Donald Trump

vaggar99

PSA: calling Ann Coulter white trash will earn you a minimum 12 hour Twitter ban.

Lizard

HOW I WISH on that Post headline.

CM189191

2-feign-reluctance said:

I love that people are actually producing fake newspapers, this is great

Halifax2TheMax

More drain the swamp.

Christie: Trump is surrounded by ‘amateurs, grifters, weaklings’ and ‘felons’ — but it’s not really his fault

In his new book, Christie reportedly blames President Trump's problems on those around Trump — as if Trump has no power over them.

• By Aaron Blake

Halifax2TheMax

mrussel1 said:

**Cont**

Pelosi is up to something similar today. Just as Republicans in 2005 reminded Democrats that they once supported altering Social Security, Republicans today keep reminding Democrats that they once supported a border wall. In his Oval Office address last week, Trump observed that “Senator Chuck Schumer … has repeatedly supported a physical barrier in the past, along with many other Democrats.” The former Bush speechwriter Marc Thiessen titled a recent column “Democrats Were for a Wall Before They Were Against It.”

As in 2005, high-minded centrists are urging Pelosi and the Democrats to compromise. “Rather than talk about the immorality of a wall,” The Washington Post recently urged, “Democrats could use their leverage to achieve a truly moral purpose. In return for a few billion dollars for a segment of the president’s wall … Democrats might permanently shield from deportation well over 1 million ‘dreamers.’” A recent Bloomberg editorial scolded Democrats for wanting “to deny the other [side] anything that might be portrayed as a victory,” and warned that “the only alternative to compromise, now that power in Washington is more equally divided, is paralysis.”

But Pelosi knows that the alternative to Democratic compromise isn’t necessarily paralysis. It may be Democratic triumph. Trump, like Bush, has picked a fight that is popular with conservatives but unpopular with the public at large. Most Americans don’t think there’s a border crisis, don’t support a border wall, and blame Trump for the shutdown. As a result, Republican members of Congress are under more political pressure to back down than their Democratic counterparts, and the longer the shutdown continues, the more that pressure should grow. For the time being, at least, conservative opposition has forced Trump to shelve talk of declaring a national emergency. All of which means that the most likely outcome to the current standoff is that Trump caves. And since the wall was Trump’s signature campaign promise, such a retreat could depress conservative enthusiasm and impair his chances in 2020. “If he gives in,” Lindsey Graham recently warned, “that’s probably the end of his presidency.”

That’s what Pelosi is aiming for. In pure policy terms, there’s a case for compromise. Arguably, it’s worth wasting a few billion dollars on a border wall to safeguard the “Dreamers” who are stuck in an agonizing legal limbo. But Pelosi is focused on something bigger: the emasculation of the president. For years, Democrats have wondered when their leaders would start playing tough. Turns out Pelosi has been doing so all along.

Who is the Dem whip? I like that AOC is challenging the dem leadership but there's a reason for the Speaker and if it becomes too fractuous, dems will lose in the long run. I like that the Dem party welcomes all kinds and has these raucous debates and conflicts but there are times when you have to sacrifice your personal politics/beliefs and rally around the greater good. The reubs were very effect at that from 1994 through 2016/18, when it started to fray and went too far right, hence why Paul Ryan stepped down. AOC should be mindful that Congress, its rules, tradition, history, etc. take time to learn the ways and that being a bomb thrower and trying to subvert "leadership' will only get her relegated to a back bench and ultimately ineffectiveness. She'd be better served trying to convince a majority of Dems to her side through persausion, deal making and consensus building. I hope she's ultimately successful, one way or the other. A Green New Deal is appealling but it needs to be thought out, detailed and explained so 6th graders can understand it.

Halifax2TheMax

mrussel1 said:

OnWis97 said:

Tiki said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

When does this shutdown end?

I agree that the Democrats will not buckle on this issue- they'll let McDonald hang himself because ultimately, that's what he is doing. This is an egregious act.

