Trump 19: Please Cry for Us Montenegro (and We Are so Sorry!)

[47of74]

6 minutes ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Oh, Thursday is shaping up to be epic: "Trump, furious and frustrated, gears up to ‘punch back’ at Comey testimony"

  Reveal hidden contents

Alone in the White House in recent days, President Trump — frustrated and defiant — has been spoiling for a fight, according to his confidants and associates.

Glued even more than usual to the cable news shows that blare from the televisions in his private living quarters, or from the 60-inch flat screen he had installed in his cramped study off the Oval Office, he has fumed about “fake news.” Trump has seethed as his agenda has stalled in Congress and the courts. He has chafed against the pleas for caution from his lawyers and political advisers, tweeting whatever he wants, whenever he wants.

And on Thursday, the president will come screen-to-screen with the FBI director he fired, James B. Comey, who has consumed, haunted and antagonized him since launching an expanding Russia investigation that the president slammed as a “witch hunt.”

Comey’s testimony is a political Super Bowl — with television networks interrupting regular programming to air it, and some Washington offices and bars making plans for special viewings.

Trump is keen to be a participant rather than just another viewer, two senior White House officials said, including the possibility of taking to Twitter to offer acerbic commentary during the hearing.

“I wish him good luck,” the president told reporters on Tuesday.

“He’s infuriated at a deep-gut, personal level that the elite media has tolerated [the Russia story] and praised Comey,” former House speaker Newt Gingrich said. “He’s not going to let some guy like that smear him without punching him as hard as he can.”

This account of Trump’s mind-set and the preparations of his team in the run-up to Comey’s testimony is based on interviews with 20 White House officials, Trump friends and other senior Republicans, many of whom spoke only on the condition of anonymity to offer candid perspectives.

The president’s lawyers and aides have been urging him to resist engaging, and they hope to keep him busy Thursday with other events meant to compete for his — and the news media’s — attention.

“The president’s going to have a very, very busy day,” White House press secretary Sean Spicer said. “I think his focus is going to be on pursuing the agenda and the priorities that he was elected to do.”

As of now, Trump’s Thursday morning — when Comey is scheduled to start testifying — is open. He plans to deliver a 12:30 p.m. speech at the Faith and Freedom Coalition’s conference in Washington, followed by a 3:30 p.m. meeting with governors and mayors on infrastructure projects.

Jay Sekulow, a high-profile conservative lawyer in Washington, has met several times recently with Trump and said he found the president to have his attention squarely on his proposals.

“He’s been very much in control and in command,” Sekulow said. “I don’t sense any siege or panic at all. . . . I’ve been there a lot, and I don’t see the president in any context distracted or flustered by any of this. I just don’t see it.”

But privately, Trump’s advisers said they are bracing for a worst-case scenario: that he ignores their advice and tweets his mind.

“He’s not going to take an attack by James Comey laying down,” said Roger Stone, a longtime Trump friend and former political adviser. “Trump is a fighter, he’s a brawler and he’s the best counterpuncher in American politics.”

The president increasingly has come to see Twitter as his preferred method of communicating with his supporters, no matter the pitfalls.

“The FAKE MSM is working so hard trying to get me not to use Social Media. They hate that I can get the honest and unfiltered message out,” Trump tweeted on Tuesday morning, making a reference to the “mainstream media.”

The West Wing, meanwhile, has taken on an atmosphere of legal uncertainty. White House counsel Donald F. McGahn has told staff to hold onto emails, documents and phone records, officials said, a move of caution designed to prepare the staff for future legal requests, should they come. McGahn has specifically advised staffers to avoid what are known as the “burn bags” in the executive branch that are often used to discard papers.

While people familiar with the White House counsel’s office described McGahn’s moves as appropriate steps because of the ongoing probes, they said many junior staffers are increasingly skittish and fearful of their communications eventually finding their way into the hands of investigators.

Some staffers nervous about their own personal liability are contemplating hiring lawyers and have become more rigorous about not putting things in text messages or emails that they would not want to be subpoenaed, one person familiar with the situation said.

Attempting to invoke executive privilege to restrict Comey’s testimony was never seriously considered by Trump or his legal team, said one senior White House official. But, this official added, the White House liked floating the possibility as a distraction.

In the weeks leading up to Comey’s testimony, the White House had privately tried to erect a war room that would handle the communications and legal strategies for responding to the Russia matter. Former Trump campaign aides Corey Lewandowski and David Bossie were in discussions to lead it.

But the plan was scuttled, as with so much else in Trump’s administration, because of internal disagreements, according to multiple officials. Arguments included whether the war room would be run from inside or outside the gates of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.; who would staff it; whether they could be trusted by the president’s senior team, or even trust one another; and whether Marc Kasowitz, Trump’s outside counsel, would ultimately control the message.

