Just T
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,544
Jun 26, 2014 1:20:09 GMT
|
Post by Just T on Sept 12, 2019 16:39:27 GMT
The New York Times... ”Breaking News: The Trump administration will finalize the repeal of a clean water regulation that limits the use of polluting chemicals near bodies of water” You know who will suffer the most from this? The children when they get sick from drinking tainted water. ETA this from trump... ”Dems have never gotten over the fact that President Trump won the Election!” @gopleader McCarthy” We are upset because the of actions taken like the one above. Funny thing about humans, we need water to survive. Preferably water that does not contain “polluting chemicals”. Good grief. It's like we are going back to the 1800s. This makes me soooo angry, and I truly do not understand how ANY human being, Republican or not, can think it is a good idea to not have tight regulations when it comes to our freaking drinking water supply. How can anyone possibly defend that???
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 7:49:33 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2019 17:22:48 GMT
The New York Times... ”Breaking News: The Trump administration will finalize the repeal of a clean water regulation that limits the use of polluting chemicals near bodies of water” You know who will suffer the most from this? The children when they get sick from drinking tainted water. ETA this from trump... ”Dems have never gotten over the fact that President Trump won the Election!” @gopleader McCarthy” We are upset because the of actions taken like the one above. Funny thing about humans, we need water to survive. Preferably water that does not contain “polluting chemicals”. He should be first in line to have to drink that water. And Kevin McCarthy should shut the hell up. I’m thinking of the line from Erin Brockovich. “We had this water brought in especially; it came from a well in Hinkley.” They should bottle the water directly from Flint, MI taps and serve it at all cabinet meetings.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 7:49:33 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2019 18:34:51 GMT
Howard Wolfson...
“I don't know of anybody who has taken as sustained and vitriolic a negative pounding as Biden and who has come through it with the strength he has,” said a top Biden adviser. politi.co/306ufIA
Zerlina Maxwell...
”Hillary Clinton would like a word”
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Sept 12, 2019 21:29:09 GMT
Where do these people come from?! He is a college graduate..... A Tennessee state GOP lawmaker has called for getting rid of the entire higher education system, asserting that such a move would “save America.”State Sen. Kerry Roberts made the remarks while speaking on his conservative talk radio show. He addressed his problems with the higher education system while discussing a recent legislative hearing focused on abortion legislation.Roberts argued that an activist's public testimony in favor of abortion rights was a "product of higher education," adding that abolishing the system would "save America." The Associated Press first reported on the lawmaker's remarks. He also claimed that the removal of higher education would cut off a “liberal breeding ground" and questioned why public colleges were funded by tax dollars. Roberts did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Hill. Roberts approved a Tennessee budget earlier this year that included money for colleges and universities, the AP noted. He is a 1983 graduate of Lipscomb University, according to his Tennessee Senate profile. **
OH WAIT barefoot and pregnant!!
Nope. The trump administration thinks that his base are dumb, stupid, easily manipulated. They don’t want his base educated—keep them stupid so they stay pawns.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Sept 12, 2019 21:30:23 GMT
The Hill.. ”#BREAKING: Trump vows to release report on his finances before 2020 election hill.cm/IU21YrH” ”President Trump on Monday pledged to release a report detailing his financial holdings before November 2020 amid increased scrutiny of government spending at his family's properties. " At some point prior to the election, I'm going to be giving out a financial report of me, and it will be extremely complete," Trump told reporters as he left the White House for North Carolina."I'm going to give out my financial condition and you'll be extremely shocked that the numbers are many, many times what you think," he added. Trump did not respond to reporters asking whether that meant he will release his tax returns.” Unless it’s his tax returns he can just make up whatever he wants. Which he will do.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 7:49:33 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2019 23:29:39 GMT
The New York Times...
“Prosecutors Near Decision on Whether to Seek an Andrew McCabe Indictment”
“WASHINGTON — Federal prosecutors in Washington appear to be in the final stages of deciding whether to seek an indictment of Andrew G. McCabe, the former deputy F.B.I. director and a frequent target of President Trump, on charges of lying to federal agents, according to interviews with people familiar with recent developments in the investigation.
In two meetings last week, Mr. McCabe’s lawyers met with the deputy attorney general, Jeffrey A. Rosen, who is expected to be involved in the decision about whether to prosecute, and for more than an hour with the United States attorney for the District of Columbia, Jessie K. Liu, according to a person familiar with the meetings. The person would not detail the discussions, but defense lawyers typically meet with top law enforcement officials to try to persuade them not to indict their client if they failed to get line prosecutors to drop the case.
An indictment of a former top F.B.I. official is extremely rare and would be the latest chapter in the saga of Mr. McCabe, who was fired last year over the issue now under criminal investigation — whether he failed to be forthcoming with internal investigators examining the F.B.I.’s dealings with the news media.