* And for the record... nobody is ignoring anything Trump is doing. He is not distracting anyone from the 'serious' issues because some people want to laugh at him for walking around with toilet paper on his shoes or make fun of him for his flopper flopping around on his head.

It's not only McDonald it's McConnell as well.
Put it to a VOTE.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/425414-mcconnell-blocks-house-bill-to-reopen-government-for-second-time

I really believe that Mitch McConnell's name will be the second-most-famous name (#1, of course, is Individual 1) when we look back on this time.  Depending on how much is proven regarding Trump working for Putin/Russia, "Mitch McConnell" may ring in our ears the way "Benedict Arnold" does.  He's turning his back on his country to serve Trump.  Why?  Is it simply because he comes from a red state and wants to win?  Is it because Trump has threatened to fire his wife if he doesn't?  Or does Trump and/or Putin have something on him?  He's at best a coward.  History's going to look badly upon him.

Mitch is a coward.  I think history will forget him.  That's almost worse.  Devin Nunnes is the person that will be remembered as the Great Enabler, the one who ran interference and stymied the investigation.  The one who was not involved in the crime yet inserted himself in the cover up, like a damned fool.  

Mitch is complicit in the Russia NRA/RNC dots. He'll be remembered for faciltiating conspiracy and election fraud.

mrussel1

Halifax2TheMax said:

mrussel1 said:

**Cont**

Pelosi is up to something similar today. Just as Republicans in 2005 reminded Democrats that they once supported altering Social Security, Republicans today keep reminding Democrats that they once supported a border wall. In his Oval Office address last week, Trump observed that “Senator Chuck Schumer … has repeatedly supported a physical barrier in the past, along with many other Democrats.” The former Bush speechwriter Marc Thiessen titled a recent column “Democrats Were for a Wall Before They Were Against It.”

As in 2005, high-minded centrists are urging Pelosi and the Democrats to compromise. “Rather than talk about the immorality of a wall,” The Washington Post recently urged, “Democrats could use their leverage to achieve a truly moral purpose. In return for a few billion dollars for a segment of the president’s wall … Democrats might permanently shield from deportation well over 1 million ‘dreamers.’” A recent Bloomberg editorial scolded Democrats for wanting “to deny the other [side] anything that might be portrayed as a victory,” and warned that “the only alternative to compromise, now that power in Washington is more equally divided, is paralysis.”

But Pelosi knows that the alternative to Democratic compromise isn’t necessarily paralysis. It may be Democratic triumph. Trump, like Bush, has picked a fight that is popular with conservatives but unpopular with the public at large. Most Americans don’t think there’s a border crisis, don’t support a border wall, and blame Trump for the shutdown. As a result, Republican members of Congress are under more political pressure to back down than their Democratic counterparts, and the longer the shutdown continues, the more that pressure should grow. For the time being, at least, conservative opposition has forced Trump to shelve talk of declaring a national emergency. All of which means that the most likely outcome to the current standoff is that Trump caves. And since the wall was Trump’s signature campaign promise, such a retreat could depress conservative enthusiasm and impair his chances in 2020. “If he gives in,” Lindsey Graham recently warned, “that’s probably the end of his presidency.”

That’s what Pelosi is aiming for. In pure policy terms, there’s a case for compromise. Arguably, it’s worth wasting a few billion dollars on a border wall to safeguard the “Dreamers” who are stuck in an agonizing legal limbo. But Pelosi is focused on something bigger: the emasculation of the president. For years, Democrats have wondered when their leaders would start playing tough. Turns out Pelosi has been doing so all along.

Who is the Dem whip? I like that AOC is challenging the dem leadership but there's a reason for the Speaker and if it becomes too fractuous, dems will lose in the long run. I like that the Dem party welcomes all kinds and has these raucous debates and conflicts but there are times when you have to sacrifice your personal politics/beliefs and rally around the greater good. The reubs were very effect at that from 1994 through 2016/18, when it started to fray and went too far right, hence why Paul Ryan stepped down. AOC should be mindful that Congress, its rules, tradition, history, etc. take time to learn the ways and that being a bomb thrower and trying to subvert "leadership' will only get her relegated to a back bench and ultimately ineffectiveness. She'd be better served trying to convince a majority of Dems to her side through persausion, deal making and consensus building. I hope she's ultimately successful, one way or the other. A Green New Deal is appealling but it needs to be thought out, detailed and explained so 6th graders can understand it.

