Trump 41: Waiting For My Impeachment

[47of74]

2 hours ago, apple1 said:

I am still VERY ANGRY about the whole issue of obscuring the ship name of the John McCain. Besides the tarp that was then removed, next there was a paint barge that just "happened" to get parked in front of the ship name. Then there was the fact that sailors assigned to the McCain were given leave so nobody saw them with caps bearing the ship name -- and as much as I cannot imagine anyone choosing to go listen to you-know-who, they were not permitted on the Wasp (as were sailors from other ships) for the POTUS "speech".

My brother served 24 years in the US Navy. Part of it was on the McCain. He says that the McCain was the best ship (out of several) that he served on.

This fiasco has been incredibly disrespectful to the McCain and its crew. Still angry.

And our fucking local media will all be fawning all over that orange bastard next month when he comes to Iowa.  Makes me fucking sick.  Especially the Dubuque paper, who get all pissy when people don't genuflect in front of Republicans.

I've gotta get a bigger swear jar.

[47of74]

By the way do you all think this swear jar is big enough?

[GreyhoundFan]

"Three crazy things about Trump’s latest rage-threat"

Spoiler

President Trump campaigned on a vow to force Mexico to pay for his border wall as part of his get-tough approach to keeping out migrants. None of this panned out — he’s not getting his wall, and his toughness isn’t deterring migrants, whose flow has exploded, driving him into a fury.

So Trump is now threatening to tax U.S. consumers to force Mexico to keep them out for him.

Welcome to Trump’s latest experiment in crafting complex policy decisions around impulsive rage-threats.

Trump is now threatening to slap a 5 percent tariff on all goods imported from Mexico, to force Mexico to stop the flow of migrants across the southern border. Those are set to hit on June 10.

If Trump decrees that Mexico has not sufficiently obeyed his directives, those tariffs will rise an additional 5 percent each month, until they hit 25 percent, where they will remain until Mexico has satisfied his demands.

This is an astonishingly reckless move, even by Trump’s standards. As The Post reports, it could upend the revamped North American Free Trade Agreement that Trump himself badly needs to succeed for reelection purposes. He needs congressional ratification to make that happen, but this could make that less likely.

What’s more, it could damage the economy. As Bloomberg reports, we import tens of billions of dollars’ worth of cars, trucks, computers and motor vehicle parts from Mexico, and complex supply chains that entangle U.S. products with Mexican ones could get ruptured, magnifying the tariffs’ impact. Bloomberg notes that resulting higher costs will “inevitably be passed on to consumers.”

Three other things about this are noteworthy:

The White House is being shifty on how we’ll know if this is “working,” and that’s exactly the point.

It’s not unreasonable for the Trump administration to generally want cooperation from Mexico in stemming the flow of asylum seekers, a new kind of immigration challenge that really is overwhelming our system. Previous administrations sought this.

What is unreasonable is that the White House won’t say what counts as meeting Trump’s demands. Administration officials say they want Mexico to do more to block Central American migrants from entering Mexico en route to the United States; to crack down more on smuggling networks; and to ensure that migrants can wait in Mexico safely, to implement Trump’s policy of keeping them there rather than entering the United States.

But as Vox reports, officials won’t specify benchmarks for these goals. One official actually says this will be done on an “ad hoc basis,” while also saying “success” entails the number of people crossing the border dropping “in a significant and substantial way.”

Given that migration flows are seasonal, it’s possible that those flows could drop, and Trump could then end the tariffs and declare that they “worked,” as Dara Lind suggests. That would be the whole point of being shifty about what counts as “working.”

But even if that happens, it probably would have done so without the tariffs, and there’s no telling what other damage they might do. Beyond all this, it’s not clear how much of an impact Mexico can have, even if it does everything Trump wants, because it’s such a complicated and vast problem, and has many causes.

Trump is raging at Mexico over migrants, while also cutting off aid to Central America.

Trump wants Mexico to do more to stem the flow of asylum seekers, but he’s actively undermining efforts that have a real chance at reducing that flow. He has cut off aid designed to mitigate the terrible conditions in Northern Triangle countries that are a key cause of the migrations.

Members of Trump’s own administration disagree with this: Kevin McAleenan, the acting homeland security secretary, has repeatedly called for such aid to continue.

Trump, however, sees cutting off aid as a way to force those countries to stop “sending” migrants our way. That’s in keeping with his worldview, which sees making asylum seekers suffer and threatening their home countries as the way to halt migrations — since both are just trying to scam us — rather than seeing them as complicated problems with root causes that need attention.

