Politikk, religion og samfunn President Donald J. Trump - Quo vadis? (Del 1)
- Trådstarter Hardingfele
- Startdato
Diskusjonstråd Se tråd i gallerivisning
-
- Status
Ccruiser
Gjest
Gøy å bla i "arkivet"
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Calling it “the least I can do for my country,” the White House press secretary, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, said on Saturday morning that she would lie for free during the government shutdown.
“Now more than ever it’s important that the stream of falsehoods and distortions from this White House continues to flow in a steady and uninterrupted fashion,” Sanders said. “To achieve that, for the duration of the government shutdown I will be lying on a pro-bono basis.”
Sanders said that Donald Trump had asked that she keep a full accounting of the lies she told during the shutdown so that she could be reimbursed for them later, but she turned down that offer. “I’ve often said that I like to lie so much I would do it for free,” she said. “This is a chance to put my money where my mouth is.”
The press secretary said that her offer had already inspired other top Administration figures to lie for free during the shutdown, including Vice-President Mike Pence, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, and White House doctor Ronny Jackson.
After making her announcement, Sanders moved on to a broad range of other topics, including her assertion that the government had not shut down.
For ordens skyld: satire.
ABC "Fake" News tar tak i noen helt konkrete og enkelt avprøvbare utsagn fra presidenten. Ett slikt utsagn ville tidligere vært nok til å senke en president, fordi det ville vært urovekkende tegn på manglende kontakt med virkeligheten.
ABC valgte syv fra øverste hylle:
ANALYSIS: 7 of some of the most glaring inaccuracies of Trump's first year - ABC News
Den første er fantastisk og de øvrige seks er også hinsides. Men, ærlig talt, hva er USA i gang med? Trump leverer, i snitt, 7 tweets pr dag og bruker timer på fjernsyn, som leverer påskudd til de fleste av hans tweets, der han forsøker å "correct the record" etter sitt eget Irrsinn.
President Donald Trump has kept media fact checkers working overtime during his first year in office. Both the Washington Post and New York Times have kept running tallies of the misinformation coming from the president, a form of White House press coverage virtually unseen in modern history.
And it's for good reason.
The president has become known for his inaccurate and/ or misleading statements, often dismissed by his many supporters as "unfiltered" or "real talk." Here’s a look at what ABC News has deemed some of the most glaring and objectively false claims put forth by the White House during President Trump’s first year in office.
1. "We have signed more legislation than anybody. We broke the record of Harry Truman." — Donald Trump on Wednesday, December 27th, 2017 in an event in West Palm Beach
Not only is that claim false, it’s about as far from the truth as it could possibly be – and hence — first on our list. Records show that by year’s end Trump had signed 94 bills into law, fewer than any president since Truman.
2. “The overall audience was, I think, the biggest ever to watch an inauguration address, which was a great thing.” — Donald Trump, Thursday January 26th, 2016 in an interview with CBN News.
In one of his first presidential acts, Donald Trump called the National Park Service's acting director the morning after his inauguration to express displeasure over a retweet of inauguration crowd photos from the agency's official account, which heavily favored President Barack Obama. All accessible data, from television ratings and digital stream counts, to the crowd photos and official city estimates, show that President Obama did in fact draw a bigger crowd. But that didn't stop the president from instructing his press secretary Sean Spicer to summon reporters to the briefing room that Sunday to excoriate them, without taking questions, about the claim that President Barack Obama drew a larger crowd. It turned into a defining moment for Spicer.
"That was the largest audience to witness an inauguration, period." — Sean Spicer on Saturday, January 21st, 2017 in a press conference
After leaving the White House late last year Spicer acknowledged his claim was inaccurate.
3. “I will be asking for a major investigation on VOTER FRAUD.” — Donald Trump tweet, Wednesday January 25th, 2017
In May of 2017 the White House established a voter fraud commission with hopes it might be able to substantiate the myth perpetuated by Donald Trump that he lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton because millions of votes were cast illegally. A year later the president was forced to disband the commission after it was unable to produce results. The White House blamed the states for refusing to participate and said the data they managed to collect would be "destroyed." To date the White House has produced no evidence to support the false claim.
