Trump 20: Sauron Doesn't Seem So Bad After All

[apple1]

6 hours ago, Curious said:

I don't usually snark on people's looks/things they can't do anything about, but can someone explain to me what is going on with Diane Feinstein's eyebrows.   I can't look away from them.  They look like 2 sperm above her eyes.  It is distracting.

She has her eyebrows plucked (or shaved) much too far apart (much too big a space across her nose). She also has both her hair and eyebrows very dark for her skin color and her age.

It COULD be helped. She needs some professional makeover advice to look her best (not that we would hold a male politician to that standard IYKWIM).

[Gobsmacked]

7 hours ago, laPapessaGiovanna said:

Good news for the Brits!

 

  Hide contents

Donald Trump has told Theresa May in a phone call he does not want to go ahead with a state visit to Britain until the British public supports him coming.

The US president said he did not want to come if there were large-scale protests and his remarks in effect put the visit on hold for some time.

The call was made in recent weeks, according to a Downing Street adviser who was in the room. The statement surprised May, according to those present.

 

 

I was just coming to post this. !!!!! Yeah!!! 

There will be street protests the length of our Island if that man sets foot for an official visit. 

Its bad enough that he visits to his golf courses. Although hopefully he won't have time to visit in the near ( or longer) future.

[AuntK]

Best that the Orange Menace stay home for the next few months. He should be very busy with his lawyers and I doubt he will be welcomed in any European country. Maybe Russia, China and Saudi Arabia would be happy to see him, but he just got back from SA, China is way too far from the WH, and Russia. . .??? Well, that wouldn't be prudent now, would it?

I doubt that his trip is "postponed," I expect it is cancelled; when would he EVER get a warm welcome in London after his insults and his deplorable actions?

I long for the days when we had a gum-chewing, Dijon-mustard-eating, khaki-suit-wearing POTUS that sometimes put his feet on HIS desk who could get all the pinheads at Faux News and talk radio so worked up!  Something to just laugh about, rather than having to go to bed each night, wondering if the current WH occupant had blown up a country while you were sleeping!

 

[onekidanddone]

7 hours ago, laPapessaGiovanna said:

Good news for the Brits!

Aww was TT's itty bitty little orange snowflake feelings hurt by the protesters? If he doesn't want to see protesters he should have stayed in Saudi Arabia where it is illegal to protest.  

Way to go Brits. You rock! 

[AuntK]

9 hours ago, formergothardite said:

It is probably in little Baron's best interest that his father ignore him. The three children Trump spent the most time with seemed to come out as pretty terrible adults. 

 

Yeah, hopefully, Baron can avoid the Trump curse, it will be difficult, but maybe if his father and 3 oldest siblings are incarcerated. . . And Tiffany, geez, she must have issues, a "trap" baby, whose father discussed abortion with her mother upon learning of the pregnancy, and being named after a jewelry store. . . at least it appears she has had very little contact with her biological father over the years.

[GreyhoundFan]

Nobody ever accused junior of being overly intelligent: "Trump’s son seems to confirm Comey’s account of the president’s comments on the Flynn investigation"

Spoiler

Soon after former FBI director James B. Comey testified that President Trump told him that he “hoped” the FBI would drop its investigation of former national security adviser Michael Flynn, the president's personal lawyer flatly denied that accusation and said Trump “never, in form or substance, directed or suggested that Mr. Comey stop investigating anyone.”

But Donald Trump Jr. — the president's eldest son — seemed to confirm Comey's version of events in a Saturday interview on Fox News as he tried to emphasize the fact that his father did not directly order Comey to stop investigating Flynn.

“When he tells you to do something, guess what? There's no ambiguity in it, there's no, 'Hey, I'm hoping,'" Trump Jr. said. “You and I are friends: 'Hey, I hope this happens, but you've got to do your job.' That's what he told Comey. And for this guy, as a politician, to then go back and write a memo: 'Oh, I felt threatened.' He felt so threatened — but he didn't do anything.”

Trump Jr. also said that Comey's testimony “vindicated” the president and that everything in it was “basically ridiculous.”

“I think he's proven himself to be a liar in all of this. I think he's proven himself to be a dishonest man of bad character,” Trump Jr. said.

His comment came during an interview with Jeanine Pirro, a former New York district attorney and judge who is a longtime friend of the Trump family. Pirro has long been a go-to interviewer for the president and his allies when they need a sympathetic cable news host who will enthusiastically agree with them and not ask any difficult questions. (That same day, Pirro attended a baby shower in New York for Lara Trump, who is married to Eric Trump.) After the interview aired late Saturday night, Pirro tweeted: “Such a great interview!” Trump Jr. agreed and tweeted: “Good times. Thanks Judge.”

...

I wish someone would take away junior's phone and not let him appear in public.

[JMarie]

10 hours ago, laPapessaGiovanna said:

Good news for the Brits!

 

  Hide contents

Donald Trump has told Theresa May in a phone call he does not want to go ahead with a state visit to Britain until the British public supports him coming.

The US president said he did not want to come if there were large-scale protests and his remarks in effect put the visit on hold for some time.

The call was made in recent weeks, according to a Downing Street adviser who was in the room. The statement surprised May, according to those present.

 

 

If we could get the residents of all the foreign countries to boycott, maybe we could force Trump to stay in the U.S. and actually do his job.  You know, between Mondays and Friday mornings (assuming he'll continue to take a vacation every weekend).  He could probably get a lot done in those four and a half days per week, if he applied himself.

[Gobsmacked]

The only three british residents who might welcome trump are Katie Hopkins, Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson. 

Most sensible Brits can't stand any of the afore mentioned. trump (no capital letter) could do us ALL a favour by taking them on a long trek somewhere dangerous and not returning any time soon. 

[GreyhoundFan]

Since the Orange Menace can't have adoring crowds in the UK, he has to keep going where he'll be fawned over: "President Trump can’t stop crashing parties at his golf clubs". The first picture made me think of David Waller conducting during his wedding.

Spoiler

The first dance. The toasts. The cake-cutting. The … surprise appearance by the president of the United States?

President Trump apparently can’t resist crashing a party, showing up to at least two private events this weekend at the Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, N.J.

On Saturday night, Trump dropped in on a wedding reception taking place at his golf club, according to pictures of the celebration that emerged on social media.

