Posted by Rude One
The last couple of days have been banner ones for racists of just about
every stripe, from backwoods yahoo country fucks to ostensibly educated
white nationalist shit crumbs, from pandering politicians to true
believers. Let's just run it down:
1. The Department of Justice
is exploring whether the federal government should be "suing
universities over affirmative action admissions policies deemed to
discriminate against white applicants." It's as if they believe that
diversity on college campuses is a bad thing, probably because it makes
people more sympathetic to people of other races. And how can you have a
race war if that happens?
2. President Donald Trump announced his support for the RAISE Act,
which is an anodyne acronym masking a shitty policy. It looks to cut in
half the number of legal immigrants coming into the country, and it
emphasizes skilled workers who can speak English. Oh, and only spouses
and children can come over with immigrants.
When nutzoid hate-filled jizz goblin Stephen Miller, a senior policy advisor and winner of "Man Who Most Looks Like a Star Trek Alien" was asked
about the racist implications of the proposal, he went into an outrage
froth that coated the gathered reporters in a glistening film of saliva.
It reached a spittle-flecked climax when Miller attacked CNN's Jim
Acosta for daring to suggest that one purpose of the bill might be to
bring in more white people, saying that "it reveals your cosmopolitan
bias to a shocking degree." Fuck's sake, "cosmopolitan" means you give a
shit about the world. The opposite of "cosmopolitan" is, more or less,
"xenophobic." Or it's just an anti-Semitic dog whistle
(which is extra weird since Miller is Jewish). Either way, between that
and a bizarro attack on the meaning of the Statue of Liberty, it was a
fucking train wreck of an appearance.
3. The Washington Post printed transcripts
of Trump's late January phone calls with Mexican President Enrique Pena
Nieto and Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull. While they are
masterpieces of fuckery, dickishness, and doltishness, it's also worth
pointing out how fucking openly racist Trump is willing to go when
talking about refugees.
When Turnbull presses Trump on honoring a deal on at least vetting
refugees to possibly take them into the United States, Trump goes
twitchy with paranoia. He knocks Cubans: "You remember the Mariel boat
lift, where Castro let everyone out of prison and Jimmy Carter accepted
them with open arms. These were brutal people." Yeah, see only 2% of the
125,000 Cubans who came here in 1980 were deemed criminals who needed
to be deported. The rest fucking made Miami what it is today. (Oddly,
Miller brought up the Mariel boat lift in his remarks yesterday. These
Trumpers are consistent in their assholery.)
Then, after Turnbull insists that the U.S. live up to its obligations,
something Trump is well-known not to give a flying rat fuck about, the
president says of the refugees who have been living in horrific
conditions on islands off Australia, "I hate taking these people. I
guarantee you they are bad. That is why they are in prison right now.
They are not going to be wonderful people who go on to work for the
local milk people...maybe you should let them out of prison." Who knows
where all these milk jobs are, but Trump equates "refugee camp" with
"prison," which would probably shock a lot of the little children who
are there.
This shit is so blatant it'd make a robed KKK member say, "Whoa, a little obvious there, fella."
Look, we know Trump is racist. We knew it for years, from the Central
Park Five to birtherism to the Muslim travel ban. It has been one of his
most consistent traits. And we know that Trump has surrounded himself
with racists, with people who are directly connected to white
nationalist groups. And we know that Trump's supporters are racist
(yeah, you are, fuck off).
And now we're seeing the policy implications of that. Trump used to ask
various non-white groups, "What the hell do you have to lose?" in
electing him.
It's pretty clear that the answer is "a future."
Showing posts with label Common Sense. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Common Sense. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 8, 2017
Monday, July 31, 2017
Fat Ass Chris Christie and all future N.J. governors barred from using beach mansion during government shutdowns
The New Jersey Assembly on Monday barred Gov. Chris Christie from using
a house at Island Beach State Park during government shutdowns.
The Legislature voted 63-2 with two abstentions to prevent Christie — or any future New Jersey governor — from using the Island Beach State Park beach mansion during a government shutdown, officials said.
Assemblyman John Wisniewski of Middlesex County proposed the measure July 13 after Christie earned statewide ire when he was photographed sunning himself July 2 with his family on the beach after he shut down state beaches during a budget standoff.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/gov-christie-barred-beach-mansion-shutdowns-article-1.3371772
The Legislature voted 63-2 with two abstentions to prevent Christie — or any future New Jersey governor — from using the Island Beach State Park beach mansion during a government shutdown, officials said.
Assemblyman John Wisniewski of Middlesex County proposed the measure July 13 after Christie earned statewide ire when he was photographed sunning himself July 2 with his family on the beach after he shut down state beaches during a budget standoff.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/gov-christie-barred-beach-mansion-shutdowns-article-1.3371772
Friday, July 28, 2017
'Skinny Repeal' Defeated, Thanks To Democrats And Senators McCain, Murkowski And Collins
By Karoli Kuns
Tonight, Senator John McCain just paid red don back for his 'I like people who weren't captured' shit.
He was the third vote, with Senators Collins and Murkowski to kill the skinny bill.
I don't know what happens next.
---
All eight pages of the Trojan Horse "Health Care Freedom Act" have been published.
I could tell you what's in them, but the thing is, Senators don't want this to become law. They don't want the House to rubber-stamp this. This is just a placeholder to send over to the House so they can convene a conference committee, which will surely fail.
And when it fails, this will pass. So I guess that means you should know what's in it.
I'm afraid (as are many of the health care experts I follow) that this will pass. I will update this post with more as it's available.
Tonight, Senator John McCain just paid red don back for his 'I like people who weren't captured' shit.
He was the third vote, with Senators Collins and Murkowski to kill the skinny bill.
I don't know what happens next.
---
All eight pages of the Trojan Horse "Health Care Freedom Act" have been published.
I could tell you what's in them, but the thing is, Senators don't want this to become law. They don't want the House to rubber-stamp this. This is just a placeholder to send over to the House so they can convene a conference committee, which will surely fail.
And when it fails, this will pass. So I guess that means you should know what's in it.
- Repeals individual mandate, effective January 1, 2017.
- Allows some tinkering by states to Essential Health Benefits
- Repeals device tax
- Defunds Planned Parenthood
- Raises limits to Health Savings Accounts
I'm afraid (as are many of the health care experts I follow) that this will pass. I will update this post with more as it's available.
Thursday, July 27, 2017
Cliven Bundy follower gets 68 years for role in armed Nevada standoff
By Steve Gorman
Outgunned by Bundy's
supporters, authorities released the cattle and left the area. Although
no shots were fired, prosecutors said Burleson and his five
co-defendants aimed rifles at law enforcement.
(Reuters)
- One of two men convicted in the first of several trials stemming from
a 2014 standoff led by renegade rancher Cliven Bundy against federal
authorities in Nevada was sentenced on Wednesday to 68 years in prison
for his role in the armed confrontation.
Gregory
Burleson, 53, of Phoenix, was found guilty in April of eight felony
counts, including charges of threatening and assaulting federal
officers, obstruction of justice, interstate travel in aid of extortion
and firearms offenses related to a crime of violence.
The
uprising at Bundy's ranch near Bunkerville, Nevada, 75 miles (120 km)
northeast of Las Vegas, grew out of a dispute in which federal agents
seized Bundy's cattle over his refusal to pay fees required for grazing
his livestock on government land.
The standoff
became a flashpoint in long-simmering tensions over federal ownership of
vast tracts of public lands in the West, and a rallying point for
right-wing militants who challenge the U.S. government's authority in
the region.
Burleson was the first of 17
defendants from the Bundy revolt to be tried, convicted and sent to
prison. A co-defendant found guilty by the same jury faces sentencing in
September.
Four others granted a mistrial in
April are being retried in Nevada. Two more groups of defendants,
including Bundy and his sons, are scheduled to stand trial later this
year and next.
Two others charged in the case
pleaded guilty separately. One received a seven-year prison term, the
other will be sentenced in January, said Trisha Young, a spokeswoman for
the U.S. Attorney's Office in Las Vegas.
Two
of Bundy's sons and four followers were acquitted of conspiracy charges
in a separate trial in October stemming from their armed takeover of a
federal wildlife center in Oregon in early 2016.
Wednesday's sentencing came days before various militia groups plan a weekend rally near Colorado Springs, Colorado.
Burleson
and the five others with whom he was tried were described by
prosecutors as Bundy's "gunmen and followers," who showed up at his
ranch from neighboring Western states armed with assault rifles and
other weapons.
Prosecutors
said all six were among hundreds who descended on Bunkerville in April
2014 for a showdown with federal officers providing security during a
court-ordered roundup of Bundy's cattle.
Reporting by Steve Gorman in Los Angeles; Editing by Grant McCool and Lisa Shumaker
Wednesday, July 26, 2017
Talking About Pardoning Yourself Makes You Sound REALLY Guilty
Donald Trump takes to Twitter and emphasizes that he has the "complete
power to pardon," drawing suspicion that his top advisers and even he himself might be facing criminal charges in connection to the
Russia scandal.