4. “If you look at President Obama and other presidents, most of them didn’t make calls.” — Donald Trump, Monday October 16th, 2017.
That was President Trump falsely asserting that his predecessors did not place consolation calls to the families of fallen soldiers, as he had done. What's most glaring about this falsehood is the nerve the President managed to strike on such a sacred and somber subject matter by turning the combat-death of an American soldier into an unprompted political pot shot on President Barack Obama. “This is an outrageous and disrespectful lie even by Trump standards," President Obama's former deputy national security adviser, Ben Rhodes, tweeted in response.
5. “Obamacare has been repealed in this bill.” — Donald Trump, Wednesday December 20, 2017
After Congressional Republicans spent much of the legislative year trying (and failing) to kill Obamacare, President Trump attempted to sneak a political-fast one when he repeatedly claimed his end-of-year tax bill victory “essentially repealed Obamacare.” Yes, the tax bill eliminated Obamacare’s individual mandate (which funds a small percentage of the health plans) but the law is still very much intact.
6. “Whether it’s a real video, the threat is real and that is what the president is talking about…” — White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders, Thursday November 30th, 2017
Setting aside the fact that the president chose to retweet a series of anti-Muslim videos from a fringe British Nationalist Group (at least one of which was proven to be fake) his defense for spreading that false propaganda was particularly egregious. His press secretary Sarah Sanders argued that the veracity of videos, one of which falsely claims to show a "Muslim migrant" beating up a "Dutch boy on crutches," ought not distract from the president's belief that "the threat is real." A reminder that President Trump has hurled the "fake news" insult at the media 186 times on Twitter alone during his first year.
7. “We’re the highest taxed nation in the developed world, and I think the undeveloped world too.” — Donald Trump, Tuesday September 26, 2017
The Washington Post reports the President has made this claim at least 55 times year, but according to Pew Research Center, using 2014 data, taxes on Americans are below average for developed countries.
Så man har en "budsjettavtale". For de neste tre ukene.
Senate breaks budget impasse, paving way for government to reopen
Neste spetakkel kommer 8 februar med ny dramatikk, krisestemning og ultimative krav. Dette er virkelig ingen måte å styre et land på.
Neste bok om Trump-administrasjonen er også på vei, ute 29 januar:
‘Defiance Disorder’: Another new book describes chaos in Trump’s White House
This new Trump book could do even more damage than Michael Wolff’s. Here’s why.
Sist redigert:665finger
Gjest
utrolig. håper det er ok at jeg bruker linken?
Obama fikk også kritikk fordi han brukte en beige dress. Fryktelige ting.
Americans outraged at President Obama's tan suit - Chicago Tribune
Det er nesten ikke til å forstå; det lengst levende demokrati, med en grunnlov så gjennomsyret med angsten for dets forfall, og dertil hørende kontroll og balanse, er på vei inn i bananrepublikkeriet/oligarkiet. De har en del å reparere i lovene (og ideologien) om de nå overlever. Gud må vite hvem som skal lære dem det!
Det ordner seg nok, for å sitere Winston Churchill:
Trump erkjenner at det var et feilgrep å sende Spicer ut på første pressekonferanse med en latterlig påstand om størrelsen på innvielsespublikummet. Alle kunne se at Trumps publikum var langt mindre enn Obamas, mens Trump forlangte at Spicer skulle si det var tidenes største publikum. "Period!"
Spicer kokte av sinne over hva han måtte gjøre. Hans første møte med pressen (og verden) ville bli et revynummer.
Det var årsaken til at han oppførte seg slik han gjorde.
Kellyanne Conway forsøkte å få Trump til å la være å forlange at Spicer skulle gjennomføre, men Trump var ubøyelig.