“When POTUS shows up to your wedding …” one Instagram user wrote, under a series of photos of Trump posing with the bride and groom. The photos were later made private.

Another photo from the event showed Trump with his arms outstretched, surrounded by wedding guests.

“He stopped by to say hello to the wedding party,” that Instagram user wrote, followed by emoji of champagne flutes and an American flag.

Sean Burke, a guest at that wedding, told The Washington Post that he spotted Trump coming down the staircase of the club from where he had been eating dinner.

Motioning toward a closed door, Burke said the president asked, “Where are they?” Then he walked into the ongoing wedding reception.

“It was very brief. He waved to everyone. Everyone obviously got very excited, got out of their chairs and came to take pictures,” Burke said. “The bride came running out, and he gave her a big hug and a kiss, so she was just ecstatic. And then the groom found out, too. … No one knew it was going to happen.”

Burke said the president’s appearance was brief and that he told the groom: “What a beautiful bride you have!” Some wedding guests had been supporters of Trump and brought along red “Make America Great Again” hats, which Trump autographed.

Contrary to other media reports, Burke said Trump did not dance with the bride or bring along his own red hats.

“He walked in and he walked out,” Burke said. “It was three to four minutes, max. … It was very impromptu. It wasn’t theatrical.”

After the president left, Burke said, people at the reception began chanting “USA! USA!”

Kat Kellerman, another guest at the wedding, told The Post through Facebook messages that Trump’s appearance “was exciting for all the guests.”

“It was a nice surprise to have the president pop down after dinner & personally congratulate Kristen & Tucker,” Kellerman wrote. “He was very gracious and personable.”

On Friday night, a group of students celebrating their eighth-grade graduation at the same golf club received a surprise visit from Trump as well.

In an Instagram photo, which later was made private, a Far Hills Country Day School student wrote: “The president showed up to our grad party. Just another run of the mill day.” He followed the post with a crying laughing emoji.

A person who attended the party confirmed that Trump reappeared several times and spoke to the students. The party attendee asked not to be named. Reached by phone, the student said he had no comment.

Far Hills Country Day School is a private school that enrolls students in prekindergarten through eighth grade, located only about five miles away from the Bedminster golf club.

Neither the general manager at the club nor the White House responded to requests for comment Saturday afternoon and Sunday morning.

It’s not the first time Trump has taken clubgoers by surprise. In February, the president hosted Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Fla., having dinner with him among club guests. He also popped in at the wedding reception of Nashville socialite Vanessa Falk and Carl Lindner IV, which was also taking place at the property, according to USA Today.

A handful of guests posted photos from Trump’s apparent surprise appearance at that wedding on social media.

“Making weddings great again!!” one guest wrote on Instagram.

...

The president has been under scrutiny for the frequency with which he has traveled to Trump-branded properties since taking office. The Washington Post’s Philip Bump reported that, on average, Trump has visited one of his private properties, including his golf club in Virginia, every 3½ days, and golfed about once every 6.2 days.

...

In May, The Post’s Drew Harwell and David A. Fahrenthold reported there had been more than 45 events held at Mar-a-Lago since Election Day. Though at least one group said it lost ticket sales to their event because of the property’s connection to Trump, others told Harwell and Fahrenthold that the potential of a presidential appearance was a selling point:

In at least 10 of those cases, the events turned out to be a little bigger, and to raise a little more money, than in past years, according to interviews with event organizers. That often meant that they paid Trump’s club a little more money.

The reason, some organizers said, was that Trump’s event customers could offer the grandeur of the presidency as an added attraction for potential attendees. The trend is likely to continue next year, as some charities planning Mar-a-Lago events for the 2018 season are hoping the dates they book coincide with times that Trump is staying at the club.

. . . The prominent role Trump has taken at the center of his private club’s events business illustrates the extent to which he stands to make money from the presidency, a key concern that has been raised by ethics experts and Democratic lawmakers. Although the president says he has given up day-to-day management of the company, his decision to retain ownership means he remains its beneficiary as Mar-a-Lago members, event hosts and attendees pay for the opportunity to attend events where they might well encounter the president.

A New York Times reporter who toured Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster recently noted that a marketing brochure mentioned the prospect of an appearance by Trump:

“If he is on-site for your big day, he will likely stop in & congratulate the happy couple,” the brochure read, according to the Times. “He may take some photos with you but we ask you and your guests to be respectful of his time & privacy.”

A club spokeswoman told the Times that the brochure was discontinued.

His desperate need for adulation made me think of the famous quote by Alice Roosevelt Longworth about her father, Teddy: "He wants to be the bride at every wedding, the corpse at every funeral, and the baby at every christening." Difference being, Teddy Roosevelt was a good president.

[candygirl200413]

One of my favorite resistance followers works with children (not 100% on what his job title is) but a few days ago he was working with Barron and his class and he said how wonderful but quiet that Barron was. I'm really hoping that keeps going and his dad doesn't pay any mind.

 

[GreyhoundFan]

"Federal attorney says Trump’s contacts made him uncomfortable before he was fired"

Spoiler

Preet Bharara, the former U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York ousted by President Trump, said Sunday that he had become increasingly uncomfortable with Trump’s efforts to “cultivate some kind of relationship” with him and that his March firing came 22 hours after finally refusing to take a call from the president.

In an interview with George Stephanopoulos on ABC’s “This Week,” Bharara said Trump called him twice as president-elect, “ostensibly just to shoot the breeze.” The calls took place after a meeting at Trump Tower in November at which Bharara, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, said Trump asked him to stay on in the new administration.

...

The third call came in March, he said. After consulting with staff members, he said he decided not to return the call because he felt it was inappropriate.

“It’s a very weird and peculiar thing for a one-on-one conversation, without the attorney general, without warning, between the president and me or any United States attorney who has been asked to investigate various things,” he said.

Mark Corallo, a spokesman for one of Trump's attorneys, said on Twitter on Sunday that it would not be unusual for Trump to contact Bharara and that if he refused to take Trump's call, “he deserved to be fired.” He accused Bharara of being a “resistance Democrat” with a political “axe to grind.”

...

