Trump 22: Not Even Poe Could Make This Shit Up

[sawasdee]

Something I truly do not understand.

There is a great deal of talk about 'States' Rights'. As far as I comprehend, states have a great deal of latitude on local matters, and also on things such as education and healthcare - to expand medicaid or not to expand medicaid, for instance.

Taking that into account, I find it unjust, even undemocratic, that a Senator from, say, Wyoming, who represents just over a quarter of a million people, has the same voice as a Senator from California, who represents over 19 million. Other democracies elect their representatives on roughly equal population bases - for both lower and upper houses. As far as I know, the US is the only democracy that gives equal voice irrespective of state population in their upper house.

This obviously means that relatively underpopulated states wield a great deal of power - and, as rural US seems to lean fairly consistently Repug, and there are a lot of rural states, the more urban and usually more Democrat states are 10 yards behind the baseline at the start of the race to control the Senate. Just look at a map of which counties each presidential candidate won in the last election - there are massive amounts of red.

It's a very odd system. And, I have been told several times, it's a Republic, not a democracy.

Well, I'll agree it's not a democracy.....

ETA I'm not American, and may have many misconceptions in the above post. Please correct me - and I truly don't mean to offend, I just find your system weird!

[GreyhoundFan]

32 minutes ago, sawasdee said:

Please tell me I'm wrong.

ETA Am I right in believing that the Democrats actually received more votes for House seats in the last election, but because of gerrymandering, are in a substantial minority? I'm sure I read this somewhere.....

ETA 2 No, Repugs got more votes - but they have a substantially greater percentage of seats than they did votes. Democrats got a larger number of votes for Senate seats.

Sadly, you're not wrong. And gerrymandering is one of the worst situations. John Oliver did a great take on it:

 

[GreyhoundFan]

I guess there aren't enough millionaires or billionaires who want to curry favor with the orange menace: "The asking price for President Trump’s Caribbean estate has been cut dramatically"

Spoiler

The trust that oversees President Trump's assets is intensifying its efforts to shed a luxury beachfront estate he owns on the Caribbean island of St. Martin, slashing the asking price of $28 million by more than $11 million in recent weeks.

Lesley Reed, the agent for Sotheby’s International Realty who is representing the property, confirmed that the sales price of $16.9 million now listed for Le Chateau des Palmiers on the agency's website is accurate. She said it had been lowered about a month ago, declining to comment further.

It is unknown what prompted the nearly 40 percent reduction, which puts the price of the waterfront estate in line with those of other ultraluxury properties for sale on St. Martin. The White House referred questions about the price cut to the Trump Organization, which did not respond to requests for comment.

In May, The Washington Post reported that the $28 million price tag for the 11-bedroom gated compound on Plum Bay far exceeded the going rate for the most exclusive estates on the island. The sum also appeared to be substantially more than what Trump paid for it in 2013, when he bought the property from a business associate, Steve Hilbert and his wife, Tomisue. The couple was seeking $19.7 million for Le Chateau des Palmiers at the time, although the final sales price was never disclosed.

Trump's business holdings are controlled by a revocable trust overseen by his son Donald Jr. and longtime Trump Organization executive Allen Weisselberg. Under the terms of the trust, the president is supposed to be walled off from day-to-day business decisions, such as price reductions.

It is unknown why the trust is selling the estate, which generated as much as $3 million in rental income in the past three years, according to Trump's financial disclosures. His most recent filing, which the president signed June 14, set the value of Le Chateau des Palmiers at between $25 million and $50 million.

The sale of the St. Martin estate would be one of the biggest transactions involving Trump’s assets since he took office. Ethics experts have warned that entering into such a deal while he is in office could raise potential conflicts of interest and attract buyers seeking to overpay as a way to curry favor with the president.

The palm tree-ringed estate — whose name translates to “Castle of the Palms” — covers nearly five acres and comes with a pool at the beach's edge, a tennis court and fitness center. There are nine bedrooms, including a two-story master suite, as well as a commercial-size catering kitchen and media room. Chandeliers, marble floors, gold-hued wallpaper and heavy gold curtains dominate the interior, according to photos accompanying the listing. The estate comes with an outdoor sound system, a state-of-the-art security system, surveillance cameras and an eight-foot-tall boundary wall “for complete privacy,” the listing notes.

The price reduction comes as the luxury market on St. Martin has been improving, with an increase in sales and qualified buyers during the last year, local real estate brokers said.

Jonathan Schaede, a broker with Sunshine Properties, said that at $16.9 million, Le Chateau des Palmiers is “definitely getting close to the bargain scenario. It’s a good deal.”