Etterpå har Trump innrømmet at dette var et feilgrep.
MEN - interessant nok brukte hans tilhengere lang tid på å vise til at Trump hadde rett og at hans publikum var gigantisk, og at MSM løy. Også her inne på HFS.
Gruppepress og ensretting har sin egen merkelige psykologi. "Who are you going to believe? Me? Or your lying eyes?"
https://www.rawstory.com/2018/01/tr...nd-inauguration-crowd-size-fox-news-reporter/Eksempelvis Mr. Brekke, som lot seg lure og klaget over MSM, liberal presse og til og med "linket" Lincoln til dette. Noe som gjorde at sistnevnte snudde seg i graven, vil jeg tro.
Takk for flott bilde - også fra et fototeknisk ståsted. Washington DC er en flott by.
Det som er interresant her, er om man zoomer inn mot Washington memorial (obeliksen),
er at det er langt flere mennesker i parken enn det som kommer fram i bildene fra Fela.
Bildene fra Obamas første innsetting er tydligvis tatt under selve høydepunktet - presidentens
edsavsigelse - mens bildene fra Trumps innsetting må være tatt før (eller etter) edsavsigelsen -
da parken ennå ikke var fylt (eller var begynt å tømmes). Mao. det er "fake (om enn morsomme)
news" Hardingfela kommer drassende med. Hvor ble det av rettferdighetssansen til folk?
Jeg skjønner godt at Trump blir forbannet, da denne lille detaljen bare er toppen av det isfjellet
- som han blir utsatt for av "den liberale pressen". Og dilitantene i europeisk MSM...
MSM har et alvorlig problem. I Storbritannia (Brexit) og USA (Trump) har rundt halvparten av den
stemmeberettigede delen av befolkningen null tro på det de leser i den politisk korrekte MSM.
Hadde de hatt det, hadde hverken Brexit eller Trump skjedd. Og resten av europa kommer etter.
"You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but you cannot
fool all the people all the time". Abraham Lincoln.
mvh
Gunnar Brekke
^Husker jeg kommenterte dengang at Spicer var fly forbannet over hva han måtte gjøre fordi han visste hvor dumt det ville fremstå.
Men etter ett år med diktatorredigert virkelighet er vi vel snart ikke lenger i stand til å forbauses av noe.
Trump husker knapt fra time-til-time nå:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/22/opinion/trump-government-shutdown.html?
Mr. Trump has sent wildly contradictory messages. The Dreamers, he said last February, are “absolutely incredible kids” who deserve to be treated “with heart.” And yet, in September he created this problem by ordering an end to the program if Congress didn’t find a permanent fix by March 5. Two weeks ago he promised to deliver them a “bill of love.” But two days later he rejected a bipartisan deal to that end.
On Friday, hours before the shutdown deadline, Mr. Trump reportedly reached an agreement with the Senate minority leader, Chuck Schumer, which would have protected Dreamers and increased border security, but he then reversed course at the urging of the anti-immigrant hawks who circle the Oval Office — mainly his chief of staff, John Kelly, and senior adviser, Stephen Miller. On Sunday, the president unleashed his inner Mr. Miller and attacked Democrats who, he said, “just want illegal immigrants to pour into our nation unchecked.”
So what does this White House want? No one seems to know, including Mr. Trump himself. Mr. Schumer said dealing with the president is “like negotiating with Jell-O.” And that was a key factor precipitating the weekend’s shutdown. One Republican strategist said Mr. Trump’s lack of any clear convictions, combined with his ignorance of basic policy matters, “emboldens all parties to take positions that they won’t compromise.”
Og Republikanerne i Kongressen er i ferd med å gå lei av Miller:
https://www.aftenposten.no/verden/i...kene-Selv-sentrale-republikanere-har-fatt-nok
Oh, they are gonna reel him in.....
Bob som Donald or the other way around?
Det tetter seg til.