Tuesday, July 25, 2017
Monday, July 24, 2017
GOP trashes Trump’s plan to end dozens of government programs
WASHINGTON
President Donald Trump’s plan to eliminate dozens of federal agencies and programs has collapsed, as a conservative Republican Congress refuses to go along.
Among the programs spared are agencies promoting rural business development and the arts, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Community Development Block Grants and the National Wildlife Refuge Fund. Those and many others are getting money in bills approved by the GOP-run House appropriations committee. The House plans to vote on spending bills throughout next week, and the Senate is expected to consider spending plans shortly.
Trump unveiled his $4.1 trillion budget plan in March, pledging to “reduce the federal government to redefine its proper role and promote efficiency.”
But in the House, where all 435 members face voters next fall, budget legislation has far more money than Trump had sought for a host of programs. The spending bill for agriculture contains $4.64 billion beyond what Trump requested, an increase of about 30 percent. For interior and the environment, the bump was $4.3 billion or 16 percent. For transportation, housing and urban development, the committee approved $8.6 billion, about 18 percent, more than the budget request.
"There’s that old saying in Washington that the president proposes and Congress disposes," said Steve Ellis, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan fiscal watchdog.
Indeed, after many House and Senate Republicans complained to Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney in hearings about the impact of some of Trump’s cuts, congressional budget-writers quickly made sure they don’t happen.
For example, instead of slashing the Appalachian Regional Commission, the House Appropriations Committee last week approved $130 million for the independent agency, created 52 years ago, that helps fund infrastructure and job-training projects in Ohio, North Carolina, South Carolina, Missouri, Mississippi, Pennsylvania and other Appalachian states that Trump won in 2016.
Lawmakers including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., to Rep. Phil Roe, R-Tenn., vowed that doing away with the ARC wasn’t going to happen.
"I am very proud that the House Appropriations Committee approved a bill that includes important funding for the ARC, an organization that does a great deal of good in East Tennessee and rural Appalachia," Roe said.
Even agencies and programs conservative Republicans purport to dislike are avoiding the Capitol ax.
The Corporation for Public Broadcasting has been on the list of programs many conservatives and Republicans have wanted to defund since Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., was House Speaker in the 1990's.
Trump wants it off the federal books, too, but House appropriators instead included $445 million for the agency.
The National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities have also been favorite conservative targets, and got a death sentence in Trump’s budget plan. That didn’t stop the House Appropriations Committee from approving $145 million for each endowment last week with plenty of Republican help.
"Throughout this year, we’ve seen some of the Republican members of that committee saying that they were working hard to make sure that the NEA would be receiving significant funding and certainly rejecting the administration’s termination proposal," said Narric Rome, vice president for government affairs for the Americans for the Arts, an advocacy group.
All this still enrages plenty of conservatives.
"The problem with the Republicans is that so many of them aren’t team players," said Chris Edwards, director of tax policies studies at the libertarian-leaning Cato Institute and editor of DownsizingGovernment.org. "They’re parochial or, with appropriators, it’s just a single-minded devotion to increase spending on the programs that they fund."
Edwards said he was stunned when leading Republicans railed against Trump’s budget plan to eliminate the Community Block Grant Development program, which allocates funds initiatives from affordable housing to after school programs.
House appropriators approved $2.9 billion for CDBG, $100 million less than its Fiscal 2017 funding level.
"Appropriators and other Republican congressmen, they love to give speeches about fiscal responsibility, they love to complain how Obama was a big spender, but now’s the real test," he said.
"Trump has given them the way forward here with some reasonable cuts. Can they rise above their parochial interests and do something that’s good for the overall budget here?."
Other budget-watchers note that the real money issues aren’t even being addressed. Marc Goldwein, senior vice president and senior policy director for the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, said that even Trump’s cuts ignore the fastest growing parts of the federal budget, entitlements like Social Security and Medicare.
"To me, it just doesn’t seem to make much sense to be focusing all our energy on cutting the slowest growing part of the budget," he said.
President Donald Trump’s plan to eliminate dozens of federal agencies and programs has collapsed, as a conservative Republican Congress refuses to go along.
Among the programs spared are agencies promoting rural business development and the arts, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Community Development Block Grants and the National Wildlife Refuge Fund. Those and many others are getting money in bills approved by the GOP-run House appropriations committee. The House plans to vote on spending bills throughout next week, and the Senate is expected to consider spending plans shortly.
Trump unveiled his $4.1 trillion budget plan in March, pledging to “reduce the federal government to redefine its proper role and promote efficiency.”
But in the House, where all 435 members face voters next fall, budget legislation has far more money than Trump had sought for a host of programs. The spending bill for agriculture contains $4.64 billion beyond what Trump requested, an increase of about 30 percent. For interior and the environment, the bump was $4.3 billion or 16 percent. For transportation, housing and urban development, the committee approved $8.6 billion, about 18 percent, more than the budget request.
"There’s that old saying in Washington that the president proposes and Congress disposes," said Steve Ellis, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan fiscal watchdog.
Indeed, after many House and Senate Republicans complained to Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney in hearings about the impact of some of Trump’s cuts, congressional budget-writers quickly made sure they don’t happen.
For example, instead of slashing the Appalachian Regional Commission, the House Appropriations Committee last week approved $130 million for the independent agency, created 52 years ago, that helps fund infrastructure and job-training projects in Ohio, North Carolina, South Carolina, Missouri, Mississippi, Pennsylvania and other Appalachian states that Trump won in 2016.
Lawmakers including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., to Rep. Phil Roe, R-Tenn., vowed that doing away with the ARC wasn’t going to happen.
"I am very proud that the House Appropriations Committee approved a bill that includes important funding for the ARC, an organization that does a great deal of good in East Tennessee and rural Appalachia," Roe said.
Even agencies and programs conservative Republicans purport to dislike are avoiding the Capitol ax.
The Corporation for Public Broadcasting has been on the list of programs many conservatives and Republicans have wanted to defund since Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., was House Speaker in the 1990's.
Trump wants it off the federal books, too, but House appropriators instead included $445 million for the agency.
The National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities have also been favorite conservative targets, and got a death sentence in Trump’s budget plan. That didn’t stop the House Appropriations Committee from approving $145 million for each endowment last week with plenty of Republican help.
"Throughout this year, we’ve seen some of the Republican members of that committee saying that they were working hard to make sure that the NEA would be receiving significant funding and certainly rejecting the administration’s termination proposal," said Narric Rome, vice president for government affairs for the Americans for the Arts, an advocacy group.
All this still enrages plenty of conservatives.
"The problem with the Republicans is that so many of them aren’t team players," said Chris Edwards, director of tax policies studies at the libertarian-leaning Cato Institute and editor of DownsizingGovernment.org. "They’re parochial or, with appropriators, it’s just a single-minded devotion to increase spending on the programs that they fund."
Edwards said he was stunned when leading Republicans railed against Trump’s budget plan to eliminate the Community Block Grant Development program, which allocates funds initiatives from affordable housing to after school programs.
House appropriators approved $2.9 billion for CDBG, $100 million less than its Fiscal 2017 funding level.
"Appropriators and other Republican congressmen, they love to give speeches about fiscal responsibility, they love to complain how Obama was a big spender, but now’s the real test," he said.
"Trump has given them the way forward here with some reasonable cuts. Can they rise above their parochial interests and do something that’s good for the overall budget here?."
Other budget-watchers note that the real money issues aren’t even being addressed. Marc Goldwein, senior vice president and senior policy director for the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, said that even Trump’s cuts ignore the fastest growing parts of the federal budget, entitlements like Social Security and Medicare.
"To me, it just doesn’t seem to make much sense to be focusing all our energy on cutting the slowest growing part of the budget," he said.
Saturday, July 22, 2017
Friday, July 21, 2017
White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer Resigns
WASHINGTON
— Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, resigned on Friday
morning, telling Trump he vehemently disagreed with the
appointment of the New York financier Anthony Scaramucci as
communications director.
Mr.
Trump offered Mr. Scaramucci the job at 10 A.M. Trump requested
that Mr. Spicer stay on, but Mr. Spicer told Mr. Trump that he believed
the appointment was a major mistake, according to a person with direct
knowledge of the exchange.
Thursday, July 20, 2017
Trump counterterrorism adviser blames Russia for election hacks
In a break with his boss, Thomas Bossert said Russian entities clearly tried to meddle in the 2016 race.
By Ali Watkins 07/20/2017 12:49 PM EDT
The hacking and subsequent release of stolen Democratic National Committee emails last year were “unacceptable efforts and behaviors by a foreign nation state,” Thomas Bossert said on Thursday. Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images
ASPEN, CO — Donald Trump’s chief counter-terrorism adviser said Thursday that the Russian government clearly tried to manipulate the 2016 election, and declared that the Obama administration’s retaliatory sanctions didn’t go far enough.
“There’s a pretty clear and easy answer to this and it’s 'yes,'” Thomas Bossert said when asked whether the Russians worked to manipulate the U.S. election — a widely held conclusion that his boss in the Oval Office has repeatedly questioned.
The Obama White House’s response — kicking out 35 diplomats and
closing two Russian diplomatic facilities in December — “wasn’t adequate
in my mind,” Bossert, a top national security aide under former
President George W. Bush, added during a wide-ranging discussion at the
National Security Forum in Aspen.