Kasowitz, who has a long-standing relationship with Trump, has been operating as an island of sorts in Trump world. He has been meeting regularly with the president and has a nascent relationship with McGahn, but he has not widely shared his legal strategy within the West Wing, according to two officials involved.

Kasowitz, whose combative personality mirrors Trump’s, has not found it easy to entice other big-name lawyers with Washington experience to join the cause because many prominent attorneys are reluctant to have him giving them direction and wonder whether he will be able to keep Trump from stumbling, one official said.

In the absence of a war room — and with the departure of communications director Michael Dubke — planning for the White House’s response to the Comey hearing has fallen largely to Chief of Staff Reince Priebus and his lieutenants.

Trump’s team is preparing a campaign-style line of attack aimed at undercutting Comey’s reputation. They plan to portray him as a “showboat” and to bring up past controversies from his career, including his handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation in 2016, according to people involved in the planning.

The Republican National Committee has lined up a roster of surrogates to appear on conservative news stations nationwide to defend Trump. But a list the RNC distributed on Tuesday could hardly be described as star-studded: The names include Bob Paduchik, an RNC co-chair who worked on Trump’s Ohio campaign; Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi (R); and Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge (R).

Trump so far has been unable to recruit reinforcements for his beleaguered senior staff. Conversations about former Trump campaign official David Urban possibly joining the White House have stalled, although he remains in contact with several Trump advisers, officials said.

The White House has long struggled with its communications team, with Trump both privately and publicly voicing displeasure with his current staff. Press secretary Sean Spicer has started appearing less frequently on camera, and Trump and several top advisers, including son-in-law Jared Kushner, are considering a range of options to revamp the current structure.

The White House recently approached Geoff Morrell — who served as the Pentagon press secretary for more than four years under former defense secretary Robert Gates — about coming inside the administration and overhauling the communications operation, according to three people with knowledge of the overture.

Morrell declined to comment, but BP announced last month that Morrell would be moving to London this summer to run government relations and communications for the company globally.

Scott Reed, senior political strategist at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, was also approached about taking a communications role within the White House, according to two people familiar with the outreach. Reed declined to comment.

In addition, Laura Ingraham, a conservative talk-radio host and Trump friend, discussed joining the White House but made clear to officials that she is more comfortable remaining outside as a vocal Trump ally because of her many broadcasting and media commitments, officials said.

Some Trump loyalists outside the White House who are preparing to go on television news shows Thursday to defend the president and undermine Comey’s testimony said they have been given no talking points, nor seen any evidence of a strategy taking shape. One such loyalist said external supporters are afraid to coordinate too closely with the White House because they fear they could be accused of obstructing justice.

Trump is personally reaching out to some allies on the Senate Intelligence Committee ahead of their questioning of Comey. He was scheduled to have dinner Tuesday night at the White House with Sens. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), both committee members, along with a few other lawmakers. The dinner had been long scheduled for the president to offer a debrief on his foreign trip, a senior White House official said.

Inside the West Wing, senior officials and junior aides fear that the president’s erratic behavior could have sweeping legal and political consequences, and they are frustrated that he has not proved able to focus on his agenda — this was supposed to be “infrastructure week,” for instance. Many are also resigned to the idea that there is little they can do to moderate or thwart Trump’s moves, so instead they are focused on managing the fallout.

One Republican close to the White House summed up the staff’s mantra as: “Please, don’t, you’re not helping things.”

But Trump and his loyalists see a political advantage to the president personally engaging, however unseemly it may appear to traditionalists.

“He believes in the long run there is an enormous premium on being the person who stands there fighting,” said Gingrich, author of “Understanding Trump,” an upcoming book. “People respond to that and wonder if he’s fighting this hard, maybe he’s right and the other guys are wrong. It’s the core of how he operates.”

Alan Dershowitz, a Harvard Law School professor and criminal law expert whose television commentary on the Russia probe has caught the Trump team’s attention, said he understands why the president would be motivated to speak out to counter Comey’s testimony.

“Every lawyer would tell the president not to tweet, not to react,” Dershowitz said. “But he’s not listening. This is typical. I tell my clients all the time not to talk and they simply disregard it. It’d very hard to tell a very wealthy, very powerful man not to tweet. He thinks, ‘I tweeted my way to the presidency,’ and he’s determined to tweet.”

Haul out the popcorn and adult beverages.

Yep, I'm ready....