Trump forsøkte å sparke Mueller, møtte motstand fra både Priebus og Bannon, og sjefsadvokaten til Det hvite hus meldte at han ville gå av dersom Trump gjennomførte planen.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/25/us/politics/trump-mueller-special-counsel-russia.html
I mellomtiden har nederlandsk etterretning levert bevis for at republikanerne har hatt støtte fra russiske ressurser i valgpåvirkning før Trump ble partiets kandidat.
https://www.volkskrant.nl/tech/dutc...ssia-s-interference-in-us-elections~a4561913/
Teorien er at russerne brukte dette for å få avslørt nettet av amerikanske agenter i Europa.
===
Skjønner godt at House of Cards ga seg. Underlige tider når et politisk parti, som har all makt i et land, gjør hva det kan for å så tvil om etterretningsressursene til landet som partiet, angivelig, skal støtte.
Sist redigert:GGjestemedlem
Gjest
Den store hestehandelen. Innvandrere mot mur.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/wor...izenship-in-exchange-for-mexico-a3750066.html
Donald Trump to offer 1.8 million undocumented immigrants path to citizenship in exchange for Mexico border wall funding
Demokratene er utrolig svake her. De ha i praksis gitt Trump og republikanerne alt de vil ha i bytte mot en lovnad fra McConnell om at de skal behandle DACA snart. Selv ikke hans egne stoler på McConnell, Jeff Flake kunne ikke gi et definitivt positivt ja på om McConnell kom til å holde løftet sitt. Når budsjettet, inkl. "Wall funding" er i havn så er det ingenting som hindrer McConnell i å bruke DACA som forhandlingskort i neste sak også. Demokratene i senatet hadde vært perfekte kandidater for Nigeria-svindel, "pengene kommer, vi må bare ha dekket noen kostnader først..."
Det går rundt for Sean Hannity. Selv Fox klarer ikke å følge med.
Video i linken: https://twitter.com/MEPFuller/statu...livewire/hannity-fox-news-forced-admit-defeat
Stonekettle Station tar for seg David Nunes, som har satt sammen et Memo så hemmelig at han ikke kan se det selv, men han har vist det til mange. Eller noe sånt.
Jim Wright bruker en del ord, men verdt å lese.
Stonekettle Station: Dirty Tricks
Ja, men her er han ute i spekulativt landskap. Han mistenker at republikanerne har brukt NSA til å spionere på FBI for å undergrave Muellers etterforskning. Det vil i så fall være særdeles alvorlig, men en enklere forklaring som står mer i stil med Trumps modus operandi er at de bare finner på ting. Hvorfor bruke tid og ressurser på overvåkning hvis man kan ta beskyldninger ut av løse luften? Det funker jo for Trump.
^Wright ønsker vel bare å indikere at dersom det skulle være hardt belegg for påstandene, så må kilden være NSA, men ellers er han vel både der og i tidligere sammenhenger tydelig på at hardlinerne og spyttslikkerne i GOP dikter fritt.
Det er underholdende med hemmeligstemplet materiale som ikke kan vises til Kongressmedlemmer som har aller høyeste sikkerhetsklarering, men som er delt med de gærne onklene i Freedom Caucus.
En god gjennomgang av det villnisset som Trump-administrasjonen og GOP har rotet seg inn i, i forsøket på å late som om russisk innblanding i valget skal ignoreres.
https://crooked.com/article/trump-mueller-russia-treason/
When Maggie Haberman of the New York Times asked White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders on Wednesday to flesh out the president’s definition of collusion, Sanders reset the benchmark for collusion so far beyond the horizon that it now encompasses a mind-blowing amount of scandalous behavior.
“I think the accusation against the President is that he had help winning the election, and that’s simply untrue,” she said. “The President won because he was the better candidate.” Russia may have illegallyhacked his political opponents and leaked the contents of their emails at strategically pivotal moments, but “that doesn’t mean that he participated in it,” Sanders added, and when he says there’s no collusion, “he’s stating for himself and to anything that he would be a part of, or know about, or have sanctioned.”