An indictment would be certain to draw praise from Mr. Trump, who has made his attacks on Mr. McCabe a centerpiece of his yearslong campaign to discredit the Justice Department and the F.B.I. over the Russia investigation.
But prosecutors may face headwinds if a case were to go to trial. One prosecutor quit the case and has expressed frustration with how it was being managed, according to person familiar with her departure, and a key witness provided testimony to the grand jury that could hurt the government’s case.
Additionally, Washington juries are typically liberal, and prosecutors could end up with jurors sympathetic to Mr. McCabe who believe that he, not the president, is the victim of a political witch hunt. Mr. McCabe’s lawyers would probably emphasize his long history at the F.B.I. and his role protecting the country.
Though the meetings between Mr. McCabe’s lawyers and top law enforcement officials suggest that prosecutors seem intent on moving forward with the case, they could also decide to pass on an indictment. Spokeswomen for the Justice Department, the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia and for Mr. McCabe all declined to comment.
Mr. McCabe, a 21-year F.B.I. veteran, was fired in March 2018 after Attorney General Jeff Sessions rejected an appeal that would have let him retire within days with a full pension. Mr. McCabe has said his dismissal was politically motivated and meant to undermine the special counsel’s Russia investigation by trying to discredit him as a witness.
The case against Mr. McCabe, 51, is centered on the findings of a scathing Justice Department inspector general’s office report last year that found that he had lacked candor on four occasions when questioned by the office’s investigators. Prosecutors appeared to be focused on Mr. McCabe’s answers about whether he authorized the disclosure of information to a Wall Street Journal reporter in October 2016 for an article about an investigation into the Clinton Foundation.
When initially questioned by F.B.I. agents in May 2017 about the disclosure to the reporter, Mr. McCabe said he had not approved it and did not know who did. Other evidence contradicted his assertion. Then in late July, two investigators with the inspector general’s office interviewed Mr. McCabe about the disclosure to the newspaper. They determined he had not been truthful, saying he had essentially made the same false denial as he did previously in May, “except this time the false denial was made in an audio-recorded interview.”
The inspector general referred his findings to federal prosecutors in Washington in the spring of 2018 after concluding his investigation.
But what should have been a seemingly straightforward case with a limited number of witnesses and facts has dragged out amid internal deliberations. It has been under investigation for so long that the term expired for the grand jury hearing evidence. One of the lead prosecutors, Kamil Shields, was unhappy with the lengthy decision-making process and has since left the Justice Department for private practice. Ms. Shields declined to comment.
Another prosecutor, David Kent, also left the case recently. It is not clear why he departed but it would be an unusual move if prosecutors were indeed planning to charge Mr. McCabe.
Among the witnesses called before the grand jury was Lisa Page, who worked closely for Mr. McCabe at the F.B.I. as his special counsel and later gained notoriety for text messages she exchanged with another F.B.I. official disparaging Mr. Trump. Mr. McCabe had authorized Ms. Page to speak with the Wall Street Journal reporter, but he told investigators on two occasions that he did not remember doing so. He later corrected himself.
Ms. Page told the grand jury that Mr. McCabe had no motive to lie because he was authorized as the deputy F.B.I. director to share the information with the newspaper. Her assertion could be damaging for prosecutors, who would have to prove that Mr. McCabe knowingly and intentionally lied to investigators. A lawyer for Ms. Page declined to comment.
The inspector general said that Mr. McCabe’s decision to release the information to the newspaper was self-serving — “an attempt to make himself look good,” according to the office’s report — but Mr. McCabe has said it was justified and in the public’s interest. The inspector general said the disclosure effectively confirmed the existence of the Clinton Foundation investigation, which James B. Comey, then the F.B.I. director, had refused to do in July 2016 in congressional testimony.
Federal law enforcement officials typically do not publicly discuss open law enforcement investigations, in part to keep the public from judging someone under investigation before all the facts are uncovered.
Mr. McCabe sued the F.B.I. and the Justice Department this month, saying that his dismissal was retaliatory and politically motivated. He accused Mr. Trump of “purposefully and intentionally” pushing the Justice Department to demote and terminate him as part of an “unconstitutional plan” to discredit and remove law enforcement officials who were “deemed to be his partisan opponents.”
Mr. McCabe’s lawyers have also said that the inspector general’s report was “deeply flawed.”
While Mr. McCabe faces the prospect of prosecution, his onetime boss, Mr. Comey, managed to avoid it when the Justice Department declined to prosecute him over memos he wrote about his interactions with the president. The department had determined that they contained classified information and investigated whether Mr. Comey mishandled them, but prosecutors quickly determined the case did not warrant charges.
An inspector general’s report on Mr. Comey’s memos is due soon.