 

 

[candygirl200413]

So I think I'll still watch the testimony but I doubt anything will come out of it. Especially after reading how spineless Rubio (and another republican senator whose name I'm blanking on) just so happened to have dinner with Trump. Majority of republican senators will just ask questions about the leakers.

[GreyhoundFan]

This administration is really trying to screw over the people. Now he's trying to sell off assets that will likely raise water prices in Washington DC and Northern Virginia: "Trump administration wants to sell the Washington Aqueduct"

Spoiler

The Trump administration wants to sell the Washington Aqueduct, stirring fears among some that the White House’s passion for privatization could mean higher water bills for 1 million residents in the District and Northern Virginia.

But the plan, buried in a few short lines in a budget proposal of more than 1,200 pages, may lead to a different outcome. Some officials in the District want the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which operates the aqueduct, instead to turn over the facility to D.C. Water, a public utility.

In that case, water rates would not increase as much because there would be no need to earn a return for investors, according to officials and private analysts.

But there’s a catch: D.C. Water would want to pay the federal government far less than the $119 million than the administration wants from the sale.

The aqueduct proposal is an example of the hurdles facing the Trump administration’s ambitious plan to privatize public assets, such as roads and bridges. The administration would then use proceeds from the sales of the assets to fund new infrastructure projects.

The White House also supports privatization to promote local control and market incentives. It isn’t clear whether Congress will go along with its plans, including for the aqueduct.

The administration’s proposal to “divest” of the facility was barely noticed when the full budget proposal was issued May 23. The Corps of Engineers has run the aqueduct since the conduit began operation during the Civil War.

The network of intakes, pipes and treatment plants carries water from the Potomac River, at Great Falls and Little Falls, to the Dalecarlia, Georgetown and McMillan reservoirs. The water is sold to D.C. Water and other utilities that serve all households in the District and Arlington, and some in Fairfax.

The Washington Aqueduct employs 140 people and is designated as a National Historic Landmark.

Divestiture would not save the federal government money in year-to-year costs, because the aqueduct receives no federal subsidies. Payments by customers cover all its expenses, for both operations and investments.

The administration said divestiture would end the outdated practice of having the Corps of Engineers play a role in supplying drinking water to civilians.

“Ownership of local water supply is best carried out by state or local government or the private sector, where there are appropriate market and regulatory incentives,” Douglas W. Lamont, a senior official in the office of the Secretary of the Army, said in May 24 testimony to a House Appropriations subcommittee.

“The proposal to eliminate the Corps’ role . . . would encourage a more efficient allocation of economic resources and mitigate risk to taxpayers,” he said.

But officials in the District and Arlington expressed concern that a private operator would jack up water rates to maximize profits.

“The best guess we have is that any transfer to a private, for-profit entity is likely to mean cost increases for customers,” said Arlington County Board Chairman Jay Fisette (D).

He expressed bewilderment that the White House would push for divestiture when customers are satisfied with the current arrangement.

“To me, you privatize when you’re looking to enhance services and do something more cost effectively. It’s unclear how this would accomplish any of those improvements,” Fisette said.

D.C. Budget Director Matthew T. Brown, who also is chairman of D.C. Water, said that he might support a sale to a private entity or to D.C. Water but that there was “absolutely” concern about higher rates.

“We would need a lot more information . . . to make any determination of what makes sense to consumers,” he said.

Water bills are likely to rise anyway in coming years, because any owner of the aqueduct would have to invest hundreds of millions of dollars to pay for needed upgrades to handle new kinds of contaminants such as pharmaceuticals and antibiotics fed to animals.

They would probably go even higher with a private operator. A 2016 study by Food and Water Watch, an advocacy group, found that on average, private, for-profit water utilities charged households 59 percent more than government ones, a difference of $185 a year for a typical household.

D.C. Water General Manager George S. Hawkins said he doubted that a private company could run the aqueduct more efficiently than the Corps.

But he said D.C. Water might do so, adding he was “very interested” in studying whether his agency could take over the aqueduct.

“Our inclination is it would be more efficient if we had the whole system within one management system,” Hawkins said.

The caveat: He and other local officials indicated they would not pay the $119 million price tag named in the White House budget.

Instead, Hawkins offered the unconventional argument that D.C. Water already possesses a large “ownership” stake in the aqueduct, because its payments for water have covered most of the facility’s costs for decades.

D.C. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D) made the same argument, adding that the administration’s price would be too high for a private operator.

“We think the only feasible alternative is for D.C. Water to own and operate it,” Norton said.

Aqueduct General Manager Tom Jacobus expressed skepticism that customers had acquired an ownership stake through their purchases of water over the years.

The aqueduct “is on the property books of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,” he said.