I believe it's Clyburn.  
Your post is dead on and similar to what I wrote in the AOC thread the other day.  You don't cross Pelosi.  But the caucus believes in her, rightfully.   She's the one that got Trump to declare it would be his shutdown.  That won this war right on the spot.  It was all too easy for her. 
I thought this article was an interesting recounting of the SS debate of 12 years ago.  I remember that Bush did the town halls and everything, but it was Pelosi who did not fall for the bait.  And she isn't falling for it here either.   

Halifax2TheMax

mrussel1 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mrussel1 said:

**Cont**

Pelosi is up to something similar today. Just as Republicans in 2005 reminded Democrats that they once supported altering Social Security, Republicans today keep reminding Democrats that they once supported a border wall. In his Oval Office address last week, Trump observed that “Senator Chuck Schumer … has repeatedly supported a physical barrier in the past, along with many other Democrats.” The former Bush speechwriter Marc Thiessen titled a recent column “Democrats Were for a Wall Before They Were Against It.”

As in 2005, high-minded centrists are urging Pelosi and the Democrats to compromise. “Rather than talk about the immorality of a wall,” The Washington Post recently urged, “Democrats could use their leverage to achieve a truly moral purpose. In return for a few billion dollars for a segment of the president’s wall … Democrats might permanently shield from deportation well over 1 million ‘dreamers.’” A recent Bloomberg editorial scolded Democrats for wanting “to deny the other [side] anything that might be portrayed as a victory,” and warned that “the only alternative to compromise, now that power in Washington is more equally divided, is paralysis.”

But Pelosi knows that the alternative to Democratic compromise isn’t necessarily paralysis. It may be Democratic triumph. Trump, like Bush, has picked a fight that is popular with conservatives but unpopular with the public at large. Most Americans don’t think there’s a border crisis, don’t support a border wall, and blame Trump for the shutdown. As a result, Republican members of Congress are under more political pressure to back down than their Democratic counterparts, and the longer the shutdown continues, the more that pressure should grow. For the time being, at least, conservative opposition has forced Trump to shelve talk of declaring a national emergency. All of which means that the most likely outcome to the current standoff is that Trump caves. And since the wall was Trump’s signature campaign promise, such a retreat could depress conservative enthusiasm and impair his chances in 2020. “If he gives in,” Lindsey Graham recently warned, “that’s probably the end of his presidency.”

That’s what Pelosi is aiming for. In pure policy terms, there’s a case for compromise. Arguably, it’s worth wasting a few billion dollars on a border wall to safeguard the “Dreamers” who are stuck in an agonizing legal limbo. But Pelosi is focused on something bigger: the emasculation of the president. For years, Democrats have wondered when their leaders would start playing tough. Turns out Pelosi has been doing so all along.

Who is the Dem whip? I like that AOC is challenging the dem leadership but there's a reason for the Speaker and if it becomes too fractuous, dems will lose in the long run. I like that the Dem party welcomes all kinds and has these raucous debates and conflicts but there are times when you have to sacrifice your personal politics/beliefs and rally around the greater good. The reubs were very effect at that from 1994 through 2016/18, when it started to fray and went too far right, hence why Paul Ryan stepped down. AOC should be mindful that Congress, its rules, tradition, history, etc. take time to learn the ways and that being a bomb thrower and trying to subvert "leadership' will only get her relegated to a back bench and ultimately ineffectiveness. She'd be better served trying to convince a majority of Dems to her side through persausion, deal making and consensus building. I hope she's ultimately successful, one way or the other. A Green New Deal is appealling but it needs to be thought out, detailed and explained so 6th graders can understand it.