Trump has repeatedly questioned the U.S. intelligence community’s conclusion that Moscow meddled in the 2016 election with the intent of helping Trump win. Trump said he pressed Russian President Vladimir Putin on the issue during their recent meeting at the G-20 in Germany, but the two sides offered different accounts, with Russia saying Trump accepted Putin’s denials.
The hacking and subsequent release of stolen Democratic National Committee emails last year were “unacceptable efforts and behaviors by a foreign nation state,” Bossert said on Thursday. He stressed, though, that there had been no manipulation of ballot counts.
The administration is not yet in a place to crack down harder on Russia, Bossert said, but is exploring how to deter cyber-attacks. There’s “no evidence,” he said, that offensive cyber operations deter foreign hackers, so the White House is exploring more “draconian” retaliations, like financial penalties.
Those cyber policies are in the works, he said, but their implementation — including potential responses to aggressive cyber-attacks from countries like Russia — will take longer than most would prefer.
“We’ll satisfy you, but we won’t satisfy you in enough time,” Bossert said.
The question of Russian interference in the 2016 election — including whether any of Trump’s associates colluded with the Kremlin — has clouded Trump’s presidency. Special counsel Robert Mueller and multiple congressional committees are probing not only the issue of election meddling, but other related issues — including whether Trump obstructed justice by firing FBI Director James Comey.
Bossert touched on several other controversial topics, including Syria, U.S. detention and interrogation policies, and the creation of a bio-defense force.
The administration continues to explore long-term detention facilities for captured combatants overseas, including the use of the Guantánamo Bay detention facility, Bossert said. Further, the White House is keeping “all options open” when it comes to reopening notorious black site secret prisons overseas, he said.
Bossert underscored the Trump administration’s commitment to Syria, but said Syrian President Bashar Assad’s departure was not a top priority. The White House has reportedly ended a covert program dedicated to arming anti-Assad groups.
“It’s not important for us to say Assad must go first,” Bossert said, but added, “The U.S. would still like to see Assad go at some point.”
The Trump adviser repeatedly chastised his interviewer, New York Times national security reporter David Sanger, about his newspaper’s coverage of classified U.S. programs. He also strongly objected to a Times article that he said unfairly implied the U.S. has responsibility for the effects of computer vulnerability exploitation programs designed by the U.S. government which fall into foreign hands and are used for malicious purposes.
Bossert also said the Trump administration would develop a comprehensive plan to defend the nation against bio-terrorism, an issue he said has been dangerously neglected, and which has taken on new urgency because of rapidly advancing biotechnology that allows for the creation of synthetic viruses.
Bossert said scientists may now be able to create a synthetic smallpox virus without access to the only two known laboratory samples of the deadly disease — a prospect he called terrifying.
Michael Crowley contributed to this report.
By Ali Watkins 07/20/2017 12:49 PM EDT
The hacking and subsequent release of stolen Democratic National Committee emails last year were “unacceptable efforts and behaviors by a foreign nation state,” Thomas Bossert said on Thursday. Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty ImagesASPEN, CO — Donald Trump’s chief counter-terrorism adviser said Thursday that the Russian government clearly tried to manipulate the 2016 election, and declared that the Obama administration’s retaliatory sanctions didn’t go far enough.
“There’s a pretty clear and easy answer to this and it’s 'yes,'” Thomas Bossert said when asked whether the Russians worked to manipulate the U.S. election — a widely held conclusion that his boss in the Oval Office has repeatedly questioned.
Trump has repeatedly questioned the U.S. intelligence community’s conclusion that Moscow meddled in the 2016 election with the intent of helping Trump win. Trump said he pressed Russian President Vladimir Putin on the issue during their recent meeting at the G-20 in Germany, but the two sides offered different accounts, with Russia saying Trump accepted Putin’s denials.
The hacking and subsequent release of stolen Democratic National Committee emails last year were “unacceptable efforts and behaviors by a foreign nation state,” Bossert said on Thursday. He stressed, though, that there had been no manipulation of ballot counts.
The administration is not yet in a place to crack down harder on Russia, Bossert said, but is exploring how to deter cyber-attacks. There’s “no evidence,” he said, that offensive cyber operations deter foreign hackers, so the White House is exploring more “draconian” retaliations, like financial penalties.
Those cyber policies are in the works, he said, but their implementation — including potential responses to aggressive cyber-attacks from countries like Russia — will take longer than most would prefer.
“We’ll satisfy you, but we won’t satisfy you in enough time,” Bossert said.
The question of Russian interference in the 2016 election — including whether any of Trump’s associates colluded with the Kremlin — has clouded Trump’s presidency. Special counsel Robert Mueller and multiple congressional committees are probing not only the issue of election meddling, but other related issues — including whether Trump obstructed justice by firing FBI Director James Comey.
Bossert touched on several other controversial topics, including Syria, U.S. detention and interrogation policies, and the creation of a bio-defense force.
The administration continues to explore long-term detention facilities for captured combatants overseas, including the use of the Guantánamo Bay detention facility, Bossert said. Further, the White House is keeping “all options open” when it comes to reopening notorious black site secret prisons overseas, he said.
Bossert underscored the Trump administration’s commitment to Syria, but said Syrian President Bashar Assad’s departure was not a top priority. The White House has reportedly ended a covert program dedicated to arming anti-Assad groups.
“It’s not important for us to say Assad must go first,” Bossert said, but added, “The U.S. would still like to see Assad go at some point.”
The Trump adviser repeatedly chastised his interviewer, New York Times national security reporter David Sanger, about his newspaper’s coverage of classified U.S. programs. He also strongly objected to a Times article that he said unfairly implied the U.S. has responsibility for the effects of computer vulnerability exploitation programs designed by the U.S. government which fall into foreign hands and are used for malicious purposes.
Bossert also said the Trump administration would develop a comprehensive plan to defend the nation against bio-terrorism, an issue he said has been dangerously neglected, and which has taken on new urgency because of rapidly advancing biotechnology that allows for the creation of synthetic viruses.
Bossert said scientists may now be able to create a synthetic smallpox virus without access to the only two known laboratory samples of the deadly disease — a prospect he called terrifying.
Michael Crowley contributed to this report.
Trump Voters Were Wrong, So Fuck Their Opinions
Posted by Rude One
In just six short months, it's become absolutely clear: Everyone who didn't vote for Donald Trump was right and everyone who voted for him was wrong. Yeah, yeah, they weren't wrong in that Trump won the election, just as someone isn't wrong for supporting a shitty baseball team. But it's incredibly clear now that the poor suckers and greedy fuckers who wanted to nuzzle up to Trump's man-teats for a suckle were wrong on just about every account regarding who he is and what he'd do.
They were wrong that he's a man of his word, they were wrong that he would look out for working people, they were wrong that he would make the nation respected "again" (as if it wasn't before), they were wrong that he wouldn't have scandals, and they were just wrong about him being a human being worthy of the office. They were wrong and we who voted against him (and I'm tossing anyone who voted for Hillary Clinton, Jill Stein, Gary Johnson, and Deez Nutz into the category of "voted against him") were right.
Trump voters fucked the goat, and so everything they say should be framed within the fact that they are goatfuckers. "Oh, you have an opinion on health care? Sorry, you fucked a goat. I don't give a shit about your goat-fucking opinion," we should think. But that's not what we do. We don't shun the goatfuckers, no matter how savagely they fucked that goat. We see that most clearly by the fact that the news networks and other media outlets still entertain the opinions of people who supported the Iraq war and never said they were wrong about it. Goatfuckers get away with it.
So we're treated on an almost daily basis to articles and stories about Trump voters and what they think about some issue and whether or not Trump's evil, batshit incompetence is enough for them to bail on the Orange King. Every single one of these stories is the same: Here are some assholes who voted for Trump. Let's treat them with reverence, as if they have hard-won wisdom because they shovel shit or work at Wal-Mart. Let's tell them about all the fuckery that Donald Trump has been up to and see what they think. Oh, look, they don't give a shit because he still hates the Mooslems and Messicans. And what might change their minds about Trumpochet? "I don’t know what he would have to do...I guess maybe kill someone. Just in cold blood."
That's an actual quote from an actual person in a Tennesseean article on Wayne County, Tennessee, an almost entirely white rural area with less people than my neighborhood. The thrust of the piece is that Trump voters couldn't give a happy monkey fuck about the Russia scandal. In fact, they think Trump is being maligned and Don Jr. is awesome. This is the newest wrinkle in the genre: What do stupid people think about something they don't understand at all? In the last week, Vox has done a story on Michigan Trump voters, who don't think the Russian connections are any big deal. The BBC sent a reporter to the Nebraska State Fair to get some American color (yes, ironic, I know) and some video of deluded shit heels sharing their delusions.
As Newsweek's Alexander Nazaryn wrote, "The real story here is how thoroughly Trump supporters have been deceived, both by Trump and tireless boot-lickers like Hannity and Jones. Every quote from an Ohioan who declares the Russia investigation is irrelevant is a testament to the delusive brand of Republicanism that now reigns supreme." Joshua Green said much the same in the New York Times.