Schaede noted that the estate is one of just a handful of ultraluxury properties on St. Martin, with a coveted beachfront location. The price drop could turn what has been until now largely chatter about the property's lineage into serious interest from buyers, he said.

“This property has some particularities, being that the owner is the president of the United States, and there are some positives and then some unwanted attention that come with that,” he said. “It definitely makes for conversation, but I don’t see anybody lining up outside.”

Arun Jagtiani, owner of Island Real Estate Team, said the estate was overpriced at $28 million. “A drastic price drop like this normally suggests the seller is getting serious about wanting to make a deal,” he said.

The challenge, Jagtiani added, will be finding a buyer who will not be put off by the media attention that would accompany such a purchase. “Not sure how easy it will be to find someone that can afford a property like this and also embrace all the media attention this transaction will generate,” he said.

With the price reduction, Le Chateau des Palmiers is no longer the most expensive listing on the island. A short drive away, a cliffside estate called Mes Amis that Sotheby's describes as “undoubtedly the finest property in St. Martin” is for sale for $17.5 million.

 

[apple1]

58 minutes ago, sawasdee said:

Something I truly do not understand.

There is a great deal of talk about 'States' Rights'. As far as I comprehend, states have a great deal of latitude on local matters, and also on things such as education and healthcare - to expand medicaid or not to expand medicaid, for instance.

Taking that into account, I find it unjust, even undemocratic, that a Senator from, say, Wyoming, who represents just over a quarter of a million people, has the same voice as a Senator from California, who represents over 19 million. Other democracies elect their representatives on roughly equal population bases - for both lower and upper houses. As far as I know, the US is the only democracy that gives equal voice irrespective of state population in their upper house.

This obviously means that relatively underpopulated states wield a great deal of power - and, as rural US seems to lean fairly consistently Repug, and there are a lot of rural states, the more urban and usually more Democrat states are 10 yards behind the baseline at the start of the race to control the Senate. Just look at a map of which counties each presidential candidate won in the last election - there are massive amounts of red.

It's a very odd system. And, I have been told several times, it's a Republic, not a democracy.

Well, I'll agree it's not a democracy.....

ETA I'm not American, and may have many misconceptions in the above post. Please correct me - and I truly don't mean to offend, I just find your system weird!

(not offended)

In fairness:

Each US state has 2 senators, regardless of population, so there are 100 senators.

However, the number of representatives each state has in the House of Representatives is population-based. There are 435 representatives.

In theory, this system is somewhat of a balance-each-other-out idea. It was a compromise plan developed in 1787.

 

ETA: As for the phrase "states' rights" -- the cynical me thinks, every time I hear that phrase thrown out from Washington DC, either they are trying to dump costs back on the individual states, or else the topic is a controversial one that they don't want to take an official stance on.

[Destiny]

Watching his “immigration reform” get skewered by pool reporters is a glorious sight. (CNN right now)

Also Stephen Miller is a god damned liar.

[JMarie]

17 minutes ago, Destiny said:

Watching his “immigration reform” get skewered by pool reporters is a glorious sight. (CNN right now)

Also Stephen Miller is a god damned liar.

Miller shouldn't be allowed in front of a microphone.  At least not until he's taken a public speaking class.

[GreyhoundFan]

17 minutes ago, JMarie said:

Miller shouldn't be allowed in front of a microphone.  At least not until he's taken a public speaking class.

He creeps me out. Whenever I see him, I think of this:

[GreyhoundFan]

A good opinion piece: "Trump seems to be crying out: Impeach me, please!"

Spoiler

No one is working harder for the impeachment of Donald Trump than Donald Trump. If we have learned anything about this president, it is that he has a compulsion to be the center of attention. He can’t bear being out of the limelight and will say almost anything — no matter how offensive, outrageous or dishonest it strikes millions of Americans — to keep the public fixated on him. The more he does this, the more he risks impeachment.

Just whether John F. Kelly, the retired Marine general who is Trump’s new chief of staff, can restrain his boss is unclear. This certainly is a central question hovering over the White House, and it won’t be easy.

For months, Trump’s behavior has posed a riddle. Why is he so self-destructive? His constant tweets deepen the country’s divisions, which he promised to heal. The customary explanation is that Trump is playing to his “base,” but recently, this has seemed less convincing. Opinion polls suggest his support has slipped even among loyal backers. (The latest Post-ABC News poll has Trump’s approval rating dropping from 42 percent in April to 36 percent in early July.)

In fact, we’ve been asking the wrong question. It has been widely assumed that Trump’s behavior must reflect some political logic. He is, after all, the nation’s most important politician. His every move must aim to bolster his popularity and agenda. Although this sounds reasonable, it doesn’t fit the facts. Trump’s nonstop outbursts alienate, usually needlessly, countless voters: precisely the people he needs to broaden his support.

