Trump is big on 'efficiency' when it's something he doesn't like.
He's not so big on cost savings when it's something he loves...
Also, keep in mind, when trump plays golf on his own courses, he makes lots of that money directly into his own pocket. From the taxpayer directly to trump.
That's *not* how I want my tax money spent!
I keep reading things like this:
Where people are saying they don't know why someone did a particular action.
Let's think about this logically a second...
Who might benefit from having put this op-ed into the paper?
No, I don't think so. What would it do other than make their life under trump hell? He's already called for lie detector tests, with mandatory firing of anyone who fails. (I agree...let's start with trump first).
I don't think this is from him either. Why freak out trump after already just releasing a new book thats...guaranteed to freak out trump already?
There's an outside chance that the Republicans did this so that voters would start thinking there really is a cabal or deep-state thing going on, and will bump supporters. They already know that this election will be crushing for them...maybe this is their hail mary.
The Democrats could benefit if they pressure trump into doing something so heinously stupid that even his supporters cannot stomach it. (This seems a long shot considering the rich tapestry of gorge-inducing items trump has done to put voters off, and people are still stupid enough to back him.) I can't imagine this one to have any possible validity, Democrats already have so much trump misbehaviour to choose from...why invent more?
Trump has already started shouting about how the cabal should be unearthed, possibly by forcing the NYT to tell who their source is. This puts journalism at risk (journalism is the *only* thing standing between a dictatorship and democracy).
I'd say it's a tie for both of these countries to put that op-ed in the NYT.
Can you imagine any better way to completely decapitate the government and populace of the US? Either the US populace along and/or the bulk of government is focused on this just now. The US simply doesn't have time or inclination to worry with other countries.
Russia wants to deflect criticism about the novichok killing in the UK right now. Why not try to discredit the President?
China wants to do something that takes trump's mind off the tariffs levelled on China.
Who stands the most to gain here?
Anyone who reads my blog knows I am not Trump's biggest fan.
A liar, coward, bully, child, criminal, and victom of insanity are some of the nicer things I've called him in the past.
The anonymous op-ed in the NYT (not failing even a little) and covered pretty much everywhere, except, strangely, not Fox "News" Network.
Now, first off: though I appreciate the sentiments expressed by the op ed, I have to completely denounce and reject the methodology mentioned. There *must* be no cabal. There *must* be no "Resistance". The letter is clearly written by someone who benefitted greatly from the changes the government has imposed so far.
You want to oust Trump and his cronies? Do it legally. Find their crimes. Litigate. Get them kicked our of office, and then put in jail.
I feel very strongly about this. What these people are doing is illegal. I might appreciate the goals yet still find the actions unacceptable.
Again, that might surprise people given how much I'm against pretty much everything Trump stands for.
"But, he's a blah, blah, blah..."
Yeah, sure. I'd probably agree to most anything begative you have to say about Trump. In large part because he has *no* consideration for tradition, no honour, no respect, no morals, and no conscience.
And yet...the actions of the people described in the book and in the op-ed are directly against the democratically elected president of the U.S. I take offence that they know better than the rest of us and will only allow certain actions to be taken. Presumably ones that they agree with.
That's really not okay.
This term, I don't like this president. I agree with some of the motivations of the people who spoke with Woodard, and the people who wrote the op-ed. I even feel a few of the same motivations.
However, once we finally dump this asshole of a president and try to heal our country, the crazies who like Trump will then feel quite justified in doing exactly the same thing back to a President that maybe I voted for next time.
This does not lead to healing. This does not lead to sanity, and it most certainly doesn't lead to a strong United States.
It leads either to a civil war, or to China and/or Russia splitting the U.S. and divvying up the spoils.
Given Fox's silence, and Trump's unending shouting about it, I'm inclined to believe that it's all 100% true and then some. I'm wishing very bad things to happen to Trump, and can't wait until he's out of office along with the menagerie of idiots he's brought into the light of day.
I cannot, however, help but look at this book, the op-ed, or anything that describes extra-legal activities as the worst possible thing that could happen right now.
The people described here should be caught, tried (fairly, of course...not because trump the loser tweeted) and jailed, if they've committed crimes. No ifs, ands, or buts.
Why? Because when the legal hammer falls on Trump and his gang of criminals, I want it to fall in a hard, clear, legally-binding and unappealable way. I look forward to when he's penniless and behind bars.
I know of nobody in the U.S. who deserves jail more. I do not want a chance of it slipping away because of mis-guided idealists bending or breaking the rules now.
Though we've had tell-alls about the Trump office before, we've never had one from someone that has proven themselves objective and trustworthy enough to get TWO pulitzer prizes for their reporting.
Now we do.
And the picture it presents is terrifying.
Trump truly is a man out of control, lurching from one crisis to another, whose staff knows he cannot be trusted to run the country.
I've said it since before the election: he's not fit for office. He's proven it time and again.
Trump needs to be removed from office before some other country decides that he's too dangerous to leave in office and takes steps themselves.
Forget the mid-terms. Let's #ImpeahcTrumpNow!
By inciting hatred and violence in the far-right groups of the west, Trump is defending and furthering Putin's real goal.
