Donald Trump

dankind

Jingo bells. Jingo bells. Jingos all the way. 

tbergs

Nothing more patriotic than sanctioned assassinations via drone on foreign soil.

Halifax2TheMax

Cue BS and the other Israeli hawks to pop in and proclaim what a brilliant brilliance of brilliancy stroke of foreign policy Team Trump Treason’s airstrike was and how this will give America the standing that Obama squandered. Gee, can’t wait for the massive truck bomb attack on innocents in a few months. Wag the dog and start a slow burn proxy war. Brilliant.

Jason P

tbergs said:

Nothing more patriotic than sanctioned assassinations via drone on foreign soil.

The US Embassy is foreign soil as well.  

bootlegger10

The guy was in Iraq leading attacks on the US embassy. Seems like fair game for the US to respond.  I am not going to feel bad that one less evil person is gone from the world.  

I guess Iran won’t like the US now.  

mickeyrat

he had exited a plane and got into a car.....

guess "evil" all depends on what side you are on.

bootlegger10

mickeyrat said:

he had exited a plane and got into a car.....

guess "evil" all depends on what side you are on.

We can argue about whether the strike was justified, the right move, or legal.  I don’t know that answer.

But don’t imply the leader of Iran’s military is not an evil guy because he wasn’t killed with his hand on a trigger at that moment.  

mickeyrat

 https://mobile.twitter.com/RiegerReport/status/1212928617518419968?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1212928617518419968&ref_url=https://news.yahoo.com/trump-tweets-predicting-obama-start-110519741.html

Bentleyspop

https://twitter.com/JosephSakran/status/1212939897402736641?s=19

Thoughts_Arrive

ikiT

This was literally the stupidest thing this douche bag has done.

Remove him, already.

https://youtu.be/55x11a0aKtY

gimmesometruth27

i saw a headline earlier that manafort has stated that hannity was his back channel to trump when manafort was overseas committing his financial crimes. why are they not hauling hannity's ass in front of the judge where manafort was tried?

Lerxst1992

The other big today story is that last night Chief Justice John Roberts released the annual report on the federal judiciary.

Roberts is in a touchy position right now. As the head of the Supreme Court, he is responsible for the health and well-being of the entire judicial system, and he cannot be unaware of the disdain Americans have conceived for Chief Justices who used the court to achieve unpopular political decisions. Roger Taney, for example (whose name is pronounced “Tawney,” for unfathomable reasons), led the court in the years before the Civil War, and has been consigned to the dustbin of history for his role in deciding the 1857 Dred Scott decision in such a way that it gave elite slaveholders control of the newly acquired American West while both denying the humanity of African Americans and the rights of poor white men. Chief Justice Melville Fuller, who presided over a slew of horrid decisions at the turn of the last century, including the 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson decision that rubberstamped “separate but equal” justifying segregation, was such an embarrassment that virtually no one even remembers him: we call his court the “Lochner Era court” rather than the “Melville Fuller court.”

Roberts was appointed by Republican President George W. Bush and presided over Shelby County v. Holder (2013), which gutted the Voting Rights Act, as well as Citizens United v Federal Election Commission (2010), which said that the government cannot restrict the amount of money corporations can invest in political speech. He is a firm believer in a small federal government and the power of corporations, but he is also an intelligent man who cares about his legacy.

Roberts will preside over the upcoming Senate impeachment trial of President Trump, and he has already exchanged words with Trump over the independence of the judiciary: Trump has tried throughout his administration to sow distrust of judges appointed by Democrats, while Roberts has countered that judges must be impartial.

So Roberts’s introduction to the annual report was not idle. He began by attacking the use of propaganda and mob rule and went on to defend the independence of the judiciary. He went out of his way to praise Judge Merrick Garland-- although not by name--, President Barack Obama’s nominee for the Supreme Court whom Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, in an unprecedented attack on the presidency, refused to consider.

But most interesting to me in his report was that when Roberts talked at great length about the role of the courts to educate Americans about the rule of law, his primary example was the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision outlawing segregation. That case is pivotal in American history not only because of its role in desegregation, but because it sparked an outpouring of scholarship suggesting that society changes not because of social trends or economic or politics, but because of court decisions. In the wake of Brown v. Board, the great historian C. Vann Woodward argued that segregation itself came only after Jim Crow laws, and that popular acceptance of civil rights would come only after legal desegregation.

Roberts seemed to me to be saying that the job of reclaiming democracy and the rule of law belonged to the courts now—a major declaration at a time when Trump has a number of court cases pending, as well, of course, as his impeachment trial. I absolutely could be reading too much into Roberts’s declaration, but it seemed to me significant.

What exactly Roberts means by the rule of law, though, remains to be seen.

Heather should be a little careful thinking Robert's can be some sort of friend of democracy and the rule of law.

Roberts has had a heavy hand ripping these apart with his Court's 5-4 party line votes in 3 significant cases involving citizen rights:

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

Shelby County v. Holder

Rucho v. Common Cause


2 of the 3 cases are the Court overriding existing law to cede obscene power to the federal govt and the wealthy. And allowing the several states to use racism to take away voting rights 

The 3rd case is the 5 republican Justices  allowing the states to use  race as a weapon to draw election district maps.

These 3 cases are pivotal in overriding congress and granting unchecked power to the white and wealthy.

Lastly, Robert's has very little power to have any material impact on an impeachment trial. Senate rules give that power to 51 senators.