But the mystery vanishes once we realize that Trump’s motives, rather than advancing some grand political strategy, are deeply personal. He can’t control himself. In his mind, silence means obscurity, which is unbearable, especially when ending it is only a tweet or two away. It doesn’t matter what he says — whether it is true or false, relevant or irrelevant to the issues — as long as he stirs passions and dominates public discussion.

It is personality more than politics that impels Trump to be Trump. With hindsight, his rhetorical escapades can be described as political maneuvers, but this is mostly damage control. See Trump and Russia.

Superficially, the odds of Trump being impeached by the House and convicted — ousted from office — by the Senate are long. Impeachment (which resembles an indictment) requires a majority vote in the House. Conviction in the Senate mandates a two-thirds vote. Even if all Democrats voted against Trump, many Republicans would have to join them for Trump to be removed. To convict in the Senate would require 19 Republican votes, if all senators were present, says political scientist Sarah Binder of the Brookings Institution. As yet, an anti-Trump coalition doesn’t exist.

Still, nothing can be entirely discounted. That’s the reality Kelly faces as chief of staff. Trump is an extreme exhibitionist in a calling — politics — where exhibitionism is normal. His addiction to incendiary tweets will be hard, though not impossible, to break. It may defy political or legal logic — indeed, it places him at further risk, because he may get himself in legal trouble or say something hugely unpopular. But it satisfies his need to “own” the news cycle.

In this sense, Trump can be seen as the strongest and most determined advocate of impeachment. If he must flirt with impeachment to retain his command of the media, so be it. As a practical matter, he might see impeachment (though not conviction) as acceptable. He would be automatically in the spotlight every day for months. He would have a new arena in which to fight and “win.”

Perhaps subconsciously, this is his goal: Impeach me, please!

I can only imagine the tweetstorm if articles of impeachment are drawn up.

[AmazonGrace]

This is where America stands now: 

White House distances itself from the poem on the Statue of Liberty http://huffp.st/6BN7DXY

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/stephen-miller-statue-of-liberty_us_5982281fe4b00f0084adcd0e?ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000067

The two Russian statements that were posted today here: 

https://wonkette.com/621083/trump-signs-russian-sanctions-with-tiny-fingers-crossed-behind-his-back

Quote

I built a truly great company worth many billions of dollars. That is a big part of the reason I was elected. As President, I can make far better deals with foreign countries than Congress.

So I want to finally find out what he's getting from Russia 

[apple1]

1 hour ago, Destiny said:

Watching his “immigration reform” get skewered by pool reporters is a glorious sight. (CNN right now)

Also Stephen Miller is a god damned liar.

Fits in perfectly with his boss.

[fraurosena]

22 hours ago, onekidanddone said:

Eat a spoon full of sugar.  Really, know it sounds disgusting, but it works on hiccups.

Mary Poppins, is that you?

[GreyhoundFan]

"Trump says the Boy Scouts head told him his speech was the ‘greatest.’ He appears to have imagined this."

Spoiler

President Trump looks to have made another fantastic statement about one of his speeches.

On Tuesday, Politico got its hands on a previously unpublished transcript of Trump's July 25 interview with the Wall Street Journal. In that interview, Trump makes a bold claim about his controversial Boy Scouts speech the day before. After someone from the Journal suggested that Trump got a “mixed” reaction to his speech, Trump — as he often does — seemed to overcompensate.

“I got a call from the head of the Boy Scouts saying it was the greatest speech that was ever made to them, and they were very thankful,” Trump said. “So there was — there was no mix.”

Except a source for the Scouts said this doesn't appear to have happened at all.

“We are not aware of any call from national BSA leadership to the White House,” the source said.

To be clear, the Scouts haven't completely denied that their leadership made such a call. Might there have been one before they realized the PR crisis they had on their hands? Sure.

But that phone call would indeed be very difficult to square with the Boy Scouts' official reactions to the speech, which was chock full of politics and petty feuding with Trump's political opponents and the media — alongside the highflying, aspirational rhetoric that presidents usually deliver to young Scouts at the National Scout Jamboree. Trump delivered the speech in West Virginia on the evening of July 24, and the Scouts appeared to rebuke him the next day, saying the organization is “wholly nonpartisan and does not promote any one position, product, service, political candidate or philosophy.”

That was the same day — July 25 — that Trump spoke with the Journal. Two days later, July 27, the Scouts issued a fuller effort to distance themselves from Trump's speech. In a letter posted online, the Scouts apologized.

