Trump having a total meltdown on Twitter this morning, whining about the usual stuff like FAKE NEWS and the fake Russia story. Then he brags about his election win (of course), his SC pick, and the surging economy, and then to finish it all off he attacks Richard Blumenthal.
The President of the United States, ladies and gentlemen:
Quote:
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
Interesting to watch Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut talking about hoax Russian collusion when he was a phony Vietnam con artist!
4:47 AM - 7 Aug 2017
Quote:
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
Never in U.S.history has anyone lied or defrauded voters like Senator Richard Blumenthal. He told stories about his Vietnam battles and....
4:52 AM - 7 Aug 2017
Quote:
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
...conquests, how brave he was, and it was all a lie. He cried like a baby and begged for forgiveness like a child. Now he judges collusion?
5:01 AM - 7 Aug 2017
Quote:
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
Hard to believe that with 24/7 #Fake News on CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, NYTIMES & WAPO, the Trump base is getting stronger!
The decision to pull out of the trade deal has become a double hit on places like Eagle Grove. The promised bump of $10 billion in agricultural output over 15 years, based on estimates by the U.S. International Trade Commission, won’t materialize. But Trump’s decision to withdraw from the pact also cleared the way for rival exporters such as Australia, New Zealand and the European Union to negotiate even lower tariffs with importing nations, creating potentially greater competitive advantages over U.S. exports.
Quote:
On July 6, the EU, which already exports as much pork to Japan as the United States does, announced political agreement on a new deal that would give European pork farmers an advantage of up to $2 per pound over U.S. exporters under certain circumstances — a move which, if unchecked, is all but certain to create a widening gap between EU exports and those from the United States.
European wine producers, who sold more than $1 billion to Japan between 2014 and 2016, would also see a 15 percent tariff on exports to Japan disappear while U.S. exporters would continue to face that duty at the border. For other products, the deal essentially mirrors the rates negotiated under the TPP, which the United States has surrendered, giving the EU a clear advantage over U.S. farmers.
Quote:
The EU’s deal is all the more noteworthy because American farmers were relying on the TPP — to which the EU was not a member — to give them an advantage over European competitors. But in a further rebuke to the United States, Tokyo decided within a matter of weeks to offer the European nations virtually the same agricultural access to its market that United States trade officials had spent two excruciating years extracting through near-monthly meetings with their Japanese counterparts on the sidelines of the broader TPP negotiations; the United States is now left out.
Quote:
The remaining 11 TPP countries have already met two times, with a third meeting planned, to move ahead with the revival of the deal without the United States. The so-called TPP-11 would be in direct response to Trump’s trade policy. Economic forecasts already show projected gains for countries involved. Canada, according to one estimate, could permanently gain an annual market share of $412 million in beef and $111 million in pork sales to Japan by 2035, because lower tariffs would enable it to eclipse America’s position in the market.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to direwolf For This Useful Post:
Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel announced the decision at press conference, saying: "Chicago will not let our residents have their fundamental rights isolated and violated, and Chicago will never relinquish our status as a welcoming city."
Attorney General Jeff Sessions recently declared that the Justice Department would withhold federal grant money from so-called “sanctuary cities” – localities that refuse to comply with federal immigration enforcement.
Quote:
"We're not going to actually auction off our values as a city, so Monday morning the City of Chicago is going to court; we're going to take the Justice Department to court based on this," Mr Emmanuel told local news station WLS.
He added: "We find it unlawful and unconstitutional to be, as a city, coerced on a policy."
Quote:
Missing out on the federal Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grants could potentially cost sanctuary cities millions of dollars. Chicago alone was slated to receive $3.2m from the grant program this year to purchase new police equipment.
The funding is especially sensitive in Chicago, which Mr Trump frequently criticises for its high crime rate.
When will someone sue Trump for slander or libel for his outrageous claims particularly against the news media and other politicians?
