Deleted
Posts: 0
May 5, 2024 7:42:03 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2019 18:07:59 GMT
trump last night...
”Kiddingly) We’re building a Wall in Colorado”(then stated, “we’re not building a Wall in Kansas but they get the benefit of the Wall we’re building on the Border”) refered to people in the very packed auditorium, from Colorado & Kansas, getting the benefit of the Border Wall!“
MSNBC
“Trump tries (and fails) to explain his Colorado border wall comments”
“ Geography has never been Donald Trump's best subject. For example, the president attended a United Nations luncheon with African leaders a couple of years ago, at which he praised the health care system in Nambia. There is no such country.
A year later, the Republican told his foreign policy advisers that he knew Nepal and Bhutan were parts of India, despite the fact that neither is part of India. Trump has also reportedly struggled to understand different time zones.
But during remarks at a shale-energy conference in Pittsburgh yesterday, Trump's difficulties with geography came into sharper focus.
"[W]e're building a wall on the border of New Mexico, and we're building a wall in Colorado. We're building a beautiful wall, a big one that really works, that you can't get over, you can't get under. And we're building a wall in Texas. And we're not building a wall in Kansas, but they get the benefit of the walls that we just mentioned."
There were a handful of problems with this, including the fact that Trump really isn't making much progress when it comes to new border-barrier construction. The idea that people "can't get over" the fences may not be altogether true, either.
But the funny part, of course, was the president's assertion that he's "building a wall in Colorado," which is not a border state. (The fact that Trump's audience cheered this comment was probably my favorite part of the story.) Sen. Pat Leahy (D-Vt.) had a little fun at the Republican's expense, taking a Sharpie to a map of the United States to make Trump's falsehood true.
This likely would've been a half-day story that generated a few laughs, but he couldn't leave well enough alone. A little after midnight, Trump thought it'd be a good idea to explain why he got this wrong.
According to a presidential tweet, he made the comments "kiddingly," and in this part of his speech, he "refered [sic] to people in the very packed auditorium, from Colorado & Kansas, getting the benefit of the Border Wall!"
First, the video of Trump's comments is online, and he obviously wasn't kidding. Second, we're apparently supposed to believe there were a bunch of people from Colorado who traveled to western Pennsylvania for the president's remarks, and he wanted to let them know about the border barriers he's not building anywhere near their state.
In case this isn't obvious, Trump didn't need to say anything at all about his mistake. If pressed for an explanation, he or his team could've simply said he misspoke, referencing Colorado when he meant to say Arizona.
But to take this sensible course would involve the president acknowledging a harmless and inconsequential error -- which is something Trump simply isn't prepared to do.”
If recent history is any guide, White House officials will quietly direct the Army Corps of Engineers to issue an unsigned statement today, explaining that Trump was right about wall construction in Colorado, reality be damned.“
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on Oct 24, 2019 18:17:05 GMT
Trey Gowdy Chairman House Select Committee statement for private Benghazi interviews. 114th Congress 2015, page 360. Today it is the republicans who are totally misrepresenting the interviews! Keeping this in mind, and that the rules the House follows were written in 2015, signed by Boehner and approved by a Republican majority, that 1/4th of the House Republicans are allowed in these depositions (approx same as Dems), and and that original depositions are routinely done in private, what exactly are they complaining about? Seriously, I’d like to know, is there something we are doing that is not routine at this point in any investigation by the House? Do they have a leg to stand on, do any of their complaints have merit? Because it is going around that that Mitch and someone else will be trying to ensure the House Dems for their impeachment efforts. Are they not just doing their constitutional duty of oversight? Because I have to say, if a Democrat was credibly accused of doing the things the Trump admin has, I’d want them investigated too. And is demanding to know who the whistleblower is the norm? I thought there were rules written to protect them specifically so people would be willing to come forward. Why is this time different, or is it?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 5, 2024 7:42:03 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2019 18:21:29 GMT
linkIt just never ends.. Axios.. “Scoop: Cyber memo warns of new risks to White House network”“An internal memo on cybersecurity, obtained by Axios, warns that "the White House is posturing itself to be electronically compromised once again." The state of play: That's after at least a dozen top- or high-level officials have resigned or been pushed out of a cybersecurity mission that was established under Barack Obama to protect the White House from Russian hacking and other threats, according to conversations with several current and former officials. Why it matters: Warnings by officials from the former Office of the Chief Information Security Officer (OCISO) — which in July was folded into the Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) — suggest new intelligence vulnerabilities. One White House official familiar with the developments said the consolidations could lead to a "Wild West" atmosphere. Details: Many of the concerns are detailed in an Oct. 17 internal memo