“I want to extend my sincere apologies to those in our Scouting family who were offended by the political rhetoric that was inserted into the jamboree,” said Michael Surbaugh, the chief scout executive for the Boy Scouts of America. “That was never our intent.”

In an official statement to The Washington Post on Wednesday, when asked about the call Trump described, Boy Scouts Communications Director Effie Delimarkos responded: “The Chief Scout Executive’s message to the Scouting community speaks for itself.”

This, of course, wouldn't be the first time Trump has inflated the reception his speeches have received. To wit:

• He told the New York Times this month of his speech in Poland: “Enemies of mine are saying it was the greatest speech ever made on foreign soil by a president.”
• He told the Associated Press in April of his speech to a joint session of Congress in January: “Some people said it was the single best speech ever made in that chamber.”
• After the media noted that Trump's inauguration had fewer attendees than President Barack Obama's, the White House vehemently insisted, counter to all available evidence, that it set records.
• Trump has repeatedly claimed other record crowds, despite holding speeches in small arenas or there being empty seats.

Trump is also known to infer much more praise than he actually receives. The most telling example, to my mind: He claimed a few months ago that a top House Democrat, Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (Md.), told him, “You will go down as one of the great presidents in the history of our country.” As I wrote back then, there is simply no way that Cummings said this, and indeed Cummings said he told Trump that he *could* be a great president if he represented all Americans.

But it was clear immediately after the speech that Trump had ventured into some pretty dicey territory. And given his track record on this kind of thing, it doesn't take much imagination to conclude that Trump himself imagined it.

Update: And if you need another example of Trump apparently conjuring a phone call out of thin air, Mexico's president says he never praised Trump's immigration policy in a call, as Trump claimed Monday.

Trump had said that "even the president of Mexico called me — They said their southern border, very few people are coming because they know they're not going to get through our border, which is the ultimate compliment."

Delusion, thy name is Drumpf.

[candygirl200413]

Stephen Miller is a vile disgusting racist excuse of a human. I didn't know just how badly he was until reading this( old article but obviously still reigns) :

Here are 21 facts that explain who Trump mouthpiece Stephen Miller really is

[fraurosena]

4 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

This will be an interesting test for Kelly. It looks like the message is more subdued than the usual psychotic rants. So, I'm guessing it was written/coached by a staffer and there will be a pre-dawn twitter storm with the TT's real thoughts. "Trump signs what he calls ‘seriously flawed’ bill imposing new sanctions on Russia"

  Hide contents

President Trump has signed a bill imposing new sanctions on Russia, ending immediate hopes of a reset of U.S. relations with the Kremlin and marking a defeat for his administration, which had expressed concerns that the legislation infringed upon executive power.

In a statement outlining his concerns, Trump called the bill “seriously flawed,” primarily because it limits his ability to negotiate sanctions without congressional approval.

“By limiting the Executive’s flexibility, this bill makes it harder for the United States to strike good deals for the American people, and will drive China, Russia, and North Korea much closer together,” Trump said in a statement on Wednesday morning. “The Framers of our Constitution put foreign affairs in the hands of the President.”

“This bill will prove the wisdom of that choice,” he added.

White House officials said that the president signed the measure on Wednesday morning, nearly a week after it was passed by the Senate with a veto-proof majority. The bill was also approved in the House last week by an overwhelming bipartisan majority.

Trump said that he signed the bill, despite his reservations, for the sake of “national unity.” In a second statement accompanying his signing of the legislation, Trump called some of the provisions in the legislation “clearly unconstitutional.”

And he questioned Congress's ability to negotiate sanctions based on its inability to approve the Republicans' health care legislation.

“The bill remains seriously flawed — particularly because it encroaches on the executive branch’s authority to negotiate,” Trump said. “Congress could not even negotiate a healthcare bill after seven years of talking.”

Russia has already retaliated against the United States for the new sanctions, announcing that it would order the U.S. Embassy to reduce its staff by 755 people and seize U.S. diplomatic properties.

In addition to adding sanctions, the bill requires congressional review for any actions the administration might seek to take to lift sanctions in the future.

The measure also imposes sanctions against North Korea and Iran for those countries' nuclear weapons programs.

Trump noted that he supported tough measures to punish the three regimes, and said that he will honor the review period prescribed in the bill.

Trump added that he would “give careful and respectful consideration” to other provisions that direct the administration to undertake diplomatic initiatives and require the administration to deny entry to the United States of certain foreign individuals, without exceptions for diplomats.

“My Administration will give careful and respectful consideration to the preferences expressed by the Congress in these various provisions and will implement them in a manner consistent with the President's constitutional authority to conduct foreign relations,” Trump said.