Each of the Trump voter pieces generally has a token interview with someone who doesn't support Trump. But they are presented as curiosities, the two-headed cow that shouldn't exist but somehow does. But the reality is, obviously, people who think Trump is full of shit vastly outnumber the aforementioned suckers and fuckers who stand by their man. How about interviewing some of us? How about asking us, "How did you know?" And we can say, "Anyone with a fuckin' brain knew." Ask us, "What do you think about the Russia dealie?" And we can say, "Either we do something about it or we're fucked."
Hell, you don't even have to stick to the cities, where the majority of the country lives. Since you've got a rural jones, you can head to Bolivar, Tennessee, a town in the ass-crack of nowhere, near to the Alabama border, as Deep South as you can get. They went for Hillary Clinton, as did nearby Whiteville. Of course, those are majority African American towns, so you'd have to change the whole goddamned narrative away from the mighty white working class.
Or, here's an idea, why not go to the communities that went for Trump and find the people who didn't. Talk to them. See if they're feeling smug or sad or angry. See what their ideas are for getting us out of this or through this goddamn bullshit time. Find out how they're feeling about Trump's relationship with Russia. Ask them because they, like the majority of the country, were right.
Let's spend a little time and energy, dear, sweet reporters, on people who aren't barking mad or madly barking.
(Note: If you didn't vote at all, go suck a donkey's dick.)
(Note: If you wanna write to me about "goatfucker shaming," I hate you already. Same for "donkey-dick sucker shaming." Some things are just fucking shameful. Sucking a donkey's dick, fucking a goat, and voting for Donald Trump, for examples.)
In just six short months, it's become absolutely clear: Everyone who didn't vote for Donald Trump was right and everyone who voted for him was wrong. Yeah, yeah, they weren't wrong in that Trump won the election, just as someone isn't wrong for supporting a shitty baseball team. But it's incredibly clear now that the poor suckers and greedy fuckers who wanted to nuzzle up to Trump's man-teats for a suckle were wrong on just about every account regarding who he is and what he'd do.
They were wrong that he's a man of his word, they were wrong that he would look out for working people, they were wrong that he would make the nation respected "again" (as if it wasn't before), they were wrong that he wouldn't have scandals, and they were just wrong about him being a human being worthy of the office. They were wrong and we who voted against him (and I'm tossing anyone who voted for Hillary Clinton, Jill Stein, Gary Johnson, and Deez Nutz into the category of "voted against him") were right.
Trump voters fucked the goat, and so everything they say should be framed within the fact that they are goatfuckers. "Oh, you have an opinion on health care? Sorry, you fucked a goat. I don't give a shit about your goat-fucking opinion," we should think. But that's not what we do. We don't shun the goatfuckers, no matter how savagely they fucked that goat. We see that most clearly by the fact that the news networks and other media outlets still entertain the opinions of people who supported the Iraq war and never said they were wrong about it. Goatfuckers get away with it.
So we're treated on an almost daily basis to articles and stories about Trump voters and what they think about some issue and whether or not Trump's evil, batshit incompetence is enough for them to bail on the Orange King. Every single one of these stories is the same: Here are some assholes who voted for Trump. Let's treat them with reverence, as if they have hard-won wisdom because they shovel shit or work at Wal-Mart. Let's tell them about all the fuckery that Donald Trump has been up to and see what they think. Oh, look, they don't give a shit because he still hates the Mooslems and Messicans. And what might change their minds about Trumpochet? "I don’t know what he would have to do...I guess maybe kill someone. Just in cold blood."
That's an actual quote from an actual person in a Tennesseean article on Wayne County, Tennessee, an almost entirely white rural area with less people than my neighborhood. The thrust of the piece is that Trump voters couldn't give a happy monkey fuck about the Russia scandal. In fact, they think Trump is being maligned and Don Jr. is awesome. This is the newest wrinkle in the genre: What do stupid people think about something they don't understand at all? In the last week, Vox has done a story on Michigan Trump voters, who don't think the Russian connections are any big deal. The BBC sent a reporter to the Nebraska State Fair to get some American color (yes, ironic, I know) and some video of deluded shit heels sharing their delusions.
As Newsweek's Alexander Nazaryn wrote, "The real story here is how thoroughly Trump supporters have been deceived, both by Trump and tireless boot-lickers like Hannity and Jones. Every quote from an Ohioan who declares the Russia investigation is irrelevant is a testament to the delusive brand of Republicanism that now reigns supreme." Joshua Green said much the same in the New York Times.
Each of the Trump voter pieces generally has a token interview with someone who doesn't support Trump. But they are presented as curiosities, the two-headed cow that shouldn't exist but somehow does. But the reality is, obviously, people who think Trump is full of shit vastly outnumber the aforementioned suckers and fuckers who stand by their man. How about interviewing some of us? How about asking us, "How did you know?" And we can say, "Anyone with a fuckin' brain knew." Ask us, "What do you think about the Russia dealie?" And we can say, "Either we do something about it or we're fucked."
Hell, you don't even have to stick to the cities, where the majority of the country lives. Since you've got a rural jones, you can head to Bolivar, Tennessee, a town in the ass-crack of nowhere, near to the Alabama border, as Deep South as you can get. They went for Hillary Clinton, as did nearby Whiteville. Of course, those are majority African American towns, so you'd have to change the whole goddamned narrative away from the mighty white working class.
Or, here's an idea, why not go to the communities that went for Trump and find the people who didn't. Talk to them. See if they're feeling smug or sad or angry. See what their ideas are for getting us out of this or through this goddamn bullshit time. Find out how they're feeling about Trump's relationship with Russia. Ask them because they, like the majority of the country, were right.
Let's spend a little time and energy, dear, sweet reporters, on people who aren't barking mad or madly barking.
(Note: If you didn't vote at all, go suck a donkey's dick.)
(Note: If you wanna write to me about "goatfucker shaming," I hate you already. Same for "donkey-dick sucker shaming." Some things are just fucking shameful. Sucking a donkey's dick, fucking a goat, and voting for Donald Trump, for examples.)
Monday, July 17, 2017
Six Long Months Of Trump
By Frank Bruni
With his sloppiness, scandals and inner circle of arrogant neophytes, he is frittering away time. That’s hardly a singular accomplishment, but we can’t afford more government paralysis and procrastination. Infrastructure that’s no longer competitive (or safe), a tax code crying out for revision, a work force without the right skills: When do we fix this? How far behind do we fall?
From the beginning, people around me talked nonstop about the end.
How
long could Donald Trump’s presidency possibly last? Would impeachment
or the 25th Amendment undo him? Before Trump, few of us even knew
of the 25th Amendment, which allows the vice president and a majority
of the cabinet to decree the president unfit. But suddenly everybody was
up to speed, and no sooner had Trump been inaugurated than the “would
you rather” question du jour became him versus Mike Pence. All-purpose
lunacy or religious zeal: Choose your governance. Pick your poison.
Part
of this, yes, reflected the company I keep. It doesn’t brim with Trump
enthusiasts. But more of this came down to Trump himself — the lidless
grandiosity, the bottomless vulgarity, the lies atop lies upon lies.
I’ll never forget his second day in office, not just because he used an
appearance at the C.I.A. to crow
at great length about his many Time magazine covers and to insist,
despite ready evidence to the contrary, that any beef of his with
intelligence agencies was a media invention. It stays with me because of
a text message I received from a journalist who covers him as well as
any other, understands him better and was utterly flabbergasted by that
display.
“We’re
all going to die,” it said. While there was jest and hyperbole in that,
there was also genuine alarm and the dark realization that Trump would
not be transmogrified by the oath of office into anything approaching a
dignified, responsible statesman. No, his extra power was just making
him extra mean, and what we saw before Nov. 8 was what we got from Jan.
20 onward: a child in a man’s suit, a knave in a knight’s armor, a
dangerous experiment with unforeseeable consequences.
They’re
more seeable now. As of Thursday, July 20, Trump will have inhabited
the presidency for a full six months, and we can reach certain
conclusions with a measure of confidence.
No
one can yet say how or when it ends. His dim namesake’s antics,
evasions and omissions have reinvigorated talk of impeachment, but
Republican lawmakers’ statements
last week don’t support that scenario. With rare exception, the
sternest words came from the most predictable quarters and hardly rose
to the level of revolt. Maybe that’s a relief. Can you imagine Trump,
with his thin skin and martyr complex, in the throes of impeachment?
He’d wail and thrash and tear down everything around him. I mean, more
than now.
We have to stop rolling our eyes when he brags about how much he has done, because he’s right. He has done plenty.
With
his stances on climate change, trade and refugees and with all the air
kisses blown at Vladimir Putin, he has altered our place in the world
and splintered its postwar framework.
Don’t be reassured by the recent
pleasantries between him and Emmanuel Macron: Much of Western Europe is reeling
from what it considers a surrender of American leadership. This,
post-Trump, may be reparable. But I wonder if our sturdiest allies will
ever feel quite the same way about this country again.
With
his first Supreme Court appointment, he showed what he would almost
surely do with a second and third: fully indulge the social
conservatives who are one of the most dependable components of his base.
If he lasts a full term and the Senate remains, as is likely, in
Republican hands after the 2018 midterms, he could leave behind a court
that leans sharply to the right for a generation to come.