The Southern District post is a plum one for federal prosecutors. With oversight of investigations and prosecutions of cases in about New York City, including Wall Street, the office is staffed with 220 assistant U.S. attorneys, making it one of the largest in the country. During his tenure, Bharara was known as a tough prosecutors, going after politicians from both parties and attacking insider trading cases. But he was also criticized for getting no major convictions from the 2007 financial crisis.

In March, Bharara was one of 46 U.S. attorneys who were asked to resign, a customary act during a transition of White House administrations. However, Bharara refused to submit his resignation, so he was fired on March 11, a Saturday.

Previous holders of that U.S. attorney's position have gone on to even more prominent posts. One was James B. Comey, who later became FBI director.  Bharara said the story told by Comey about his own contacts with the president “felt a little bit like deja vu.” Based on Comey’s testimony last week before the Senate Intelligence Committee, “I think there’s absolutely evidence to begin a case” for beginning an investigation into whether Trump obstructed justice. “No one knows right now whether there’s a provable case of obstruction … there’s no basis to say there’s no obstruction.”

I didn't watch the program, but there is a clip in the article.

[AmazonGrace]

17 hours ago, sawasdee said:

^^^Isn't this how he  treated Tiffany too - virtually ignoring her?

Literally;

 

[fraurosena]

Gee, I'm in awe of how hard working this presidunce is! 

Tracking President Trump’s Visits to Trump Properties

Quote

 

[laPapessaGiovanna]

12 hours ago, JMarie said:

 He could probably get a lot done in those four and a half days per week, if he applied himself.

If I were you I'd hope that he will spend 4 days long weekends golfing and the remaining days contradicting his aides, undermining his appointed officials, losing bigly in court, making his own party look like fools trying to excuse the inexcusable, making the EU and progressive parties popular badmouthing them, prompting more efforts than ever against against global warming thanks to his absurd negationism, twiting idiocies without filters and getting next to nothing done. At the end of his term his most enviable accomplishment will be the destruction of the Repugliklan Party and the zeroing of the alt right for the foreseeable future. This is my wish for the US and the world.

[fraurosena]

11 minutes ago, laPapessaGiovanna said:

the Repugliklan Party

@laPapessaGiovanna, I love this so much! What an apt description.  

[GreyhoundFan]

Let's see how long this lasts: "So long, Trump Tower. First lady Melania Trump and son Barron move into White House."

Spoiler

The president and first lady’s commuter marriage appears to be over, as the family has united under one roof again.

First lady Melania Trump and son Barron, 11, moved into the White House on Sunday after spending the first several months of President Trump’s presidency residing in their Trump Tower penthouse in New York.

“Looking forward to the memories we’ll make in our new home!” Melania Trump tweeted Sunday from her official @FLOTUS account. An accompanying photograph featured a view of the Washington Monument from a window in the White House.

...

Her communications director, Stephanie Grisham, confirmed the move, tweeting, “It’s official! @FLOTUS & Barron have made the move to DC! #WelcomeHome.”

The first lady and the president held hands as they walked from Marine One to the White House on Sunday. Barron strolled alongside them, dressed in a T-shirt emblazoned with the words, “The Expert.”

It is unusual for the first lady and the president to live apart during any stretch of the presidency, much less in its infancy. The Washington Post reported it appeared “unprecedented” and described the decision as flouting “the most basic of all first lady traditions.”

After Trump’s inauguration in January, Melania Trump and Barron remained in New York so the 11-year-old could finish out the school year at Columbia Grammar and Preparatory School on the Upper West Side of Manhattan. He will transfer to the private St. Andrew’s Episcopal School in Maryland for the coming year.

“My husband is traveling all the time,” Melania said after the election in November, when she first announced she would remain in New York. “Barron needs somebody as a parent, so I am with him all the time.”

Indeed, Melania has scarcely been seen at the White House since Trump’s presidency began. April’s Easter Egg Roll, which she co-hosted, arguably marked her most high-profile appearance in Washington since the inauguration.

Many think that will likely change, particularly because it will be more difficult for her to remain unseen while living in Washington, D.C.

“In New York City, both of them basically hide in plain sight, blending into the fabric of the city is an easier task,” former Secret Service agent Jonathan Wackrow said on CNN.

She also may become more involved in her role as first lady — something she’s been slow to do.

“She is embracing the ceremonial aspects of the role, but we have not seen any advocacy,” Myra Gutin, a professor of communication at Rider University and author who has studied first ladies, told The Washington Post in April.

Being at the White House may change that.

“I do think once she’s in D.C. there’ll be more pressure for her to be working on something that’s her own, that’s helping some segment of the population because that’s what first ladies are supposed to do,” Jean Harris, professor of political science and women’s studies at the University of Scranton in Pennsylvania, told the Associated Press.

 

[fraurosena]

1 minute ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Let's see how long this lasts: "So long, Trump Tower. First lady Melania Trump and son Barron move into White House."

  Hide contents

The president and first lady’s commuter marriage appears to be over, as the family has united under one roof again.

First lady Melania Trump and son Barron, 11, moved into the White House on Sunday after spending the first several months of President Trump’s presidency residing in their Trump Tower penthouse in New York.

“Looking forward to the memories we’ll make in our new home!” Melania Trump tweeted Sunday from her official @FLOTUS account. An accompanying photograph featured a view of the Washington Monument from a window in the White House.

...

Her communications director, Stephanie Grisham, confirmed the move, tweeting, “It’s official! @FLOTUS & Barron have made the move to DC! #WelcomeHome.”

The first lady and the president held hands as they walked from Marine One to the White House on Sunday. Barron strolled alongside them, dressed in a T-shirt emblazoned with the words, “The Expert.”

It is unusual for the first lady and the president to live apart during any stretch of the presidency, much less in its infancy. The Washington Post reported it appeared “unprecedented” and described the decision as flouting “the most basic of all first lady traditions.”

After Trump’s inauguration in January, Melania Trump and Barron remained in New York so the 11-year-old could finish out the school year at Columbia Grammar and Preparatory School on the Upper West Side of Manhattan. He will transfer to the private St. Andrew’s Episcopal School in Maryland for the coming year.

“My husband is traveling all the time,” Melania said after the election in November, when she first announced she would remain in New York. “Barron needs somebody as a parent, so I am with him all the time.”

Indeed, Melania has scarcely been seen at the White House since Trump’s presidency began. April’s Easter Egg Roll, which she co-hosted, arguably marked her most high-profile appearance in Washington since the inauguration.