The White House had expressed concerns publicly and directly to lawmakers about the provision embedded within the bill that essentially prevents Trump from lifting existing sanctions without congressional approval, which comes after the administration had signaled that it hoped to ease tensions with Russia.

The administration also said it was worried about the impact of the bill on U.S. businesses doing business in Russia.

The new sanctions also further retaliate against Russia for its alleged meddling in the 2016 election, despite Trump's continued denial that Russia was responsible for a government-led effort to influence the campaign, a conclusion reached last year by the U.S intelligence community.

Trump has called the ongoing investigations in Congress and by a special counsel into Russian interference in the 2016 election a “witch hunt.” He has also repeatedly insisted that while Russia could have been responsible, other countries might also have been at fault.

That Congress would tie Trump's hands on this issue reflects a deepening concern about the administration's posture toward Russia, which critics have characterized as naive.

In a statement late last week, the White House signaled that Trump would eventually sign the measure, and a White House official added that the administration had worked to negotiate critical elements of it.

Yet even as Putin moved quickly to retaliate against the United States, Trump has not issued any statement — written or otherwise — on the Kremlin's actions.

Yeah, I don't think he'd ever use the term "encroaches" -- this must have been a staffer.

I find his statements rather disquieting. Saying parts of this almost unanimous and bipartisan bill are unconstitutional, paired with disparaging remarks about Congress are a further indication of his moves toward authoritarianism. I've noticed he's been doing this more and more lately, and in ever more blatant ways.

If he is not called out on this soon, it will be too late to do anything about it before anyone realizes.

[onekidanddone]

11 minutes ago, candygirl200413 said:

Stephen Miller is a vile disgusting racist excuse of a human. I didn't know just how badly he was until reading this( old article but obviously still reigns) :

Here are 21 facts that explain who Trump mouthpiece Stephen Miller really is

The part about First Nations really has be boiling. Excuse the scalping? Really?  How about the extermination of entire peoples? Germ warfare with small pox blankets?  And hey, if he has a beef with Native Americans for excusing scalping as part of their culture, does he excuse lynching as part of his?

[fraurosena]

40 minutes ago, AmazonGrace said:

I built a truly great company worth many billions of dollars

And even this is a lie.

His daddy built the company. He's been busy ruining it ever since he got his tiny widdle hands on it. How many bancrupcies did he have again? How much of the inherited money his father made did he squander away? How much money does he owe Deutsche Bank, the only bank left willing to lend him money- and why did he need to lend money from a bank if he has so many billions?

[AmazonGrace]

11 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

I find his statements rather disquieting. Saying parts of this almost unanimous and bipartisan bill are unconstitutional, paired with disparaging remarks about Congress are a further indication of his moves toward authoritarianism. I've noticed he's been doing this more and more lately, and in ever more blatant ways.

If he is not called out on this soon, it will be too late to do anything about it before anyone realizes.

The statement totally sounds like he's telling Vlad, "sorry I had to sign this to keep the Congress happy but don't worry I'm not going to actually enforce this bill "

Apparently Trump may have had a phone call with Putin before the bill was signed. 

[Destiny]

Stephen Miller is a vile disgusting racist excuse of a human. I didn't know just how badly he was until reading this( old article but obviously still reigns) :
Here are 21 facts that explain who Trump mouthpiece Stephen Miller really is

Holy fuck. HOLEEEEEE FUCK.

[fraurosena]

13 minutes ago, onekidanddone said:

The part about First Nations really has be boiling. Excuse the scalping? Really?  How about the extermination of entire peoples? Germ warfare with small pox blankets?  And hey, if he has a beef with Native Americans for excusing scalping as part of their culture, does he excuse lynching as part of his?

To make things worse, it was the Europeans who introduced 'scalping' as a means of proof of how many enemies the Native American tribes had killed for them.

 

30 minutes ago, GreyhoundFan said:

"Trump says the Boy Scouts head told him his speech was the ‘greatest.’ He appears to have imagined this."

  Reveal hidden contents

President Trump looks to have made another fantastic statement about one of his speeches.

On Tuesday, Politico got its hands on a previously unpublished transcript of Trump's July 25 interview with the Wall Street Journal. In that interview, Trump makes a bold claim about his controversial Boy Scouts speech the day before. After someone from the Journal suggested that Trump got a “mixed” reaction to his speech, Trump — as he often does — seemed to overcompensate.

“I got a call from the head of the Boy Scouts saying it was the greatest speech that was ever made to them, and they were very thankful,” Trump said. “So there was — there was no mix.”

Except a source for the Scouts said this doesn't appear to have happened at all.

“We are not aware of any call from national BSA leadership to the White House,” the source said.

To be clear, the Scouts haven't completely denied that their leadership made such a call. Might there have been one before they realized the PR crisis they had on their hands? Sure.