Mr. Comey could play a key role as a witness in any trial of Mr. McCabe because the inspector general believed that Mr. McCabe had strong reasons to hide the Clinton Foundation disclosure from the director because he likely would not have approved it. Mr. McCabe has said he told Mr. Comey about the revelations to the newspaper, but Mr. Comey has said he does not remember the conversation. The inspector general said Mr. McCabe was untruthful with Mr. Comey during those discussions.
After his firing, Mr. McCabe published a best-selling memoir about his time at the F.B.I., and CNN announced last week that he will become a contributor. Mr. Trump called the move “disgraceful,” and others criticized the news network for hiring a contributor who is still centrally involved in news events.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 7:49:33 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2019 3:41:11 GMT
What was this speech by trump tonight suppose to be about?
Highlights of trump’s speech in Baltimore compliments of Aaron Rupar..
“Speaking to the House GOP retreat, Trump brags that "earlier today, my administration formally repealed the horrible, dangerous, anti-everything waters of the United States rule."
He then thanks @replouiegohmert, while Republicans applaud.”
“Trump pushes more fake middle-income tax cuts! “
“We're now working on a tax cut for middle-income people that is going to be very, very inspirational. It's going to be something that I think it's what everybody is looking for, & we'll be announcing it sometime in the next year."
“Trump is now making stuff up about the conversations he purportedly has with other heads of state”
“TRUMP: "It is the Democrats & it is the media. We are fighting two battles. The Democrats and the media. It is as if they are one because they are one. They are working together. They are colluding and they are obstructing."
“Two years after pushing a health care bill that would've resulted in tens of millions of people losing their coverage, Trump says, with a straight face, "we will always protect patients with preexisting conditions."
“Trump is totally incoherent. He claims the Clean Waters Act "didn't give you clean water," but then in the very next breath says "by the way, today, we have the cleanest air, we have the cleanest water that we've ever had in the history of our country." (This is a lie.)”
“Trump, making no sense at all, claims that 25 years ago "there was nobody here" in America, and therefore air and water was cleaner than it is now. Twenty five years ago was 1994.”. Me - he really did say 25 years ago when nobody was here...
“Trump blames new energy efficient light bulbs for making him "look orange." Me - he said that!
“Trump teases Kevin McCarthy for his "political face" and for being "just like a cow, he's just smaller."
“Trump makes a bizarre sound while mimicking President Xi of China and mocking Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren”
“Trump brings up Hillary Clinton, mocks her purported lack of stamina, and says "she didn't like stairs, she didn't like airplanes -- she didn't like a lot."
“Trump is way off script and things are getting weird. Here is is saying "Buttigieg" a bunch of times before mocking Mayor Pete's height.” Me - he was on script earlier?
“Trump pushes some really gory stuff about MS-13: "They take young women. They slice them up with a knife. They slice them up -- beautiful, young."
He goes on to call MS-13 members "animals."
“Trump stokes fears by highlighting crimes committed by undocumented immigrants. (Undocumented immigrants are in fact statistically no more likely to commit crimes than anyone else.)”
“A big applause line for Trump during his speech to House GOP: "Democrats believe our cities should be sanctuaries for violent criminal aliens. Republicans believe our cities should be sanctuaries for law-abiding Americans."
“Trump is really on one tonight. This is arguably weirder than his rally speeches.”
“Trump tells the same BS story he tells at his rallies about a "tough guy" businessman who "hates" him, but supports him anyway.”
“Trump claims "the country will go to hell" if a Democrat wins next year, says they're "gonna take your money, they're gonna take -- and very much hurt -- your families."
“Mike Pounce"
“Trump mockingly mimics John McCain's vote against ACA repeal”
“Trump on wind energy: "If you happen to be watching the Democrat debate and the wind isn't blowing, you're not going to see the debate ... 'the goddamn windmill stopped!'"
“Trump, speaking in Baltimore, says Baltimore has "been destroyed by decades of failed and corrupt rule."
House Republicans respond with tepid applause.”
“🚨 Trump says the federal government gave San Francisco and Los Angeles notice today that they need to quickly clean up homelessness in their city, or the federal government is going to step in and do something about it”
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 7:49:33 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2019 3:53:50 GMT
Above is something trump passes off as a speech. He was speaking at some Republican retreat. Compare this speech from President Obama to that ramble above.
President Obama did as well in 2010..
Thank you, John, for the gracious introduction. To Mike and Eric, thank you for hosting me. Thank you to all of you for receiving me. It is wonderful to be here. I want to also acknowledge Mark Strand, president of the Congressional Institute. To all the family members who are here and who have to put up with us for an elective office each and every day, thank you, because I know that's tough.
I very much am appreciative of not only the tone of your introduction, John, but also the invitation that you extended to me. You know what they say, "Keep your friends close, but visit the Republican Caucus every few months."