written by a senior White House cybersecurity director who is among the officials who have left the mission. * The memo doubled as a formal resignation letter by its author, Dimitrios Vastakis, who was the branch chief of the White House computer network defense. Vastakis did not respond to requests for comment. * Vastakis worked in the OCISO, established after Russian hackers breached some White House computers in 2014. * OCISO was created to "take on the responsibility of securing the Presidential Information Technology Community (PITC) network," per the internal memo. The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment. * A White House source familiar with the plans told me: "You have an entire section who’s dedicated to providing counter threat intelligence information" and "if you remove that, it’s like the Wild West again." The president's team is trying to force out the career staff, especially the expert staff hired under Obama, according to another source familiar with the changes. They said the effects could leave the White House vulnerable to a "network compromise." The organizational structure for the cybersecurity mission going forward also raises questions about the continuity, oversight and retention of records that had been covered by the Presidential Records Act (PRA). *. "It is highly concerning that the entire cybersecurity apparatus is being handed over to non-PRA entities," the memo says. * "This is a significant shift in the priorities of senior leadership, where business operations and quality of service take precedence over securing the President's network," the memo says. "As a career cyber security professional, this is alarming." Some cybersecurity officials feel they're being pushed out. * OCISO staff are "systematically being targeted for removal from the Office of the Administration (OA) through various means," the memo says. Those included "revocation of incentives, reducing the scope of duties, reducing access to programs, revoking access to buildings, and revoking positions with strategic and tactical decision making authorities." * Several sources described growing internal resentment after it was announced two months ago that staff would no longer be receiving their annual bonuses on Oct. 1. * Others have left voluntarily for different opportunities. Joe Schatz, the former White House Chief Information Security officer, left the team in August for a technology consulting firm, according to a news release.
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Oct 24, 2019 18:45:54 GMT
is there something we are doing that is not routine at this point in any investigation by the House? Do they have a leg to stand on, do any of their complaints have merit? Because it is going around that that Mitch and someone else will be trying to ensure the House Dems for their impeachment efforts. For the previous impeachments, both had a Special Counsel who did the private hearings/investigations and passed to info to the House and the House then had public hearings... Shiff is doing the grand jury equivalent(?), it is NOT wrong! The complaints have no merit as far as I know. Moscow Mitch and lying Lindsey are trying to pass a resolution condemning the House hearing... etal Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is throwing his support behind a resolution condemning the House impeachment inquiry into President Trump. Senate Republicans are expected to introduce a “Graham-McConnell” resolution later Thursday “condemning the House of Representatives closed door, illegitimate impeachment inquiry,” per a release from Sen. Lindsey Graham’s (R-S.C.) office. McConnell confirmed to reporters that he will back the measure, saying, "Obviously I support it." Graham said earlier this week that he was planning to introduce the resolution, telling Fox News’s Sean Hannity that it “puts the Senate on record condemning the House." It’s unclear if the resolution will come up for a vote. It would allow GOP senators, who have grown increasingly frustrated with the House, to formalize their opposition. But it would also likely fail to get the 60 votes needed to pass. McConnell and his caucus have increasingly railed against the House impeachment inquiry process, which includes near-daily closed-door depositions with current and former officials. "Overturning the results of an American election requires the highest level of fairness and due process, as it strikes at the core of our democratic process," McConnell wrote in a tweet earlier this month. "So far, the House has fallen far short by failing to follow the same basic procedures that it has followed for every other President in our history," he added. ** thehill.com/homenews/senate/467279-mcconnell-backs-resolution-condemning-house-impeachment-inquiry
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 5, 2024 7:42:03 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2019 18:47:00 GMT
And it continues...
WSJ
“Trump to Tell Federal Agencies to Cut New York Times, Washington Post Subscriptions”
“White House plans to direct government staffers to not renew orders with the newspapers, whose coverage he has disparaged as ‘fake’
“WASHINGTON—The White House is planning to instruct federal agencies to not renew their subscriptions to the New York Times and the Washington Post, administration officials said, escalating President Trump’s attacks on the media outlets.
“Not renewing subscriptions across all federal agencies will be a significant cost saving—hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars will be saved,” White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said in an email Thursday. Me- The White House could save millions of taxpayers dollars if we didn’t have to pay the security costs every weekend when trump goes golfing at one of his properties either. The cost is going to increase when he starts going to Florida.