“Move after move after move is about showing how tough they are,” Cecilia Muñoz, a senior policy adviser to Barack Obama who worked on multiple migration crises, told me. “What we have is a refugee crisis in our hemisphere. We need a much broader and more international approach.” Democrats, by the way, have rolled out such an approach.

One can envision scenarios in which Mexico does do more, but even if Trump finds a way of declaring a win on this, there’s no denying that the threats, deterrence efforts and all-around “toughness” have disastrously failed by Trump’s own metrics.

Congress could stop this, but won’t.

Trump is invoking authorities under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which is ordinarily used to impose sanctions, as the legal basis for going around Congress to inflict new tariffs on Mexico. Even some Republicans, such as Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, question the move’s legality.

This is part of a broader pattern, in which Trump has frequently invoked the authority to act unilaterally to impose tariffs, by absurdly claiming they are necessary to address national security or national emergencies. Bipartisan bills have already been introduced to rein in these authorities in some contexts.

Congress could constrain the authority Trump is currently claiming, according to Stephen Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas at Austin. It could amend the law Trump is relying upon to “impose tighter constraints on when the president can unilaterally raise tariffs” in response to such a supposed “emergency,” Vladeck told me.

Needless to say, even though Republicans oppose Trump’s tariffs and his legal justification for them, this won’t ever happen.

The tangerine toddler is not going to be happy until the US is a smoldering pile of ash.

[GreyhoundFan]

I still can't believe that Dumpy is supposed to represent the US at this important and solemn event: "How Trump will ruin the 75th anniversary of D-Day"

Spoiler

In June of 1984, President Ronald Reagan traveled to Normandy, France, to commemorate the 40th anniversary of D-Day. “These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc,” he said in one of his most memorable speeches. “These are the men who took the cliffs. These are the champions who helped free a continent. These are the heroes who helped end a war.”

Even his most committed opponents would acknowledge that this was what Reagan was best at: the occasions that demanded rhetoric both grand and grounded, meant to make every American feel connected to the country’s history, delivered with perfectly pitched emotion by a skilled actor.

There is about to be another commemoration at Normandy, but this one may not be quite so inspiring:

World leaders will gather in solemn assembly next week above the sandy beaches of Normandy to mark the 75th anniversary of the world-changing D-Day invasion of France. It’s typically a heartfelt tribute to alliance and sacrifice and a unified vow for enduring unity, outweighing any national or political skirmish of the moment.

That’s what has some U.S. veterans and others worried about President Donald Trump’s attendance. The president has shown a repeated willingness to inject nationalistic rhetoric and political partisanship into moments once aimed at unity. For Trump, there is no water’s edge for politics, no veneer of nonpartisanship around military or national security matters.

The president, who did not serve in the military before becoming commander in chief, has feuded with Gold Star families, blasted political opponents on foreign soil, and mocked Sen. John McCain, a prisoner of war, for being captured by the enemy. Trump’s antipathy for the late senator was so well known that the White House this week requested that the Navy keep the USS McCain out of the president’s line of sight during a recent trip to Japan, so as not to rile the president.

We all know that the chances that Trump will do something to ruin this occasion are extremely high. As much as he loves talking about “my military,” there’s one part of the values we associate with the military that Trump is not so comfortable with: sacrifice.

Trump likes the toughness, he’ll float a pardon for accused war criminals, but the idea of giving something up for a larger cause is not something he can relate to.

I suspect that’s one of the sources of his long-standing hatred of McCain. It was the way McCain was so often praised for his suffering and sacrifice as a prisoner of war in Vietnam that irked Trump so much, which is why he tried to recast McCain’s war record as one of weakness. “He’s not a war hero,” Trump said. “He’s a war hero because he was captured. I like people that weren’t captured, okay?”

An event marking the anniversary of D-Day is all about honoring sacrifice. Can you imagine Trump paying tribute to “the men who took the cliffs”? I doubt he’ll even be able to speak the words, much less do so in a way that makes Americans feel connected to that history.

This is one of the key roles of a president — or at least something that until recently we expected from presidents. On ceremonial occasions or moments of crisis and loss. they’re called upon to represent the entire nation, to make us remember or understand something and feel the same thing at the same time.

As the two parties have sorted themselves more completely into opposing ideological camps and negative partisanship has increased, that has become more difficult. But not impossible, at least not until now. Just after the Sept. 11 attacks in 2001, for instance, George W. Bush’s approval ratings shot past 90 percent, not so much because he did anything in particular but because he made some public statements that conveyed a combination of sorrow and resolve that resonated with what Americans were feeling.

One certainly wonders whether Republicans would have rallied around Al Gore in the same way Democrats did with Bush had Gore been president at the time. We don’t have to wonder about how they treated Barack Obama, with some of them constantly insisting not just that his policy priorities were wrong but that he was not even an American and therefore his entire presidency was illegitimate.

The leader of that racist effort was, of course, none other than Donald Trump. Yet despite it, Obama never stopped trying to tell a story about America that included everyone. His rhetoric shared something with Reagan’s, in that they both liked to describe ordinary Americans who became heroic in the service of their country. Here’s part of the speech Obama gave at the 50th anniversary of “Bloody Sunday” in Selma, Ala.:

What could more profoundly vindicate the idea of America than plain and humble people – the unsung, the downtrodden, the dreamers not of high station, not born to wealth or privilege, not of one religious tradition but many – coming together to shape their country’s course?

What greater expression of faith in the American experiment than this; what greater form of patriotism is there; than the belief that America is not yet finished, that we are strong enough to be self-critical, that each successive generation can look upon our imperfections and decide that it is in our power to remake this nation to more closely align with our highest ideals?

Trump couldn’t give a speech like that, either. He calls us not to sacrifice or common purpose but to selfishness and greed, the characteristics he himself embodies so completely. He thinks not paying his taxes “makes me smart.” He sees every interaction with another person or another country as a zero-sum contest where you’re either the winner or the loser.

It’s on occasions such as the D-Day anniversary when we’re reminded just what we’re missing with Trump in the Oval Office. It would be challenging at this point for any president to bind us together, to tell us our history in a way that could make us feel even for a moment that we’re connected to one another. But it would never occur to Donald Trump to even try.

I truly despised Saint Ronnie, but he did deliver speeches well.

[AmazonGrace]

Trump thinks D-Day is short for Donald-Day.

[Audrey2]

5 hours ago, 47of74 said:

By the way do you all think this swear jar is big enough?

At the rate Donnie, Mikey, the idiots in Congress and the Neanderthals in state governments are going, the Grand Canyon wouldn't be a big enough swear jar!

2 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

I still can't believe that Dumpy is supposed to represent the US at this important and solemn event: "How Trump will ruin the 75th anniversary of D-Day"

  Reveal hidden contents

In June of 1984, President Ronald Reagan traveled to Normandy, France, to commemorate the 40th anniversary of D-Day. “These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc,” he said in one of his most memorable speeches. “These are the men who took the cliffs. These are the champions who helped free a continent. These are the heroes who helped end a war.”

Even his most committed opponents would acknowledge that this was what Reagan was best at: the occasions that demanded rhetoric both grand and grounded, meant to make every American feel connected to the country’s history, delivered with perfectly pitched emotion by a skilled actor.

There is about to be another commemoration at Normandy, but this one may not be quite so inspiring:

World leaders will gather in solemn assembly next week above the sandy beaches of Normandy to mark the 75th anniversary of the world-changing D-Day invasion of France. It’s typically a heartfelt tribute to alliance and sacrifice and a unified vow for enduring unity, outweighing any national or political skirmish of the moment.

That’s what has some U.S. veterans and others worried about President Donald Trump’s attendance. The president has shown a repeated willingness to inject nationalistic rhetoric and political partisanship into moments once aimed at unity. For Trump, there is no water’s edge for politics, no veneer of nonpartisanship around military or national security matters.

The president, who did not serve in the military before becoming commander in chief, has feuded with Gold Star families, blasted political opponents on foreign soil, and mocked Sen. John McCain, a prisoner of war, for being captured by the enemy. Trump’s antipathy for the late senator was so well known that the White House this week requested that the Navy keep the USS McCain out of the president’s line of sight during a recent trip to Japan, so as not to rile the president.

We all know that the chances that Trump will do something to ruin this occasion are extremely high. As much as he loves talking about “my military,” there’s one part of the values we associate with the military that Trump is not so comfortable with: sacrifice.

Trump likes the toughness, he’ll float a pardon for accused war criminals, but the idea of giving something up for a larger cause is not something he can relate to.

I suspect that’s one of the sources of his long-standing hatred of McCain. It was the way McCain was so often praised for his suffering and sacrifice as a prisoner of war in Vietnam that irked Trump so much, which is why he tried to recast McCain’s war record as one of weakness. “He’s not a war hero,” Trump said. “He’s a war hero because he was captured. I like people that weren’t captured, okay?”

An event marking the anniversary of D-Day is all about honoring sacrifice. Can you imagine Trump paying tribute to “the men who took the cliffs”? I doubt he’ll even be able to speak the words, much less do so in a way that makes Americans feel connected to that history.

This is one of the key roles of a president — or at least something that until recently we expected from presidents. On ceremonial occasions or moments of crisis and loss. they’re called upon to represent the entire nation, to make us remember or understand something and feel the same thing at the same time.

As the two parties have sorted themselves more completely into opposing ideological camps and negative partisanship has increased, that has become more difficult. But not impossible, at least not until now. Just after the Sept. 11 attacks in 2001, for instance, George W. Bush’s approval ratings shot past 90 percent, not so much because he did anything in particular but because he made some public statements that conveyed a combination of sorrow and resolve that resonated with what Americans were feeling.

One certainly wonders whether Republicans would have rallied around Al Gore in the same way Democrats did with Bush had Gore been president at the time. We don’t have to wonder about how they treated Barack Obama, with some of them constantly insisting not just that his policy priorities were wrong but that he was not even an American and therefore his entire presidency was illegitimate.

The leader of that racist effort was, of course, none other than Donald Trump. Yet despite it, Obama never stopped trying to tell a story about America that included everyone. His rhetoric shared something with Reagan’s, in that they both liked to describe ordinary Americans who became heroic in the service of their country. Here’s part of the speech Obama gave at the 50th anniversary of “Bloody Sunday” in Selma, Ala.:

What could more profoundly vindicate the idea of America than plain and humble people – the unsung, the downtrodden, the dreamers not of high station, not born to wealth or privilege, not of one religious tradition but many – coming together to shape their country’s course?

What greater expression of faith in the American experiment than this; what greater form of patriotism is there; than the belief that America is not yet finished, that we are strong enough to be self-critical, that each successive generation can look upon our imperfections and decide that it is in our power to remake this nation to more closely align with our highest ideals?

Trump couldn’t give a speech like that, either. He calls us not to sacrifice or common purpose but to selfishness and greed, the characteristics he himself embodies so completely. He thinks not paying his taxes “makes me smart.” He sees every interaction with another person or another country as a zero-sum contest where you’re either the winner or the loser.

It’s on occasions such as the D-Day anniversary when we’re reminded just what we’re missing with Trump in the Oval Office. It would be challenging at this point for any president to bind us together, to tell us our history in a way that could make us feel even for a moment that we’re connected to one another. But it would never occur to Donald Trump to even try.

I truly despised Saint Ronnie, but he did deliver speeches well.

No. Just no. D Day is one of our most solemn and sacred days. On that day, too many good men sacrifices their lives to rid the world of tyranny. I'm sick at the thought that Donnie will be remotely near this sacred place.

[GreyhoundFan]

1 hour ago, Audrey2 said:

I'm sick at the thought that Donnie will be remotely near this sacred place.

I read elsewhere that the weather forecast is for heavy rain and wind. That may keep the orange snowflake at his hotel.

[Dandruff]

I hope the 2020 election campaign is filled with comparisons of the OT to John McCain.  It seems to be a particularly sore point, and I suspect that references to "a real man" who stood up to defend his country would resonate among some Trump voters and patriotic Americans in general.

[Gobsmacked]

Trumpy McFuckface is on his way to the UK. Along with his Trump mobiles, 1000 staff etc. 

We will be sending him back asap . I don't do royalty but I do feel very sorry for the Queen. 93 years young and having to deal once again with his orange -arse-ness. 

[Dandruff]

2 hours ago, Gobsmacked said:

Trumpy McFuckface is on his way to the UK. Along with his Trump mobiles, 1000 staff etc.

What does the protest schedule look like?

[Howl]

The Brits are getting ready for the Trump invasion.  UK's Sky TV advert for Trump coverage is the best thing ever: 

 

[Gobsmacked]

Huge protests are being arranged in London. 14 + uk towns and cities are arranging coaches to take folk down to London from all over Britain. 

There will be a March in Edinburgh on Tuesday. Meeting outside St Giles Catherdral ( not sure what time yet but did see 3pm mentioned). March down the Royal Mile to Holyrood. 

I can't post details on my poor aging phone.  Prof Google has info. 

News just in! Prince Andrew is being drafted into the 'fun' to spend two days with the official party to distract Trumpy Orange-bum  with talk about Golf, should any un- diplomatic conversation occur!!!!!   

 

Edited June 1, 2019 by Gobsmacked
Added a bit

[Howl]

From HuffPo:  

Ex-Ethics Chief Tweets Very Long List Of Bad Signs From Donald Trump’s Presidency

Walter Shaub urged Americans not to “underestimate the threat to our republic from within” with his lengthy Twitter thread.

Click below to read the unroll of Shaub's twitter thread. 

Heed the signs and don't underestimate the threat to our republic from within

 

[Gobsmacked]

Now I'm reeeeeeally pissed off. TRUMP fuck off. Keep out of Brexit.  ( Scotland doesn't want it), Keep off our NHS. You fucking great orange fucking idiot.

rant over. 

[GreyhoundFan]

On 6/1/2019 at 8:30 AM, Gobsmacked said:

Trumpy McFuckface is on his way to the UK. Along with his Trump mobiles, 1000 staff etc. 

We will be sending him back asap . I don't do royalty but I do feel very sorry for the Queen. 93 years young and having to deal once again with his orange -arse-ness. 

Hey, you will get the full Dumpy experience, since Junior, Ivanka, Eric, and Tiffany will all be there.

Please feel free to keep all of them. Or, better yet, ship them off to an uncharted and uninhabited island.

And to give you a little taste of how the visit will go,  he insulted the Duchess of Sussex, calling her "nasty".

[Gobsmacked]

Sensible folk in The UK are NOT lookng forward to this visit. Teresa May is only Prime Minister until he leaves. God knows who the Tories will choose in her place. Boris Johnson is a bumbling idiot on the outside but evil and dangerous. Jacob Rees-Mogg is a Dickension looking dangerous prat. Roll on the next General Election. The whole world is going tits up. 

[Audrey2]

I would love to make a joke about not letting the Trumps back in the US, saying their passports were fake, but I wouldn't want to impose them on Great Britain. Can we deport them to Russia?

[Dandruff]

2 hours ago, Audrey2 said:

I would love to make a joke about not letting the Trumps back in the US, saying their passports were fake, but I wouldn't want to impose them on Great Britain. Can we deport them to Russia?

I'm thinking N. Korea.

[AmazonGrace]

 

[AmazonGrace]

he's finally been told what "diplomacy" means:

 

[47of74]

A teenager decided to welcome fuck face to the UK

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/trump-uk-visit-penis-stansted-airport-protest-climate-change-real-essex-a8941271.html

A teenager has mowed an anti-Trump message, complete with a giant penis, into the grass of his family home ahead of the US president’s UK state visit.

Ollie Nancarrow spent his weekend mowing the words “Oi Trump” into his lawn, near Hatfield Heath, in Essex.

The 18-year-old also used the mower to etch a giant polar bear, penis and the words “climate change is real” into the grass, according to the Bishop’s Stortford Independent.

Of course Trump McFuckface was probably too busy rubbing one out to Faux News to notice.

[fraurosena]

4 hours ago, AmazonGrace said:

 

Either he has a body double or he had hair transplants and wanted to show them off.

[apple1]

(Warning: This post jumps all over the place. Apologies.)

1) That episode in church is at McLean Bible Church - where he went for a grand total of (I have read) eleven minutes, coming from the golf course, where I imagine he spent a lot more than 11 minutes. Apparently so he could be the center of attention. To which I, as a self-identified Christian, say the following:

"And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly." (That's in Matthew chapter 6).

2) I foresee an upsurge in number of T shirts sold that say NASTY.

3) To all of you in the UK: I'm. So. Embarrassed.

Edited June 3, 2019 by apple1

[GreyhoundFan]

I love how they used the Dumpy picture where he is trying to look stern/serious, but really looks like he's constipated. I guess he's had too many Big Macs.

 

[47of74]

Oh how I wish this had been real...

Quote

Her Majesty has courted controversy today after critics suggested her choice of hats was a calculated comment on the US president during his state visit.

The Queen’s choice of clothing has, in the past, been interpreted as a mechanism for expressing opinions usually denied to the monarch – including an emerald green dress on a visit to Ireland and a blue and gold hat after the EU referendum.

It is suggested that her choice of a hat with ‘TWAT’ picked out in flowers and a siren which blows a raspberry every time Trump speaks has a hidden message which royal-watchers around the country are keen to decode.

“It can be difficult to know what the Queen is thinking, so you have to pick up on subtle cues like the large, motorised, rotating middle finger on the brim of her headwear,” said Simon Prince-Williams, NewsThump’s Royal Correspondent.