Many think that will likely change, particularly because it will be more difficult for her to remain unseen while living in Washington, D.C.

“In New York City, both of them basically hide in plain sight, blending into the fabric of the city is an easier task,” former Secret Service agent Jonathan Wackrow said on CNN.

She also may become more involved in her role as first lady — something she’s been slow to do.

“She is embracing the ceremonial aspects of the role, but we have not seen any advocacy,” Myra Gutin, a professor of communication at Rider University and author who has studied first ladies, told The Washington Post in April.

Being at the White House may change that.

“I do think once she’s in D.C. there’ll be more pressure for her to be working on something that’s her own, that’s helping some segment of the population because that’s what first ladies are supposed to do,” Jean Harris, professor of political science and women’s studies at the University of Scranton in Pennsylvania, told the Associated Press.

 

Lol, did you happen to see the video in this article about the move? 

First Lady Melania Trump, Son Barron, 11, Move Into the White House

In it, you can see the toddler getting of Marine One, followed by Barron, who ignores him completely during the whole video. Then Melania comes out of the helicopter, and for a very, very short while, she holds hands with her husband. But very soon after that, they've let go of their hands and you see her quickly move her bag between them. 

Such a loving family... 

[Zola]

12 hours ago, candygirl200413 said:

One of my favorite resistance followers works with children (not 100% on what his job title is) but a few days ago he was working with Barron and his class and he said how wonderful but quiet that Barron was. I'm really hoping that keeps going and his dad doesn't pay any mind.

 

I don't know where he got the info, but my son (huge anime fan with whom I have watched many) said someone asked Barron if he likes anime and which ones, and Barron replied yes and named several favorites (example my son gave was Cowboy Bebop - which is totally kickass.)

I think I really like Barron.

[GreyhoundFan]

"D.C. and Maryland to sue President Trump, alleging breach of constitutional oath"

Spoiler

Attorneys general for the District of Columbia and the state of Maryland say they will sue President Trump on Monday, alleging that he has violated anti-corruption clauses in the Constitution by accepting millions in payments and benefits from foreign governments since moving into the White House.

The lawsuit, the first of its kind brought by government entities, centers on the fact that Trump chose to retain ownership of his company when he became president. Trump said in January that he was shifting his business assets into a trust managed by his sons to eliminate potential conflicts of interests.

But D.C. Attorney General Karl A. Racine (D) and Maryland Attorney General Brian E. Frosh (D) say Trump has broken many promises to keep separate his public duties and private business interests. For one, his son Eric Trump has said the president would continue to receive regular updates about his company’s financial health.

The lawsuit, a signed copy of which Racine and Frosh provided to The Washington Post on Sunday night, alleges “unprecedented constitutional violations” by Trump. The suit says Trump’s continued ownership of a global business empire has rendered the president “deeply enmeshed with a legion of foreign and domestic government actors” and has undermined the integrity of the U.S. political system.

“Fundamental to a President’s fidelity to [faithfully execute his oath of office] is the Constitution’s demand that the President ... disentangle his private finances from those of domestic and foreign powers. Never before has a President acted with such disregard for this constitutional prescription.”

The suit could open a new front for Trump as he navigates investigations by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III and congressional committees of possible collusion between his associates and the Russian government during the 2016 presidential campaign.

If a federal judge allows the case to proceed, Racine and Frosh say, one of the first steps will be to demand through the discovery process copies of Trump’s personal tax returns to gauge the extent of his foreign business dealings. That fight would most likely end up before the Supreme Court, the two said, with Trump’s attorneys having to defend why the returns should remain private.

“This case is, at its core, about the right of Marylanders, residents of the District of Columbia and all Americans to have honest government,” Frosh said. To fully know the extent of Trump’s constitutional violations “we’ll need to see his financial records, his taxes that he has refused to release.”

Racine said he felt obligated to sue Trump in part because the Republican-controlled Congress has not taken the president’s apparent conflicts seriously.

“We’re getting in here to be the check and balance that it appears Congress is unwilling to be,” he said.

The constitutional question D.C. and Maryland will put before a federal judge is whether Trump’s business ownership amount to violations of parts of the Constitution known as the foreign and domestic emoluments clauses.

To guard against foreign countries gaining sway over the new republic’s ambassadors in the late 1700s, drafters of the Constitution prohibited any “Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust” from accepting “any present, Emolument, Office or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.”

In another part of the Constitution, framers sought to prevent a president from favoring one state over another, forbidding him from receiving any gift or emolument from a state and instead, only the compensation approved by Congress.

The lawsuit, to be filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, will be the latest and most significant legal challenge to Trump over the issue of emoluments. The first was filed in January by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a D.C.-based watchdog group. In March, a D.C. restaurant sued Trump, alleging the new Trump International Hotel in D.C. benefits from unfair advantages because of its close association with the president. And last week, a group of Democratic members of Congress said they plan to file suit soon. Each, however, has faced legal hurdles over standing to sue the president.

In the Trump administration’s most detailed response yet, the Department of Justice filed a 70-page legal brief on Friday arguing the CREW lawsuit should be dismissed. The administration said Trump’s businesses are legally permitted to accept payments from foreign governments while he is in office. The filing held up the lack of past complaints — going all the way back to farm produce sold abroad by George Washington — to assert that market-rate payments for Trump’s real estate, hotel and golf companies do not constitute emoluments as defined by the Constitution.

Racine and Frosh, however, argue Trump’s violations are on scale never seen before and that both D.C. and Maryland are being adversely affected by the Trump hotel near the White House.

After hiring staff and holding events to cater to foreign diplomats, the Embassy of Kuwait held an event at the hotel, switching its initial booking from the Four Seasons. Saudi Arabia, the destination of Trump’s first trip abroad, also booked rooms at the hotel through an intermediary on more than one occasion since Trump’s inauguration. Turkey held a state-sponsored event there last month. And in April, the ambassador of Georgia stayed at the hotel and tweeted his compliments. Trump himself has appeared at the hotel and greeted guests repeatedly since becoming president.

As a result, the hotel may be drawing business away from the taxpayer-owned D.C. convention center and one in nearby Maryland subsidized by taxpayers, Frosh and Racine argue.