Ms. Grisham declined to provide further details, and it wasn’t immediately clear how the White House intended to compel agencies to cancel the subscriptions or how soon the order would take effect. The White House was still working on implementing the directive as of Thursday morning, an administration official said.
Spokeswomen for the Times and the Post declined to comment.
The decision comes days after Mr. Trump told his staff to cancel the White House’s print subscriptions to the Post and the Times after expressing frustration with their coverage.
“We don’t even want it in the White House anymore,” Mr. Trump said of the Times during an interview with Fox News host Sean Hannity that aired Monday night. “We’re going to probably terminate that and the Washington Post. They’re fake.”
Print editions of the Times and the Post weren’t among the newspapers delivered to the White House on Thursday, a White House official said.
The president has repeatedly railed against and sought to discredit the newspapers’ coverage of his administration, including its dealings with Ukraine and the resulting impeachment inquiry in the House. On Twitter and during campaign rallies, Mr. Trump has attacked the news media, calling it the “enemy of the people” and dismissing some of the country’s most venerable journalism outlets as “fake news.”
In June, Mr. Trump wrote on Twitter that a Times story represented a “virtual act of Treason.” The publisher of the New York Times, A.G. Sulzberger, responded with an opinion article in The Wall Street Journal, saying the “new attack crosses a dangerous line in the president’s campaign against a free and independent press.”
Mr. Trump is an avid consumer of the news, and he regularly reads the Times and the Post, according to aides who privately acknowledged that they expect him to continue doing so despite the directive.
It wasn’t immediately known how many subscriptions to the Times and the Post the federal government has. Federal employees are eligible for free digital subscriptions to the Post using their government email addresses.
Officials at the General Services Administration and the White House Office of Management and Budget didn’t immediately provide data about the total number of subscriptions.
Government officials read and rely on the country’s major newspapers, which have reporters stationed around the country and across the globe and document everything from bombings in Syria to the passage of bills in Congress. Canceling the subscriptions could limit officials’ access to vital information that could assist them in doing their jobs.“
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Oct 24, 2019 19:00:17 GMT
And is demanding to know who the whistleblower is the norm? I thought there were rules written to protect them specifically so people would be willing to come forward. Why is this time different, or is it? Its different because dt is a bully, hateful person who wants to GET the Whistleblower. dt listens and takes info from all his many people without verification. He says it all the time. He has threatened the Whistleblower on Twitter and others have mentioned it in responses to dt He has told people to beat up others! Would you feel safe if he wanted to get you for any reason?' He does NOT understand that career employees serve the taxpayers, not individuals or the president, EVER!
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on Oct 24, 2019 19:00:41 GMT
What I don’t understand is how this is different? Are they suggesting we need another SC for the Ukrainian issue? Because that’s what Nixon and Clinton had, right? All depositions were done behind closed doors, then and now, and going through the House means 1/4th of the Republicans have access to all of these hearings, which they wouldn’t with a SC.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 5, 2024 7:42:03 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2019 19:04:05 GMT
Will Harris...
”Lindsey Graham is about to make an announcement regarding the impeachment proceedings. How great would it be if he just got up there and said, "Yeah, we're done here. He's guilty as fuck, and we're washing our hands of him. NOW WHY WON'T THIS CHEETOS DUST COME OFF?!"
So I wonder what the announcement is going to be?
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Oct 24, 2019 19:08:07 GMT
The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment. He and they do not care. He just handed Turkey and Syria to Russia and his hero Putin. Why should he care what they hear from he WH?
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Oct 24, 2019 19:23:44 GMT
What I don’t understand is how this is different? Are they suggesting we need another SC for the Ukrainian issue? Because that’s what Nixon and Clinton had, right? All depositions were done behind closed doors, then and now, and going through the House means 1/4th of the Republicans have access to all of these hearings, which they wouldn’t with a SC. it's NOT different... IMO, the Republicans are just trying to SAY it is to rile up their base. And I don't think anything says that a special prosecutor is REQUIRED. Not to mention that ANY impeachment is NOT in any way trying to 'overturn' the results of the election. (red text I bolded) If Trump is impeached, Hillary will NOT become President. Impeachment is the remedy set up to handle Presidential overreaches and abuses; this process has NOTHING to do with the 2016 election. (this misdirection is just another thing to rile up the base, IMO) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ separately: is it actually WITHIN the President's power to tell Federal Agencies what newspapers they can or can't subscribe to, for gosh sakes?!? Access to information (even if it is information he doesn't like) sure doesn't sound like something he should be able to restrict.
|
|
|
Post by kmcginn on Oct 24, 2019 19:32:38 GMT
So how is it going to save taxpayers millions of dollars if they are free? He's such an A$$HOLE!