And what, in the meantime, happens to Americans’ already shriveled faith in Washington? Trump’s election reflected many voters’ exasperation with the status quo and sense of permanent estrangement from some gilded clique of winners. He was their pyrrhic retort. How much hotter will their anger burn when they realize they got played?
I’m more likely to win a season of “The Bachelorette” than he is to build that incessantly promised wall. His professed disdain for Wall Street was a campaign-season pose, abandoned the minute he started assembling his administration. Health care that’s better, cheaper and more universal? Oh, please.
It’s possible that Trump’s fans will never blame him, because of one of his most self-serving and corrosive feats: the stirring of partisanship and distrust of institutions into the conviction that there’s no such thing as objective truth. There are only rival claims. There are always “alternative facts.” Charges of mere bias are the antiquated weapons of yesteryear; “fake news” is the new nullifier, and it’s a phrase so dear to him that his unprincipled acolytes are building on it. Last week a Trump adviser, Sebastian Gorka, lashed out at the “fake news industrial complex.” Trump reportedly swooned.
What happens to a democracy whose citizens not only lose common ground but also take a match to the idea of a common reality? Thanks in part to Trump, we may find out. He doesn’t care about civility or basic decency, and even if he did, he lacks the discipline to yoke his actions to any ideals. The Democratic strategist Doug Sosnik expressed it perfectly, telling me, “His presidency is what happens when you have road rage in the Oval Office.”
I was just 9 when Richard Nixon resigned and a teenager during the Jimmy Carter years. I began paying close attention only with Ronald Reagan. He and every one of his successors bent the truth, to varying degrees. He and every successor had a vanity that sometimes ran contrary to the public good. But none came close to Trump in those regards.
None shrugged off conflicts of interest the way he does. None publicly savaged women (and men) based on their looks or supposed cosmetic surgery. None made gloating a trademark of his public discourse. Two scoops for Trump, one for everybody else. He’s president and you’re not. The pettiness radiates outward, as does the viciousness and lack of ethics — to his lawyers, to his kin.
And it’s more than just coarse spectacle. It’s an assault on what it means to be president and what the presidency means. The injury to the office won’t be quick to heal.
I can’t shake two incidents in particular. A few weeks before his inauguration, Trump tweeted a New Year greeting that was, instead, a spitball thrown at anyone who hadn’t genuflected before him. Last month, he coaxed his cabinet members to kiss his ring as the television cameras rolled. Those grotesque bookends affirmed that he is changeless and that he rules as he lives, for Trump and Trump alone.
Still I try for optimism: We won’t all die.
But suffer? Count on it.
Friday, July 14, 2017
Random Thoughts on Trump(s) and Russia
Posted by Rude One
1. Let's do this one more time, President Pussygrabber McCrazy. Consider this a lesson in the law.
James Comey could have leaked all the classified information he could get his large hands on.
Hillary Clinton could have mishandled classified emails and done something something with uranium and Russia.
Bill Clinton could have told Loretta Lynch exactly what to say about Hillary.
Every news channel that isn't Fox could be totally fake.
Barack Obama could have done nothing about Russian interference in the 2016 election.
Democrats could have colluded with Russians or Ukrainians or another foreign country during the election.
All the intelligence agencies could be leaking to do damage to the administration.
All of those things can be true, but none of them change the fact that you can still be guilty of obstruction of justice.
A murderer cannot use as a defense that his neighbor is a murderer, too. But both Trump and his son constantly tweet out what they say others are guilty of, as if to say, "If you let them get away with it, you have to let us get away with it." It's like neither of them understand that Hillary Clinton isn't the president and that Barack Obama is out of office.
2. Speaking of Pussygrabber McCrazy, Jr., he is still insisting there was nothing untoward about his meeting, along with Paul "Eyes That Have Seen Trump Nude" Manafort and Jared "Would Gladly Fuck a Dead Raccoon If His Father-in-Law Told Him To" Kushner, with a Russian lawyer. His explanation for having giving two seemingly contradictory statements about the meeting is "No inconsistency in statements, meeting ended up being primarily about adoptions. In response to further Q's I simply provided more details." No, motherfucker, you lied and thought you could get away with it. It's just like the campaign lied from the start about hookups with Russians in general.
3. First off, this "adoption" thing is a bullshit excuse. It has to do with the Magnitsky Act, passed by Congress and signed by President Obama in 2012 in order to punish Russian government officials and oligarchs who are involved in human rights abuses and fraud. It froze the assets of some really rich Russian dicks, and Putin had a hissy, so he banned Americans from adopting Russian babies. Putin hates the Act and wants it repealed. The lawyer who Junior met with, Natalia Veselnitskaya, is involved in an effort to get it repealed. Adoption is part of it, but this is about cold fuckin' cash and power.
4. But the really fucked-up part of this is that when a Russian associated with the Kremlin wanted to get together at Trump fuckin' Plaza because she had dirt on Hillary Clinton, Junior's response was, "Well, sure" when it should have been "I better call the FBI." But he couldn't do that because Junior is cut from the same scuzzy cloth as his father and the Trumps likely owe the Russians a metric fuck-ton of money and jump when told to.
4a. One fun part that hasn't gotten much discussion: Veselnitskaya "recalled that after about 10 minutes, either Mr. Kushner or Mr. Manafort left the room." She makes it seem that it's because nothing significant was discussed. But it could have been that they thought, "Oh, crap, this is illegal" and got the fuck out of Dodge. (Or they were rushing to tell Daddy about what they learned. He was in the building that day, June 9, 2016.)
5. Look, I'm not running around with my hair on fire and game theorizing the shit out of all this on Twitter. I've been circumspect, definitely leaning towards the "this is hinky" side of things with Russia. But at some goddamned point, if you keep sucking dicks for money for meth, you're a meth whore. Sure, sure, you suck one or two dicks and get paid and then go buy meth, maybe we can let it slide as tweaker shit. But if you're doing it every day, then you, my friend, have a problem with meth. And handling your finances. But mostly meth.
It's becoming more difficult to deny that the Trump administration is a meth whore. And we know who the john is.
1. Let's do this one more time, President Pussygrabber McCrazy. Consider this a lesson in the law.
James Comey could have leaked all the classified information he could get his large hands on.
Hillary Clinton could have mishandled classified emails and done something something with uranium and Russia.
Bill Clinton could have told Loretta Lynch exactly what to say about Hillary.
Every news channel that isn't Fox could be totally fake.
Barack Obama could have done nothing about Russian interference in the 2016 election.
Democrats could have colluded with Russians or Ukrainians or another foreign country during the election.
All the intelligence agencies could be leaking to do damage to the administration.
All of those things can be true, but none of them change the fact that you can still be guilty of obstruction of justice.
A murderer cannot use as a defense that his neighbor is a murderer, too. But both Trump and his son constantly tweet out what they say others are guilty of, as if to say, "If you let them get away with it, you have to let us get away with it." It's like neither of them understand that Hillary Clinton isn't the president and that Barack Obama is out of office.
2. Speaking of Pussygrabber McCrazy, Jr., he is still insisting there was nothing untoward about his meeting, along with Paul "Eyes That Have Seen Trump Nude" Manafort and Jared "Would Gladly Fuck a Dead Raccoon If His Father-in-Law Told Him To" Kushner, with a Russian lawyer. His explanation for having giving two seemingly contradictory statements about the meeting is "No inconsistency in statements, meeting ended up being primarily about adoptions. In response to further Q's I simply provided more details." No, motherfucker, you lied and thought you could get away with it. It's just like the campaign lied from the start about hookups with Russians in general.
3. First off, this "adoption" thing is a bullshit excuse. It has to do with the Magnitsky Act, passed by Congress and signed by President Obama in 2012 in order to punish Russian government officials and oligarchs who are involved in human rights abuses and fraud. It froze the assets of some really rich Russian dicks, and Putin had a hissy, so he banned Americans from adopting Russian babies. Putin hates the Act and wants it repealed. The lawyer who Junior met with, Natalia Veselnitskaya, is involved in an effort to get it repealed. Adoption is part of it, but this is about cold fuckin' cash and power.
4. But the really fucked-up part of this is that when a Russian associated with the Kremlin wanted to get together at Trump fuckin' Plaza because she had dirt on Hillary Clinton, Junior's response was, "Well, sure" when it should have been "I better call the FBI." But he couldn't do that because Junior is cut from the same scuzzy cloth as his father and the Trumps likely owe the Russians a metric fuck-ton of money and jump when told to.
4a. One fun part that hasn't gotten much discussion: Veselnitskaya "recalled that after about 10 minutes, either Mr. Kushner or Mr. Manafort left the room." She makes it seem that it's because nothing significant was discussed. But it could have been that they thought, "Oh, crap, this is illegal" and got the fuck out of Dodge. (Or they were rushing to tell Daddy about what they learned. He was in the building that day, June 9, 2016.)
5. Look, I'm not running around with my hair on fire and game theorizing the shit out of all this on Twitter. I've been circumspect, definitely leaning towards the "this is hinky" side of things with Russia. But at some goddamned point, if you keep sucking dicks for money for meth, you're a meth whore. Sure, sure, you suck one or two dicks and get paid and then go buy meth, maybe we can let it slide as tweaker shit. But if you're doing it every day, then you, my friend, have a problem with meth. And handling your finances. But mostly meth.