Part of the reason I accepted your invitation to come here was because I wanted to speak with all of you, and not just to all of you. So I'm looking forward to taking your questions and having a real conversation in a few moments. And I hope that the conversation we begin here doesn't end here; that we can continue our dialogue in the days ahead. It's important to me that we do so. It's important to you, I think, that we do so. But most importantly, it's important to the American people that we do so.
I've said this before, but I'm a big believer not just in the value of a loyal opposition, but in its necessity. Having differences of opinion, having a real debate about matters of domestic policy and national security -- and that's not something that's only good for our country, it's absolutely essential. It's only through the process of disagreement and debate that bad ideas get tossed out and good ideas get refined and made better. And that kind of vigorous back and forth -- that imperfect but well-founded process, messy as it often is -- is at the heart of our democracy. That's what makes us the greatest nation in the world.
So, yes, I want you to challenge my ideas, and I guarantee you that after reading this I may challenge a few of yours. I want you to stand up for your beliefs, and knowing this caucus, I have no doubt that you will. I want us to have a constructive debate. The only thing I don't want -- and here I am listening to the American people, and I think they don't want either -- is for Washington to continue being so Washington-like. I know folks, when we're in town there, spend a lot of time reading the polls and looking at focus groups and interpreting which party has the upper hand in November and in 2012 and so on and so on and so on. That's their obsession.
And I'm not a pundit. I'm just a President, so take it for what it's worth. But I don't believe that the American people want us to focus on our job security. They want us to focus on their job security. I don't think they want more gridlock. I don't think they want more partisanship. I don't think they want more obstruction. They didn't send us to Washington to fight each other in some sort of political steel-cage match to see who comes out alive. That's not what they want. They sent us to Washington to work together, to get things done, and to solve the problems that they're grappling with every single day.
And I think your constituents would want to know that despite the fact it doesn't get a lot of attention, you and I have actually worked together on a number of occasions. There have been times where we've acted in a bipartisan fashion. And I want to thank you and your Democratic colleagues for reaching across the aisle. There has been, for example, broad support for putting in the troops necessary in Afghanistan to deny al Qaeda safe haven, to break the Taliban's momentum, and to train Afghan security forces. There's been broad support for disrupting, dismantling, and defeating al Qaeda. And I know that we're all united in our admiration of our troops.
So it may be useful for the international audience right now to understand -- and certainly for our enemies to have no doubt -- whatever divisions and differences may exist in Washington, the United States of America stands as one to defend our country.
It's that same spirit of bipartisanship that made it possible for me to sign a defense contracting reform bill that was cosponsored by Senator McCain and members of Congress here today. We've stood together on behalf of our nation's veterans. Together we passed the largest increase in the VA's budget in more than 30 years and supported essential veterans' health care reforms to provide better access and medical care for those who serve in uniform.
Some of you also joined Democrats in supporting a Credit Card Bill of Rights and in extending unemployment compensation to Americans who are out of work. Some of you joined us in stopping tobacco companies from targeting kids, expanding opportunities for young people to serve our country, and helping responsible homeowners stay in their homes.
So we have a track record of working together. It is possible. But, as John, you mentioned, on some very big things, we've seen party-line votes that, I'm just going to be honest, were disappointing. Let's start with our efforts to jumpstart the economy last winter, when we were losing 700,000 jobs a month. Our financial system teetered on the brink of collapse and the threat of a second Great Depression loomed large. I didn't understand then, and I still don't understand, why we got opposition in this caucus for almost $300 billion in badly needed tax cuts for the American people, or COBRA coverage to help Americans who've lost jobs in this recession to keep the health insurance that they desperately needed, or opposition to putting Americans to work laying broadband and rebuilding roads and bridges and breaking ground on new construction projects.
There was an interesting headline in CNN today: "Americans disapprove of stimulus, but like every policy in it." And there was a poll that showed that if you broke it down into its component parts, 80 percent approved of the tax cuts, 80 percent approved of the infrastructure, 80 percent approved of the assistance to the unemployed.
Well, that's what the Recovery Act was. And let's face it, some of you have been at the ribbon-cuttings for some of these important projects in your communities. Now, I understand some of you had some philosophical differences perhaps on the just the concept of government spending, but, as I recall, opposition was declared before we had a chance to actually meet and exchange ideas. And I saw that as a missed opportunity.
Now, I am happy to report this morning that we saw another sign that our economy is moving in the right direction. The latest GDP numbers show that our economy is growing by almost 6 percent -- that's the most since 2003. To put that in perspective, this time last year, we weren't seeing positive job growth; we were seeing the economy shrink by about 6 percent.
So you've seen a 12 percent reversal during the course of this year. This turnaround is the biggest in nearly three decades -- and it didn't happen by accident. It happened -- as economists, conservative and liberal, will attest -- because of some of the steps that we took.
And by the way, you mentioned a Web site out here, John -- if you want to look at what's going on, on the Recovery Act, you can look on recovery.gov -- a Web site, by the way, that was Eric Cantor's idea.