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on Oct 24, 2019 21:07:34 GMT
Will Harris... ”Lindsey Graham is about to make an announcement regarding the impeachment proceedings. How great would it be if he just got up there and said, "Yeah, we're done here. He's guilty as fuck, and we're washing our hands of him. NOW WHY WON'T THIS CHEETOS DUST COME OFF?!" So I wonder what the announcement is going to be? I think it is the joint resolution with Mitch to censure the House over the impeachment proceedings.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 5, 2024 7:42:03 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2019 21:09:27 GMT
Then - Jake Kapur
“Kevin McCarthy to Fox, 2015: "Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi special committee. A select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping.“
Note: Many of those who testified were closed hearings.
Now - Sahil Kapur
”Lindsey Graham calls the House impeachment process a “danger to the future of the presidency.”
“If you can drive down a president’s poll numbers” while pursuing impeachment in closed-door meetings, he says, then “God help future presidents.”
|
|
|
Post by hop2 on Oct 24, 2019 22:07:46 GMT
Then - Jake Kapur “Kevin McCarthy to Fox, 2015: "Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi special committee. A select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping.“ Note: Many of those who testified were closed hearings. Now - Sahil Kapur ”Lindsey Graham calls the House impeachment process a “danger to the future of the presidency.” “If you can drive down a president’s poll numbers” while pursuing impeachment in closed-door meetings, he says, then “God help future presidents.” It’s only OKIYAR
|
|
|
Post by artgirl1 on Oct 24, 2019 22:30:23 GMT
What I don’t understand is how this is different? It is not different except that under 'dimwit donnie', the Republican Party has adapted his method that if you say it enough, (gullible) people will believe anything you say. It is how this whole Presidency has operated, and these Republicans feel that they must toe the line. It really is sad how many of these spineless Senators have tied their souls to this crook. I hope they are all defeated in 2020.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 5, 2024 7:42:03 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2019 23:25:42 GMT
linkTypical trump stiffing folks he owes money to. Washington Post... “The Trump campaign has over $1 million in outstanding bills from American cities”“Albuquerque has joined a lengthy list of U.S. cities with a simple request: that President Trump’s campaign pay for the costs incurred during a rally. On Wednesday, the Albuquerque Journal reported that the city sent an invoice to Trump’s reelection campaign in an effort to recoup more than $211,000 in expenses from a September rally. That figure includes more than $71,000 in police overtime. The Trump campaign’s indifference to municipal bills became a significant issue earlier this month when the city of Minneapolis attempted to get paid in advance for a rally Trump was planning to hold in the city. Trump and his campaign publicly berated Minneapolis’s mayor. But even then it was easy to see why a city would want Trump’s team to pay in advance. As the Minneapolis rally loomed, CNN went back to a number of cities that had been identified in June by the Center for Public Integrity as places with outstanding bills in to the Trump campaign. CNN found that there was at least $841,000 still outstanding. The total, though, is more than that: Dave Levinthal, who reported the initial tallies for the Center for Public Integrity, confirmed in an email to The Post on Thursday that he’d checked back with all the cities he’d identified in July and that none had been paid as of his most recent outreach.Adding in the bill from Albuquerque, that brings the total outstanding bill to more than $1 million — $1,052,395.78, to be precise. El Paso, which hasn’t been paid for costs from a February rally, added a late fee of about $99,000 earlier this year, bringing the total to $1,151,183.36. Add in the $530,000 that Minneapolis was originally seeking and the total nears $1.7 million.Before being elected president, Trump had earned a reputation for not paying vendors who’d done work for the Trump Organization. In this case, though, the bills fall into something of a gray area. The campaign generally doesn’t sign contracts for additional police officers, so the cities don’t have binding agreements to recoup the costs. As Levinthal suggested in June, it’s more of a norm that the bills would be paid — and Trump has certainly earned a reputation for sidestepping norms since entering the world of politics. In the context of Trump’s campaign, these costs are not significant. Earlier this week, the Republican Party celebrated having raised more than $300 million through the first three quarters of 2019. Reimbursing these cities for the costs they incurred from Trump’s rallies, then, would eat up a little more than a day’s average fundraising. Don’t expect that to happen.