But that phone call would indeed be very difficult to square with the Boy Scouts' official reactions to the speech, which was chock full of politics and petty feuding with Trump's political opponents and the media — alongside the highflying, aspirational rhetoric that presidents usually deliver to young Scouts at the National Scout Jamboree. Trump delivered the speech in West Virginia on the evening of July 24, and the Scouts appeared to rebuke him the next day, saying the organization is “wholly nonpartisan and does not promote any one position, product, service, political candidate or philosophy.”

That was the same day — July 25 — that Trump spoke with the Journal. Two days later, July 27, the Scouts issued a fuller effort to distance themselves from Trump's speech. In a letter posted online, the Scouts apologized.

“I want to extend my sincere apologies to those in our Scouting family who were offended by the political rhetoric that was inserted into the jamboree,” said Michael Surbaugh, the chief scout executive for the Boy Scouts of America. “That was never our intent.”

In an official statement to The Washington Post on Wednesday, when asked about the call Trump described, Boy Scouts Communications Director Effie Delimarkos responded: “The Chief Scout Executive’s message to the Scouting community speaks for itself.”

This, of course, wouldn't be the first time Trump has inflated the reception his speeches have received. To wit:

• He told the New York Times this month of his speech in Poland: “Enemies of mine are saying it was the greatest speech ever made on foreign soil by a president.”
• He told the Associated Press in April of his speech to a joint session of Congress in January: “Some people said it was the single best speech ever made in that chamber.”
• After the media noted that Trump's inauguration had fewer attendees than President Barack Obama's, the White House vehemently insisted, counter to all available evidence, that it set records.
• Trump has repeatedly claimed other record crowds, despite holding speeches in small arenas or there being empty seats.

Trump is also known to infer much more praise than he actually receives. The most telling example, to my mind: He claimed a few months ago that a top House Democrat, Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (Md.), told him, “You will go down as one of the great presidents in the history of our country.” As I wrote back then, there is simply no way that Cummings said this, and indeed Cummings said he told Trump that he *could* be a great president if he represented all Americans.

But it was clear immediately after the speech that Trump had ventured into some pretty dicey territory. And given his track record on this kind of thing, it doesn't take much imagination to conclude that Trump himself imagined it.

Update: And if you need another example of Trump apparently conjuring a phone call out of thin air, Mexico's president says he never praised Trump's immigration policy in a call, as Trump claimed Monday.

Trump had said that "even the president of Mexico called me — They said their southern border, very few people are coming because they know they're not going to get through our border, which is the ultimate compliment."

Delusion, thy name is Drumpf.

Did you happen to see Lawrence O'Donnel last night? Fits right in with your assessment of the presidunce.

http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/lawrence-trump-making-increasingly-incoherent-russia-statements-1015135299899

 

[Howl]

re: Trump's estate on the market

Quote

The challenge, Jagtiani added, will be finding a buyer who will not be put off by the media attention that would accompany such a purchase. “Not sure how easy it will be to find someone that can afford a property like this and also embrace all the media attention this transaction will generate,” he said.

Sounds like the ideal get away for the Russian oligarch needing to park dirty money.  

[SilverBeach]

A republic is a form of democracy, one that uses elected represenratives.

[Howl]

From the article posted by @GreyhoundFan: 

Quote

But the mystery vanishes once we realize that Trump’s motives, rather than advancing some grand political strategy, are deeply personal. He can’t control himself. In his mind, silence means obscurity, which is unbearable, especially when ending it is only a tweet or two away. It doesn’t matter what he says — whether it is true or false, relevant or irrelevant to the issues — as long as he stirs passions and dominates public discussion.

Precisely: narcissistic personality disorder.  This was discussed at length by many journalists and psychologists and even psychiatrists  when Trump was first elected, letting us know what we were in for.  It amazes me that people are still trying to parse Trump through any other paradigm when there's only one that fits. 

From Psychology Today's article The Destructive Force of Narcissistic Injury

Quote

Narcissists suffer from what the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders defines as narcissistic injury: “vulnerability in self-esteem which makes narcissistic people very sensitive to ‘injury’ from criticism or defeat. Although they may not show it outwardly, criticism may haunt these individuals and may leave them feeling humiliated, degraded, hollow and empty. They react with disdain, rage, or defiant counterattack.”

Deranged tweets are how Trump launches his counterattacks. 

In just the last few days, Trump has made grandiose claims with zero supporting evidence -- otherwise known as blatant lies.   Today, Aug 2, The LA Times has reported the following: 

Quote

Trump told the Wall Street Journal in an interview published Wednesday, "I got a call from the head of the Boy Scouts saying it was the greatest speech that was ever made to them, and they were very thankful." Politico published the transcript of the interview.