It's becoming more difficult to deny that the Trump administration is a meth whore. And we know who the john is.
73 percent of Democrats would give up drinking for Trump impeachment
By Aida Chavez
Detox.net
surveyed 1,013 active alcohol drinkers on March 14 and asked questions
related to what they would be willing to sacrifice in exchange for
alcohol. Forty-one percent of those surveyed identified as women, 58
percent as men and 1 percent identified as a gender not listed on the
survey.
There was a 5
percentage point margin of error when asking about the average minimum
amount of money respondents would be willing to give accept to give up
alcohol.
Over
73 percent of Democrats would give up alcohol for the rest of their
life if it meant President Trump would be impeached tomorrow, according to a survey released on Thursday by a drug and alcohol rehabilitation group.
Only
17 percent of Republicans would give up alcohol for Trump’s
impeachment. The poll also found that nearly 31 percent of Republicans
would give up drinking if it meant the media stopped writing negative
things about President Trump.
Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) formally introduced an article
of impeachment against President Trump on Wednesday, accusing the
president of obstructing justice during the investigation of Russia’s
2016 election interference. It was the first time a lawmaker had offered
an impeachment article against Trump.
As for political affiliation, 21 percent identified as Republican, 43 percent as Democrat and 36 percent as other.
The
minimum amount of money the Americans surveyed would accept to quit
drinking for a year is at least $4,700 and to give up alcohol for life
they would expect at least $365,458.
Thursday, July 13, 2017
Wednesday, July 12, 2017
Tuesday, July 11, 2017
Look At The Timeline
Over
the weekend, as the import of the Donald Trump Jr meeting became clear,
but before this morning’s emails release, I started going back through
my notes to piece together the timeline of events and whether they
looked different in the light of the new revelations. And? Good guess!
They look a lot different. For the moment, look at the timeline after
the jump starting in April and running through August. That is the
critical part. The critical addition of the Don Jr meeting fits right
into a critical period when what we understand were Russian intelligence
operatives were trying various vehicles to surface emails that were
stolen during the spring. Look at the timeline after the jump – again,
go ahead to April 2016.
June 16th, 2015: Donald Trump announces his candidacy for President of the United States.
Circa Summer 2015: The US government alleges that Russian hackers first gain access to DNC computer networks.
Circa August 2015: Trump staff arranges first meeting between Trump and General Flynn, according to Flynn’s account in an August 2016 interview
with The Washington Post. “I got a phone call from his team. They asked
if he would be willing meet with Mr. Trump and I did. … In late summer
2015.”
August 8th, 2015: Roger Stone leaves formal role in Trump campaign. Whether he quits or was fired is disputed. Stone will continue as a key, albeit informal advisor, for the remainder of the campaign.
December 10th, 2015: Michael Flynn attends conference and banquet in Moscow to celebrate the 10th anniversary of RT (formerly Russia today). Flynn is seated next to Russian President Vladimir Putin at the concluding banquet.
March 19th, 2016: Hackers successfully hack into Clinton campaign Chairman John Podesta’s email.
March 21st, 2016: In a meeting with The Washington Post editorial board, Trump provides a list of five foreign policy advisors. The list includes Carter Page but not Michael Flynn. The list is Walid Phares, Carter Page, George Papadopoulos, Joe Schmitz, and ret. Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg.
March 28th, 2016: Trump campaign hires Paul Manafort to oversee delegate operations for campaign. Manafort becomes the dominant figure running the campaign by late April and takes over as campaign manager on June 21st with the firing of campaign manager Corey Lewandowski.
February-April 2016: Flynn advisory relationship with Trump appears to have solidified over the Spring of 2016. In late January Flynn is mentioned as an advisor who has “regular interactions” with Trump. There are similar mentions in February and March. Yet as late as mid-March, Flynn appeared to downplay his ties to Trump. By May Flynn is routinely listed as an advisor and by late May is even being mooted as a possible vice presidential pick.
April 2016: DNC network administrators first notice suspicious activity on Committee computer networks in late April, 2016, according to The Washington Post. The DNC retains the services of network security firm Crowdstrike which expels hackers from the DNC computer network. Crowdstrike tells The Washington Post it believes hackers had been operating inside the DNC networks since the Summer of 2015.
April 19th, 2016: “DCLeaks.com” url/address registered.
May 3rd, 2016: Donald J. Trump becomes becomes presumptive nominee after Ted Cruz and John Kasich withdraw from race.
May 26th, 2016: Donald J. Trump officially secure majority of GOP delegates, officially clinching the nomination of the Republican party.
June 3rd, 2016: First email contact between Rob Goldstone and Donald Trump Jr. about meeting with “Russian government lawyer” with damaging information about Hillary Clinton.
June 7th, 2016: Donald J Trump gives speech in which he promises a major speech about Hillary Clinton’s crimes on June 13th. “I am going to give a major speech on … probably Monday [June 13th] of next week and we’re going to be discussing all of the things that have taken place with the Clintons. I think you’re going to find it very informative and very, very interesting.”
June 8th, 2016: First tweet posted to “DCLeaks” Twitter account.
June 9th, 2016: Donald Trump, Jr., Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort meet with Natalia Veselnitskaya. Trump agreed to take the meeting after being told by Trump associate Rob Goldstone that Veselnitskaya had damaging information about Hillary Clinton which came from a Russian government operation to help his father Donald J. Trump.
June 12th, 2016: Julian Assange first announces that Wikileaks has Clinton emails which are soon to be released. “Wikileaks has a very big year ahead … We have emails related to Hillary Clinton which are pending publication.”
June 14, 2016: Washington Post publishes first account of hacking of the DNC computer networks, allegedly by hackers working on behalf of the Russian government.
June 15th, 2016: “Guccifer 2.0”, later identified by US government officials and other private sector analysts as a fictive persona created by Russian intelligence operatives, contacts The Smoking Gun to take credit for hacking the DNC.
June 27th, 2016: First hacked DNC emails posted to “DCLeaks” website.
July 11th-12th, 2016: Trump campaign officials intervene to remove language calling for providing Ukraine with lethal aid against Russian intervention is Crimea and eastern Ukraine. It is, reportedly, the only significant Trump campaign intervention in the platform in which the Trump campaign has allowed activists a free hand.
July 12th, 2016: Official publication date, The Field of Fight by Michael Flynn and Michael Ledeen.
July 22, 2016: Wikileaks releases first tranche of DNC emails dating from January 2015 to May 2016.
July 27th, 2016: Donald Trump asks Russia to hack Clinton’s email to find 33,000 alleged lost emails: “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you can find the 33,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”
August 1st, 2016: Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort denies Trump campaign changed GOP platform on Russia and Ukraine.
August 8th, 2016: Trump Advisor Roger Stone tells Southwest Broward Republican Organization “I actually have communicated with Assange. I believe the next tranche of his documents pertain to the Clinton Foundation but there’s no telling what the October surprise may be.”
August 14th, 2016: The New York Times publishes story detailing handwritten ledgers showing “$12.7 million in undisclosed cash payments designated for Mr. Manafort from Mr. Yanukovych’s pro-Russian political party from 2007 to 2012, according to Ukraine’s newly formed National Anti-Corruption Bureau.”
August 17th, 2016: Nominee Donald Trump receives his first intelligence briefing with Gen. Michael Flynn and Gov. Chris Christie in attendance.
August 19, 2016: Paul Manafort resigns from Trump campaign.
August 21, 2016: Trump advisor Roger Stone tweets: “Trust me, it will soon [sic] the Podesta’s time in the barrel.”
September 26th, 2016: Trump Russia-Europe Policy Advisor Carter Page steps down from campaign while disputing allegations that he engaged in private communications with Russian government officials. A Yahoo News article from three days earlier reported that US intelligence officials were probing whether he met privately with Russian officials in Moscow in July, including an alleged meeting with close Putin ally Igor Sechin, Chairman of Russian oil company Rosneft.
September 26th, 2016: At first presidential debate, Donald Trump casts doubt on Russian role in hacking campaign: “It could be Russia, but it could also be China. It could also be lots of other people. It also could be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds.”
October 7, 2016: A “Joint Statement from the Department of Homeland Security and Office of the Director of National Intelligence” officially accuses the Russian government of being behind hacking of the DNC “to interfere with the US election process.”
October 7, 2016: Wikileaks releases first batch of Podesta emails – one hour after release of Access Hollywood Trump tape.
October 12th, 2016: Stone says he has been in contact with Assange through an intermediary.
October 30th, 2016: In response to FBI Director James Comey’s letter to Congress about new developments in the Clinton email server probe, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid writes a public letter to Comey in which he claims: “In my communications with you and other top officials in the national security community, it has become clear that you possess explosive information about close ties and coordination between Donald Trump, his top advisors, and the Russian government.”
December 9th, 2016: Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) hand delivers a selection of memos (aka ‘the Steele dossier’) to FBI Director James Comey.