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Oct 25, 2019 1:21:47 GMT
Rachel Maddow: NYT: DOJ conducting criminal inquiry into own Russia investigation. Durham, prosecutor, now has subpoena power, may call another grand jury. "Claiming Obama conspiracy had LE and intelligence open the initial case/investigation of 2016 Russia. The LE and Intel could now be criminally charged for opening the initial case/investigation." To make it look like the whole Russia thing was made up and the real criminals are those who opened the investigation to start .............. I just don't know what all was said. I can't read the NYT!
Barr is still very involved...
Katie Benner, NYT Justice Dept Reporter on phone, wrote the article.
|
|
smginaz Suzy
Pearl Clutcher
Je suis desole.
Posts: 2,606
Jun 26, 2014 17:27:30 GMT
|
Post by smginaz Suzy on Oct 25, 2019 1:41:03 GMT
Another one?! When was our first cival war? Clearly a product of DeVos schools and Trump University. Also, I believe the Bowling Green massacre started the first cival war.
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Oct 25, 2019 1:51:53 GMT
Mulvaney, looks more like Wilbur Ross to me......
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Oct 25, 2019 3:57:13 GMT
In the context of Trump’s campaign, these costs are not significant. Earlier this week, the Republican Party celebrated having raised more than $300 million through the first three quarters of 2019. Reimbursing these cities for the costs they incurred from Trump’s rallies, then, would eat up a little more than a day’s average fundraising. ummm- whose pockets will this $$$ be going into, if it's NOT being used to pay campaign expenses like expenses in the cities where he's holding rallies? I'll give you three guesses, and the first two don't count. It'll go the same place the missing inauguration funding went. I think if he hasn't paid ahead of time, then cities should REFUSE to host his rallies. It's not like he has some divine 'right' to have rallies wherever he wants just because he happens to currently be the President (hopefully not for long).
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Oct 25, 2019 5:39:16 GMT
ummm- whose pockets will this $$$ be going into, if it's NOT being used to pay campaign expenses like expenses in the cities where he's holding rallies? The campaign has been paying legal fees for dt, and his sons and whomever he chooses to pay for, but not likely the people he promised to pay if they needed a lawyer for things they did at work for him. I think they are also allowed to keep the monies too!
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on Oct 25, 2019 9:03:12 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 5, 2024 7:42:03 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2019 13:15:25 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 5, 2024 7:42:03 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2019 13:21:06 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 5, 2024 7:42:03 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2019 13:23:10 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 5, 2024 7:42:03 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2019 13:34:22 GMT
Lauding our "patriotic dictatorship".
We are doomed.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 5, 2024 7:42:03 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2019 13:37:51 GMT
trump...
”Donald J. Trump is an absolutely historic President already, in less than 3 years in office. His record is there for everyone to look at & to examine and compare. This is an illegitimate effort to overthrow a President, not a formal Impeachment inquiry.” @loudobbs Thank you Lou”
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 5, 2024 7:42:03 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2019 13:49:14 GMT
Apparently Rob Drake, the 'cival war' umpire is part of an organization called 'Calling for Christ' www.callingforchrist.com/about'Who We Are We are umpires of Major and Minor League baseball. Baseball is our profession, but Jesus is our Lord. We aim to serve professional baseball umpires on and off the field. Reaching, teaching, and making disciples is our directive. Our mission is winning souls for the Kingdom of God. There is one God that exists eternally in three persons; The Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit. (Gen 1:26, John 14:15-21, John 15:26) What We Believe Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior. We have surrendered our life to Him and believe He is the Son of God. It is only through Jesus that we receive eternal life. (Matt 3:17, John 3:16 John 3:3, John 14:6-7 John 15:5) The Bible is God's holy word and is the final authority for us here on Earth. (2 Tim 3:15-17, Heb 4:12, 2 Pet 1:21, John 17:17) Humans are created in the image of God, but each one has fallen short of God’s perfect standard and is in need of salvation. (Gen 1:26; Rom 3, 5:12-19; Eph 2:1-3, 4:18-19)" Why is there so often some form of Christian proselytizing behind people like Drake - and yet he's Jonesing for a civil war?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 5, 2024 7:42:03 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2019 14:05:21 GMT
Kyle Griffin..
”Impeachment investigators have negotiated in recent days with a lawyer for former national security adviser John Bolton about a date for him to be deposed behind closed doors, according to two people briefed on the matter.”
This could get even more interesting real fast if Bolton is deposed.
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Oct 25, 2019 14:13:50 GMT
Far too late. He put it out there for all to see. Showed his true feelings up close and personal. I see a threat of violence. They might better talk to the players. How do they feel with their long term future in his hands? How does he call balls and strikes, or out at bases. Has his deep seated attitude filtered into his job and theirs?
|
|