I believe it's Clyburn.  
Your post is dead on and similar to what I wrote in the AOC thread the other day.  You don't cross Pelosi.  But the caucus believes in her, rightfully.   She's the one that got Trump to declare it would be his shutdown.  That won this war right on the spot.  It was all too easy for her. 
I thought this article was an interesting recounting of the SS debate of 12 years ago.  I remember that Bush did the town halls and everything, but it was Pelosi who did not fall for the bait.  And she isn't falling for it here either.   

Well, it’s clyburn’s job to herd the cats and “whip” them to leadership’s position. Crossing Pelosi doesn’t mean remaining silent but being out in front of the press talking about how you’re going to challenge her or defeat her isn’t a recipe for success. Private meetings, conversations and building a consensus will bring Nancy around. Young whippersnappers trying to change the world. She should approach Nancy and say, “look, I want to be you in 4-6 years. Show me how and let’s work together but where we have differences, I’m going to tell you about them first, before I go before the cameras, if needed.”

mickeyrat

  https://www.npr.org/2019/01/16/685977471/federal-watchdog-finds-government-ignored-emoluments-clause-with-trump-hotel?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20190116&fbclid=IwAR0Mz6eLsBKzJ3Jm0pdJNW_s7KP83aHOj7m2aObHV4mb1hAzLIGmrv1Wptw

Federal Watchdog Finds Government Ignored Emoluments Clause With Trump Hotel

Officials leasing the Old Post Office Building for the Trump International Hotel in Washington improperly ignored the Constitution's anti-corruption clauses when they continued to lease the government property to President Trump even after he won the White House, according to an internal federal government watchdog.

The Inspector General for the General Services Administration, the agency that leased the building to Trump in 2013, said in a report published Wednesday that agency lawyers decided to ignore the constitutional issues when they reviewed the lease after Trump won the 2016 election.

"The GSA Office of General Counsel recognized that the President's business interest in the lease raised issues under the U.S. Constitution that might cause a breach of the lease, yet chose not to address those issues," said Inspector General Carol F. Ochoa. "As a result, GSA foreclosed an opportunity for an early resolution of these issues and instead certified compliance with a lease that is under a constitutional cloud."

continues...

vaggar99

on FB today:

I tried to be reticent, restrained and reserved, removed and really reluctant to react to the reprehensible and ridiculous rhetoric rushing from the repugnant rich man residing in the symbolic home of our nation. But I fail. Again. I dunno about you but when I think of the 800,000 American citizens sidelined, furloughed, denied their right to earned income, being used as pawns as part of the hissy fit of the petulant, pretender presiding in the White House, it angers and disappoints me and l wonder how anybody can still buy into the divisive ruse and rhetoric spewing from the egomaniac whose elocution relies on hateful sound bites and whose articulation doesn’t come close to that of a well educated 12 year old. He wants a wall, but when sane minded people, not buying into fear mongering prevent the spoiled geriatric rich kid from getting his way he petulantly shuts down the Gov’t, sending innocent and honest everyday people home without pay and requires the “essential” employees to work without pay. He then has the audacity to suggest they support his position. He even stops paying those on our first line of defense, the United States Coast Guard, who combat the very things he uses to stir his pot of fear-based support. Really. Now some furloughed workers are being called back to work, albeit without the likelihood of a paycheck anytime soon. As much as I want this madness to end, I hope the legislators stand their ground against this carbuncle on our collective body politic. What is really going on? There are so many American citizens, hundreds of thousands, close to one million, loyal, patriotic employees, who believed in their country and their leaders are probably wondering about the gross inconsistencies in promises versus realities in this, a now very real to them, reality check, which in this case is simply No Paycheck for You People. Creating Jobs? Yeah, he promised jobs. But he’s taking away much more than he ever gave. I don’t know how any other American citizen with any modicum of compassion coupled with a working brain could still endorse his inciteful plan to make America... oh to hell with that meaningless slogan while I’m at. 