December 29th, 2016: President Barack Obama outlines a wave a sanctions and expulsions of Russian diplomat in response to Russian efforts to interfere in the 2016 election.
December 29th, 2016: Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov vows retaliation for sanctions.
December 29th, 2016: Incoming National Security Michael Flynn has multiple phone conversations with Russian Sergey Kislyak. It is later reported that the calls covered US sanctions and suggestions that Obama’s punitive actions could be undone in a matter of weeks. Trump administration officials had repeatedly denied that the conversations involved more than pleasantries and logistics about future meetings.
December 29th-30th, 2016: Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov announces preliminary plans to expel American diplomats.
December 30th, 2016: Russian President Vladimir Putin says he will not retaliate against sanctions and expulsions but await presidency of Donald Trump.
January 19th, 2017: The New York Times reports that the FBI is leading an interagency task force probing ties between Russia and three close Trump associates: Paul Manafort, Carter Page and Roger Stone.
January 26th, 2017: Acting Attorney General Sally Yates and a senior intelligence official visit to White House Counsel Donald McGahn to deliver the message that National Security Advisor Flynn has deceived the Vice President about the subject matter of his calls and may be subject to Russian blackmail.
February 13th, 2017: Michael Flynn resigns as National Security Advisor.
June 16th, 2015: Donald Trump announces his candidacy for President of the United States.
Circa Summer 2015: The US government alleges that Russian hackers first gain access to DNC computer networks.
August 8th, 2015: Roger Stone leaves formal role in Trump campaign. Whether he quits or was fired is disputed. Stone will continue as a key, albeit informal advisor, for the remainder of the campaign.
December 10th, 2015: Michael Flynn attends conference and banquet in Moscow to celebrate the 10th anniversary of RT (formerly Russia today). Flynn is seated next to Russian President Vladimir Putin at the concluding banquet.
March 19th, 2016: Hackers successfully hack into Clinton campaign Chairman John Podesta’s email.
March 21st, 2016: In a meeting with The Washington Post editorial board, Trump provides a list of five foreign policy advisors. The list includes Carter Page but not Michael Flynn. The list is Walid Phares, Carter Page, George Papadopoulos, Joe Schmitz, and ret. Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg.
March 28th, 2016: Trump campaign hires Paul Manafort to oversee delegate operations for campaign. Manafort becomes the dominant figure running the campaign by late April and takes over as campaign manager on June 21st with the firing of campaign manager Corey Lewandowski.
February-April 2016: Flynn advisory relationship with Trump appears to have solidified over the Spring of 2016. In late January Flynn is mentioned as an advisor who has “regular interactions” with Trump. There are similar mentions in February and March. Yet as late as mid-March, Flynn appeared to downplay his ties to Trump. By May Flynn is routinely listed as an advisor and by late May is even being mooted as a possible vice presidential pick.
April 2016: DNC network administrators first notice suspicious activity on Committee computer networks in late April, 2016, according to The Washington Post. The DNC retains the services of network security firm Crowdstrike which expels hackers from the DNC computer network. Crowdstrike tells The Washington Post it believes hackers had been operating inside the DNC networks since the Summer of 2015.
April 19th, 2016: “DCLeaks.com” url/address registered.
May 3rd, 2016: Donald J. Trump becomes becomes presumptive nominee after Ted Cruz and John Kasich withdraw from race.
May 26th, 2016: Donald J. Trump officially secure majority of GOP delegates, officially clinching the nomination of the Republican party.
June 3rd, 2016: First email contact between Rob Goldstone and Donald Trump Jr. about meeting with “Russian government lawyer” with damaging information about Hillary Clinton.
June 7th, 2016: Donald J Trump gives speech in which he promises a major speech about Hillary Clinton’s crimes on June 13th. “I am going to give a major speech on … probably Monday [June 13th] of next week and we’re going to be discussing all of the things that have taken place with the Clintons. I think you’re going to find it very informative and very, very interesting.”
June 8th, 2016: First tweet posted to “DCLeaks” Twitter account.
June 9th, 2016: Donald Trump, Jr., Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort meet with Natalia Veselnitskaya. Trump agreed to take the meeting after being told by Trump associate Rob Goldstone that Veselnitskaya had damaging information about Hillary Clinton which came from a Russian government operation to help his father Donald J. Trump.
June 12th, 2016: Julian Assange first announces that Wikileaks has Clinton emails which are soon to be released. “Wikileaks has a very big year ahead … We have emails related to Hillary Clinton which are pending publication.”
June 14, 2016: Washington Post publishes first account of hacking of the DNC computer networks, allegedly by hackers working on behalf of the Russian government.
June 15th, 2016: “Guccifer 2.0”, later identified by US government officials and other private sector analysts as a fictive persona created by Russian intelligence operatives, contacts The Smoking Gun to take credit for hacking the DNC.
June 27th, 2016: First hacked DNC emails posted to “DCLeaks” website.
July 11th-12th, 2016: Trump campaign officials intervene to remove language calling for providing Ukraine with lethal aid against Russian intervention is Crimea and eastern Ukraine. It is, reportedly, the only significant Trump campaign intervention in the platform in which the Trump campaign has allowed activists a free hand.
July 12th, 2016: Official publication date, The Field of Fight by Michael Flynn and Michael Ledeen.
July 22, 2016: Wikileaks releases first tranche of DNC emails dating from January 2015 to May 2016.
July 27th, 2016: Donald Trump asks Russia to hack Clinton’s email to find 33,000 alleged lost emails: “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you can find the 33,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”
August 1st, 2016: Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort denies Trump campaign changed GOP platform on Russia and Ukraine.
August 8th, 2016: Trump Advisor Roger Stone tells Southwest Broward Republican Organization “I actually have communicated with Assange. I believe the next tranche of his documents pertain to the Clinton Foundation but there’s no telling what the October surprise may be.”
August 14th, 2016: The New York Times publishes story detailing handwritten ledgers showing “$12.7 million in undisclosed cash payments designated for Mr. Manafort from Mr. Yanukovych’s pro-Russian political party from 2007 to 2012, according to Ukraine’s newly formed National Anti-Corruption Bureau.”
August 17th, 2016: Nominee Donald Trump receives his first intelligence briefing with Gen. Michael Flynn and Gov. Chris Christie in attendance.
August 19, 2016: Paul Manafort resigns from Trump campaign.
August 21, 2016: Trump advisor Roger Stone tweets: “Trust me, it will soon [sic] the Podesta’s time in the barrel.”
September 26th, 2016: Trump Russia-Europe Policy Advisor Carter Page steps down from campaign while disputing allegations that he engaged in private communications with Russian government officials. A Yahoo News article from three days earlier reported that US intelligence officials were probing whether he met privately with Russian officials in Moscow in July, including an alleged meeting with close Putin ally Igor Sechin, Chairman of Russian oil company Rosneft.
September 26th, 2016: At first presidential debate, Donald Trump casts doubt on Russian role in hacking campaign: “It could be Russia, but it could also be China. It could also be lots of other people. It also could be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds.”
October 7, 2016: A “Joint Statement from the Department of Homeland Security and Office of the Director of National Intelligence” officially accuses the Russian government of being behind hacking of the DNC “to interfere with the US election process.”
October 7, 2016: Wikileaks releases first batch of Podesta emails – one hour after release of Access Hollywood Trump tape.
October 12th, 2016: Stone says he has been in contact with Assange through an intermediary.
October 30th, 2016: In response to FBI Director James Comey’s letter to Congress about new developments in the Clinton email server probe, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid writes a public letter to Comey in which he claims: “In my communications with you and other top officials in the national security community, it has become clear that you possess explosive information about close ties and coordination between Donald Trump, his top advisors, and the Russian government.”
December 9th, 2016: Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) hand delivers a selection of memos (aka ‘the Steele dossier’) to FBI Director James Comey.
December 29th, 2016: President Barack Obama outlines a wave a sanctions and expulsions of Russian diplomat in response to Russian efforts to interfere in the 2016 election.
December 29th, 2016: Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov vows retaliation for sanctions.
December 29th, 2016: Incoming National Security Michael Flynn has multiple phone conversations with Russian Sergey Kislyak. It is later reported that the calls covered US sanctions and suggestions that Obama’s punitive actions could be undone in a matter of weeks. Trump administration officials had repeatedly denied that the conversations involved more than pleasantries and logistics about future meetings.
December 29th-30th, 2016: Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov announces preliminary plans to expel American diplomats.
December 30th, 2016: Russian President Vladimir Putin says he will not retaliate against sanctions and expulsions but await presidency of Donald Trump.
January 19th, 2017: The New York Times reports that the FBI is leading an interagency task force probing ties between Russia and three close Trump associates: Paul Manafort, Carter Page and Roger Stone.
January 26th, 2017: Acting Attorney General Sally Yates and a senior intelligence official visit to White House Counsel Donald McGahn to deliver the message that National Security Advisor Flynn has deceived the Vice President about the subject matter of his calls and may be subject to Russian blackmail.
February 13th, 2017: Michael Flynn resigns as National Security Advisor.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Josh Marshall is editor and publisher of TalkingPointsMemo.com.