His boss, Army Col. Edward P. Chamberlayne, who commands the Corps’ Baltimore district, said his unit would obey whatever orders it gets — but suggested it would like to preserve the status quo.

“We’ve been given a mission since 1863 to provide a clean, reliable water supply for the District of Columbia,” Chamberlayne said. “We’ve done that, and we’re prepared to do that into the future. . . . We’re the U.S. Army. If we’re given a mission, we’ll do it.”

 

[nvmbr02]

50 minutes ago, candygirl200413 said:

So I think I'll still watch the testimony but I doubt anything will come out of it. Especially after reading how spineless Rubio (and another republican senator whose name I'm blanking on) just so happened to have dinner with Trump. Majority of republican senators will just ask questions about the leakers.

I am not expecting any huge bombshells to drop, nor am I expecting the republican senators to grow spines but I do expect strong questioning from the democrats, especially California's senators Diane Feinstein and Kamala Harris. 

[Childless]

4 hours ago, nvmbr02 said:

I am not expecting any huge bombshells to drop, nor am I expecting the republican senators to grow spines but I do expect strong questioning from the democrats, especially California's senators Diane Feinstein and Kamala Harris. 

This has me scratching my head.  I know the GOP politicians are whiny little cowards, but I'm almost certain they despise Trump and get hard ons thinking about a President Pence, so what the hell are they waiting for?

[bashfulpixie]

16 minutes ago, Childless said:

This has me scratching my head.  I know the GOP politicians are whiny little cowards, but I'm almost certain they despise Trump and get hard ons thinking about a President Pence, so what the hell are they waiting for?

My guess is that enough of them are dirty with Russian involvement that they're scared of being taken out too. 

[ALM7]

This just in Via-Trump-Tweet Tweet

 https://www.justice.gov/criminal/history/assistant-attorneys-general/christopher-a-wray

Christopher A. Wray (2003-2005)

Early History: Christopher Asher Wray was born in 1967. He graduated from Yale University in 1989 and received his law degree from Yale Law School in 1992. He then clerked for Judge J. Michael Luttig of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. In 1993, Mr. Wray started working in private practice in Atlanta, Georgia. In 1997, he joined the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Georgia. In 2001, he served at Main Justice as an Associate Deputy Attorney General and, later, as Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General.

Tenure: In 2003, Mr. Wray was nominated by President George W. Bush as Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Criminal Division. He served in that position until 2005.

Later Career: After his service at the Department, Mr. Wray returned to private practice, specializing in white collar and internal investigations.

[GreyhoundFan]

Another good one from Jennifer Rubin: "The other shoes start falling"

Spoiler

The Post reports:

The nation’s top intelligence official told associates in March that President Trump asked him if he could intervene with then-FBI Director James B. Comey to get the bureau to back off its focus on former national security adviser Michael Flynn in its Russia probe, according to officials.

On March 22, less than a week after being confirmed by the Senate, Director of National Intelligence Daniel Coats attended a briefing at the White House together with officials from several government agencies. As the briefing was wrapping up, Trump asked everyone to leave the room except for Coats and CIA Director Mike Pompeo.

The president then started complaining about the FBI investigation and Comey’s handling of it, said officials familiar with the account Coats gave to associates. Two days earlier, Comey had confirmed in a congressional hearing that the bureau was probing whether Trump’s campaign coordinated with Russia during the 2016 race.

We now have a situation in which multiple, highly respected GOP officials — Coats, Pompeo and perhaps Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein — will have a remarkably consistent story showing a frantic and persistent president pestering them to derail an ongoing FBI investigation.

In the case of President Richard Nixon, a recording of a single directive for the CIA to squash the FBI investigation of the break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters was dubbed a smoking gun.

Fordham law professor Jed Shugerman tells me that the obstruction statute, 18 U.S. Code Section 1505, requires that the prosecutor show a defendant in an obstruction prosecution “corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication influences, obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law.” Shugerman says that for these purposes, the requisite intent boils down to “acting with an improper purpose, personally or by influencing another, including making a false or misleading statement, or withholding, concealing, altering, or destroying a document or other information.”

What have we got to show that?

• The president allegedly cleared the room before asking Coats and Pompeo to stop Comey.
• The president repeatedly asked Comey about the investigation. In one instance, he again cleared the room (asking Vice  President Pence and Sessions, among others, to leave) so that he could talk to Comey alone. Afterward, Comey told Sessions not to leave him alone with Trump because of concern over interference with the investigation.
• According to a contemporaneous, purported memo by Comey, the president told Comey he hoped ” you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy.”
• Trump fired Comey, first putting out a false story and blaming Rosenstein for the firing. He then essentially confessed to Lester Holt in an NBC interview that “when I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said, ‘You know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story; it’s an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that they should have won.’ “
• The president reportedly became irate with Sessions when he found he had recused himself, possibly suggesting that he wanted Sessions there to keep Comey in check.
• He made up a bogus story about Trump Tower being bugged by the Obama team in an effort to throw the FBI off-topic.