Furthermore, if you are one of the naive that think Russia isn’t or hasn’t been involved in disrupting the state of our union, and has been actively doing so since before the cuban missile crisis, then you don’t really understand what’s been going on since the end of World War II. 

And gosh by golly, surprise, surprise, 4 US soldiers were killed yesterday in Syria, by suicide bombing, claimed to be carried out by the Islamic State, you know, a foe the Orange One boasted was defeated in Syria. Right. His privileged arrogance, consistent dishonesty, and republican recklessness coupled with his inherent inability to comprehend the struggles of the people he was sworn to protect and preserve make him the singularly most pathetic person for our Commander-in-chief. 

In my lifetime. Who would have believed?

Halifax2TheMax

vaggar99 said:

on FB today:

I tried to be reticent, restrained and reserved, removed and really reluctant to react to the reprehensible and ridiculous rhetoric rushing from the repugnant rich man residing in the symbolic home of our nation. But I fail. Again. I dunno about you but when I think of the 800,000 American citizens sidelined, furloughed, denied their right to earned income, being used as pawns as part of the hissy fit of the petulant, pretender presiding in the White House, it angers and disappoints me and l wonder how anybody can still buy into the divisive ruse and rhetoric spewing from the egomaniac whose elocution relies on hateful sound bites and whose articulation doesn’t come close to that of a well educated 12 year old. He wants a wall, but when sane minded people, not buying into fear mongering prevent the spoiled geriatric rich kid from getting his way he petulantly shuts down the Gov’t, sending innocent and honest everyday people home without pay and requires the “essential” employees to work without pay. He then has the audacity to suggest they support his position. He even stops paying those on our first line of defense, the United States Coast Guard, who combat the very things he uses to stir his pot of fear-based support. Really. Now some furloughed workers are being called back to work, albeit without the likelihood of a paycheck anytime soon. As much as I want this madness to end, I hope the legislators stand their ground against this carbuncle on our collective body politic. What is really going on? There are so many American citizens, hundreds of thousands, close to one million, loyal, patriotic employees, who believed in their country and their leaders are probably wondering about the gross inconsistencies in promises versus realities in this, a now very real to them, reality check, which in this case is simply No Paycheck for You People. Creating Jobs? Yeah, he promised jobs. But he’s taking away much more than he ever gave. I don’t know how any other American citizen with any modicum of compassion coupled with a working brain could still endorse his inciteful plan to make America... oh to hell with that meaningless slogan while I’m at. 

Furthermore, if you are one of the naive that think Russia isn’t or hasn’t been involved in disrupting the state of our union, and has been actively doing so since before the cuban missile crisis, then you don’t really understand what’s been going on since the end of World War II. 

And gosh by golly, surprise, surprise, 4 US soldiers were killed yesterday in Syria, by suicide bombing, claimed to be carried out by the Islamic State, you know, a foe the Orange One boasted was defeated in Syria. Right. His privileged arrogance, consistent dishonesty, and republican recklessness coupled with his inherent inability to comprehend the struggles of the people he was sworn to protect and preserve make him the singularly most pathetic person for our Commander-in-chief. 

In my lifetime. Who would have believed?

And yet 35-40% of 60+ million continue to do so, ardently. Go figure.

The Juggler

“Polling data is given to everybody.”

-The President’s lawyer. 

Halifax2TheMax

So, if I'm doing my math correctly, Team Trump Treason's government shut down has taken $1.8 BB out of the economy. 800,000 employees, average salary $40K (guessed what the average is, it could be higher or lower) = $32,000,000,000 annualized. Divide that by 52 weeks in the year and its $615,384,615. Employees haven't been paid for 3 weeks and we're at $1,846,153,846. What's it going to take? A crashed jet liner? Widespread ecoli outbreak? Hijacked jet with hostages? Kentucky voters turning against Mitchy Baby? Me thinks he's complicit and isn't running again, just bidding his time and falling on his petard. And these repub talking heads defending Team Trump Treason as Team Trump Treason just being Team Trump Treason. Despicable.

vaggar99

Trump doesn't seem to understand anything about illegal immigration

Scott Martelle

President Trump's focus on heightening and expanding the border walls and fences along the U.S.-Mexico border shows he doesn't understand the problem. (Guillermo Arias / AFP/Getty Images)

You have to like the timing. As the partial government shutdown continues and a fresh caravan of the desperate moves from Honduras into Guatemala, a new report reminds the nation that President Trump really has no clue about what’s going on with illegal immigration in the U.S.