Monday, July 10, 2017
Thursday, July 6, 2017
Got fed up. Wrote to NBC's Phil Griffin and Andy Lack about MSNBC grotesqueries
By calimary
Let me know what you think. Address included at the top here, in case you want to use it for your own letter.
Phil Griffin
NBCUniversal
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, NY 10112
Dear Mr. Griffin –
Longtime loyal MSNBC viewer here. Demographically: female, white, 64, college grad, wife/mother, news/politics junkie, retired news anchor/reporter, lifelong liberal Democrat, and I vote! Honored to be a member of your loyal viewership that’s lifted MSNBC to #1 in cable news in prime time, thanks to two true gems - Maddow and O’Donnell!
First: THANK YOU for relieving us of Greta Van Susteren. I wrote you months ago to point out that such a signature Fox News name DOES NOT BELONG on a network like MSNBC. Her ratings failure proved my point. PLEASE understand your audience better. We’re home at MSNBC precisely BECAUSE it does not feature programming or on-air talent like what you’d find at Fox News. If we wanted that presentation, we’d already be watching over there.
2) WHY did you force Megyn Kelly on NBC? The ratings already prove that’s another fail. She reads ice-cold on camera. She does not, and will not, appeal at any network whose audience isn’t predominately male, old, white, conservative, and horny. Move her over to MSNBC at your peril. There are far better and smarter ways to spend $17+ million/year.
3) WHY is the #1 BEST interviewer in cable news being squandered on weekend mornings? Joy Reid deserves and has earned massively better exposure, like a Monday-through-Friday show.
4) WHY do Ali Velshi and Stephanie Ruhle deserve so much Monday-through-Friday exposure? There are THREE shows between those two people alone. You really don’t have any other available talent? Are you planning to change the name of MSNBC into the Velshi/Ruhle network?
5) WHY is MSNBC being turned into a whites-only club? You gave up a Tamron Hall for the Alpha blonde from Fox News??? While the excellent Craig Melvin is reduced to a mere fill-in, and the brilliant Joy Reid languishes on the weekends?
6) WHY would you even consider the smug, arrogant, and obnoxious Hugh Hewitt for ANY exposure on MSNBC??? WHY does ANY conservative merit a show on MSNBC in the first place??? Do you just have a thing for a bad fit? Do you buy your suits that way?
I represent your largest and most loyal constituency. WHY do you make programming choices like you have? Unless you’re a mole for CNN (or worse, Fox)?
PLEASE consider the constituency you have, which is THE reason why MSNBC now reigns in cable news. If you continue to alienate us with your bad hires and programming decisions, you can count on legions of us finding new homes for our loyalty.
I was right about Greta. I’m right about this, too.
Signed, and CC'd to Andrew Lack
Let me know what you think. Address included at the top here, in case you want to use it for your own letter.
Phil Griffin
NBCUniversal
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, NY 10112
Dear Mr. Griffin –
Longtime loyal MSNBC viewer here. Demographically: female, white, 64, college grad, wife/mother, news/politics junkie, retired news anchor/reporter, lifelong liberal Democrat, and I vote! Honored to be a member of your loyal viewership that’s lifted MSNBC to #1 in cable news in prime time, thanks to two true gems - Maddow and O’Donnell!
First: THANK YOU for relieving us of Greta Van Susteren. I wrote you months ago to point out that such a signature Fox News name DOES NOT BELONG on a network like MSNBC. Her ratings failure proved my point. PLEASE understand your audience better. We’re home at MSNBC precisely BECAUSE it does not feature programming or on-air talent like what you’d find at Fox News. If we wanted that presentation, we’d already be watching over there.
2) WHY did you force Megyn Kelly on NBC? The ratings already prove that’s another fail. She reads ice-cold on camera. She does not, and will not, appeal at any network whose audience isn’t predominately male, old, white, conservative, and horny. Move her over to MSNBC at your peril. There are far better and smarter ways to spend $17+ million/year.
3) WHY is the #1 BEST interviewer in cable news being squandered on weekend mornings? Joy Reid deserves and has earned massively better exposure, like a Monday-through-Friday show.
4) WHY do Ali Velshi and Stephanie Ruhle deserve so much Monday-through-Friday exposure? There are THREE shows between those two people alone. You really don’t have any other available talent? Are you planning to change the name of MSNBC into the Velshi/Ruhle network?
5) WHY is MSNBC being turned into a whites-only club? You gave up a Tamron Hall for the Alpha blonde from Fox News??? While the excellent Craig Melvin is reduced to a mere fill-in, and the brilliant Joy Reid languishes on the weekends?
6) WHY would you even consider the smug, arrogant, and obnoxious Hugh Hewitt for ANY exposure on MSNBC??? WHY does ANY conservative merit a show on MSNBC in the first place??? Do you just have a thing for a bad fit? Do you buy your suits that way?
I represent your largest and most loyal constituency. WHY do you make programming choices like you have? Unless you’re a mole for CNN (or worse, Fox)?
PLEASE consider the constituency you have, which is THE reason why MSNBC now reigns in cable news. If you continue to alienate us with your bad hires and programming decisions, you can count on legions of us finding new homes for our loyalty.
I was right about Greta. I’m right about this, too.
Signed, and CC'd to Andrew Lack
Wednesday, July 5, 2017
Chris Christie’s Tutorial In Hubris
We
can scoff and sneer at those images of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie
on his beachfront imperium, or we can learn from them. As he took in the
sun, he doled out a lesson, the same one that Donald Trump is
delivering on a daily basis and in a grander fashion:
Beware
the politician who doesn’t give a damn for decorum. What he markets as
irreverence can be something coarser and more perverse.
It can lead to ruin. Christie’s approval rating from New Jersey voters was just 15 percent — the lowest for any current governor in the country and the worst in his state’s history
— before his weekend repose on what turned out to be quicksand. He
could sink into single digits after this. Negative integers aren’t
entirely out of the question.
I
hope Trump is watching, but I have my doubts. The Christie family’s
swimwear pageant isn’t the kind that he’s known to ogle. Plus, he surely
turns the channel when the visage on the screen isn’t his own.
The
stories of the disgraced New Jersey governor and the disgraceful
American president overlap.
Christie was “Trump before Trump,” Michael
Steele, a former chairman of the Republican National Committee, told The
Washington Post’s Robert Costa in an article
published late Monday. “He does what he wants to do, and his success
can be traced to that. But there are consequences, of course, when you
work that way.”
Steele
could as easily have been talking about Trump, and when Costa referred
to the “defiance that has both lifted and hobbled Christie’s political
career,” he brought to mind Trump’s temperament and trajectory, whether
he meant to or not.
The
twins of tantrum, Christie and Trump had almost identical political
appeals. They mocked propriety. They broke rules. They assertively
peddled the impression that as happy as they were to make friends, they
were even happier to make enemies, because that meant that they were
fully in the fight.
In
an era of resentment and anger, many voters thrilled to the spectacle.
The problem with other politicians, these voters legitimately reasoned,
was too much indulgence of vested interests and too cowardly an
obeisance to convention. If you didn’t slaughter the sacred cows, you’d
never get to the tastiest filet.
But
Christie and Trump proved to be butchers of a more indiscriminate and
self-serving sort, and both demonstrated that there’s a short leap from
headstrong to hardheaded and from defiant to delusional. Bold
nonconformity can be the self-indulgent egotist’s drag.
Yes,
Christie called out fools in certain circumstances where they deserved
it and steamrolled opponents who stood in the way of some plans that
were wholly defensible. And he was seemingly immune to any of the
subsequent caricatures of him as a bully.
But he was also deaf to inevitable and entirely fair questions about his behavior. As Nick Corasaniti noted
in The Times this week, he was caught “using a state helicopter paid
for by taxpayers to attend his son’s baseball game.” He let King
Abdullah of Jordan treat him and his family to a $30,000 weekend in a posh hotel.
He
was blind to how he would come across when, in his speech at the 2012
Republican National Convention, he took such a gaudy star turn that the
party’s presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, was reduced to a cameo. Christie bucked traditional manners, all right. He bucked them all the way to jaw-dropping megalomania.
Make
no mistake: For all their flamboyant pugnaciousness, the Christies and
Trumps of the political world are chasing adulation every bit as much as
their peers are — maybe more so. They’re just taking a deliberately
muddier route, and if they don’t get there, they’re more likely to wear
their failure as a badge of honor and to dig in with a destructive
arrogance.
When
Christie was asked whether, despite a shutdown of the state government,
he would steal away to the manse on the shore that’s a perk of his
office, he unabashedly answered yes.
“That’s just the way it goes,” he said. “Run for governor, and you can have a residence.”
Translation: I’m governor and you’re not. Where have we heard a formulation like that before?
Trump
and Christie somehow decided that you have to govern by middle finger
if you want to avoid governing by pinkie finger. But there’s a digit in
between: a middle ground. It’s where real leadership and true
effectiveness lie.
Christie’s
disrepute and dashed ambitions confirm as much. So does the ongoing
insult of Trump’s presidency. They show that if you embrace a politician
who talks too frequently and proudly about not caring what anyone
thinks, you’ll wind up in the clutch of a politician whose last refuge
is not caring what anyone thinks. That’s a dangerous place to be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)