Playing the statesman by day, and trying to burnish his bad-boy image at night, Putin's support of these fringe groups is aimed at nothing short of overcoming the west not by military might, but rather getting the countries to kill themselves from within.
There is a way to stop this sort of thing: Remove Trump. Stop the hate-talk. #impeachTrump
The problems of the west are *not* based on a particular race, abundance or lack of any particular commodity, or religion.
The problems of the west are completely based on greedy, selfish and vain villains who are trying to take everyone else's cake, and keep it for themselves.
What do I mean? I mean this (cutting $25 of planned 2.5% raises for federal employees). I mean this (Trump trying to implement another capital gains tax cut that cuts $100 billion in taxes for the ultra-wealthy).
Just for those of you reading this, that's not us.
Say NO to Trump and his ever-filling swamp!
If you ever had any doubt who you should support in the McCain / Trump arguments, consider this article.
Trump is simply the sex-toy Putin's using to fuck America. People who support Trump are just trying desperately to ignore that.
Anything else is just noise.
Trump and his spokesperson Guiliani have both now come out saying that collusion is not a crime.
We hear about "collusion" a lot. It's a word that we all pretend to understand. Wikipedia says, "Collusion is a secret agreement between two or more parties to limit open competition by deceiving, misleading, or defrauding others of their legal rights, or to obtain an objective forbidden by law typically by defrauding or gaining an unfair market advantage."
Hrm...gaining the Presidency, considering the about of scandal and corruption that has happened over the last two years, as well as the never-before-seen level of nepotism and conflict of interest...that has certainly provided more than enough opportunity for Trump to gain an unfair market advantage.
The meeting with the Russians in New York (a well-documented meeting with many different excuses, explanations, and squirming offered by Trump's campaign) would definitely allow for such an agreement to be made.
Lots of smoke and all that, bound to be a spark underneath.
But consider this interview. She actually *is* a lawyer, She's saying that the word "collusion" is probably a placeholder for something along the lines of "conspiracy".
A "conspiracy" is "An agreement between two or more people to commit an illegal act, along with an intent to achieve the agreement's goal. "
A crime such as, oh, I don't know, a violation of campaign finance laws, such as the one W Samuel Patton confessed to this morning.
How much longer are we going to put up with this man in the White House?
Frankly, I don't care if he can't be convicted for "collusion". If that's not a thing he can be charged with, pick one of the things he *can* be charged with and let's get on with it.
I'm ready to quit hearing about Trump and his own personal swamp NOW!
I lost my Mom in 2013 after a over-year long fight with Cancer. I miss her all the time, lots.
She said lots of things that I understand better now that I have children and a few years' experience.
One of the most important that has stuck with me and helped me more than I could say is this:
"Actions speak more loudly than words."
In this "alternate reality" climate we're in, it seems more relevant than ever.
Don't look at what Trump says or does not say. Watch what he does.
He hires someone who doesn't care about the environment to "lead" the EPA.
He says he's going to get us better deals, but he simply pulls out of several.
He says he wants to drain the swamp, but the list of criminals and those under investigation is growing fast.
He's picking trade wars with enemies, friends, and pretty much everyone who will sit down with him (except for Russia, of course).
Again, "Actions speak more loudly than words."
Watch what he does and form your own opinions. You don't need Trump forcing opinions down your throat.
My Mom was really smart sometimes. I miss her.
How can anyone who considers themselves "religious" support Trump?
He promotes hate and violence.
By trying to convince you that 'Antifa' is a bad thing. Antifa means "anti-fascist". That means people who don't want a dictator, and in practical terms someone who objects to hate groups like Nazis and the KKK. Why is 'Antifa' a bad thing?
He's an adulterer.
He's a liar. He's admitted to lying 'because people agree with him'.
He's performed crimes. He's cozied up to Putin, even after it's been proven to a legal standard that the Russians are still trying to influence American politics.
He's single-handedly ruining the planet, and revoking almost anything Obama did that could be considered to help the planet or to protect the little guy.
He's claimed to have 'solved' the Nuclear issue on the Korean peninsula, but North Korea has not slowed even by a little their nuclear efforts.
He's started trade wars, and hurt America's image around the globe.
How is /this/ the guy to represent anyone who claims to support religion?
I'd like to define a couple terms...
In Montana (and several other states), Intimidation is a legal term meaning:
(1) A person commits the offense of intimidation when, with the purpose to cause another to perform or to omit the performance of any act, the person communicates to another, under circumstances that reasonably tend to produce a fear that it will be carried out, a threat to perform without lawful authority any of the following acts:
(a) inflict physical harm on the person threatened or any other person;
(b) subject any person to physical confinement or restraint; or
(c) commit any felony.
(2) A person commits the offense of intimidation if the person knowingly communicates a threat or false report of a pending fire, explosion, or disaster that would endanger life or property.
(3) A person convicted of the offense of intimidation shall be imprisoned in the state prison for any term not to exceed 10 years or be fined an amount not to exceed $50,000, or both.
With that in mind, how could anyone read this article and believe that it's not an illegal incitement of violence?
In anyone else, this would be enough to take action. Enough to be arrested, jailed, and perhaps convicted.
For those who voted (and would still vote) for Trump, did you really wish for a bully, a bigot, a pussy and a coward to be in the White House?