"We are unaware of any such call," the Boy Scouts responded in a statement. It specified that neither of the organization's two top leaders — President Randall Stephenson and Chief Scout Executive Mike Surbaugh — had placed such a call.

and then this

Quote

A few days after the Journal interview, Trump said that Mexico's president, Enrique Peña Nieto, had paid him the "ultimate compliment" by calling and telling him that "their southern border, very few people are coming because they know they're not going to get through our border."

The Mexican government press office issued a statement Wednesday denying that.  Peña Nieto "has not had recent telephone communication with President Donald Trump," the statement said.

Sarah Huckabee Sanders says that the congratulatory comments were relayed during a personal conversation with Peña Nieto, so weren't a lie.  ETA: She claims they spoke at the relatively recent G20 Summit, rather than in a phone call, but I do think there's a snowball's chance in hell that the conversation went as Trump relayed it.  

Trump talked to Peña Nieto in person almost a year ago and by phone at the end of January 2017.   Sarah?  SARAH?

Our president is making shit up; he's creating a fantasy world where he really is the best and every defeat is actually so much WINNING. The best, the biggest WINNING in the history of WINNING because he's creating his own reality. Literally, he's a legend in his own mind.  This does not bode well. 

John Kelly seems firmly grounded in reality.  We'll see how long he lasts.  The first test is whether he can get rid of Stephen Miller, the Steve Bannon lickspittle protege.  However, Miller has survived a general's earlier attempt to purge him (was that Mad Dog?), and he seems to have the survival instincts of a cockroach, so he may be around for awhile, waiting for the zombie apocalypse to begin. 

[GreyhoundFan]

Here's a good article about today's briefing featuring that vampire Stephen Miller: "Stephen Miller vs. Jim Acosta sent the White House news briefing completely off the rails"

Spoiler

<video is embedded at the top of the article>

How strange was Wednesday's White House press briefing? Put it this way: Guardian reporter Ben Jacobs — who set a pretty high bar for weirdness when he was body slammed by a congressional candidate just 10 weeks ago — found the scene in the briefing room so strange that he joked about unwittingly ingesting a hallucinogenic.

...

Here's what happened:

White House senior policy adviser Stephen Miller was about to finish his turn at the microphone when, declaring that the last question was not sufficiently on topic, he said he would take one more and pointed to CNN's Jim Acosta.

If you are not familiar with the characters here, allow me to share quick bios. Miller is the aide to President Trump who made a memorable and rather authoritarian proclamation on TV in February: “Our opponents, the media and the whole world will soon see as we begin to take further actions, that the powers of the president to protect our country are very substantial and will not be questioned.” Acosta is the CNN reporter who got under Trump's skin during a January news conference, prompting Trump to exclaim, “You are fake news!”

Quite a matchup, right?

It was actually terrible.

In an exchange that will surely delight Trump's media-hating base, Miller tore into Acosta without really engaging in substance.

Acosta quoted part of the famous inscription on the Statue of Liberty (“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free”) and asked whether the Trump administration's newly unveiled, merit-based proposal for granting green cards is in keeping with U.S. tradition.

Miller responded with an obtuse answer about how “the poem that you're referring to was added later, is not actually part of the original Statue of Liberty.”

Acosta brought up Trump's pledge to build a wall along the southern border, in an apparent effort to put the plan released on Wednesday into a broader context. “You want to bring about a sweeping change to the immigration system,” he said.

Instead of tackling Acosta's big-picture question, Miller accused him of conflating separate issues.

“Surely, Jim, you don't actually think that a wall affects green-card policy,” Miller shot back. “You couldn't possibly believe that, do you? … Do you really at CNN not know the difference between green-card policy and illegal immigration? I mean, you really don't know that?”

Acosta referred to Trump's plan to award points to green-card applicants based on English proficiency and asked, “Are we just going to bring in people from Great Britain and Australia?”

Rather than defend the fairness of Trump's proposed emphasis on English skills, Miller said Acosta had just insulted English speakers from every country other than Britain and Australia.

“I am shocked at your statement, that you think only people from Great Britain and Australia would know English,” he said. “It's actually — it reveals your cosmopolitan bias to a shocking degree. … This is an amazing moment. That you think only people from Great Britain or Australia would know English is so insulting to millions of hard-working immigrants who do speak English from all over the world. Jim, have you honestly never met an immigrant from another country who speaks English, outside of Great Britain and Australia? Is that your personal experience?”

Acosta's aggressive questioning style is polarizing, to be sure. He has become a favorite villain for Trump supporters, and even some critics of the president. National Review editor Rich Lowry argued after Wednesday's briefing that Acosta veered into advocacy by pushing Miller so hard.