Trump, in an impromptu Q&A with reporters at the White House this week, characterized the obstructive episodes that news media and congressional investigators have uncovered as “fighting back,” suggesting his “no obstruction” claim could encompass the kind of criminal behavior that is about to land his former national security adviser Michael Flynn, his former foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos, and possibly others, in federal prison. We learned Thursday evening that it also encompasses an aborted presidential order, in June of last year, to fire Robert Mueller.
It’s not collusion, in other words, so long as it didn’t swing the election, and Trump himself has any level of plausible deniability with respect to the conduct of his subordinates. Likewise, it’s not obstruction if Trump was just trying to protect himself.
Even on these expansive terms, Trump’s self-exonerating criteria fail. Russian hackers might not have manipulated the vote in any direct way, but the narrowness of Trump’s victory suggests very strongly that the theft and leaking of Democratic emails, and a parallel pro-Trump propaganda campaign were in fact determinative of the outcome. If these kinds of sabotage tactics didn’t affect people’s voting decisions, nobody would care about them. Since they do affect people’s voting decisions, they could easily have swayed one of the closest presidential elections in American history.
But even if we stipulate that Sanders only meant to argue that it’s not collusion if no one tampered with the vote, the scope of potential wrongdoing by Trump campaign officials remains vast.
Redaktørene i NYTimes stiller spørsmålet:
This leads to the third and most pressing question of all: If Mr. Trump and his associates are truly innocent of any wrongdoing, what are they so afraid of?
De lister opp hva vi nå vet at Trump-administrasjonen har gjort, som kan karakteriseres som forsøk på å hindre etterforskningen:
In January 2017, Mr. Trump asked James Comey, the F.B.I. director at the time, who was leading the Russia investigation, to pledge loyalty to him and to state publicly that Mr. Trump himself was not being investigated. Mr. Comey demurred on both counts.
In February, Mr. Trump fired his national security adviser, Michael Flynn, after public reports that he had lied to Vice President Mike Pence about his communications with Russian officials. (The White House had in fact been alerted to Mr. Flynn’s lies, and his vulnerability to blackmail, more than two weeks earlier.)
The next day, after an Oval Office meeting with Mr. Comey and other officials, Mr. Trump cleared the room and urged Mr. Comey to drop the investigation into Mr. Flynn.
In March, Jeff Sessions, the attorney general, recused himself from any investigations related to the 2016 campaign, after it was reported that he had failed to disclose his own contacts with Russians during the campaign. Mr. Trump tried to block the recusal, believing that Mr. Sessions should protect him from the Russia investigation. When Mr. Sessions recused himself anyway, Mr. Trump was furious.
Later that month, Mr. Trump asked top intelligence officials to intervene and persuade Mr. Comey to drop the Russian investigation. He also asked them to publicly deny that there was evidence of collusion between his campaign and the Russians.
In May, Mr. Trump fired Mr. Comey. The White House first claimed that Mr. Comey had been fired for mishandling the F.B.I.’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server. But two days later, Mr. Trump admitted on national television that he had fired Mr. Comey in order to stop the Russia investigation.
In June, we know now, Mr. Trump tried to fire Mr. Mueller, who had been appointed to take over the investigation only weeks earlier. Mr. Trump has denied that he ever made such an attempt.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/01/26/opinion/editorials/trump-fears-the-truth.html?
Man må jo beundre russerne. De flyttet rundt på grupper av amerikanere som om de var sjakkbrikker.
Russian trolls created Facebook events seen by more than 300,000 users - Jan. 26, 2018
Da melder jo spørsmålet seg, hvem andre har de lurt?
Er vi fullstendig klar over rekkevidden i disse "troll-angrepene"?
Kan bli spennende tider fremover, med land som benytter troll (hvorfor skulle det bare være Russland?), med teknologier der man kan bytte ut ansikter i videoer og med diverse regjeringer rundt om kring i verden der fakta og vitenskap ikke lenger er hverken fakta eller sannhet. Det blir ikke lett å skille sannheten fra løgn utover.