The Juggler

U.S. manufacturing activity hits worst level since 2009

Photo: Scott Olson/Getty Images

The Institute of Supply Management's index of manufacturing activity released Friday hit its lowest level since the end of the Great Recession in December.

Why it matters: It shows worsening conditions for the U.S. manufacturing sector, which has been in contraction for five straight months, and reignites concerns about the trade war's impact on the economy. Stocks, already in the red after a U.S. airstrike killed a top Iranian general, fell near the lowest levels of the day following the release of the data.

By the numbers: The index came in at 47.2 in December — worse than the 49 economists expected — falling 0.9 points from the prior month's reading. (Any reading below 50 suggests the manufacturing sector is in contraction.)

• Respondents to the survey, which manufacture goods in 18 different industries, noted sluggish demand for products, as well as suppliers passing tariff-related costs on to manufacturers.

The bottom line: "Global trade remains the most significant cross-industry issue, but there are signs that several industry sectors will improve as a result of the phase-one trade agreement between the U.S. and China," ISM chair Timothy Fiore said in a statement.

bootlegger10

Lerxst1992 said:

The other big today story is that last night Chief Justice John Roberts released the annual report on the federal judiciary.

Roberts is in a touchy position right now. As the head of the Supreme Court, he is responsible for the health and well-being of the entire judicial system, and he cannot be unaware of the disdain Americans have conceived for Chief Justices who used the court to achieve unpopular political decisions. Roger Taney, for example (whose name is pronounced “Tawney,” for unfathomable reasons), led the court in the years before the Civil War, and has been consigned to the dustbin of history for his role in deciding the 1857 Dred Scott decision in such a way that it gave elite slaveholders control of the newly acquired American West while both denying the humanity of African Americans and the rights of poor white men. Chief Justice Melville Fuller, who presided over a slew of horrid decisions at the turn of the last century, including the 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson decision that rubberstamped “separate but equal” justifying segregation, was such an embarrassment that virtually no one even remembers him: we call his court the “Lochner Era court” rather than the “Melville Fuller court.”

Roberts was appointed by Republican President George W. Bush and presided over Shelby County v. Holder (2013), which gutted the Voting Rights Act, as well as Citizens United v Federal Election Commission (2010), which said that the government cannot restrict the amount of money corporations can invest in political speech. He is a firm believer in a small federal government and the power of corporations, but he is also an intelligent man who cares about his legacy.

Roberts will preside over the upcoming Senate impeachment trial of President Trump, and he has already exchanged words with Trump over the independence of the judiciary: Trump has tried throughout his administration to sow distrust of judges appointed by Democrats, while Roberts has countered that judges must be impartial.

So Roberts’s introduction to the annual report was not idle. He began by attacking the use of propaganda and mob rule and went on to defend the independence of the judiciary. He went out of his way to praise Judge Merrick Garland-- although not by name--, President Barack Obama’s nominee for the Supreme Court whom Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, in an unprecedented attack on the presidency, refused to consider.

But most interesting to me in his report was that when Roberts talked at great length about the role of the courts to educate Americans about the rule of law, his primary example was the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision outlawing segregation. That case is pivotal in American history not only because of its role in desegregation, but because it sparked an outpouring of scholarship suggesting that society changes not because of social trends or economic or politics, but because of court decisions. In the wake of Brown v. Board, the great historian C. Vann Woodward argued that segregation itself came only after Jim Crow laws, and that popular acceptance of civil rights would come only after legal desegregation.

Roberts seemed to me to be saying that the job of reclaiming democracy and the rule of law belonged to the courts now—a major declaration at a time when Trump has a number of court cases pending, as well, of course, as his impeachment trial. I absolutely could be reading too much into Roberts’s declaration, but it seemed to me significant.

What exactly Roberts means by the rule of law, though, remains to be seen.

Heather should be a little careful thinking Robert's can be some sort of friend of democracy and the rule of law.

Roberts has had a heavy hand ripping these apart with his Court's 5-4 party line votes in 3 significant cases involving citizen rights:

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

Shelby County v. Holder

Rucho v. Common Cause


2 of the 3 cases are the Court overriding existing law to cede obscene power to the federal govt and the wealthy. And allowing the several states to use racism to take away voting rights 

The 3rd case is the 5 republican Justices  allowing the states to use  race as a weapon to draw election district maps.

These 3 cases are pivotal in overriding congress and granting unchecked power to the white and wealthy.

Lastly, Robert's has very little power to have any material impact on an impeachment trial. Senate rules give that power to 51 senators.

I am not making any statement regarding these cases, but just going to comment that you mention these were party line votes.  So does that mean that both sides put party over law, or is party line only a negative connotation when conservatives vote together?

If Roberts was the devil he would have ruled against Obamacare.

ikiT

I have a lot of faith in Roberts.  He effing hates Trumpito.  He's going to give him NOTHING.

ikiT

https://instagram.com/p/B63mdz0AK14/embed/

Halifax2TheMax

What’s the over under on the amount of time before a Team Trump Treason Tower is collapsed and it what country? Sure am glad I don’t have to go home to one of those.

gimmesometruth27

Halifax2TheMax said:

What’s the over under on the amount of time before a Team Trump Treason Tower is collapsed and it what country? Sure am glad I don’t have to go home to one of those.

that would be an interesting development. he would go to war for sure if that happened. 

dankind

Halifax2TheMax said:

What’s the over under on the amount of time before a Team Trump Treason Tower is collapsed and it what country? Sure am glad I don’t have to go home to one of those.