Norman Eisen, who served as the chief White House ethics lawyer for President Barack Obama and is CREW’s board chairman, said jurisdictions such as the District and Maryland are among the “most perfect plaintiffs” to sue over emoluments because they have a coequal say in making sure the Constitution is being enforced.

“In the emoluments clauses, we have these ancient air bags that were placed in the Constitution by the framers that are now being deployed,” said Eisen, who has been advising the District and Maryland on their suit. “Trump is the framers’ worst-case scenario; a president who would seize office and attempt to exploit his position for personal financial gain with every governmental entity imaginable, across the United States or around the world.”

On the domestic side, the suit alleges Trump has received unconstitutional financial favors from the U.S. government. It says the U.S. General Services Administration, which handles federal real-estate, wrongly allowed Trump’s company to continue to lease the Old Post Office building, where Trump built his D.C. hotel, even though a clause in the contract said no elected official could remain on the lease.

The GSA initially said Trump would have to fully divest from the hotel after the election. But after Trump proposed increasing GSA’s budget, the suit says the agency issued a letter saying Trump was in full compliance.

The suit also alleges that Trump is violating domestic emoluments by creating a situation in which states feel compelled to compete for Trump’s favor, perhaps by offering zoning exemptions, waivers or other benefits to help his businesses.

After initially saying the Trump organization would not pursue new deals while he was in office, Trump’s sons announced last week that the company would begin building a network of new hotels in mostly red states that he won in last year’s election.

The suit by D.C. and Maryland says the two jurisdictions are faced with an “intolerable dilemma” to either go along with the Trump Organization getting special treatment, including possible lost local revenue or “deny such requests and be placed at a disadvantage vis-à-vis states and other government entities that have granted or will agree to such concessions.”

The District and Maryland file the suit at great peril, Racine and Frosh allege, because the two have a disproportionately large percentage of federal workers and could be acutely affected by federal budget cuts that Trump could seek as retribution.

But Maryland argues that it has special standing to sue. As one of the original states that approved the Constitution, Maryland gave up a clause in its own state declaration that had required its governors not to take any gifts from foreign governments or other states.

“This case represents another storm, not just a dusting of snow, but a blizzard of trouble for Trump,” Eisen said. “Who better than governmental actors to say our deal was, our fundamental democratic bargain was, we would get a president who would follow the Constitution.”

Racine and Frosh say that unless Trump is reined in under the emoluments clause, Americans can never be certain that “underlying his travel ban, withdrawal from the Paris Accord climate deal or proposed tax cuts” that he is acting in the country’s best interest and not his own.

Strict adherence to the emoluments clauses, D.C. and Maryland argue, “ensure that Americans do not have to guess whether a President who orders their sons and daughters to die in foreign lands acts out of concern for his private business interests; they do not have to wonder if they lost their job due to trade negotiations in which the President has a personal stake; and they never have to question whether the President can sit across the bargaining table from foreign leaders and faithfully represent the world’s most powerful democracy, unencumbered by fear of harming his own companies.”

The suit seeks an injunction to force Trump to stop violating the Constitution, but leaves it up to the court to decide how that should be accomplished.

Countdown to tweet storm.

 

@fraurosena -- yes, that video is quite telling. They're not exactly the most loving family out there.

[fraurosena]

2 minutes ago, GreyhoundFan said:

"D.C. and Maryland to sue President Trump, alleging breach of constitutional oath"

  Reveal hidden contents

Attorneys general for the District of Columbia and the state of Maryland say they will sue President Trump on Monday, alleging that he has violated anti-corruption clauses in the Constitution by accepting millions in payments and benefits from foreign governments since moving into the White House.

The lawsuit, the first of its kind brought by government entities, centers on the fact that Trump chose to retain ownership of his company when he became president. Trump said in January that he was shifting his business assets into a trust managed by his sons to eliminate potential conflicts of interests.

But D.C. Attorney General Karl A. Racine (D) and Maryland Attorney General Brian E. Frosh (D) say Trump has broken many promises to keep separate his public duties and private business interests. For one, his son Eric Trump has said the president would continue to receive regular updates about his company’s financial health.

The lawsuit, a signed copy of which Racine and Frosh provided to The Washington Post on Sunday night, alleges “unprecedented constitutional violations” by Trump. The suit says Trump’s continued ownership of a global business empire has rendered the president “deeply enmeshed with a legion of foreign and domestic government actors” and has undermined the integrity of the U.S. political system.

“Fundamental to a President’s fidelity to [faithfully execute his oath of office] is the Constitution’s demand that the President ... disentangle his private finances from those of domestic and foreign powers. Never before has a President acted with such disregard for this constitutional prescription.”

The suit could open a new front for Trump as he navigates investigations by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III and congressional committees of possible collusion between his associates and the Russian government during the 2016 presidential campaign.

If a federal judge allows the case to proceed, Racine and Frosh say, one of the first steps will be to demand through the discovery process copies of Trump’s personal tax returns to gauge the extent of his foreign business dealings. That fight would most likely end up before the Supreme Court, the two said, with Trump’s attorneys having to defend why the returns should remain private.

“This case is, at its core, about the right of Marylanders, residents of the District of Columbia and all Americans to have honest government,” Frosh said. To fully know the extent of Trump’s constitutional violations “we’ll need to see his financial records, his taxes that he has refused to release.”

Racine said he felt obligated to sue Trump in part because the Republican-controlled Congress has not taken the president’s apparent conflicts seriously.

“We’re getting in here to be the check and balance that it appears Congress is unwilling to be,” he said.

The constitutional question D.C. and Maryland will put before a federal judge is whether Trump’s business ownership amount to violations of parts of the Constitution known as the foreign and domestic emoluments clauses.

To guard against foreign countries gaining sway over the new republic’s ambassadors in the late 1700s, drafters of the Constitution prohibited any “Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust” from accepting “any present, Emolument, Office or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.”

In another part of the Constitution, framers sought to prevent a president from favoring one state over another, forbidding him from receiving any gift or emolument from a state and instead, only the compensation approved by Congress.

The lawsuit, to be filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, will be the latest and most significant legal challenge to Trump over the issue of emoluments. The first was filed in January by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a D.C.-based watchdog group. In March, a D.C. restaurant sued Trump, alleging the new Trump International Hotel in D.C. benefits from unfair advantages because of its close association with the president. And last week, a group of Democratic members of Congress said they plan to file suit soon. Each, however, has faced legal hurdles over standing to sue the president.