Collectively, we have a rather persuasive picture of a president frantic to end an investigation that might embarrass him or diminish him in some fashion. Ethics guru Norman Eisen says that in an obstruction prosecution, the key issue would be whether Trump and others were “acting for an improper purpose, such as to evade personal embarrassment or legal liability for Trump, for people connected to him, and possibly even for Russian wrongdoers.” He notes: “It’s already clear from the president’s own words that he was acting to impair the investigation. The key question is whether he was doing so with a wrongful purpose, and if so, what that was.”

However, all of this goes to whether a criminal prosecution would hold up. The real worry for Trump is impeachment. The actions listed above certainly could qualify as abuse of power and obstruction for impeachment purposes. Impeachment is a political decision by Congress.

We will be looking at a series of questions today and when Comey testifies tomorrow:

Did the president make an explicit request to end the Comey investigation?

Did he suggest that Comey or other officials’ jobs would be in jeopardy unless they complied?

Did Comey and others tell associates at the time what Trump was doing?

Do Comey, Coats and others have contemporaneous notes of conversations with the president?

Will Sessions voluntarily testify at some point? If so, he can be asked why Trump was so upset over the recusal.

What did/does Flynn have to say or what other evidence is there in the Russia investigation that so disturbed Trump?

And most important, will Trump control himself or once again dig his own political grave with Twitter outbursts?

How do GOP lawmakers react to the testimony? Do they, for example, start denouncing Trump and his behavior?

We may have the rare case in which intent in alleged obstruction may be easier than usual to demonstrate because the alleged perpetrator made so many comments and talked to so many people about his obsession with dumping Comey. At that point, the GOP would need to decide whether to move forward to remove him — or risk losing control of both houses and letting Democrats do it in 2018.

Yeah, the Repugs won't stand up.

[Gobsmacked]

On 6 June 2017 at 3:52 AM, 47of74 said:

The Mayor of London has asked the UK government to cancel the state visit of the orange fuck head

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/05/donald-trump-attack-courts-travel-ban-london

I doubt it would happen.  May is so desperate to be seen as the second coming of Margaret Thatcher that she would probably insist that the visit go forward no matter what Donnie Dumbfuck says or does.

The general election is tomorrow, Thursday. Donald John's visit hinges on the outcome. (IMO). Hopefully May won't get the Majority she was expecting. Her pre-election behaviour will hopefully have been an eye opener to many voters sitting on the fence.

[CTRLZero]

18 hours ago, fraurosena said:

"Soor loozer. Covfefeffevce     "

I've read this post a couple times, and just wanted to thank you for the laugh.  When I first read his "covfefe" tweet, I thought maybe someone had implemented an encryption program on his tweets.

[GreyhoundFan]

Well, we do know who he is -- a boorish, whiny, cranky, impulsive toddler: "If Trump stops tweeting, how will we know who he really is?"

Spoiler

“If only he would stop tweeting.”

Those words came from a friend of mine named “Jack,” quite possibly President Trump’s biggest fan. A former Secret Service agent, Jack is your typical die-hard Trump supporter.

That is to say, he’s a white, Christian male, married with two kids. He’s honest, hard-working — a true-blue patriot, brave and loyal to the core. He and I are at political odds these days and argue frequently about Trump.

“Yes, but” is about all I can get out before Jack is off on a rollicking defense of the president, whom he finds utterly unobjectionable — except, that is, for those “dadgum tweets.”

What?! Yes, even Jack was appalled by Trump’s tweets about London Mayor Sadiq Khan following the London terrorist attack. Hearing about them propelled Jack into a 40-minute tirade, he told me.

Maybe there’s hope after all. The only hitch is that Jack thinks Trump would be fine if only he’d stop blurting unfiltered thoughts on social media. (We probably differ on our definition of “fine.”)

The first of the tweets in question came the morning after the London incident. Trump cited the casualty numbers, then added: “Mayor of London says there is ‘no reason to be alarmed!’ ”

Utterly wrong and false. Fake news, if you will.

What Khan had said was that Londoners shouldn’t be alarmed by the increased police presence. Therein lie several magnitudes of difference. Thus, we infer, Trump either opted to be repugnantly antagonistic or was balefully misinformed. The latter might have been forgivable had Trump admitted as much. But no, instead, this childish man (or mannish child?) doubled down.

