Trump 13: More Scandal, More Fun. Yay! :/

[Cartmann99]

1 hour ago, RoseWilder said:

This article will probably make me lose a little sleep tonight: 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/26/robert-mercer-breitbart-war-on-media-steve-bannon-donald-trump-nigel-farage?CMP=share_btn_tw

The article goes on to say: 

ETA: The article gets more horrifying from there. I definitely recommend reading the whole thing. 

Thank you for this @RoseWilder. The more I read about Robert Mercer, the more depressed I get. We're in a propaganda war, and our opponent is far-right billionaire determined to get his way. 

[PraiseDog]

On 3/3/2017 at 11:45 AM, RoseWilder said:

Louise Mensch, who I mentioned previously in this thread, still insists that James Comey is the good guy in all of this: 

I see her point on this. I believe at least several Republicans in the House and Senate are in on the Russia scandal. So it does make sense that Comey wouldn't want to share what he knows with them. 

What do you guys think?

Yes, absolutely! 
Yesterday when I was reading about Comey's recent meeting with the Senate Intelligence Committee, and how some members were frustrated that he wasn't telling them a whole lot, my first thought was, "It's possible that he CAN'T say much in front of all of you, because some of the people in this room might be currently under investigation."

After reading the Louise Mensch article you posted, I believe this even more.  It's probable that Comey is just doing his job, and sticking to the protocol and ethics he's supposed to, so as not to compromise his investigation.

If we examine his mentioning the Hillary emails the week before the election, yes it sucked that attention was drawn to such a "nothingburger" (as Ted Cruz likes to stupidly characterize things) just before the election, but the timing of Anthony Weiner's investigation left Comey little choice.  Releasing the info immediately should have pointed out that they contained nothing illegal, while delaying their release would have brought the FBI's ethics into question, especially  if Hillary had won.

I believe Comey is a "by-the-book, just-the-facts" type of person, who believes following the rules and protocol of his profession will eventually result in a clean chain of evidence.  Which in the end, will benefit us. 

I think I need to read more of Louise Mensch's articles, thank you for pointed her out.
 

[Dark Matters]

Long article from the Brookings Institute but well worth the read: what happens when the public doesn't believe in the sincerity of the president's oath?

https://www.lawfareblog.com/what-happens-when-we-dont-believe-presidents-oath

What Happens When We Don’t Believe the President’s Oath?
By Benjamin Wittes, Quinta Jurecic
Friday, March 3, 2017, 12:30 PM
        
The Constitution’s eligibility requirements for the presidency are spare, and in every formal sense, at least, Donald J. Trump meets them all: He was elected with a majority of electoral votes in a fashion that comports with the Twelfth Amendment. While he famously questioned his predecessor’s birth certificate and citizenship, nobody seems to doubt his. Trump is, as Article II, Section I, Clause 5 requires, “a natural born citizen”; he has “attained to the age of thirty five years”—with some years to spare, actually; and he has certainly “been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.”

And finally, on January 20, 2017, in apparent accordance with Article II, Section I, Clause 8, “Before he enter[ed] on the execution of his office, he [took] the following oath or affirmation:—‘I do solemnly swear . . . that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.’”

There’s only one problem with Trump’s eligibility for the office he now holds: The idea of Trump’s swearing this or any other oath “solemnly” is, not to put too fine a point on it, laughable—as more fundamentally is any promise on his part to “faithfully” execute this or any other commitment that involves the centrality of anyone or anything other than himself.

Indeed, a person who pauses to think about the matter has good reason to doubt the sincerity of Trump’s oath of office, or even his capacity to swear an oath sincerely at all. We submit that  huge numbers of people—including important actors in our constitutional system—have not even paused to consider it; they are instinctively leery of Trump’s oath and are now behaving accordingly.

This reality, and we argue here that it is a reality, is already conditioning the Trump presidency in overt ways visible every day. What’s more, we submit that these doubts about the President’s oath will inevitably shape public and institutional reaction to his service. And as a predictive matter, we believe that doubts about the President’s oath will have important and negative implications for the future of the American presidency.  

To be clear, we are not suggesting that the sincerity of the presidential oath presents any sort of justiciable question. To the contrary, what makes the problem of Trump’s oath vexing and difficult is precisely that it is quite improper for the judiciary to look behind a person’s formal compliance with Article II, Section I, Clause 8—any more than the courts have mechanisms to verify that the content of a State of the Union address really meets the requirements of Article II, Section 3. It's the very definition of a political question.

Rather, our argument is both subtler and, in some respects, more dramatic: It is that the presidential oath is actually the glue that holds together many of our system’s functional assumptions about the presidency and the institutional reactions to it among actors from judges to bureaucrats to the press. When large enough numbers of people within these systems doubt a president’s oath, those assumptions cease operating. They do so without anyone’s ever announcing, let alone ruling from the bench, that the President didn’t satisfy the Presidential Oath Clause and thus is not really president. They just stop working—or they work a lot less well.