Now, here's the point. These are serious times, and what's required by all of us -- Democrats and Republicans -- is to do what's right for our country, even if it's not always what's best for our politics. I know it may be heresy to say this, but there are things more important than good poll numbers. And on this no one can accuse me of not living by my principles. A middle class that's back on its feet, an economy that lifts everybody up, an America that's ascendant in the world -- that's more important than winning an election. Our future shouldn't be shaped by what's best for our politics; our politics should be shaped by what's best for our future.
But no matter what's happened in the past, the important thing for all of us is to move forward together. We have some issues right in front of us on which I believe we should agree, because as successful as we've been in spurring new economic growth, everybody understands that job growth has been lagging. Some of that's predictable. Every economist will say jobs are a lagging indicator, but that's no consolation for the folks who are out there suffering right now. And since 7 million Americans have lost their jobs in this recession, we've got to do everything we can to accelerate it.
So, today, in line with what I stated at the State of the Union, I've proposed a new jobs tax credit for small business. And here's how it would work. Employers would get a tax credit of up to $5,000 for every employee they add in 2010. They'd get a tax break for increases in wages, as well. So, if you raise wages for employees making under $100,000, we'd refund part of your payroll tax for every dollar you increase those wages faster than inflation. It's a simple concept. It's easy to understand. It would cut taxes for more than 1 million small businesses.
So I hope you join me. Let's get this done. I want to eliminate the capital gains tax for small business investment, and take some of the bailout money the Wall Street banks have returned and use it to help community banks start lending to small businesses again. So join me. I am confident that we can do this together for the American people. And there's nothing in that proposal that runs contrary to the ideological predispositions of this caucus. The question is: What's going to keep us from getting this done?
I've proposed a modest fee on the nation's largest banks and financial institutions to fully recover for taxpayers' money that they provided to the financial sector when it was teetering on the brink of collapse. And it's designed to discourage them from taking reckless risks in the future. If you listen to the American people, John, they'll tell you they want their money back. Let's do this together, Republicans and Democrats.
I propose that we close tax loopholes that reward companies for shipping American jobs overseas, and instead give companies greater incentive to create jobs right here at home -- right here at home. Surely, that's something that we can do together, Republicans and Democrats.
We know that we've got a major fiscal challenge in reining in deficits that have been growing for a decade, and threaten our future. That's why I've proposed a three-year freeze in discretionary spending other than what we need for national security. That's something we should do together that's consistent with a lot of the talk both in Democratic caucuses and Republican caucuses. We can't blink when it's time to actually do the job.
At this point, we know that the budget surpluses of the '90s occurred in part because of the pay-as-you-go law, which said that, well, you should pay as you go and live within our means, just like families do every day. Twenty-four of you voted for that, and I appreciate it. And we were able to pass it in the Senate yesterday.
But the idea of a bipartisan fiscal commission to confront the deficits in the long term died in the Senate the other day. So I'm going to establish such a commission by executive order and I hope that you participate, fully and genuinely, in that effort, because if we're going to actually deal with our deficit and debt, everybody here knows that we're going to have to do it together, Republican and Democrat. No single party is going to make the tough choices involved on its own. It's going to require all of us doing what's right for the American people.
And as I said in the State of the Union speech, there's not just a deficit of dollars in Washington, there is a deficit of trust. So I hope you'll support my proposal to make all congressional earmarks public before they come to a vote. And let's require lobbyists who exercise such influence to publicly disclose all their contacts on behalf of their clients, whether they are contacts with my administration or contacts with Congress. Let's do the people's business in the bright light of day, together, Republicans and Democrats.
I know how bitter and contentious the issue of health insurance reform has become. And I will eagerly look at the ideas and better solutions on the health care front. If anyone here truly believes our health insurance system is working well for people, I respect your right to say so, but I just don't agree. And neither would millions of Americans with preexisting conditions who can't get coverage today or find out that they lose their insurance just as they're getting seriously ill. That's exactly when you need insurance. And for too many people, they're not getting it. I don't think a system is working when small businesses are gouged and 15,000 Americans are losing coverage every single day; when premiums have doubled and out-of-pocket costs have exploded and they're poised to do so again.
I mean, to be fair, the status quo is working for the insurance industry, but it's not working for the American people. It's not working for our federal budget. It needs to change.
This is a big problem, and all of us are called on to solve it. And that's why, from the start, I sought out and supported ideas from Republicans. I even talked about an issue that has been a holy grail for a lot of you, which was tort reform, and said that I'd be willing to work together as part of a comprehensive package to deal with it. I just didn't get a lot of nibbles.
Creating a high-risk pool for uninsured folks with preexisting conditions, that wasn't my idea, it was Senator McCain's. And I supported it, and it got incorporated into our approach. Allowing insurance companies to sell coverage across state lines to add choice and competition and bring down costs for businesses and consumers -- that's an idea that some of you I suspect included in this better solutions; that's an idea that was incorporated into our package. And I support it, provided that we do it hand in hand with broader reforms that protect benefits and protect patients and protect the American people.
A number of you have suggested creating pools where self-employed and small businesses could buy insurance. That was a good idea. I embraced it. Some of you supported efforts to provide insurance to children and let kids remain covered on their parents' insurance until they're 25 or 26. I supported that. That's part of our package. I supported a number of other ideas, from incentivizing wellness to creating an affordable catastrophic insurance option for young people that came from Republicans like Mike Enzi and Olympia Snowe in the Senate, and I'm sure from some of you as well. So when you say I ought to be willing to accept Republican ideas on health care, let's be clear: I have.
Bipartisanship -- not for its own sake but to solve problems -- that's what our constituents, the American people, need from us right now. All of us then have a choice to make. We have to choose whether we're going to be politicians first or partners for progress; whether we're going to put success at the polls ahead of the lasting success we can achieve together for America. Just think about it for a while. We don't have to put it up for a vote today.
Let me close by saying this. I was not elected by Democrats or Republicans, but by the American people. That's especially true because the fastest growing group of Americans are independents. That should tell us both something. I'm ready and eager to work with anyone who is willing to proceed in a spirit of goodwill. But understand, if we can't break free from partisan gridlock, if we can't move past a politics of "no," if resistance supplants constructive debate, I still have to meet my responsibilities as President. I've got to act for the greater good –- because that, too, is a commitment that I have made. And that's -- that, too, is what the American people sent me to Washington to do.
So I am optimistic. I know many of you individually. And the irony, I think, of our political climate right now is that, compared to other countries, the differences between the two major parties on most issues is not as big as it's represented. But we've gotten caught up in the political game in a way that's just not healthy. It's dividing our country in ways that are preventing us from meeting the challenges of the 21st century. I'm hopeful that the conversation we have today can help reverse that.
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Sept 13, 2019 6:03:40 GMT
Like night and day. Lordy, I miss that man.
|
|
|
Post by hop2 on Sept 13, 2019 11:17:28 GMT
Like night and day. Lordy, I miss that man. i miss sanity
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Sept 13, 2019 23:49:13 GMT
(CNN) The Justice Department said Friday that a request to a federal court from House Democrats seeking access to secret grand jury material underlying special counsel Robert Mueller's report should be turned down because the lawmakers have "come nowhere close to demonstrating a particularized need" for the information.House Democrats first filed suit in July, days after Mueller's testimony on Capitol Hill, asking the court to order the release of grand jury information connected to the Mueller report to the House Judiciary Committee. The Democrats argue they need the information to consider whether to move toward impeachment proceedings. Specifically, the lawmakers are seeking the unredacted Mueller report, as well as transcripts of grand jury testimony related to President Donald Trump's knowledge of Russian efforts to interfere in the 2016 election and links between members of his campaign and Russians. Lawmakers also want any grand jury testimony related to Trump's knowledge of any potential "criminal acts" by him or his associates. In the filing, the the Justice Department called lawmakers' request an "extraordinary order" that is overly broad. "The Committee's failure to provide a tailored request accompanied by a concrete explanation for why this material is necessary is particularly striking given the extensive investigations Congress has already conducted into Russian inference with the 2016 election, gathering information to which the Committee already has access," the Justice Department wrote. ** www.cnn.com/2019/09/13/politics/justice-department-house-democrats-robert-mueller/index.htmlSo much for being able to get the Grand Jury info..... So much for getting any info... dt wins, with USAG Barr's help
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Sept 14, 2019 1:33:39 GMT
A question I don't know the answer to! Fans at a Portland Thorns soccer game this week appeared to boo President Trump as Armed Forces enlistees pledged to obey his orders as part of a swearing-in ceremony that took place during halftime. The Oregonian newspaper first reported on the crowd's reaction, sharing video from Wednesday's game in which fans could be heard groaning and booing as enlistees were asked to “obey the orders of the President of the United States.” thehill.com/homenews/news/461380-trump-booed-during-military-swearing-in-at-portland-thorns-halftimeIs 'obey the orders of the president' in the swearing in?!?!?!?
|
|
|
Post by Skellinton on Sept 14, 2019 2:30:14 GMT
A question I don't know the answer to! Fans at a Portland Thorns soccer game this week appeared to boo President Trump as Armed Forces enlistees pledged to obey his orders as part of a swearing-in ceremony that took place during halftime. The Oregonian newspaper first reported on the crowd's reaction, sharing video from Wednesday's game in which fans could be heard groaning and booing as enlistees were asked to “obey the orders of the President of the United States.” thehill.com/homenews/news/461380-trump-booed-during-military-swearing-in-at-portland-thorns-halftimeIs 'obey the orders of the president' in the swearing in?!?!?!? Yes it is. “I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.” I am proud to live in a state that is primarily disgusted with the Orange Menace and glad I can openly and passionately discuss just how awful he is without worrying that people within eat shot will be aghast or argue with me. But that display at the game was appalling. Not OK, at all. The military are taking an oath to protect their country, the people booing were out of line and 100% disrespectful to people that did not deserve that. I am not proud of that display, I am embarrassed for our city. That was awful.