In a subsequent tweet, he wrote: “Pathetic excuse by London Mayor Sadiq Khan who had to think fast on his ‘no reason to be alarmed’ statement. MSM [mainstream media] is working hard to sell it.”

One doesn’t know whether to scream or scream louder.

Surely, even Trump can’t believe that people are so gullible as to accept that the media, in reporting Khan’s complete quote rather than the abridged “presidential” version, are trying to put something over. But then, Trump doesn’t have to believe it. He knows his fans will consume whatever he serves because they elected him, didn’t they?

The bilious billionaire conned the nation — and people like Jack aren’t bothered.

“The truth is, I don’t care about anybody anymore,” Jack says, referring to umbrage over Trump’s more troubling policies, from the travel ban to the wall. “I only care about our country.”

About this, I have no doubt. An Iraq veteran and a physically imposing man who knows how to handle artillery, Jack’s the guy you want in your bunker. Unlike most denizens of the Washington swamp, he’s refreshingly without guile or artifice. And when he talks about love of country, I know he’s not talking about raising a flag on the Fourth of July. He’s talking about putting his life on the line.

Thus, I take Jack’s comments seriously and respectfully. I try to understand where he’s coming from as I consider the disconnect between my view of this disastrous president and that of a bit more than one-third of the American people. How can we see things so differently?

In a word, he told me, Obama.

Whatever Trump is, former president Barack Obama is viewed by Jack and cohorts as having been far worse, enough so that nothing Trump does stylistically matters as much as what Obama did substantively. The deeds-over-words trope dovetails with Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway’s scolding of NBC’s “Today” show anchors Monday. The media focus too much on what Trump tweets, she said, and not enough on what he does.

But words do matter, as Conway well knows. When you’re the president, they matter profoundly. Trump can’t pretend anymore that he’s just ol’ Donald being himself. That this must be explained to him is concerning enough. More to the urgency of his Twitter obsession: If he’s impulsive enough to toss off a gratuitous insult to a mayor grappling with catastrophe, what else might he be willing to say — and to whom?

So, yes, on one hand, Trump must stop tweeting. On the other, how else would we know how truly demented the man is? Luckily, it’s not too late to save the country, yet. But if Jack is worried about the president’s tweeting, it may be time for congressional Republicans to acknowledge what has long been obvious, declare the man incompetent and deliberate accordingly.

If not, you ain’t (even) got Jack.

 

[AnywhereButHere]

3 hours ago, ALM7 said:

This just in Via-Trump-Tweet Tweet

 https://www.justice.gov/criminal/history/assistant-attorneys-general/christopher-a-wray

Christopher A. Wray (2003-2005)

Early History: Christopher Asher Wray was born in 1967. He graduated from Yale University in 1989 and received his law degree from Yale Law School in 1992. He then clerked for Judge J. Michael Luttig of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. In 1993, Mr. Wray started working in private practice in Atlanta, Georgia. In 1997, he joined the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Georgia. In 2001, he served at Main Justice as an Associate Deputy Attorney General and, later, as Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General.

Tenure: In 2003, Mr. Wray was nominated by President George W. Bush as Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Criminal Division. He served in that position until 2005.

Later Career: After his service at the Department, Mr. Wray returned to private practice, specializing in white collar and internal investigations.

I love how Twitter was the only "official" announcement of Caligula's choice of Wray to head the FBI.

I have to wonder if it's how Wray found out about it as well. I can just see it. He's sitting down to breakfast when the congratulatory (or not...) calls start coming in, and he's all perplexed as to what for. I mean, his predecessor found out about his firing from a news crawl, so hey...

[JMarie]

Such a kind and inclusive First Family!

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2017/06/07/eric-trump-calls-dnc-chairman-tom-perez-a-whack-job-says-democrats-arent-even-people/22130569/

Quote

President Trump's son sounded off on the current state of the Democratic party on Wednesday during a FOX News appearance with Sean Hannity.

In discussing Democratic opposition to President Trump, the 45th president's son told Hannity he has "never seen hatred like this."

"To me, they're not even people," Eric Trump told the conservative host. "It's so, so sad. Morality is just gone. Morals have flown out the window."

"You see the Democratic Party — they're imploding," the Trump son continued. "They're imploding. They're imploding. They have no message!"

The executive vice president of the Trump Organization went on to criticize former Obama labor secretary and current Democratic National Committee chairman Tom Perez, calling him a "whack job."

"You see the head of the DNC who is a total whack job," Trump stated. "There's no leadership there!"

Eric Trump is no stranger to the art of defending his father and going after his opponents in public fashion. Trump recently backed the president's going after London Mayor Sadiq Khan after last weekend's terror attack.