That is, we argue here, what we’re seeing now. And the disruption in our expectations of the presidency, and our civic and legal responses to it will, we suspect, have a very long tail.  

[RoseWilder]

This was covered on The Rachel Maddow Show last week (I highly recommend watching for those who want to understand the Russia scandal better - she's been doing a fantastic job of covering it.) For those who didn't get a chance to watch last week, here's an article that covers one of the stories she reported on: 

http://www.palmerreport.com/news/dmitry-rybolovlev-who-keeps-flying-in-to-meet-donald-trump-owns-russian-money-laundering-bank/1692/

Quote

Over the past weeks, Palmer Report has been reporting on the mysterious round-the-world gallivanting of Russian billionaire Dmitry Rybolovlev, who spends most of his time at his home in Monaco but has a habit of flying into whatever city Donald Trump happens to be visiting at the time. And thanks to an exposed multibillion dollar money laundering scheme on the part of a bank that’s closely tied financially to both Rybolovlev and Trump, we think we know why.

As we’ve been documenting this month, whenever Donald Trump has left the White House and ventured anywhere, Dmitry Rybolovlev (aka the “Russian King of Fertilizer”) has tended to show up in the same city. It happened during Trump’s victory tour in Concord, North Carolina, a place Rybolovlev had no legitimate reason to be. It happened again when Trump vacationed in West Palm Beach, even though that required Rybolovlev to fly all the way in from Switzerland. That was also the time that Trump deposited reporters in a semi-submerged basement of his resort with black plastic covering the the windows.

 

Oh for fuck's sake. The White House is asking Congress to investigate the Obama administration: 

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/05/politics/white-house-spicer-congress-2016/index.html?adkey=bn

Quote

President Donald Trump is asking Congress to look into whether the Obama administration abused its investigative powers during the 2016 election, White House press secretary Sean Spicer said in a statement Sunday.

"Reports concerning potentially politically motivated investigations immediately ahead of the 2016 election are very troubling," Spicer said, posting the statement on Twitter. "President Donald J. Trump is requesting that as part of their investigation into Russian activity, the congressional intelligence committees exercise their oversight authority to determine whether executive branch investigative powers were abused in 2016.

Considering how corrupt and hypocritical the Republicans in congress are, they'll probably have an investigation going by the end of the day, WHILE STILL FUCKING REFUSING TO DO AN INVESTIGATION INTO TRUMP'S TIES TO RUSSIA. 

So I guess Trump thinks if he can get the public talking about this we're all going to forget about his Russian ties. 

[RoseWilder]

There's so much happening in the news lately that I can't catch up. I'm still trying to catch up on articles from mid-week, so this is a few days old but I don't think anyone has posted it yet (apologies if they already have.) 

I'm kind of surprised this isn't making bigger headlines because I think it's a really big deal: 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/27/commerce-nominee-wilbur-ross-bank-of-cyprus-putin

Quote

The White House has been accused of withholding information from Congress about whether Donald Trump or any of his campaign affiliates have ever received loans from a bank in Cyprus that is partly owned by a close ally of Russian president Vladimir Putin.

A group of Democratic senators have been waiting for two weeks for Wilbur Ross, a billionaire investor who has served as vice-chairman of the Bank of Cyprus since 2014, to answer a series of questions about possible links between the bank, Russian officials, and current and former Trump administration and campaign officials. Ross also received a second letter on Friday from Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey with more detailed questions about possible Russia links.

But in a speech on Monday night, just before the Senate voted to approve Ross’s nomination as secretary of the commerce department, Senator Bill Nelson of Florida said the White House “has chosen to sit on” a written response by Ross to some of those questions even though Ross told the senator he was eager to release his response.

 

[GreyhoundFan]

And while our country is going to hell in a handbasket, Junior and Junior 2 are going around putting money in the tangerine toddler's pockets while we pay: "Trump sons, planning expansion of family business, look to leverage campaign experience"

Quote

Donald Trump’s adult sons, who are overseeing a nationwide expansion of the family business during their father’s presidency, are envisioning ways that their experiences from the campaign trail can help them establish a footing in dozens of new markets.

The idea is to move beyond a focus on luxury hotels in big metropolises and build boutique properties in a broader mix of cities, including some the Trump brothers came to know well during more than a year of intensive travel, fundraising and grass-roots networking on the road to the White House.

“I got to see a lot of those markets on the campaign,” Donald Trump Jr., the president’s eldest son, told The Washington Post in a recent interview from his office on the 25th floor of Trump Tower. “I think I’ve probably been in all of them over the last 18 months.”