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Sept 14, 2019 2:54:39 GMT
But that display at the game was appalling. Not OK, at all. The military are taking an oath to protect their country, the people booing were out of line and 100% disrespectful to people that did not deserve that. I am not proud of that display, I am embarrassed for our city. That was awful. Thank you, as long as the Constitution comes first!! ... And I agree that they were out of order..
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Sept 14, 2019 3:04:14 GMT
The DOJ is not going to allow any release of info to Nadler/Judiciary Committee... ** In the filing, the the Justice Department called lawmakers' request an "extraordinary order" that is overly broad. "The Committee's failure to provide a tailored request accompanied by a concrete explanation for why this material is necessary is particularly striking given the extensive investigations Congress has already conducted into Russian inference with the 2016 election, gathering information to which the Committee already has access," the Justice Department wrote. The Justice Department argued that the committee's application for materials relies on authorization related to a "judicial proceeding." The department argues that impeachment proceedings in Congress "including hypothetical removal proceedings in the Senate -- are not 'judicial proceedings' under the plain and ordinary meaning of that term."** Lot more t link: www.cnn.com/2019/09/13/politics/justice-department-house-democrats-robert-mueller/index.html"hypothetical removal proceedings in the Senate -- are not 'judicial proceedings' under the plain and ordinary meaning of that term." How can the House determine if they are going to draw up Articles of Impeachment without the documents/witnesses for their investigation? The investigation might no lead to impeachment. Barr/DOJ seems to assume there will be no procedure in the Senate? Better yet, they say it is not a judicial proceeding in the Senate.. Say what, Wonder what Chief Justice Roberts thinks about that conclusion? He would be the Judge !!
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 7:49:33 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2019 3:45:40 GMT
Interesting..
Emily Nussbaum..
”I'm a Warren supporter, but anecdotally, there is a stranger, stronger troll campaign against Harris than anyone else out there online... I've said positive things about several of the Dem candidates & she's the only one about whom I get a wave of canned vitriol-bots in response.”
Eric..
”I saw that ramp up immediately after she hit Biden on school desegregation in the first debate. I wonder if the apparatus went into place then and has continued to function irrespective of how she's fared in the polls.”
Emily..
”Me too. I'm not saying there aren't legit critiques of Harris, but these are not them. It's interesting, because I don't get these for Warren, Buttigieg, Booker or Castro.”
Michelangelo...
”Absolutely — having had many of the candidates on my show and tweeting out clips about them,I can tell you that it’s her, and believe it or not, the now out-of-the-race Eric Swalwell. He was swarmed by Russian bots each time.”
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Sept 14, 2019 11:41:13 GMT
thehill.com/homenews/senate/461170-conservatives-offer-stark-warning-to-trump-gop-on-background-checksTed Cruz and others: we’re not going to expand background checks and close the gun show loophole because it will demoralize the Republican base, and they may not turn out in 2020. So much to unpack there, but this was particularly interesting to me. “We're going to see record-shattering Democratic turnout. The only element missing to ensure Democratic victory is demoralizing conservatives so they stay home. I hope we don't do that.” So he’s basically admitting that Trump is deeply unpopular and that Democrats and others are mobilized against him. A rare moment of honesty from the guy who came very close to losing his seat to Beto.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 7:49:33 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2019 19:38:26 GMT
He should be first in line to have to drink that water. And Kevin McCarthy should shut the hell up. I am not the praying type but will freely admit that rarely a day goes by that I don't spend a little time sending thoughts that trump and his family reap what they sow. Today I'll put a little more energy into my thoughts and send evil to combat evil. A pox on him and his family. If you want a #45 voodoo doll, let me know. DH makes them!
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 7:49:33 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2019 21:57:26 GMT
Reuters...
“Global spare oil capacity in U.S. hands after Saudi outage”
“Reuters) - An attack on Saudi oil facilities on Saturday is believed to have disrupted half the country's production capacity, making the United States the only real holder of the global supply cushion via its ability to raise own output or to soften sanctions against other major oil producers.
Saudi Arabia has yet to comment on the extent of damage on its oil production but industry sources have said some 5-6 million barrels per day (bpd) or 5-6% of global supply have been affected.
Saudi Arabia, the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries' de-facto leader and largest producer, has been long seen as the custodian of the world's spare oil capacity.”
Are we sure trump isn’t somehow behind this attack?