"You should be alarmed," Eric Trump told ABC News. "Because this has become the new norm. And it's not right. And we, as a society, especially as Americans, better do something about it."

Eric Trump's Wednesday appearance also came as reports broke that he funneled cancer charity money to his businesses and associates.

So he's saying that half the country aren't even people?

[fraurosena]

7 minutes ago, JMarie said:

Such a kind and inclusive First Family!

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2017/06/07/eric-trump-calls-dnc-chairman-tom-perez-a-whack-job-says-democrats-arent-even-people/22130569/

So he's saying that half the country aren't even people?

No, more than half...  

 

But, jokes aside. That's a really scary statement. Isn't that what was said of the Jews in Nazi Germany?
 

[Zola]

Obamacare is imploding, the Democratic party is imploding...again and again with that word. 

Repeating it month after month doesn't mean it's actually happening. 

Never seen hatred like what? Like your father practically frothing at the mouth to get his supporters riled up enough to turn on those labeled 'the enemy' in blatantly vicious terms most decent- minded Americans find not only shocking but abhorrent? Like a roomful of Republicans chanting hateful and mean-spirited refrains with total delight on their faces? Like that kind of hatred?

Shut the fuck up, Trumps. 

[JMarie]

15 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

No, more than half...  

 

But, jokes aside. That's a really scary statement. Isn't that what was said of the Jews in Nazi Germany?
 

Also what was said about slaves in antebellum America

[JenniferJuniper]

So here's a guy saying at least half the humans in the US aren't really people.  Who then goes on to bemoan the loss of "morality".

Wait, what, hello?  

This is a coup, make no mistake about it.  And the Trumps and their minions would like nothing more than to lock us all up in camps.  People need to start taking to the streets before it's too late.

[AnywhereButHere]

Spoiler

 

I'm sure someone has posted this already, but I just heard it yesterday on MSNBC (and what the hell, MSNBC? Why are you giving airtime to this crap?).

For a minute I thought it was a trailer for a new movie based on some book my kid would read. I swear, this is how the world in The Hunger Games could've started. Creepy as hell!

[GreyhoundFan]

1 hour ago, JMarie said:

Such a kind and inclusive First Family!

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2017/06/07/eric-trump-calls-dnc-chairman-tom-perez-a-whack-job-says-democrats-arent-even-people/22130569/

So he's saying that half the country aren't even people?

I came by to post this. I have one thing to say to you, Eric, FUCK YOU. So, "there has never been such hatred towards a president"? I guess he forgets all the alt-righters shouting to hang Obama. I don't know about the rest of you, I have no desire to see Agent Orange physically hurt. I just want him out of power. Eric needs to keep his damned mouth shut.

[AnywhereButHere]

My husband was talking to the father of one of our son's teammates a couple of months ago. We've known them for 11 years, great guy, nice, caring, interesting to talk to, also religious and conservative. This great guy who we've known for a decade actually came out and stated to my husband, a very liberal democrat, that all liberals/democrats have a mental disease, and that we were included in that estimation. Yes, folks, to be liberal we must also be crazy. He was perfectly serious. My husband, who is usually pretty combative and outspoken, was in shock and didn't even know how to respond. Still doesn't for that matter.

Eric the Trumphole is a little shit, and I expect nothing good out of his mouth. I doubt he sees many of his fellow humans as people including republicans, just the ones richer than he is or can do something for him (and this last one is suspect).

[onekidanddone]

A while back I'm over visiting my mom and my sister and her husband are there as well. Brother-in-law says. "Oh I wish the media would just leave the Trump children alone. I mean didn't the Democrats complain there should be privacy for Obama's daughters"?

Aaaaad I kind of went all psyco bitch on him. Obama's daughters were children and Trump's spawn are adults and are putting themselves out there by being part of the campaign, working in the White  House and shilling for the Trump brand on nation wide  TV.

I've held back so many times with sister's husband, I just had it. She was glaring more at him than me. I think it pissed her off as well.

[Gobsmacked]

2 hours ago, fraurosena said:

No, more than half...  

 

But, jokes aside. That's a really scary statement. Isn't that what was said of the Jews in Nazi Germany?
 

Also homosexual people, travellers/gypsys. The elderly/infirm  and handicapped people were considered to be none people therefore disposable. This could be the the start of a dangerous downhill slide if Donald John and his evil spawn are left in power unchecked.

[GreyhoundFan]

Okay, not directly about Agent Orange, but since it's about climate change and involves Sarah Palin, who seems desperate to seem relevant: "Palin accidentally bashes Florida Republicans in Paris accord meme"

Spoiler

Sarah Palin took a strong stand in support of Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement, warning her Facebook readers with a meme that intoned “Don’t be Fooled! The Paris Climate Accord is a SCAM.”