The initial plan is tied to the Trumps’ previously announced new chain, Scion, which is being designed as a less-corporate feeling brand of high-end hotels with a more affordable per-room price point than the Trumps’ five-star properties.

As with many existing Trump-branded property deals, the developers would own the hotels while the Trumps would be paid licensing and management fees.

The company says it has signed at least 17 letters of intent with potential developers. It is targeting an array of cities such as Austin, Dallas, St. Louis, Nashville and Seattle — and Trump Jr. said the campaign proved useful in forging relationships with potential new connections.

“I met people along the way that would be awesome partners,” he said.

...

Every time I see pictures of their smug faces, I get stabby.

[AnywhereButHere]

57 minutes ago, RoseWilder said:

This was covered on The Rachel Maddow Show last week (I highly recommend watching for those who want to understand the Russia scandal better - she's been doing a fantastic job of covering it.) For those who didn't get a chance to watch last week, here's an article that covers one of the stories she reported on: 

http://www.palmerreport.com/news/dmitry-rybolovlev-who-keeps-flying-in-to-meet-donald-trump-owns-russian-money-laundering-bank/1692/

 

Oh for fuck's sake. The White House is asking Congress to investigate the Obama administration: 

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/05/politics/white-house-spicer-congress-2016/index.html?adkey=bn

Considering how corrupt and hypocritical the Republicans in congress are, they'll probably have an investigation going by the end of the day, WHILE STILL FUCKING REFUSING TO DO AN INVESTIGATION INTO TRUMP'S TIES TO RUSSIA. 

So I guess Trump thinks if he can get the public talking about this we're all going to forget about his Russian ties. 

While we're all looking in the center ring, we (hopefully) won't see the disasters to the right and left. It's the greatest show on earth, folks! 

[Petrel]

Now he's called for a congressional investigation of Obama.  God-fucking-dammit, this guy is insane.  

[JMarie]

God bless Martha Raddatz for trying to get a straight answer from WH spokesperson Sarah Huckabee Sanders.  I was watching the interview during breakfast and managed not to choke while eating.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/sarah-huckabee-sanders-trump-wiretapping-claims_us_58bc1dcee4b0b99894182989

Quote

In an interview on ABC News’ “This Week,” guest host Martha Raddatz asked Sanders why the president had made the allegations so confidently.

“I think that this is, again, something that if this happened, Martha ―” Sanders began.

“If, if, if, if,” Raddatz interjected. “Why is the president saying that it did happen?”

“He is going off of information that he’s seen that has led him to believe that this is a very real potential,” Sanders replied.

 

[fraurosena]

Interesting.

Republicans adopted pro-Russia stance on Ukraine just after Trump officials met with Russian ambassador

Quote

Donald Trump appears to have pushed for the Republicans to adopt a pro-Moscow policy over Ukraine just as his senior aides were meeting with Russia’s US Ambassador.

At the Republican National Convention last summer, the party agreed to insert language into its platform that opposed arming or providing Ukraine with weapons to take on pro-Russian rebels. At the time, Mr Trump told an interviewer he “wasn’t involved in it”.

But now, a former adviser to Mr Trump has revealed that the push to change the platform came after the direct intervention of the New York tycoon. Mr Trump had hinted as to his views on Ukraine during a speech in the spring of 2016, where the Russian Ambassador, Sergey Kislyak, was among the guests.

I wonder if Congress will pick this up as fast as they will the 'wiretap' controversy. Nahhh, who am I kidding... 

[CTRLZero]

2 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

The company says it has signed at least 17 letters of intent with potential developers. It is targeting an array of cities such as Austin, Dallas, St. Louis, Nashville and Seattle — and Trump Jr. said the campaign proved useful in forging relationships with potential new connections.

Groan...two of my favorite cities are being targeted.  Hope I never have to see the Trump logo.  They'll no doubt be building them using American steel and other products from all those factories Daddy Trump is [re]opening. 

[fraurosena]

Keith Olbermann again. Still on point:

 

[Petrel]

Quote

“He is going off of information that he’s seen that has led him to believe that this is a very real potential,” Sanders replied.

The president needs to stop hitting F5 on Breitbart.

[onekidanddone]

1 hour ago, fraurosena said:

Keith Olbermann again. Still on point:

 

He so sharp. So clear I do love him.   However, sometimes he is so on point I get a panic attack just thinking about the fascist in the White House.  But I keep coming back for more.  I suppose I can't leave it alone either.

[fraurosena]

So here's a (lengthy) overview of what the tangerine toddler's administration has been up to whilst everyone was looking at the Russian Connection:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/05/us/politics/trump-deregulation-guns-wall-st-climate.html

Quote

Telecommunications giants like Verizon and AT&T will not have to take “reasonable measures” to ensure that their customers’ Social Security numbers, web browsing history and other personal information are not stolen or accidentally released.