In the Trump administration’s most detailed response yet, the Department of Justice filed a 70-page legal brief on Friday arguing the CREW lawsuit should be dismissed. The administration said Trump’s businesses are legally permitted to accept payments from foreign governments while he is in office. The filing held up the lack of past complaints — going all the way back to farm produce sold abroad by George Washington — to assert that market-rate payments for Trump’s real estate, hotel and golf companies do not constitute emoluments as defined by the Constitution.

Racine and Frosh, however, argue Trump’s violations are on scale never seen before and that both D.C. and Maryland are being adversely affected by the Trump hotel near the White House.

After hiring staff and holding events to cater to foreign diplomats, the Embassy of Kuwait held an event at the hotel, switching its initial booking from the Four Seasons. Saudi Arabia, the destination of Trump’s first trip abroad, also booked rooms at the hotel through an intermediary on more than one occasion since Trump’s inauguration. Turkey held a state-sponsored event there last month. And in April, the ambassador of Georgia stayed at the hotel and tweeted his compliments. Trump himself has appeared at the hotel and greeted guests repeatedly since becoming president.

As a result, the hotel may be drawing business away from the taxpayer-owned D.C. convention center and one in nearby Maryland subsidized by taxpayers, Frosh and Racine argue.

Norman Eisen, who served as the chief White House ethics lawyer for President Barack Obama and is CREW’s board chairman, said jurisdictions such as the District and Maryland are among the “most perfect plaintiffs” to sue over emoluments because they have a coequal say in making sure the Constitution is being enforced.

“In the emoluments clauses, we have these ancient air bags that were placed in the Constitution by the framers that are now being deployed,” said Eisen, who has been advising the District and Maryland on their suit. “Trump is the framers’ worst-case scenario; a president who would seize office and attempt to exploit his position for personal financial gain with every governmental entity imaginable, across the United States or around the world.”

On the domestic side, the suit alleges Trump has received unconstitutional financial favors from the U.S. government. It says the U.S. General Services Administration, which handles federal real-estate, wrongly allowed Trump’s company to continue to lease the Old Post Office building, where Trump built his D.C. hotel, even though a clause in the contract said no elected official could remain on the lease.

The GSA initially said Trump would have to fully divest from the hotel after the election. But after Trump proposed increasing GSA’s budget, the suit says the agency issued a letter saying Trump was in full compliance.

The suit also alleges that Trump is violating domestic emoluments by creating a situation in which states feel compelled to compete for Trump’s favor, perhaps by offering zoning exemptions, waivers or other benefits to help his businesses.

After initially saying the Trump organization would not pursue new deals while he was in office, Trump’s sons announced last week that the company would begin building a network of new hotels in mostly red states that he won in last year’s election.

The suit by D.C. and Maryland says the two jurisdictions are faced with an “intolerable dilemma” to either go along with the Trump Organization getting special treatment, including possible lost local revenue or “deny such requests and be placed at a disadvantage vis-à-vis states and other government entities that have granted or will agree to such concessions.”

The District and Maryland file the suit at great peril, Racine and Frosh allege, because the two have a disproportionately large percentage of federal workers and could be acutely affected by federal budget cuts that Trump could seek as retribution.

But Maryland argues that it has special standing to sue. As one of the original states that approved the Constitution, Maryland gave up a clause in its own state declaration that had required its governors not to take any gifts from foreign governments or other states.

“This case represents another storm, not just a dusting of snow, but a blizzard of trouble for Trump,” Eisen said. “Who better than governmental actors to say our deal was, our fundamental democratic bargain was, we would get a president who would follow the Constitution.”

Racine and Frosh say that unless Trump is reined in under the emoluments clause, Americans can never be certain that “underlying his travel ban, withdrawal from the Paris Accord climate deal or proposed tax cuts” that he is acting in the country’s best interest and not his own.

Strict adherence to the emoluments clauses, D.C. and Maryland argue, “ensure that Americans do not have to guess whether a President who orders their sons and daughters to die in foreign lands acts out of concern for his private business interests; they do not have to wonder if they lost their job due to trade negotiations in which the President has a personal stake; and they never have to question whether the President can sit across the bargaining table from foreign leaders and faithfully represent the world’s most powerful democracy, unencumbered by fear of harming his own companies.”

The suit seeks an injunction to force Trump to stop violating the Constitution, but leaves it up to the court to decide how that should be accomplished.

Countdown to tweet storm.

 

@fraurosena -- yes, that video is quite telling. They're not exactly the most loving family out there.

Ha, I posted that very article in the resistance thread! 

Tweets following in one... two... three...

[GreyhoundFan]

I wouldn't use the term sweetheart, I'd use another word, one that starts with a "bi" and ends with a "tch": "China and Saudi Arabia have seduced Trump into being their sweetheart"

Spoiler

It’s disappointing but not surprising that in the fifth month of the Trump administration, Germany, Mexico and South Korea are among the big losers in U.S. foreign relations. They may be among America’s closest allies, but President Trump made it clear enough during his campaign that he considers them conniving freeloaders who snicker at the United States behind its back.

What’s surprising is the big winners so far — not Russia, nor Israel — but two countries Trump has spent decades disparaging: China and Saudi Arabia. So far, Asia’s rising superpower and the Middle East’s most reactionary autocracy have gotten everything they’ve wanted from the White House, including unconditional public support from the president.

China, which Trump long assailed as a trade cheater and said would be sanctioned on his first day in office, has seen no such censure. Instead, Trump has lauded President Xi Jinping as someone with whom he has made “tremendous progress” in forging a cooperative relationship. Not only has Trump publicly promised not to label Xi’s government a currency manipulator, but he has mostly restrained the Pentagon from challenging Beijing’s aggressive campaign to consolidate control over the South China Sea.

Saudi Arabia has been a Trump target since 1987, when he took out full-page newspaper ads accusing it of “taking advantage of the United States” and demanding that it “pay for the protection” Washington provides. Yet since visiting the kingdom last month, the new president has swung so fully behind its ruling family that it felt empowered to launch a diplomatic and military boycott against neighboring Qatar, home of the largest U.S. military base in the Middle East.

Arguably, these flip-flops had some rational basis. Trump says the tack toward Beijing is meant to gain its help in stopping North Korea’s accumulation of nuclear weapons. The alignment with Saudi Arabia can be cast as part of a larger campaign to turn back Iranian aggression in the Middle East — and, perhaps, help Israel broker peace with the Palestinians.

Yet it’s possible to seek Beijing’s help on North Korea, or Saudi Arabia’s on Iran, without uncritically embracing their regimes or offering them carte blanche to pursue agendas that threaten vital U.S. strategic interests. Previous U.S. presidents have tried to strike such a balance. What’s distinctive about Trump is his black-and-white approach to foreign governments: Either he loves them, or he does not.

Or maybe, the distinction is whether the president perceives that he is held in high enough regard by the regime in question. Those that seem critical, or condition their affection, such as Mexico and Germany, are out; those prepared to hang portraits of him in their capitals and celebrate his arrival with sword dances, such as Saudi Arabia, are in.

Xi’s China has not been quite so effusive. But Xi was willing to pay court to Trump at his resort in Mar-a-Lago. His government has granted Trump dozens of valuable trademarks since his inauguration, along with a bunch given to Ivanka Trump’s fashion business on the day of the summit.

China and Saudi Arabia focus their diplomacy on the Trump family. They both used as their prime conduit Jared Kushner, the presidential son-in-law whose evident naivete about foreign affairs is as great as his ambitions. As my colleague Josh Rogin has reported, Henry Kissinger opened a back channel between Kushner and Beijing before the Mar-a-Lago summit — one from which the U.S. government’s China hands were excluded.

A similar channel connects Kushner with Saudi Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who has emerged as the preeminent figure in a regime headed by his aged father. Before Trump’s visit to Riyadh, the two sketched out ambitious — and as yet unrealized — plans for an “Arab NATO” that, bolstered with tens of billions in U.S. weapons sales, would push back against Iran.

The clincher in these sweetheart deals has been the seduction by Xi and Salman of the president himself — which, by Trump’s own account, has been all too easy. According to the president, after just a 10-minute lecture from Xi about North Korea, he said “I realized it’s not so easy” for China to act. When he spoke about stopping terrorism in Riyadh, Trump tweeted last week that the Saudis “pointed to Qatar” — with which they have been feuding over other issues. The president swallowed their line.

No doubt the Chinese and Saudis are shrewd enough to know their current luck may not last. When China fails to rein in North Korea, or the Saudis fail to deliver the Palestinians for a Mideast peace deal, Trump may suddenly turn on them. For now, though, they have illuminated an embarrassing and somewhat scary truth about this president: When it comes to foreign affairs, he is heedless of history, susceptible to blandishments and supremely gullible.

It's pitiful that he is so easily swayed by flattery.

[CTRLZero]

1 hour ago, GreyhoundFan said:

The GSA initially said Trump would have to fully divest from the hotel after the election. But after Trump proposed increasing GSA’s budget, the suit says the agency issued a letter saying Trump was in full compliance.

This sort of thing is really scary (well, it's all scary).  I hope Trump is tangled up with lots of ethically-based lawsuits.  On the other hand, Trump is starting to look like one big diversion machine for the Republicans, who are up to mischief while we are reeling in shock from the President's latest antics.  We heed a huuuge housecleaning in this nation, the biggest, most beautiful housecleaning!

[GreyhoundFan]

"Trump is a new kind of protectionist — he operates in stealth mode"

Spoiler

June is shaping up to be a busy month on President Trump’s policy agenda. Even if his headline proposals for health care and tax reform are stymied, another of his policy promises — increased trade protectionism — is proceeding full-steam ahead.

However, the form that it is taking is unusual. Trump is unlikely to fulfill campaign threats of NAFTA withdrawal or imposing wholesale, 45 percent import tariffs on China.

Instead, the Trump administration has unleashed a steady, stealthy and unilateral approach to imposing trade barriers that does not require consultations with Congress. As he recently tweeted, Trump’s first steps may involve taking “major action” by imposing restrictions on imports of steel and aluminum because he perceives them as a threat to national security.

I look forward to reading the @CommerceGov 232 analysis of steel and aluminum — to be released in June. Will take major action if necessary.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 27, 2017

In a recent study, I examine the trade policy actions that the Trump administration triggered during its first “100 days” through an unprecedented set of investigations arising under a host of different U.S. trade laws. The most dramatic were the tweet-worthy national security investigations of steel and aluminum imports. Other investigations under different laws involve investigations of imported products such as softwood lumber and solar panels.

The administration is on the cusp of deciding whether to impose new trade barriers. Trump has sent strong political signals that such barriers are likely. However, the trading partners hit by these protectionist measures may not be the ones you might expect.

National security law: Steel and aluminum

On April 20, President Trump instructed Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross to initiate an investigation of whether steel imports were a threat to the U.S. national security under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. This request was novel on two counts. First, the law itself has rarely been used: This was the first investigation under the law since 2001, only the 14th since 1980, and only twice have trade barriers resulted after those investigations. Second, Trump’s decision that the government should initiate the case is rare.

Trump’s decisions on steel were not a one-off. Only a week later, Trump self-initiated a second investigation, this one alleging that aluminum imports threaten national security.

Trump’s new trade barriers could cover an additional 3 percent or more of U.S. imports in these sectors. However, much of potential U.S. steel and aluminum imports — especially from China — are already covered by special, highly restrictive trade barriers imposed under other U.S. trade laws. Some of these restrictions date to the Clinton administration. This means that the countries likely to be hit by Trump’s new protectionism would be — Canada, Germany, Japan, Mexico and South Korea. In the period since World War II, these countries have not posed a notable threat to U.S. national security.

Global safeguards law: Solar panels

By self-initiating the national security cases, Trump also confirmed commitment to his inaugural speech statement that “Protection will lead to great prosperity and strength.” It is not surprising, then, that companies are beginning to come forward to ask for trade barriers under another rarely used law — the global safeguard, or Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974.

The first such petition was filed by a bankrupt U.S. company, Suniva, on April 26 claiming that imports of solar panels were the cause of their injury. This is also the first case since 2001 under this U.S. law.

Historically, companies have rarely triggered investigations under the global safeguards law. Even if there was evidence that imports injured their industry, the law gives the president discretion as to whether to impose new trade barriers. Many presidents have been wary about fielding investigations under this law. Trump, in contrast, has indicated that when it comes to import protection, his administration is open for business.

But just like aluminum and steel, significant U.S. trade barriers are in place against imports of solar panels from China under a different law. Any new Trump barriers probably would fall on the current sources of U.S. solar panel imports, such as Germany, Malaysia, Mexico and Singapore.

Anti-dumping and countervailing duty laws: Softwood lumber

The fourth major trade action of Trump’s first 100 days involved softwood lumber imports from Canada. The trade policy itself is less unusual, because the action arose under the routinely used U.S. anti-dumping and countervailing duty laws. Rather, what was unusual was that Trump and Ross weighed in politically, thereby escalating the issue on the other side of the border.

With Trump now involved, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was also forced to engage. He almost immediately threatened to retaliate by revoking Canadian port access from U.S. coal producers and launching his own trade actions, which could end up targeting Canada’s imports from Oregon.

Adding up the trade protection: Potentially lots of new barriers on unwitting partners

The figure below aggregates each of the actions occurring under Trump’s administration of U.S. trade laws through its first 100 days. Suppose — beginning this month — the administration completes these investigations and begins imposing special new trade barriers. In comparison to the day he stepped into office, the share of U.S. imports suddenly covered by these trade barriers would nearly double, from 3.8 to 7.4 percent.

Share of U.S. imports covered by barriers imposed under trade laws including projection for Trump’s first ‘100 days’

...

Source: Bown, Chad P. (2017) “Steel, Aluminum, Lumber, Solar: Trump’s Stealth Trade Protection” Peterson Institute for International Economics Policy Brief, June. U.S. trade laws = anti-dumping, countervailing duties, global safeguards, and threat to national security (Section 232).

The share of U.S. imports from China subject to trade barriers would increase from 9.2 to 10.9 percent. Again, the United States has some real grievances with China’s actions as a nonmarket economy, its industrial overcapacity in steel and aluminum, and alleged subsidies in solar panels.

However, Trump’s new trade protection may not end up targeting China, but will hit partners such as Canada, Germany, Japan, Mexico and South Korea — most of which have little to do with the concerns the United States has with China. The share of U.S. imports from these sorts of countries subject to special trade barriers would nearly triple, from 2.2 to 6.4 percent.

Trump’s protectionism could result in higher costs for U.S. industries that use steel, aluminum and lumber, and a potential loss of jobs for solar panel installers. And, of course, trading partners could retaliate, or impose trade barriers on some U.S. export that they think threatens their national security. Trump’s stealthy trade policy could trigger a slow dismantling of the rules-based trading system.

The rooster balloons that look like the TT are scary.

[GreyhoundFan]

"Trump’s defense against Comey has fallen into a predictable pattern: Make a baseless accusation"

Spoiler

We know that James B. Comey is a leaker. It's doubtful that he's a criminal; legal experts have said that even though the former FBI director shared his memos of conversations with President Trump with the media, if the information wasn't classified, that probably wasn't a crime.

Which could help explain why on Sunday, Trump upped the ante by tweeting this:

...

Trump just basically accused the FBI director he fired of leaking classified information, days after Comey testified under oath to Congress that the president might have interfered in an FBI investigation.

In hindsight, this tweet probably shouldn't have been surprising: When the president feels threatened, his go-to move is to accuse his opponent of doing something illegal and offer no evidence to back it up. Conspiracy theorists can and will pick this up and run with it, people can choose to believe which narrative they want and the waters are sufficiently muddied.

Except this time, Congress may actually force the president to try to prove his claim.

For now, this flame-throw-and-duck method might work well, when Trump and Comey are in a classic he-said, he-said standoff. Comey testified to the Senate last week that Trump tried to interfere in the FBI's investigations of ousted national security adviser Michael T. Flynn and that Trump lied about why he fired Comey.

Trump has now twice accused Comey of lying. Trump and his private attorney have denied that Trump asked Comey for a loyalty pledge and to back off the FBI's various Flynn investigations. But regarding Flynn, Trump offered up in the next breath: “And there'd be nothing wrong if I did say that, according to everything I read today.”

But soon, Trump could regret this tweet. Congress might be calling the president's bluff — if that's what it is — by asking the White House to turn over tapes of Trump's conversations with Comey (if they exist) and other evidence of their conversations. Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) even invited Trump to testify before Congress. (“One hundred percent,” Trump said Friday when asked in a news conference if he'd testify under oath if asked.)

The problem for Trump is that Comey is a largely credible witness, and his testimony under oath was detailed and shocking.

Unlike Comey, Trump has offered no proof. And he appears to be going out of his way to create another storyline: Comey is a leaker (true), and maybe even leaked more than we know about and it might be illegal (there is no evidence for this).

Trump has followed this playbook before. And if you measure victory by distraction, it has worked beautifully for him.

After Attorney General Jeff Sessions acknowledged that he did not disclose during his confirmation proceedings that he met with Russian officials during the campaign, Sessions had to recuse himself from overseeing the FBI's Russia investigation.

That weekend, Trump tweeted this:

...

Months later, there is still no evidence of this. Congress has launched no investigation of it. And the Trump-friendly chairman of the House Intelligence Committee had to recuse himself from that panel's Russia investigation after he tried to give the president something to hang onto.

Trump does this so often that reporters call him out in news stories for it. “It has long been his practice to stir up new controversies to deflect attention from a damaging news cycle,” The Washington Post's White House team wrote about the wiretapping tweet.

In November, just weeks after Trump's election, he claimed that the biggest voter fraud in U.S. history caused him to lose the popular vote. Seven months later, there's no investigation of this, and there is no evidence for it.

...

Each one of these claims — if true — would be on the scale of crimes in politics we haven't seen in decades — or ever.

Each one of these claims came immediately after Trump felt as though he were losing control of the narrative.

And each one of these claims has yet to be backed up with even a shred of evidence.

But that doesn't stop Trump from making them. This time, though, Congress may actually force him to try to prove it.

Liar-in-chief...

[formergothardite]

If Trump testifies before Congress, I sure hope it is public. That would be one entertaining event. He will blatantly lie, ramble incoherently and not know what things can be discussed in a public setting or a private one. He will come out looking even more of a buffoon.