The Center for Migration Studies reports that visa overstays in 2017 accounted for more people living in the U.S. without permission than did people who slipped across the border. More significantly, it’s not a new trend but a new normal.

“For the past 10 years, the primary mode of entry to the undocumented population has been to overstay temporary visas,” the report said, adding: “Visa overstays have significantly exceeded illegal border crossings during each of the last seven years.”

If you’re wondering how lengthening and heightening existing walls and fences along the U.S.-Mexico border addresses that problem, you’re not alone.

---

Share quote & link 

The government knows much of this. Its annual visa-overstay report last year said more than 607,000 people of the 52.7 million people who entered the country legally didn’t leave when they were supposed to, a rate of 1.15% (this doesn’t include folks who overstayed but left before the end of the year). That was the second year in a row overstays surpassed 600,000 people, and it’s based primarily on passenger manifests for planes and ships.

Tracking folks who depart the country at ground border crossings is sporadic, at best, in large part because the ports of entry were designed to handle incoming traffic, not outgoing. The government gets some data from Canada on third-country citizens crossing north from the U.S., and from Mexico on Mexican nationals who return to that country, but that’s about it.

Still, the vast majority of entries and departures are through airports and seaports. And the rate of overstays is pretty low, but the total number of overstays is substantial when matched against the estimated 11 million people living in the U.S. without permission – two-thirds of whom have been here for more than a decade. And just in case it isn’t obvious, people still here when their visas expire slip into undocumented status and are subject to deportation.

If you’re wondering how lengthening and heightening existing walls and fences along the U.S.-Mexico border addresses that problem, you’re not alone.

To its credit, the Trump administration has asked Congress to complete an exit-entry system that uses biometric data to track visitors crossing the border in both directions, which would make it easier to figure out who has left and who remains in the country without permission.

But it doesn’t do much for tracking those folks down.

Meanwhile, what we get mostly from Trump is froth and bluster about a non-existent crisis over people entering the U.S. illegally from Mexico. Apprehensions at the southwest border have been trending steadily downward for years from a peak of 1.6 million in 2000 to nearly 467,000 last year – which itself was a slight increase over the previous year, propelled by a surge in families fleeing violence and poverty in Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador.

Trump’s focus is not on the governmental problem of fixing the immigration system, or even necessarily on doing what Americans want — some 58% of Americans oppose substantially expanding the border wall. He’s playing to the immigration hard-liners in his fold, regardless of the damage and waste it causes.

ikiT

01162019 Rudy Giuliani: "I never said there was no collusion between the campaign, or people in the campaign."

mrussel1

Tiki said:

01162019 Rudy Giuliani: "I never said there was no collusion between the campaign, or people in the campaign."

So what possessed Rudy to go on CNN (of all places) and make that announcement last night, on a Wednesday?  Seems like strange timing.  My guess is there is something else coming shortly and this is "getting ahead of the story".  

vaggar99

I love Michael Cohen

HughFreakingDillon

Tiki said:

01162019 Rudy Giuliani: "I never said there was no collusion between the campaign, or people in the campaign."

funny, pretty sure he said "there was no collusion, but even if there was, collusion isn't illegal". did he not say that?

my2hands

Let me know when the circus leaves town

Halifax2TheMax

vaggar99 said:

I love Michael Cohen

You should see the latest regarding his not paying an IT contractor and the Twitter account set up on his behalf. Manhattan at its sleaziest.