Hey, anyone who follows Trump can unfollow and get his tweets from @UnfollowTrump and not boost his number of followers.
It's an interesting question of if you can sue him.
The case law will allow the president to be sued for things he does outside his duties as president. It won't allow him to be sued for carrying out his duties as president even if by doing so he causes harm. There is a whistleblower case where the Nixon tapes show Nixon saying to fire this guy. He tried to sue Nixon for damages and was denied because it was in Nixons duties as president.
So Clinton could be sued by Jones for Harassment because it occurred outside the presidency, Turmp University lawsuits were still valid as well. However I think a credible case could be made that Trump slandering the media is being done as part of him carrying out the office of the president.
There is a podcast by Roman Mars the 99% Invisable guy called "What can Trump teach us about con law" that does a pretty good job discusssion the relavent statutes and is a good listen.
Sam Harris really nailed it on the head with this amazing description of Trump
Quote:
"[Trump] strikes me as a distillation of everything that is wrong with the American character. This could be, in large measure, a caricature, but he has brought the caricature to life. If you take our materialism, and our ignorance about the rest of the world, and our satisfaction in that ignorance, our overconfidence, our pretension to greatness, even when we're actually being merely petty, our vanity, our sexism, boorishness, narcissism . . . a kind of childishness that doesn't have the virtues of childhood -- it's a kind of malignant childhood that is just all boastfulness and ME-ME-ME-ME-ME, without any of the curiosity or sympathy that you meet in actual children -- he is the living embodiment of a kind of American Grotesque. It's almost like he's a golem that has been conjured by the worst things that have ever been said about us as a country. If he can't grope it or put gold letters on it, it doesn't exist [to him]." -- Sam Harris
__________________ Allskonar fyrir Aumingja!!
The Following 43 Users Say Thank You to Thor For This Useful Post:
Sam Harris really nailed it on the head with this amazing description of Trump
He's certainly never pulled his punches, and he never lets up about it either. Immediately after the election:
Spoiler!
Quote:
So…what went wrong? And how bad is this?
Well, I think there are two parts to this story. First is unambiguously depressing, and this is the part that has been seized on by most liberals. But it’s only half the story, and it is this: Trump has ascended to power despite showing every sign of being dangerously unfit for it and by exposing in himself and in the electorate the worst that America has to offer: racism, sexism, antisemitism, a contempt for the most vulnerable among us, intimations of fascism, a positive love of bullying, total disdain for our democratic institutions, a willingness to make threats of political violence just for the fun of it, a contempt for science, and a love of conspiracy theories. I mean, I could run through it all again, the crazy things he’s said and the toxic alliances he’s made.
The irony is: If he had been merely half as bad, he would have seemed worse. He would have been more recognizably dangerous. But there were so many awful moments that the media couldn’t focus on them for long enough, or weigh their significance. And the big things were as big as they get, right? “Climate change is a hoax.” “Why can’t we use our nuclear weapons?” “Maybe nuclear proliferation is a good thing. Let the Saudis and the Japanese and the South Koreans build their own nukes.” “Who’s to say we should support our NATO alliances? What have they done for us?” “Putin is a great leader.” “Maybe we should just default on our debt, cut a better deal.” Any one of those things should have ended it.
But of course, the little things were just as weird, and should have been just as disqualifying. I mean, we have just elected a president who has bragged about invading the dressing rooms of beauty pageant contestants, so that he could see them naked, when they were effectively his employees—he owned the pageant. And then he even bullied some of these young women publicly, some on social media in the wee hours of the morning while campaigning for the presidency. And then he denied doing any of these things when no denial was even possible. We had all seen his tweets. And in response to the astonishment of the media, he looked the American people in the eye, and said, “No one respects women more than I do. No one.” And half the country accepted that as, what, the truth? As good theatre? As sketch comedy? I mean, there are really no words to describe how far from normal we have drifted here.