Historien gjentar seg, denne gang som farse.
That was the day I knew that Nixon was finished. Not because of the suitcase filled with cash from Bebe Rebozo’s bank headed for a casino in the Bahamas. Not because of the firings, resignations and indictments of figures from the Nixon reelection committee and White House.
Not because it was inevitable that Nixon would have to give up the tapes, and the tapes would probably hang him.
As I stood there at the rear of the theater on Capitol Hill watching the staff of the Senate Watergate Committee at work, I realized that I was witnessing Washington’s immune system, and it had detected an infection. The offices of the Senate Watergate Committee, and the special prosecutor, and the Judiciary Committee, and the Washington Post, and the New York Times and the AP and UPI and the networks — all of them were flooding the bloodstream of the nation’s capital with antibodies focused on one thing: ridding the place of Richard Nixon.
Nixon had been in office for more than four years when on June 17, 1972, the so-called Plumbers working for the Nixon reelection committee, at the direction of the White House, were arrested at the Watergate office building in the process of bugging the Democratic National Committee Headquarters. Donald Trump was in office a grand total of four days when his national security adviser, Michael Flynn, committed a crime when he lied to the FBI about his contacts with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak during the Trump campaign and transition.
https://www.salon.com/2018/01/27/defeat-is-inevitable-everybody-knows-it-even-trump/
Sist redigert:
Sammenfatning av denne twitter-tråden.
https://twitter.com/HoarseWisperer/status/958166228392120320?
The Hoarse Whisperer
@HoarseWisperer
Following Following @HoarseWisperer
More
Stressing out about the day's news?
This may help.
A shortie on the doings at the FBI.
1/
Earlier today, it was announced that FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was leaving effective immediately.
With Trump's endless criticism of McCabe, it's pretty natural that the collective reaction was shock and fear... as if Trump had won here somehow.
2/
In reality, McCabe was poised to leave in two months anyway. He reaches full retirement in March-ish. His departure in and of itself isn't shocking.
The timing seemed sudden and sharp though of course.
3/
The key thing is looking at who Chris Wray appoints to replaces him.
Now, as background, Trump thought Wray was going to be a loyalist because Wray had been involved in helping Chris Christie during Bridgegate.
Wray ain't a dirty bird though.
4/
Wray is ex-Department of Justice. He worked under Jim Comey. He won the highest award for service in DOJ.
He's a Justice Department veteran. He ain't a Trump sleazeball hanger-on.
5/
As FBI Director he has now pushed aside two people Trump was critical of... James Baker and Andrew McCabe.
In normal times, those moves would raise an eyebrow. New bosses bring in their people.
In these abnormal times, they raise plenty of eyebrows.
6/
...but while people worry Wray may be less than a good guy, his actions thus far are incredibly comforting.
After he pushed James Baker aside he appointed someone SURE to rankle Trump. The U.S. Attorney closest to Mueller's investigation. Dana Boente.
7/
Today, immediately after apparently nudging McCabe out the door, Wray announced his replacement...
...and the guy he picked is in many ways Trump's worst nightmare.
David Bowditch. An FBI career man. A mini-Mueller.
8/
Bowditch isn't JUST an FBI veteran, he has the kind of pedigree Republicans would usually experience the kind of erection you have to call your urologist over.
He was a police officer. He joined the FBI and was a sniper on SWAT teams. He was on the Joint Terrorism Task Force
9/
He fought gangs and was instrumental in a history-making gang prosecution.
The guy is a caricature of the kind of "Law and Order" background Trump alleges he cares about.
In a word: he's unimpeachable.
10/
Andrew McCabe had become a distraction and Trump had found some storylines that were effectively muddying the waters.
Chris Wray just did exactly what he did with James Baker's role.
He not only robbed Trump of his ammo, he returned fire with a Howitzer.