Wall Street banks like Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase will not be punished, at least for now, for not collecting extra money from customers to cover potential losses from certain kinds of high-risk trades that helped unleash the 2008 financial crisis.

And Social Security Administration data will no longer be used to try to block individuals with disabling mental health issues from buying handguns, nor will hunters be banned from using lead-based bullets, which can accidentally poison wildlife, on 150 million acres of federal lands.

These are just a few of the more than 90 regulations that federal agencies and the Republican-controlled Congress have delayed, suspended or reversed in the month and a half since President Trump took office, according to a tally by The New York Times.

The emerging effort — dozens of additional rules could be eliminated in the coming weeks — represents one of the most significant shifts in regulatory policy in recent decades. It is the leading edge of what Stephen K. Bannon, Mr. Trump’s chief strategist, described late last month as “the deconstruction of the administrative state.”

This quote is just the beginning of the article. It's creepy and scary what's happening, all in the name of making a buck or two more at the cost of the environment, health, education and overall wellbeing of american citizens. Read this and weep, Trumpvidians. They don't give a shit about you. It's all about making the rich people richer. And this is the evidence. 

[RoseWilder]

I found this on the twitter page of the senior congressional reporter for CNN: 

So they refused to investigate Trump's Russia ties, even though there's about 200 pieces of evidence, but now they're investigating President Obama with not one shred of evidence. 

Does anyone else feel like putting their fist through a window? 

[GreyhoundFan]

10 minutes ago, RoseWilder said:

I found this on the twitter page of the senior congressional reporter for CNN: 

So they refused to investigate Trump's Russia ties, even though there's about 200 pieces of evidence, but now they're investigating President Obama with not one shred of evidence. 

Does anyone else feel like putting their fist through a window? 

Yes, about 200 times a day.

 

For a little humor: "Stephen King trolls Trump’s wiretapping tweets as only a horror writer could". I can't copy much, since you have to see Stephen King's Tweets for the rest to make sense, but gotta love SK. There is a funny Tweet in the article from Bruce Bartlett:

Quote

Take Nixon in the deepest days of his Watergate paranoia, subtract 50 IQ points, add Twitter, and you have Trump today.

I would think subtract 75 points, but otherwise, that's on point.

[fraurosena]

On the other hand, Comey has asked the DOJ to reject the tangerine toddler's claim:

 

Quote

The F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, asked the Justice Department this weekend to publicly reject President Trump’s assertion that President Barack Obama ordered the tapping of Mr. Trump’s phones, senior American officials said on Sunday. Mr. Comey has argued that the highly charged claim is false and must be corrected, they said, but the department has not released any such statement.

Mr. Comey, who made the request on Saturday after Mr. Trump leveled his allegation on Twitter, has been working to get the Justice Department to knock down the claim because it falsely insinuates that the F.B.I. broke the law, the officials said. [...]

A statement by the Justice Department or Mr. Comey refuting Mr. Trump’s allegations would be a remarkable rebuke of a sitting president, putting the nation’s top law enforcement officials in the position of questioning the truthfulness of the government’s top leader. The situation underscores the high stakes of what the president and his aides have unleashed by accusing the former president of a conspiracy to undermine Mr. Trump’s young administration. [...]

A spokesman for Mr. Obama and his former aides have called the accusation by Mr. Trump completely false, saying that Mr. Obama never ordered any wiretapping of a United States citizen.

“A cardinal rule of the Obama administration was that no White House official ever interfered with any independent investigation led by the Department of Justice,” Kevin Lewis, Mr. Obama’s spokesman, said in a statement on Saturday.

Not the shade that the statement by Obama's spokesman throws. 

[RoseWilder]

This is horrifying (I feel like I say that about 100 times a day): 

 

[fraurosena]

13 minutes ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Yes, about 200 times a day.

 

For a little humor: "Stephen King trolls Trump’s wiretapping tweets as only a horror writer could". I can't copy much, since you have to see Stephen King's Tweets for the rest to make sense, but gotta love SK.

Dang, I thought it would be Joe Biden... 

[RoseWilder]

And let's balance out that horror with something better: 

 

[fraurosena]

Just now, RoseWilder said:

And let's balance out that horror with something better: 

 

Yeah, just posted that... 

[RoseWilder]

1 minute ago, fraurosena said:

Yeah, just posted that... 

Oh, sorry. I posted a few things in a row and "new reply" popped up but I didn't click on it before posting my next thing. 

[fraurosena]

No worries, @RoseWilder, I do the same quite often... 

[RoseWilder]

Even Bush's people (who were pretty corrupt themselves) think Trump and his administration are so insane that they feel the need to speak out against it: