Trump 23: The Death Eaters Have Taken the Fucking Country

[Penny]

I saw that on tv. Just like a toddler, when you say don't do something, they do it. What a moron!

[Ali]

I am positive a blind person (someone other than this toddler) could still effectively be President of the United States.  It would come with difficulties though. This job has a great deal of responsibility and him doing something intentionally that could damage his eyes really ticks me off. He really does not take it seriously.

[GreyhoundFan]

Y'all don't get it, if the TT can stare into the eclipse and not go blind, that proves that he was installed in the office by God. That's what the BTs will say. I saw a clip of him staring into the sun and thought that going blind would hamper his TV viewing.

[JMarie]

55 minutes ago, Ali said:

So are kids around the world going  to come to the conclusion he is an idiot or are they going think it is okay to look at the sun during an eclipse because he did? I hope it is the former.

They're going to think he's a science denier.  See, even kids are smarter than him.

[GreyhoundFan]

So, we saw earlier today that there is no money to pay Secret Service agents because of all the overtime they've had to do with the TT and his spawn. This article has some more info, the part that chaps my hide is here:

Quote

...

One purchase order reviewed by CBS News shows the US Secret Service has spent $35,185 on golf cart rentals “for POTUS visit” in Palm Beach County, Florida since the President’s inauguration.

Another purchase order showed a charge of $64,000 for “Elevator services- Trump Tower” in December 2016.  A Secret Service official told CBS News that “elevator inspection is one of many protective operational measures utilized by the Secret Service.”

...

The freaking TT is charging the government for golf carts used by agents who are protecting him? SERIOUSLY?

[fraurosena]

26 minutes ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Y'all don't get it, if the TT can stare into the eclipse and not go blind, that proves that he was installed in the office by God. That's what the BTs will say. I saw a clip of him staring into the sun and thought that going blind would hamper his TV viewing.

No, he can stare into the eclipse and not go blind because the stupid scientists are wrong. Just like they're wrong on climate change. Plus, he's got the bestest eyes ever. The bestestest eyes in the whole world. What, in the whole universe! Some silly sunshine could ever harm them. And the moon is covering the sun, so he's not looking at the sun at all, he's looking at the moon. Geez, you guys are dumb... 

/s

[GreyhoundFan]

"Neil Gorsuch doesn’t seem to care much about impartiality after all"

Spoiler

At his Supreme Court confirmation hearings in March, then-Judge Neil M. Gorsuch spoke to Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) with grave sincerity, saying, “Senator, the independence and integrity of the judiciary is in my bones.” To Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), he promised: “I do take seriously impartiality and the appearance of impartiality.”

As the saying goes, however, actions speak louder than words.

Now that Gorsuch has been confirmed to the Supreme Court, his actions are beginning to bring his commitment to integrity and impartiality into sharper focus: It was recently revealed that the justice has agreed to speak to a conservative group at the Trump International Hotel in Washington next month.

As The Post recently reported, this property earned the Trump Organization $2 million in the first four months of 2017, even though the organization had predicted a $2 million loss in that period. The hotel charges $652.98 a night, on average, likely making it the most expensive hotel in the city. Since Trump was elected, the hotel has drawn swarms of lobbyists and foreign delegations hoping to ingratiate themselves with President Trump and his family.

The Trump International Hotel has become a prominent symbol, in the heart of our nation’s capital, of Trump’s success at exploiting his elective office for personal gain. Situated on Pennsylvania Avenue just a few blocks from the White House, it shines like a beacon to those seeking to curry favor with the 45th president.

This hotel’s business is also key to three major lawsuits that have been filed against Trump, alleging that he violated critical anti-corruption provisions in our Constitution. Under the foreign emoluments clause, U.S. government officials — from the president on down — are prohibited from accepting any payments or benefits from foreign governments without the consent of Congress. Furthermore, the Constitution’s domestic emoluments clause specifically forbids the president from accepting any payment, other than his fixed presidential compensation, from federal, state or local governments.

The Founding Fathers took great pains in drafting our Constitution, with the emoluments clauses and other anti-corruption provisions, to ensure that our nation’s elected officials would base their decisions only on what is best for the American people, not their personal bottom line.

Gorsuch selectively refused to answer senators’ questions about issues facing our country during his confirmation hearings, saying that doing so would indicate that he had prejudged those issues. When Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) pressed him on the foreign emoluments clause, Gorsuch said: “I’m hesitant to discuss any part of the Constitution to the extent were talking about a case [that] is likely to come before a court.”

Let’s be crystal clear: Any of those three separate lawsuits asking federal courts to step in and order Trump to obey the Constitution’s emoluments clauses — including one on behalf of more than 200 members of Congress (represented by my organization, the Constitutional Accountability Center) — could eventually reach the Supreme Court.

Is it possible that Gorsuch is not aware of these lawsuits? Was he not aware that his forthcoming speech would be given at the Trump International Hotel? If he is aware, does his decision to help a conservative organization put money into the pockets of the president who nominated him — by speaking at the profit-generating property so conspicuously at the heart of a profound legal dispute about the meaning of the Constitution’s text — indicate that Gorsuch has prejudged these critical issues? Perhaps he’s already decided that he will have to sit out these cases if they make their way to the Supreme Court. Why else would he see no problem in giving a speech at this hotel?

For one who promised to “take seriously . . . the appearance of impartiality,” it is time for Gorsuch to return to those words. Speaking at the Trump International Hotel does not foster the appearance of impartiality. It does the opposite. Gorsuch should reflect soberly on his decision to speak at his patron’s property, which lies at the center of not one but three cases that could come before him in the months ahead.

Upon such reflection, Gorsuch should withdraw from speaking at any of Trump’s properties and thereby begin to match the volume of his actions as the court’s newest justice with those of his words as Trump’s nominee.

Yeah, not going to happen, Gorsuch will go ahead and dive headfirst into the tangerine swamp.

[Howl]

During totality, one can look directly at the eclipse with no danger to the eyes/retina.  Once the sun peeks out, though, the protective glasses need to go on.  

Early on, before Trump was elected, Melania referred to her two boys.  She's on the front line of the toddler war and has been since she said "I do" and maybe before. 

[sawasdee]

50 minutes ago, GreyhoundFan said:

One purchase order reviewed by CBS News shows the US Secret Service has spent $35,185 on golf cart rentals “for POTUS visit” in Palm Beach County, Florida since the President’s inauguration.

And that article was published on April 14th.  Wonder what the total is now.....after all, we've had his golfing vacation in Bedminster.

No wonder the Secret Service is going broke.

 

[GreyhoundFan]

38 minutes ago, Howl said:

During totality, one can look directly at the eclipse with no danger to the eyes/retina.  Once the sun peeks out, though, the protective glasses need to go on.  

We never hit totality here in the DC area. We peaked at 83%. The local reporters kept harping on the fact that you had to have protective glasses or another method (weaved fingers, cereal box, etc). Of course, he doesn't listen.

 

@sawasdee I didn't see the date until I posted it. It was referred to in an article on Huffpost today. I also wonder how much the total is up to now.

[apple1]

2 hours ago, fraurosena said:

No, he can stare into the eclipse and not go blind because the stupid scientists are wrong. Just like they're wrong on climate change. Plus, he's got the bestest eyes ever. The bestestest eyes in the whole world. What, in the whole universe! Some silly sunshine could ever harm them. And the moon is covering the sun, so he's not looking at the sun at all, he's looking at the moon. Geez, you guys are dumb... 

/s

It pains me to "defend" him.

But I did see a photo in which he had eclipse glasses on. Not sure why one pic with them on and another without them.

[Destiny]

It pains me to "defend" him.
But I did see a photo in which he had eclipse glasses on. Not sure why one pic with them on and another without them.

He had em on cos an aide yelled from below to put em on. Not cos he’s smart. lol.

[Ali]

10 minutes ago, apple1 said:

It pains me to "defend" him.

But I did see a photo in which he had eclipse glasses on. Not sure why one pic with them on and another without them.

I watched the video. He looks up at least twice before putting on his glasses. He pulled out his glasses to show everyone that he has them and was choosing not to put them on. When he was ready, he put them on. He and Melania look at the sun again without glasses after taking them off.

[GreyhoundFan]

"It’s time to talk about Trump’s mental health"

Spoiler

How unstable and divorced from reality is President Trump? We’ve reached the point where the nation has the right and the need to know.

We’re not accustomed to asking such questions about our presidents. We don’t know how to even begin inquiring into a president’s mental health, so we rationalize aberrant behavior as being part of some subtle strategy. We say that Trump is cleverly playing to his base, or employing the “madman theory” of foreign relations, or simply being unpredictable to gain an advantage by keeping everyone off balance.

But if Trump were really playing three-dimensional chess, presumably he’d be getting things done. His approval ratings would be rising rather than falling. Allies in Congress would be expressing admiration rather than increasing dismay.

Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) hit a nerve Thursday when he said that Trump “has not yet been able to demonstrate the stability nor some of the competence” needed in a president. That indictment was significant because Corker, who chairs the Foreign Relations Committee, is a respected Capitol Hill veteran who chooses his words carefully — and who thus far has been willing to give Trump a chance. Corker said he feared that “our nation is going to go through great peril” and called for “radical change” at the White House.

Democrats have been slightly more plain-spoken. Rep. Adam B. Schiff told CNN on Sunday that “I certainly think that there’s an issue with the president’s capability.” And fellow California Rep. Jackie Speier tweeted last week that Trump “is showing signs of erratic behavior and mental instability that place the country in grave danger.”

Speier went so far as to call for action under the 25th Amendment, which allows the vice president and the Cabinet to relieve the president of his “powers and duties” if he is unable to discharge them.

Trump’s performance last week following the Charlottesville incident was indeed alarming, the problem being not just what he said but how he said it. After initially blaming the violence — which led to the death of 32-year-old Heather Heyer — on “many sides,” Trump reversed course and specifically condemned neo-Nazis and the Ku Klux Klan — but looked like the reluctant star of a hostage video. Then the next day, Trump went back to blaming “both sides” in what can only be called an angry, red-faced rant.

We should assume that the ugliness we heard from Trump about Charlottesville reflects his true feelings. And we can conclude that he failed to grasp how jarring those sentiments would sound to most Americans’ ears.

Anyone can have a bad day. But according to many published reports, Trump often erupts into rage — especially when he sees something he doesn’t like on the cable news shows he is said to watch compulsively.

In his Twitter postings, he increasingly lashes out in ways that are counterproductive. I can see some method behind his incessant ranting about “fake news,” which may actually help him with his political base. But why attack Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) whose help the president needs if he is to get legislation passed or nominees approved? Why campaign against Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), who has been a frequent critic but ended up supporting Trump on health care? Is Trump unable to imagine how other GOP senators — whose votes he needs if he is to get anything done — are going to react?

I have spoken with people who have known Trump for decades and who say he has changed. He exhibits less self-awareness, these longtime acquaintances say, and less capacity for sustained focus. Indeed, it is instructive to compare television interviews of Trump recorded years ago with those conducted now. To this layman’s eyes and ears, there seems to have been deterioration.

I am not professionally qualified to assess the president’s mental health; psychiatrists and psychologists who have the proper credentials and experience to do so are silenced by ethical rules. The stakes are so high, however, that the officials who work alongside Trump and observe him closely bear a tremendous responsibility. There is a huge difference between sounding as unhinged as North Korea’s Kim Jong Un and actually being that unstable.

It is of some comfort that Trump is surrounded by levelheaded military men — Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, national security adviser H.R. McMaster and Chief of Staff John Kelly — who are unlikely to do anything rash. But no one elected them.

It is uncomfortable to talk about the president’s mental health. But at this point it is irresponsible not to.

I think it's past time.

[JMarie]

46 minutes ago, Ali said:

I watched the video. He looks up at least twice before putting on his glasses. He pulled out his glasses to show everyone that he has them and was choosing not to put them on. When he was ready, he put them on. He and Melania look at the sun again without glasses after taking them off.

He probably didn't want to put them on because they weren't Trump brand sunglasses.

[AuntK]

I cannot drink my wine fast enough to be able to listen to this asshole without damaging the tv. What an asshat!

[GreyhoundFan]

An interesting op-ed: "It’s too late to disavow Trump"

Spoiler

The useful idiots are falling by the wayside. First came a few corporate big shots, and then some more, and then many, many more. Princes of Wall Street, richer and more important than any chief executive, also left, and then Julius Krein, a conservative intellectual and digital pamphleteer, retracted his support of President Trump in a New York Times op-ed and inevitably was hailed as a political Rip Van Winkle who had just woken up. He and the others slept too long.

They have done their damage. Trump is in the White House, fulminating on Twitter, messing up foreign policy, mistaking critics for enemies, refusing to immediately and unequivocally condemn neo-Nazis, racists and other assorted goons — and, in general, failing to provide the nation with a scintilla of moral leadership. This will last until it can’t any longer. There is only so much chaos a nation can stand.

Meanwhile, the parts of the American corporate and political leadership who slummed with Trump and think that the quick shower of a repudiation statement will wipe them clean ought to think again. They are obliged to consider how they ever supported a person whose racism was apparent in his rabid conviction that Barack Obama had not been born in the United States and whose posse always contained so-called white nationalists. The surprise of Charlottesville is not that it happened, but that it took so long. Our president is neo-racist.

It was also apparent that Trump lies with almost every breath. And yet some of the powerful people who knew the dark truth about Trump — who would not do business with him, who would not lend him money and who, most importantly, would not raise a child to be like him — supported him for president. Some, such as Carl Icahn and Wilbur Ross (who is now commerce secretary), got in early, while others hung back until Trump won the GOP nomination. Having panicked at the prospect of Hillary Clinton winning the presidency, they embraced Trump.

Anti-Hillaryism diseased their minds. It enabled them to hold her responsible for the deaths of Americans in Benghazi, Libya, and to obsess over her missing emails. She was a lousy candidate, sure, but her most serious criminal act was to frequently flash an insincere smile.

Trump critics such as myself have been accused of living in a bubble. On the contrary, it is Trump’s supporters in the 1 percent who breathed their own fumes. They believed in the Gordian knot fantasy: the myth that a bold person could solve an intractable problem, as Alexander the Great did by not even attempting to untie the Gordian knot but rather severing it with his sword. Trump’s supporters felt that all that was needed was common sense or, better yet, something called “business sense.” If Trump could run a business, he could, therefore, run the country.

This myth was so strongly held that it overcame both logic and experience. It was an extension and a mockery of Ronald Reagan’s simplistic belief that “Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem” and that all that was needed in a president was the zeal and cool nerves of a short-seller.

Trump’s complete lack of character was brushed aside. So, too, was his utter lack of compassion. His high-powered supporters said nothing as he attacked the Khans, the Gold Star parents of an Army captain who was killed in Iraq. They were similarly mute when he denigrated John McCain’s suffering as a prisoner of war in Vietnam and mocked a disabled reporter. They never asked him to prove he had donated a cent to charity.

Trump railed against Mexicans and Muslims, bullied his fellow candidates, winked at his supporters in the odious alt-right, was caught boasting of an adolescent sexism, exhibited an astounding ignorance of just about everything he needed to know — history and government — and persisted in a pernicious campaign to delegitimize the mainstream media. The latter may be his only success.

Trump’s presidency will fail. Just don’t ask me how and when. It will collapse because at its center is a hollow man, lacking ballast, whose chaos cannot be contained. In the meantime, those who supported him then but have now recanted need to consider what steered them so wrong. What compelled them to support a man whose ignorance, selfishness, egomania and abysmal character were so clear? Was it their lust for deregulation, lower taxes and a Wagnerian end to the Obama era? They slept — but it was our nightmare.

 

[GreyhoundFan]

"The Daily 202: A dozen key lines from Trump’s Afghanistan speech"

Spoiler

THE BIG IDEA: President Trump gave an uncharacteristically introspective speech last night, acknowledging that he’s changed his position on the war in Afghanistan as he escalated the military’s involvement in America’s longest war.

After seven months, Trump has finally settled on a policy that does not go as far as his generals wanted but also represents a clear break with the populists and isolationists who he catered to as a candidate.

Reading carefully from a teleprompter, in his first prime-time address to the nation, the president sought to explain why he’s been persuaded that staying in Afghanistan is in America’s national interest. Continuing to use a phrase he debuted in Saudi Arabia during his first foreign trip, Trump described his doctrine as “principled realism.”

“Although Trump did not specify how many more troops will be sent to Afghanistan, congressional officials said the administration has told them it will be about 4,000 more than the 8,500 U.S. service members currently in the region,” David Nakamura and Abby Phillip report.

-- If you missed the 27-minute speech, delivered from the Fort Myer military base in Arlington, Va., here are the 12 most important nuggets:

He opened with a nod to the division after Charlottesville: “The young men and women we send to fight our wars abroad deserve to return to a country that is not at war with itself at home. We cannot remain a force for peace in the world if we are not at peace with each other. As we send our bravest to defeat our enemies overseas — and we will always win — let us find the courage to heal our divisions within.” (Trump did not say how he plans to do this.)

He acknowledged war fatigue: “Nearly 16 years after the September 11th attacks, after the extraordinary sacrifice of blood and treasure, the American people are weary of war without victory. Nowhere is this more evident than with the war in Afghanistan, the longest war in American history — 17 years! [Actually, it is 16.] I share the American people’s frustration. I also share their frustration over a foreign policy that has spent too much time, energy, money, and most importantly lives, trying to rebuild countries in our own image, instead of pursuing our security interests above all other considerations.”

He acknowledged that he’s flip-flopped on Afghanistan: “My original instinct was to pull out — and, historically, I like following my instincts. But all my life I've heard that decisions are much different when you sit behind the desk in the Oval Office; in other words, when you're President of the United States. So I studied Afghanistan in great detail and from every conceivable angle.”

He gave three justifications for changing his position: “First, our nation must seek an honorable and enduring outcome worthy of the tremendous sacrifices that have been made … Second, the consequences of a rapid exit are both predictable and unacceptable. … A hasty withdrawal would create a vacuum that terrorists, including ISIS and al-Qaeda, would instantly fill, just as happened before September 11th. … Third and finally, I concluded that the security threats we face in Afghanistan and the broader region are immense. Today, 20 U.S.-designated foreign terrorist organizations are active in Afghanistan and Pakistan — the highest concentration in any region anywhere in the world.”

He critiqued Barack Obama: “As we know, in 2011, America hastily and mistakenly withdrew from Iraq. … When I became President, I was given a bad and very complex hand. … We cannot repeat in Afghanistan the mistake our leaders made in Iraq.”

He said there will never be a timetable for withdrawal: “A core pillar of our new strategy is a shift from a time-based approach to one based on conditions. I’ve said it many times how counterproductive it is for the United States to announce in advance the dates we intend to begin, or end, military options. We will not talk about numbers of troops or our plans for further military activities. Conditions on the ground — not arbitrary timetables — will guide our strategy from now on. America’s enemies must never know our plans or believe they can wait us out. I will not say when we are going to attack, but attack we will.”

He said he is unshackling and empowering military commanders: “Micromanagement from Washington, D.C. does not win battles. They are won in the field drawing upon the judgment and expertise of wartime commanders and frontline soldiers acting in real time, with real authority, and with a clear mission to defeat the enemy. … Our troops will fight to win. From now on, victory will have a clear definition: attacking our enemies, obliterating ISIS, crushing al-Qaeda, preventing the Taliban from taking over the country, and stopping mass terror attacks against Americans before they emerge.”

He preemptively pushed back on the idea he’s committing to an open-ended commitment: “Our commitment is not unlimited, and our support is not a blank check. The government of Afghanistan must carry their share of the military, political, and economic burden.”

He boldly promised victory: “One way or another, these problems will be solved. I’m a problem-solver. And in the end, we will win.”

He opened the door to negotiating directly with the Taliban: “After an effective military effort, perhaps it will be possible to have a political settlement that includes elements of the Taliban in Afghanistan, but nobody knows if or when that will ever happen.”

He played hardball with Pakistan: “We have been paying Pakistan billions and billions of dollars at the same time they are housing the very terrorists that we are fighting. But that will have to change, and that will change immediately. No partnership can survive a country’s harboring of militants and terrorists who target U.S. servicemembers and officials. It is time for Pakistan to demonstrate its commitment to civilization, order, and to peace.”

He insisted that he has not changed his mind about the United States promoting democracy abroad: “We are a partner and a friend, but we will not dictate to the Afghan people how to live, or how to govern their own complex society. We are not nation-building again. We are killing terrorists. … We want them to succeed. But we will no longer use American military might to construct democracies in faraway lands, or try to rebuild other countries in our own image. Those days are now over.”

-- If you read one story about how Trump made his decision, make it the ticktock by Philip Rucker and Robert Costa: “President Trump was frustrated and fuming. Again and again, in the windowless Situation Room at the White House, he lashed out at his national security team over the Afghanistan war, and the paucity of appealing options gnawed at him. Last month, as Trump mulled over a new strategy in a 16-year conflict that bedeviled his predecessors, he groused that sending additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan could have a negligible impact. He threatened to fire the current commander there. He flirted with privatizing the military effort. He even considered pulling out. Declaring victory seemed all but impossible. Five weeks later, at a Camp David summit, the commander in chief arrived at his decision. A president obsessed with winning has now settled on simply trying not to lose. …

“Trump’s private deliberations — detailed in interviews with more than a dozen senior administration officials and outside allies — revealed a president un-attached to any particular foreign-policy doctrine, but willing to be persuaded as long as he could be seen as a strong and decisive leader. Defense Secretary Mattis and national security adviser H.R. McMaster, both generals with extensive battlefield experience in Afghanistan, warned Trump about the consequences of withdrawal and cautioned that any move in Afghanistan would have ripple effects throughout the region. One of the ways McMaster tried to persuade Trump to recommit to the effort was by convincing him that Afghanistan was not a hopeless place. He presented Trump with a black-and-white snapshot from 1972 of Afghan women in miniskirts walking through Kabul, to show him that Western norms had existed there before and could return.

“Another key voice in Trump’s deliberations — especially in guiding the president to make a decision in recent weeks — was John F. Kelly, the newly installed White House chief of staff. A retired four-star Marine general, Kelly had a deeply personal understanding of the stakes: His son, 2nd Lt. Robert M. Kelly, 29, was killed there in 2010 when he stepped on a land mine while leading a platoon of Marines. … While (Reince) Priebus was considered a passive voice on Afghanistan, Kelly all but forced a decision from the president with newfound urgency. One adviser called him ‘the accelerator.’

“Trump’s decisions were put off in part because of infighting in his ranks, chiefly between McMaster and chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon … When McMaster floated possibly sending tens of thousands of additional troops, Bannon shot back that such a commitment would be a folly in a country where intervention had crippled foreign powers through the centuries … McMaster expressed alarm and irritation to confidants that Bannon was tempting the president to drift away from the military leadership with ideas that were not feasible. He was especially bothered by a proposal to hand over much of the military responsibility to private contractor Erik Prince, the founder of the controversial security company formerly known as Blackwater USA. Mattis heard out Bannon’s pitch during a weekend meeting at the Pentagon in early July but quickly sided with McMaster.”

...

I'm really not sure how I feel about the new direction in Afghanistan, but I wonder what Kelly and McMaster had to do to hold his feet to the fire and keep him reading from the teleprompter.

[GreyhoundFan]

Yes, he is: "Trump is delighting dictators everywhere"

Spoiler

We are seeing the sad effects of President Trump’s renunciation of moral leadership on American politics and culture — the waning of civility, idealism and respect, and the waxing of contempt, prejudice and racial division. But how is a similar moral abdication — summarized as the doctrine of “America first” — influencing America’s place in the world? And does that really matter?

I posed these questions to David Coltart, a politician, human rights activist and former education minister in Zimbabwe. “If the reaction of the regime in Harare is anything to go by,” he responded, “I think many African dictators are delighted by President Trump’s accession to power because they perceive that he will not seek to hold them to an international human rights standard.”

In Zimbabwe, notes Coltart, regime ministers and propaganda officials have begun using the term “fake news” in their repression of the media. Trump’s cozy relationship with Vladimir Putin has given cover to President Robert Mugabe as he pursues closer ties to Russia. It amounts, Coltart says “to comfort that Trump will go lightly on Putin’s allies.” The Trump administration’s proposed cuts at the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development have also sent a signal. “The U.S. has historically assisted human rights organizations which have worked to promote democracy and respect for constitutionalism,” says Coltart. “It now appears as if there will be dramatic cutbacks in the funding of these particular grants, which in turn will severely affect the ability of these [nongovernmental organizations] to operate — to the great delight of dictators and the consternation of civic groups and democrats.”

So this, very concretely, is what Trump’s renunciation of foreign policy idealism means: delighted dictators, bolder attacks on a free press, expanded Russian influence, and betrayed dissidents and exiles.

It is clear why this would matter to a Chinese political prisoner, or a Ukrainian public official, or a Ugandan AIDS patient. They might feel desperately isolated, or live in abject fear, or be dead. But why should American citizens care?

I raised that question with diplomatic historian William Inboden at the University of Texas at Austin. “Most of the signature successes of American foreign policy,” he responded, “have come when our power and values acted in concert, which also furthered our national interests.”

In best professorial fashion, Inboden pointed to the reconstruction of Japan and Germany following World War II, which turned enemies into friends; the establishment of the international economic system in the postwar period, which helped raise a billion people out of extreme poverty and make the United States the richest nation in history; the crafting of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which has reduced deadly threats; leadership in cementing the peace deal between Israel and Egypt under President Jimmy Carter; interventions in Bosnia and Kosovo that ended ethnic cleansing and restored stability to Europe; and the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, which has saved millions of lives and earned tremendous goodwill across Africa.

Would any of these actions have been undertaken as a result of Trump’s “America first” foreign policy? “If we were to abandon our values in our foreign policy,” Inboden said, “we would be unilaterally disarming ourselves and giving up one of our unique assets.” But this seems exactly what is happening as America reconsiders its support for freedom, human dignity and humanitarian assistance. “Most of the rest of the world is still in a state of shock and confusion over what Trump’s presidency will mean,” concluded Inboden. “Other nations are starting to reassess how they will respond to a world without America’s principled leadership.”

This is a gathering moral and strategic disaster — providing new advantages to China and Russia as America’s priorities in the world come to resemble China’s or Russia’s more narrowly defined roles. A nation dedicated to transnational ideals that attract respect and emulation is becoming another nationalist power among nationalist powers. And all the wrong people are cheered by this development.

Last month, the former Soviet dissident and poet Irina Ratushinskaya died of cancer. She had been imprisoned in the gulag for peaceful opposition to the Soviet regime. President Ronald Reagan repeatedly pressed the case for her release, which finally took place under Mikhail Gorbachev. Two years earlier, she and about 10 other imprisoned women smuggled a secret note to Reagan congratulating him on his 1984 reelection. Their note, now displayed at the Reagan Library, said: “We look with hope to your country which is on the road of FREEDOM and respect for HUMAN RIGHTS.”

What imprisoned dissident would write such a note to Trump today?

 

[allthegoodnamesrgone]

16 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

So, we saw earlier today that there is no money to pay Secret Service agents because of all the overtime they've had to do with the TT and his spawn. This article has some more info, the part that chaps my hide is here:

The freaking TT is charging the government for golf carts used by agents who are protecting him? SERIOUSLY?

My thoughts are Trump is the one who over charged them so Trump is the one who can pay for them.  The Obama's the Bush's the Clinton's the Regan's never had an issue with affording SS. Trump has bankrupt them in 9 months.

[GreyhoundFan]

2 minutes ago, allthegoodnamesrgone said:

My thoughts are Trump is the one who over charged them so Trump is the one who can pay for them.  The Obama's the Bush's the Clinton's the Regan's never had an issue with affording SS. Trump has bankrupt them in 9 months.

I agree. Yesterday, the article I published about the Secret Service was from April. Well, CBS updated it.  Guess how much the golf cart total is up to?

Quote

...

The Secret Service has also spent $64,000 to inspect elevators at Trump Tower and $73,000 on golf cart rentals at Trump properties.

...

I am so angry about this. How dare he charge us, the taxpayers for the golf cart rentals for the men and women protecting his orange ass.

[sawasdee]

@GreyhoundFan

1 hour ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Last month, the former Soviet dissident and poet Irina Ratushinskaya died of cancer. She had been imprisoned in the gulag for peaceful opposition to the Soviet regime. President Ronald Reagan repeatedly pressed the case for her release, which finally took place under Mikhail Gorbachev. Two years earlier, she and about 10 other imprisoned women smuggled a secret note to Reagan congratulating him on his 1984 reelection. Their note, now displayed at the Reagan Library, said: “We look with hope to your country which is on the road of FREEDOM and respect for HUMAN RIGHTS.”

What imprisoned dissident would write such a note to Trump today?

I actually teared up thinking that the beacon of hope that the US kept burning for so many years, with initiatives on Human Rights, AIDS, etc, has been almost completely extinguished in just 7 months. He's not just your president - the US president has been called "the leader of the free world" for good reason. And he's thrown 70 years of generous outreach away.

 

50 minutes ago, GreyhoundFan said:

I am so angry about this. How dare he charge us, the taxpayers for the golf cart rentals for the men and women protecting his orange ass.

Not just the golf carts. He charges them through the nose for food and accommodation too. He even charges for space for their command centre.

I'd like it if the president and family got protection at all times, but expenses other than wages and security when not on official business, and not on Government property, were the responsibility of the incumbent.

Then the TT and his horrid offspring would be paying the per diem when off golfing, vacationing, cutting ribbons in Dubai etc. If the Orange Nightmare were paying the per diems at Bedminster, Mar-a-Lardo etc - would he go as often? Or would he do an Obama and play golf at Andrews Air Force Base?

The blatancy of his exploitation of the presidency for personal financial gain is just breath taking.

And Congress? Crickets, as usual.

ETA Less than half of his projected SS costs for the year - $40million - would seriously help each American officially living in poverty. I know where I would rather see the money go  - but many of these are the ones who will vote for him right up to the prison door.

 

[allthegoodnamesrgone]

8 minutes ago, sawasdee said:

@GreyhoundFanI actually teared up thinking that the beacon of hope that the US kept burning for so many years, with initiatives on Human Rights, AIDS, etc, has been almost completely extinguished in just 7 months. He's not just your president - the US president has been called "the leader of the free world" for good reason. And he's thrown 70 years of generous outreach away.

The U.S. gave up their status as the leader of the free world when we allowed Russia to install their pawn.  We are not even a democracy anymore, we are a theocratic dictatorship.

[GreyhoundFan]

Another one down! "16th charity cancels its event at President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Club, blaming ‘political turbulence’"

Spoiler

A Florida charity for children announced Tuesday that it was canceling plans to hold a fundraiser luncheon at President Trump's Mar-a-Lago Club next winter — adding to an exodus of its high-paying charity clients in the days after his comments about violent protests in Charlottesville.

The Unicorn Children's Foundation, based in Boca Raton, said it would move a planned “Fashion Show Luncheon” to another venue, but did not say which one. The group explained its decision with a statement saying “We are not a political organization and do not condone hatred or bullying on any level.”

“Due to the political turbulence associated with this choice of venue it would be a disservice to our supporters and our children to hold our event at Mar-a-Lago,” said Sharon Alexander, the group's chief executive, in the statement. “We prefer the conversations to be centered off the venue and instead focused on how we can help kids with special needs excel in their communities.”

In all, 16 charities have now canceled events at Mar-a-Lago since last Tuesday, when President Trump said there were “fine people” among the people who came to Charlottesville to protest the planned removal of a statue of Confederate general Robert E. Lee. That crowd also included neo-Nazis and white supremacists, including one man now charged with murder for running down counterprotesters with his car.

These departures have had a serious impact on a major line of business for the president's club: hosting the ritzy galas and luncheons that are the highlights of Palm Beach's winter social “season.” The events can bring in significant amounts of revenue: Charities hosting large galas can pay Trump's club between $125,000 and $275,000 for a single night's revelry. Even lunchtime events can cost charities between $25,000 and $85,000. Unicorn Children's Foundation did not immediately respond to a question about how much its luncheon was slated to cost.

The galas have also provided the president with a significant role in the social life of Palm Beach: On big gala nights, the island's uber-elite must come to him, to admire a club that doubles as Trump's second home. Even as president, Trump has continued to relish this role as Palm Beach's host in chief: He has returned to Mar-a-Lago repeatedly this year, calling it the “Winter White House,” and dropped in to glad-hand and speak at several galas.

Even before Trump's comments on Charlottesville, Mar-a-Lago seemed headed for a down year. The club was slated to host 16 galas and at least nine other events, including luncheons and a reception. Even before last week, some longtime clients had moved to other venues — with some citing hassles involved in getting their partygoers through the president's security bubble.

Now, 11 of the galas and five of the other events have been canceled. Other departures may be coming: One charity that had planned a luncheon at Mar-a-Lago, the Palm Beach Habilitation Center, said it is holding an “emergency board meeting” this week to reconsider that decision.

The Trump Organization has not responded to questions about what these departures have meant for Mar-a-Lago's bottom line. In recent years, the club has reported annual profits between $3 million and $8.6 million, according to documents filed in a Florida lawsuit. After Trump's election, the club also doubled the initiation fee for new members, from $100,000 to $200,000.

Can you imagine the tantrums that will be thrown when he is standing at Mar-a-Loco in his tux and nobody else is there?

[candygirl200413]

BUT guys! Even with him bankrupting SS, he just totally understands the working class so like why complain?! *all the sarcasm*.

It's funny, like when I was younger talking to my east african family members they would be like saying how many problems america had and I used to get a little defensive because even though I knew America definitely have their issues but I was always like we still have good things going for us. Ever since it looked like fuckface called Mexicans rapists I'm just forever disgusted.