11/
Wray just screwed Trump so damn hard, it's gonna leave a mark... and Trump is too dumb to even realize he just got game-set-matched by an appointee who ain't having any of it.
Wray just stole Trump's talking points AND turned up the heat on him.
12/
Even better, Bowditch's elevation entirely earns the trust of the rank and file FBI. They have now seen twice that Wray is on their side not Trump's.
Comey was their homey but now it's Wray all the way.
13/
The most delicious little morsel in this pie to the face is this though...
Chris Wray just sent a 90-decibel message right into Trump's earhole:
"Come after whoever you want. There are a million more behind 'em. There is no stopping the FBI."
So good. So damn good.
ENDSom vanlig har han tatt i litt ekstra:
https://www.aftenposten.no/verden/i...nt-Det-hindret-ham-ikke-i-a-bruke-det-pa-nytt
Fakta er Fake News.
Helping elect Donald Trump, in so many ways, represents the culmination of Paul Manafort’s work. The president bears some likeness to the oligarchs Manafort long served: a businessman with a portfolio of shady deals, who benefited from a cozy relationship to government; a man whose urge to dominate, and to enrich himself, overwhelms any higher ideal. It wasn’t so long ago that Trump would have been decisively rejected as an alien incursion into the realm of public service. And while the cynicism about government that enabled Trump’s rise results from many causes, one of them is the slow transformation of Washington, D.C., into something more like the New Britain, Connecticut, of Paul Manafort’s youth.
Last year, a group of Manafort’s longtime friends, led by an old Republican hand named Bill Greener, tried to organize a cadre of surrogates to defend Manafort from the allegations against him, including the worst one: that he collaborated with a hostile foreign power to subvert the American democratic process. Manafort’s old partner Charlie Black even showed up for a meeting, though the two had largely fallen out of touch. A few of the wheel men from the old firm wanted to help too. Yet, when volunteers were needed to go on TV as character witnesses, nobody raised his hand. “There wasn’t a lot to work with,” one person contacted by this group told me. “And nobody could be sure that Paul didn’t do it.” In fact, everything about the man and the life he chose suggests that he did.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/03/paul-manafort-american-hustler/550925/
- Ble medlem
- 18.02.2009
- Innlegg
- 24.587
- Antall liker
- 15.156
- Sted
- Kopervik og Bergen
- Torget vurderinger
- 1
Og GOP slutter rekkene rundt mannen som har gjort det utenkelige til en normaliet
«On Tuesday evening, Trump finally became the president of the whole Republican party. It shows how far the normalization of radical right ideas has come. Trump was already the true voice of the party base, but now the party elite also embraced him. Ayn Rand disciple Paul Ryan even enthusiastically applauded Trump’s $1.5tn government-stimulated infrastructure plan.»
Og Demokratene fortsetter selvskadingen
«And so Kennedy did what the Democratic party has been doing for over a year now, reach out to Hispanics, including the by now obligatory few sentences in (surprisingly good) Spanish, and women – the type of “identity politics” the party has been criticized for since the 2016 defeat.
But for all the heralding of diversity, and criticism of this administration’s nativism and racism, there was no explicit reference to key issues for the non-white, and white, underclass. Issues like prison reform or voter suppression were not even explicitly mentioned. And he barely mentioned the opioid crisis, one of the most soul-crushing problems of the US in general, and his state of Massachusetts in particular, which Trump had devoted several minutes to.»
Som Thatcher sa (om enn ikke med samme intensjon): There is no alternative.
Shitty times
Edit: Glemte lenken
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...mps-speech-miserable-democrats-response-to-itSist redigert:
Spennende tider.
Victor Cha var hauk i administrasjonen til George W. Bush og ble innstilt som ambassadør til Sør-Korea av Trump administrasjonen.
Men da Cha ble klar over at Trump og Pentagon vurderer å gå til forkjøpsangrep på Nord-Korea uttrykte han sin motstand mot dette.