Quote:
So the question now is, How do we move forward, having declared the next president to be an absolute jackass and a sexual predator and, as I said in a previous podcast, a liar of a sort one would only expect to find in a mental hospital? How do we move from making jokes about placing the nuclear codes in the hands of a dangerous narcissist to actually placing the nuclear codes into his hands? Well, I’m afraid we just do. And we hope that this man who appears to lie about everything has also been lying about how awful a person he is. Let’s hope he isn’t who he has seemed to be. Let’s hope that he really is a cipher. Let’s hope that he was only pretending not to believe in climate change. Let’s hope that he was only pretending to admire Vladimir Putin. Let’s hope that he was only pretending to believe the sorts of conspiracy theories that helped get him elected. Let’s hope he really is a conman without any core commitments other than to maintain his own fame and glory. Because then there’s a chance that knowledgeable people might be able to influence him.
I thought President Obama struck the right note yesterday. We all must hope for Trump’s success at this point. We want his presidency to be a good one. It’s as if we’re all on an airplane together, and the real pilot has died, and now a man who has never flown an airplane has taken the controls and is attempting an emergency landing, and we’re all stuck in the back of the plane. So we’re rooting for the man in the cockpit. Of course, before he got his hands on the controls, some of us complained about how unqualified he was. There were a few other people back here with a lot of time spent flying planes, but this guy stormed the cockpit, and now he’s in the pilot seat, and the runway is in view, and we are out of time. So, let’s hope he’s talking to the people in air traffic control. But the problem, of course, is that it actually matters who’s in the tower. Just think about who Trump has surrounded himself with: Rudy Giuliani, Chris Christie, Sarah Palin, Mike Pence—this is a clown car of ideologues and incompetents, with a couple of religious maniacs thrown in. Again, we want him to land this plane, and it doesn’t have to be pretty. It doesn’t matter if we all wind up covered in vomit. We will be grateful just to be alive. And I will be very grateful if after four years Donald Trump hasn’t set back human progress a generation.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
Trump is a federal employee. One who is schooled on information handling. In retweeting this story he not only adds credence to the story, confirming the materials contained there in, but he also knowingly re-transmits the classified information. This is classified as second party dissemination and is a federal crime. There is a reason why intelligence officials are schooled to not discuss or make comment on stories where details from reports leak out. When you do comment, you confirm the existence of the intelligence gathering mechanism and the area of research being conducted. I wonder what Kelly is going to do about this leaker?
Trump is a federal employee. One who is schooled on information handling. In retweeting this story he not only adds credence to the story, confirming the materials contained there in, but he also knowingly re-transmits the classified information. This is classified as second party dissemination and is a federal crime. There is a reason why intelligence officials are schooled to not discuss or make comment on stories where details from reports leak out. When you do comment, you confirm the existence of the intelligence gathering mechanism and the area of research being conducted. I wonder what Kelly is going to do about this leaker?
But Clinton! E-mails! Obama! Comey! Disastrous Obamacare! Lock Her Up! Build the wall! Bad Hombres!
NOt the first time either. A week or so ago he confirmed via twitter he stopped wasteful payments on training Syrians. It was a well known program due to a multitude of leaks but was still a CIA program and the CIA never confirms nor denies things they are doing. Trump has no idea how to handle sensitive information. None. These things are so far beyond using a private server it's not funny.
Apparently a new report by top climate scientists was leaked to the NY Times yesterday, fearing that the Trump administration would try to suppress it.
The draft report by scientists from 13 federal agencies, which has not yet been made public, concludes that Americans are feeling the effects of climate change right now. It directly contradicts claims by President Trump and members of his cabinet who say that the human contribution to climate change is uncertain, and that the ability to predict the effects is limited.
“Evidence for a changing climate abounds, from the top of the atmosphere to the depths of the oceans,” a draft of the report states. A copy of it was obtained by The New York Times.
Quote:
The report was completed this year and is a special science section of the National Climate Assessment, which is congressionally mandated every four years. The National Academy of Sciences has signed off on the draft report, and the authors are awaiting permission from the Trump administration to release it.
One government scientist who worked on the report, Katharine Hayhoe, a professor of political science at Texas Tech University, called the conclusions among “the most comprehensive climate science reports” to be published. Another scientist involved in the process, who spoke to The New York Times on the condition of anonymity, said he and others were concerned that it would be suppressed.
Quote:
“It’s a fraught situation,” said Michael Oppenheimer, a professor of geoscience and international affairs at Princeton University who was not involved in the study. “This is the first case in which an analysis of climate change of this scope has come up in the Trump administration, and scientists will be watching very carefully to see how they handle it.”
Scientists say they fear that the Trump administration could change or suppress the report. But those who challenge scientific data on human-caused climate change say they are equally worried that the draft report, as well as the larger National Climate Assessment, will be publicly released.
For those who are interested, you can read the entire report here:
I just gave you 10. You asked for 2 or 3, and I gave you 10.
Except that she didn't. In the quote you provided.
Not once is a real solution mentioned. Same old smoke and mirrors of making promises no politician can keep, because there is no actual solution there. All she had to do was utter the words, universal healthcare, or medicare for all, or single payer system, and that would made the case. What she said, and what you posted, was political bull#### that screams "I don't have a solution."
The other snippet about her ability to understand the problems facing average Americans.
That is not reaching out to Americans and telling them you understand their plight. That is more policy wonk bull#### that people see right through. That is an appeal more to industry than it is to the people who need help. Great, you're committing $30B to something, but what am I getting out of this? What problem for me does this directly address? Is this going to get me my job back? Nothing concrete. An if you actually look at that plan, it doesn't align with other promises and contradicts itself. Coal communities are not going to make the United States a 21st Century energy superpower. Suggesting as much is blowing dirty smoke up the keisters of everyone.
She did none of that, which is why there was still a rift within the party. If she had adopted those key platform planks, the party would have united quickly and decisively.
Which means she was out of her element then, and an even worse politician than anyone imagined.
Disagree all you want, but the results speak for themselves.
Because she never countered the narrative. She never gained control of the narrative. She was her own worst enemy because she allowed Trump to frame her as he pleased.
Yeah, she was stiff and unlikeable, and that's coming from someone who supported her.
What election cycle did you watch??? Trump owned the media cycle, good and bad, and made sure he was able to frame Clinton as he pleased. Clinton never fought back with any significant force, and failed at making anything stick. Trump gave her opportunity after opportunity and she couldn't close the deal.
People are not logical. They are emotional beings and will vote with their heart and rarely use their heads. Have you not read the hockey forum? People ignore their heads and follow their hearts all the time. Whether it be bringing back an ex-player, or what prospect is the next big thing, or what player to draft, emotion plays into every decision and logic is ignored.
So, I had a long answer typed up the other day, but was in weekend golf tournament and had to leave it, unfinished, and when I got back, it was not on the ipad.
So, to recap,,, what I was looking for was some detailed things she should have said, like a quote, something you would have said verbatim, if you were her.
Your point of universal healthcare, fit my request, and I don't think that would have done anything except hurt her more. Most of Americans thought that Obamacare and ACA were separate things, and Republicans and Fox news had them convinced Obamacare was evil.
Anyways, my point is, I don't think she could have said or done anything to change the results, and I'll just leave it at that.
My second point is, Trump is a moron, and the American voters got what they deserved.
“This is the fallacy of Trump Republicanism writ large,” GOP strategist and Trump critic Rick Wilson remarks. “A con artist, reality TV clown, and scenery-chewing blowhard can get away with this. Rank-and-file Republicans will still have to answer to their constituents for a year of wheel-spinning as their president’s daily rage-tweeting, witch-hunting, and lunacy leads them down the broad road to political hell.”