However, the picture Palin used — featuring well-dressed people celebrating — was pure fake news. It didn’t really feature the “lobbyists” and others she bashed. Instead, it depicts a group least-likely to support either the idea of man-made climate change or the Paris Accord: the highly conservative Republican members of the Florida House of Representatives on the chamber floor. Palin deleted the post after POLITICO reported her error.

Florida Republicans and insiders couldn’t stop mocking and laughing at Palin’s error.

“I’m appalled …. As the owner of a publishing company, I find it appalling that she would use a low-res picture like this when a high-res picture is readily available,” joked state Rep. Scott Plakon, who’s in the picture standing with his hands together as he clapped with joy.

Plakon said “I was almost in tears with laughter” over how Palin got it so wrong with her now-deleted 9:37 am Tuesday Facebook post — which has been shared nearly 8,000 times and generated hundreds of comments. “I’m not sure what she’s saying. Are we cheering for Paris or against it? I think she’s saying we’re celebrating Paris.”

To be clear, Plakon believes the idea of man-made climate change is a “false religion” and that the Paris accord is a “bad deal” for the United States. He supported President Trump’s withdrawal from the voluntary agreement last week.

Plakon tracked down the photo to a Florida House web page from former Republican Rep. Chris Dorworth that shows it was taken May, 7, 2011 when the Florida House celebrated out-maneuvering the more-moderate Senate.

“Paris climate accord? I thought you said ‘Honda Accord.' Well, this is embarrassing,” joked Dorworth, who’s standing with both fists raised in celebration in the photo. “The science of Honda Accords is undisputed. Global warming … not so much,” he said via text message.

Asked if he believed in man-made climate change or the Paris Accords, Dorworth replied bluntly: “no and no.”

When former Republican Rep. J.C. Planas saw the post, he had to comment on Palin’s web page: “That is a picture of REPUBLICAN Florida Legislators. Hahahahahahaha!!!! You are such an idiot!!!”

Planas was not in the picture but promptly razzed some of the former members who were. Unlike many of the former members in the photograph, Planas told POLITICO Florida that he does believe in man-made climate change but says he understands the United States should not strike deals that “completely sabotage our economy while Asian countries continue polluting.”

The meme Palin shared, Planas said, “goes to show the stupidity of some people who will sacrifice facts in order to promote an idea of a fake global conspiracy. My party needs to wise up and get rid of these idiots.”

Palin’s meme features the warning at the top “Don’t be Fooled! The Paris Climate Accord is a SCAM,” followed by the House Republican photograph. It then closes with the line: “They pretend it's about fixing our environment... But it's REALLY about stealing Billions from the American people and giving it to foreign companies, countries and lobbyists!”
Former House Speaker Will Weatherford, who led his chamber’s redistricting committee in 2011 and is depicted in the photo, initially thought the picture commemorates the announcement that the state House maps passed constitutional muster.

Asked if he believed in man-made climate change and the Paris Accords, Weatherford demurred: “I am a private citizen now. I don’t have to answer those binary questions anymore … when I run again, you can ask me then.”

Another Republican in the photograph, former Rep. Seth McKeel, said via text Wednesday morning that he “assumed it was some idiot who found a random pic. Are they really suggesting Will and I took some vote on the Paris Climate Accord?”

McKeel said he was notified of Palin’s post when someone sent him a picture of it with the comment that sums up the reaction of insiders: “‘High quality’ work by Palin’s comms team. It’s like they decided to grab a random picture of politicians off Google with no context to make their point. All of which are Republicans and all of which are members (or former members) of the Florida House and didn’t vote on the issue. But hey, it fits the narrative.”

McKeel declined to say whether he believes in climate change and the Paris accord.

"I'm not jumping into that. My take is it sounds like Sarah Palin needs some more help using Google images."

She is such an idiot.

[ShepherdontheRock]

I mean I don't recognize any of the Trump family as "real people" either so there you go Eric. 

Okay, Barron and maybe Tiffany might be alright. 

[JMarie]

2 hours ago, AnywhereButHere said:

  Hide contents

 

I'm sure someone has posted this already, but I just heard it yesterday on MSNBC (and what the hell, MSNBC? Why are you giving airtime to this crap?).

For a minute I thought it was a trailer for a new movie based on some book my kid would read. I swear, this is how the world in The Hunger Games could've started. Creepy as hell!

If he makes it to another election (and that's a huuuuuge if), that means he'd already be in office for four years.  Wouldn't America already be great by that point?  I mean "great" as defined by him, not rational human beings.