Det førte til at Det hvite hus trakk tilbake anmodningen til Senatet om at Cha skulle godkjennes som ambassadør.
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/01/30/politics/victor-cha-ambassador-to-south-korea/index.html
Her er hva Cha mener om konsekvensene av et slikt angrep på Nord-Korea:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...81c94-05f7-11e8-8777-2a059f168dd2_story.html?
Yet, there is a point at which hope must give in to logic. If we believe that Kim is undeterrable without such a strike, how can we also believe that a strike will deter him from responding in kind? And if Kim is unpredictable, impulsive and bordering on irrational, how can we control the escalation ladder, which is premised on an adversary’s rational understanding of signals and deterrence?
Some have argued the risks are still worth taking because it’s better that people die “over there” than “over here.” On any given day, there are 230,000 Americans in South Korea and 90,000 or so in Japan. Given that an evacuation of so many citizens would be virtually impossible under a rain of North Korean artillery and missiles (potentially laced with biochemical weapons), these Americans would most likely have to hunker down until the war was over.
Spennende tider II - GOP og Trump-administrasjonen kjemper for å undergrave autoriteten til FBI og USAs øvrige etterretningsressurser, i forbindelse med Russlands innblanding i valget. Man vurderer å sparke Rod Rosenstein, som er fungerende justisminister for etterforskningen, etter at justisminister Jeff Sessions valgte å fratre ansvaret på grunn av sine kontakter med russerne.
Sparkes Rosenstein kan man blokkere anvendelse av hva Muellers etterforskning eventuelt avslører, ved å innsette en annen fungerende justisminister (Attorney General) som henlegger saken.
Det tilspisser seg i USA, her er Fake News versjonen av hva som står på spill for Det hvite hus:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/31/us/politics/trump-russia-hope-hicks-mueller.html?
Konflikten med FBI:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...62038-06c2-11e8-b48c-b07fea957bd5_story.html?
Shep Smith i Fox News er ikke imponert over "Memoet" som kongressrepresentant Devin Nunes ønsker å offentliggjøre:
Sist redigert:- Ble medlem
- 05.02.2015
- Innlegg
- 2.954
- Antall liker
- 316
Ser at dere fortsatt holder på med konspirasjonsteoriene deres, Washington Post er vel et av favoritt stedene deres å hente informasjon fra, jo de er troverdige
Og dette er første del av dommen til Washington Post:
https://www.document.no/2018/02/01/har-trump-virkelig-fremmet-2-140-usannheter/
Det er mange slike eksempler i artikkelen og jeg er ganske sikker på at dere har brukt Washington Post sine fakta sjekker til å få frem hvor ille og løgnaktig Trump er.
Talen han holdt for et par dager siden ble veldig godt mottatt og bortimot 70% av det amerikanske folket syntes den var god, Trump blir også mere populær, var vel 39% før talen er vel høyere nå.
Det viktigste for demokratene er innvandrerne, akkurat som SV,AP,KRF og Rødt her i Norge så jeg skjønner støtten til demokratene på forumet her, det er vel ikke helt illrødt men hummerrødt er det.
Atter en gal demokrat ute og uttaler seg:
Rep. Maxine Waters calls for a parental advisory when Trump appears on TV | Fox News
Så hvor er bevisene at Trump kampanjen har samarbeidet med Russland?
Bevisene for at Trump-kampanjen samarbeidet med Russland startet her: Joe Hockey discussed Alexander Downer's Russia revelations with FBI
Legg merke til at Papadopoulos har erklært seg skyldig.
Indisiene startet mye tidligere, f eks da Trump-kampanjen fikk GOP til å skrive inn Russland-vennlige standpunkter i partiprogrammet, eller da Trump offentlig ba russerne om å offentliggjøre stjålne eposter som kunne hjelpe ham i valgkampen.- Status
-
Laster inn…
Diskusjonstråd Se tråd i gallerivisning
-
Laster inn…