapus

07-31-17, 03:01 PM

As with most legal questions concerning the US, it depends on the state.

Maine and Vermont allow Felons still serving their sentences in prison to vote.

In other states, the rules about felons voting also depends on the state.

Some states Felons permanently lose their rights to vote
Some states a Felon can vote after serving their sentence
Some states prohibit Felons from voting unless their voting rights have been restored by the governor.

A good reference site is http://felonvoting.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000286

People serving misdemeanor sentences in Jail can still vote using an absentee ballot.

As for registering the homeless to vote, it also depends on the state. My state has methods for registering homeless citizens for example.

Skybird

07-31-17, 05:00 PM

Scaramucci got donaldized after just ten days. :har: I admit I have became addicted to the White House daily soap - the first US sitcom that indeed can squeeze laughter out of me. Usually I just stare in disbelief at these sit"coms".

u crank

07-31-17, 05:04 PM

Scaramucci got donaldized ......

On Chief of Staff John Kelly's first day on the job. I like this guy. :yep:

vienna

07-31-17, 05:43 PM

It was amusing to hear Scaramucci was "escorted" out of the White House, not unlike so many other people in the general workplace who re given the boot; I wonder if they're going to revoke his security clearance, also; there is a long history of the White House, regardless of the party in power, being loathe to revoke clearances because it is seen by some as the ultimate insult or comedown to lose clearances; this is why you often see ex-politicos or retired high ranking military officers still holding on to clearances long after they have ceased to really have a need for them...

Well, at least the White House has an actual adult in a position of authority and a Marine General, to boot; it is a bit ironic, since Trump had loudly proclaimed during his campaign that he knew more and better than the generals; now, if they can finally get a real adult in the Oval Office instead of that overgrown whiny brat, maybe the country can get on with real business...

<O>

STEED

07-31-17, 05:54 PM

Scaramucci struck me as a person who would head for a fall, what took me back how fast it was.

Skybird

07-31-17, 06:23 PM

On Chief of Staff John Kelly's first day on the job. I like this guy. :yep:
Lets see. He is said to do good job, but he wills to work for an all time low like the Donald, and that speaks against him. A man gets not just measured by his loyalty, but also by his choice of to whom or what he stays loyal to. Willing to work for the Donald, is a stigma.

I would have preferred hom to make an appearnce in the next administration coming after the Donald, when I read the media'S coverage of his biography. Apparently a good man - wasted on a bad man.

And so far the Donald has introduced all his personell choices as "grrreat" and that they will do a "tremendous" job. And then he started to twitter...

Most posts in the administration still have not found new names, btw. I read that thousands of offices and seats are still unmanned, half a year later. And "good names" boycott this adminsitration, I also read. Does the Donald plan to ever be "complete"? Russia. Syria. North Korea.

Many intrigues in the WH, no diubt. But Kelly's biggest opponent is the Donald himself. Himmelsfahrtskommando.

u crank

07-31-17, 06:38 PM

Lets see. He is said to do good job, but he wills to work for an all time low like the Donald, and that speaks against him. A man gets not just measured by his loyalty, but also by his choice of to whom or what he stays loyal to. Willing to work for the Donald, is a stigma.

From what I've read, Kelly's attraction to Trump is more about policy than personality. It will be interesting to see how he does.

Sailor Steve

07-31-17, 06:53 PM

I thought so too...
As did I. You might have noticed that I agreed with him before saying that. It was less straw man and more tease.

Skybird

07-31-17, 07:06 PM

From what I've read, Kelly's attraction to Trump is more about policy than personality. It will be interesting to see how he does.
Who - the Donald? You are right. Kelly's performance will completely depend on the Donald's temper and self control. And of both we have gotten enough taste now to know what to expect: more of the same.