From Newsweek..
”Iran-backed Houthi rebels claim responsibility for drone attacks on the world's largest oil processing plant”
Apparently not, but the sad thing is, I can believe trump would do something like this.
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Sept 14, 2019 22:11:03 GMT
I am not the praying type but will freely admit that rarely a day goes by that I don't spend a little time sending thoughts that trump and his family reap what they sow. Today I'll put a little more energy into my thoughts and send evil to combat evil. A pox on him and his family. If you want a #45 voodoo doll, let me know. DH makes them! Can you post the details? or PM me if you don’t want to post publicly? thx
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 7:49:33 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2019 22:42:55 GMT
If you want a #45 voodoo doll, let me know. DH makes them! Can you post the details? or PM me if you don’t want to post publicly? thx I'll try to find the pics... DH has an Etsy page, eBay, Pinterest, Facebook, etc... Each voodoo doll is handmade and individual, so no 2 look exactly alike. He's made jewelry for over 10 years now, and other craft items. He began making inventive ouija boards and then voodoo items, which are bigger attractions (go figure!). He also has scarier dolls that he makes for a select audience. I'll look for the #45 pics. They were on my cellphone which broke, but I'm sure I have them somewhere.........
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Sept 14, 2019 23:53:55 GMT
Are we sure trump isn’t somehow behind this attack? From Newsweek.. ”Iran-backed Houthi rebels claim responsibility for drone attacks on the world's largest oil processing plant” Apparently not, but the sad thing is, I can believe trump would do something like this. Somewhere this morning I think I read something about bombing Iran oil fields. MAYBE a rumor... Looking for it now...
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Sept 15, 2019 0:07:14 GMT
So ... Can't find the other article........... But they are saying Iran did it!
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 7:49:33 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2019 0:55:09 GMT
This from Ben Rhodes who was on President Obama Foreign Security Team..
“The Houthis are not the same as Iran and the Saudis are fighting a war against them in Yemen. This is an incredibly dumb, dishonest and dangerous thing to say.”
Pompeo..
”Tehran is behind nearly 100 attacks on Saudi Arabia while Rouhani and Zarif pretend to engage in diplomacy. Amid all the calls for de-escalation, Iran has now launched an unprecedented attack on the world’s energy supply. There is no evidence the attacks came from Yemen.”
So who are you going to believe? Ben Rhodes or Pompeo?
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Sept 15, 2019 1:45:19 GMT
This from Ben Rhodes who was on President Obama Foreign Security Team.. “The Houthis are not the same as Iran and the Saudis are fighting a war against them in Yemen. This is an incredibly dumb, dishonest and dangerous thing to say.” Pompeo.. ”Tehran is behind nearly 100 attacks on Saudi Arabia while Rouhani and Zarif pretend to engage in diplomacy. Amid all the calls for de-escalation, Iran has now launched an unprecedented attack on the world’s energy supply. There is no evidence the attacks came from Yemen.” So who are you going to believe? Ben Rhodes or Pompeo?oh, that’s an easy one.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 7:49:33 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2019 13:38:22 GMT
trump’s Sunday morning rant
”Now the Radical Left Democrats and their Partner, the LameStream Media, are after Brett Kavanaugh again, talking loudly of their favorite word, impeachment. He is an innocent man who has been treated HORRIBLY. Such lies about him. They want to scare him into turning Liberal!”
”Brett Kavanaugh should start suing people for liable, or the Justice Department should come to his rescue. The lies being told about him are unbelievable. False Accusations without recrimination. When does it stop? They are trying to influence his opinions. Can’t let that happen!“
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 7:49:33 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2019 14:17:11 GMT
The stable genius fixed it..
”Brett Kavanaugh should start suing people for libel, or the Justice Department should come to his rescue. The lies being told about him are unbelievable. False Accusations without recrimination. When does it stop? They are trying to influence his opinions. Can’t let that happen!”
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 7:49:33 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2019 14:29:27 GMT
Loved this twitter response:
"As in: "Brett Kavanaugh can't sue for libel because that would open him up to discovery and since he's liable to have done a lot of sexual assault and he would be held liable for damages"."
|
|
|
Post by hop2 on Sept 15, 2019 16:05:24 GMT
Loved this twitter response: "As in: "Brett Kavanaugh can't sue for libel because that would open him up to discovery and since he's liable to have done a lot of sexual assault and he would be held liable for damages"." Ooo that pesky ‘discovery’ part of a lawsuit How long do you think we have before the legal System is completely corrupted?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 7:49:33 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2019 16:19:53 GMT
You got to love it. trump is coming to the SF Bay Area for a fund raiser. Actually he is sneaking into the Bay Area.
Where he is going is a big secret. Now I can understand if he was going to let’s say Afghanistan, but the San Francisco Bay Area, please. What a little coward.
|
|