...

But Miller's refusal to respond in an intellectually honest way sent the question-and-answer session off the rails. He seemed more determined to expose CNN's alleged bias than to make the case for Trump's latest policy proposal.

 

[JMarie]

3 hours ago, candygirl200413 said:

Stephen Miller is a vile disgusting racist excuse of a human. I didn't know just how badly he was until reading this( old article but obviously still reigns) :

Here are 21 facts that explain who Trump mouthpiece Stephen Miller really is

When someone like him is in your class, you know you're in for a loooooong semester.

[GreyhoundFan]

Another good one from Dana Milbank: "Trump’s golf game tells us an awful lot about Trump"

Spoiler

The late golf legend Bobby Jones called his sport “the closest game to the game we call life. You get bad breaks from good shots; you get good breaks from bad shots — but you have to play the ball where it lies.”

Unless you are Donald Trump.

I just read one of the best pieces of political journalism of the Trump age. It’s Sports Illustrated’s report on the president’s golf game.

Golf is a game of humility: Even the best players are brought low by nature and chance. And it’s a game of honor: You keep your own score and are often unseen by other players.

Then there is Trump golf. He breaks rules, exaggerates scores and ignores the game’s decorum. Sound familiar? He is, Sports Illustrated asserted, “easily the best golfer” ever to occupy the White House. Likewise, he is an enormously talented politician, with a genius for marketing. Yet in golf, as in life, he doesn’t leave it at that. He gilds the lily with dishonesty.

“Trump will sometimes respond to a shot he duffed by simply playing a second ball and carrying on as if the first shot never happened,” SI reports. “In the parlance of the game, Trump takes floating mulligans, usually more than one during a round. Because of them it is impossible to say what he has actually shot on any given day, according to 18 people who have teed it up with Trump over the last decade.”

Many duffers take mulligans, or apply “winter rules” to help themselves out of difficulty. But you can’t then claim your score was honestly attained. “In 2007, Trump called [SI senior writer Michael] Bamberger to brag about a 68 he had shot at Bel-Air Country Club in Los Angeles,” the article reports. “. . . For Trump to shoot 68 on a tough course like Bel-Air would require him to play nearly perfectly from tee to green while making a number of substantial putts. One of his playing partners that day confirmed that Trump played ‘good,’ but that he took all the usual liberties common among everyday golfers: mulligans, gimmes, improved lies, etc.” Bamberger didn’t report that Trump shot a 68, and he “heard about it from Trump.”

Trump’s official handicap, the magazine says, is an astonishingly good 2.8, which means he’ll average about three strokes over par on 18 holes. But, the magazine continues, “he has posted only three scores since ’14. [Pro golfer Ernie] Els, a South Florida resident who has known Trump for many years, estimates he is ‘an eight or a nine.’ ” Trump couldn’t be content winning the presidency; he had to make up fantasies about millions of illegal votes denying him a popular-vote victory. Likewise, he is a good golfer. But he needs to invent something better.

Or invent “championships” the way his clubs hung fake Time magazine covers of him. SI noted a 2013 Trump tweet in which he boasted: “I’ve won 18 Club Championships including this weekend.” But, SI said, “Trump has never made public a list of his club titles, and fact-checking calls to all of the Trump properties on this subject went universally un-returned. Winged Foot is the one non-Trump club at which the President is a member, and his name does not appear on any of the honor boards in the old clubhouse.”

Reaction to the article has focused on Trump reportedly telling members of his Bedminster golf club that he visits frequently because the White House “is a real dump.” A Trump aide denied this. Clearly, Trump isn’t just escaping — he loves golf. After criticizing President Barack Obama for playing golf, he has played once every 5.7 days as president, The Washington Post’s Philip Bump counts.

So why does he desecrate the game he loves? He drives his cart on greens and tee boxes. He talks through other players’ shots. He “doesn’t play a round of golf so much as narrate it, his commentary peppered with hyperbole,” SI reports. He says he’s attracted to the game by “walking down all those beautiful fairways,” but he only rides in a cart.

Maybe Trump has a chip on his shoulder because the old-boy golf clubs wouldn’t admit the gauche showman. So he built his own. Now the populist Trump boasts that he’s “the best golfer of all the rich people.”

Or maybe he can’t help himself. Not satisfied being a very good golfer, he shaves scores, boasts of championships un-won and tears up greens with carts — because he can.

The famed 20th-century golf pro and instructor Percy Boomer said that the game reveals much about the man. “If you wish to hide your character, do not play golf,” he said.

But Trump plays, and reveals more than we’d like to see.