Rumour holds it that Tillerson and two or three others are close to voluntarily throwing the towel and leaving the Donaldinarium.

vienna

07-31-17, 09:04 PM

Trump desperately needs Kelly, if only to show he is at least trying to have some degree of sanity in the West Wing; that sanity is definitely not forthcoming from Trump, himself. One thought occurred to me: is Kelly laying the groundwork for a transition to a new President? By any measure, Kelly is one person any President would want to have on his staff, but he is not a blind loyalist, as Trump so often exhibits his need to have; is Kelly actually going to be acting to restore order, not to shore up Trump's flailing and failing tenure, but, rather, to create a stable organizational structure for the new Oval Office resident?; it has been noted in news articles that Kelly is not at all enamored of Trump's "style" but does have a liking for the general policies; so, Kelly can right the ship, the Special Counsel and the Congress can oust Trump and a smooth, sane, transition can occur. Far fetched? Not if it is noted the Washington Post has just reported Trump personally dictated Junior's statement, which was an outright lie, about Jr.'s meeting with the Russians:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-dictated-sons-misleading-statement-on-meeting-with-russian-lawyer/2017/07/31/04c94f96-73ae-11e7-8f39-eeb7d3a2d304_story.html?utm_term=.d7f85b660958

More fuel for an obstruction of justice charge? Maybe...

<O>

Mr Quatro

07-31-17, 11:29 PM

One thought occurred to me: is Kelly laying the groundwork for a transition to a new President? By any measure, Kelly is one person any President would want to have on his staff ...

... so, Kelly can right the ship, the Special Counsel and the Congress can oust Trump and a smooth, sane, transition can occur. Far fetched?

<O>

I think you are a prophet and didn't know it ... :yep:

VP Mike Pence in 2020 for POTUS or earlier ... :up:

vienna

08-01-17, 04:18 AM

I think you are a prophet and didn't know it ... :yep:

Oh dear, please don't tell me I now have to don robe and sandals and hie myself to a mountain top and assume a lotus position; that really would be hard on these old knees and joints... :haha:

Stephen Colbert on the 'Mooch' getting canned:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vr_o1y47icc

<O>

vienna

08-02-17, 02:05 PM

There are times when "Russia-gate" seems eerily similar to Watergate. When Trump viciously went after Sessions publicly, I began to wonder if Trump was intending to use Session as sort of his "Spiro Agnew" much in the same way Nixon threw his Vice-President under the wheels of the bus as a deflection and distraction from Nixon's own Watergate mess. Now it seems anther sort of parallel has emerged; during the final stages of Watergate, the military leadership and the Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, became so concerned about Nixon's grasp on reality (and sanity), an agreement was reached by the Chiefs and Kissinger that if the military were to receive a direct order for military action from Nixon, they would have to first clear the action with Kissinger, who would have the final say on a go/no-go. Now, some 40 years later, it seems some similar concerns have prompted Secretary of Defense Mattis and White House Chief-Of-Staff Kelly to form a pact to keep Trump under personal watch lest Trump do something untoward:

Mattis And Kelly Made A Secret Pact To Babysit Trump --

http://taskandpurpose.com/john-kelly-mattis-trump-babysit/

You know you’re living in unusual times when the sanest person in the executive branch of the U.S. government is nicknamed “Chaos.”

That’s the primary takeaway from an Associated Press curtain-raiser on retired Marine Gen. John Kelly’s ascension to the rank of White House chief of staff. While the executive role traditionally considered gatekeeper to the commander-in-chief and the constitutional authority he wields, the AP hints at a different dynamic in the Oval Office:

[Secretary of Defense James] Mattis and Kelly also agreed in the earliest weeks of Trump’s presidency that one of them should remain in the United States at all times to keep tabs on the orders rapidly emerging from the White House, according to a person familiar with the discussions. The official insisted on anonymity in order to discuss the administration’s internal dynamics.

“Orders rapidly emerging from the White House” is a delightful euphemism for the president’s tendency to rule by decree tweet, a habit that has roiled a Department of Defense scrambling to interpret whether Trump’s unpredictable digital broadsides are, say, a signal of imminent attack on North Korea or something slightly more innocuous. Republican lawmakers who spoke to the AP are praying that Kelly, a retired four-star general known for his disciplinarian streak, will “forcefully clean the place up.”

What does it say for the state of leadership of this nation when the Chief Executive must be 'baby-sat' and gives reasons he is not to be trusted with major decisions?...

<O>