Trump, June 2017: From [Covfefe] with Love

On the other hand, it's just a rule. Or a law, or whatever. People increasingly just do whatever they feel regardless of some dumb code of conduct. Maybe the president will just smash open the case where the Constitution is and start writing some new amendments at the bottom in crayon. Why the fuck not.

i wonder how hard it would be to convince trump that the national treasure movies are documentaries

It's like releasing a wild dog in your kitchen and trusting that it'll behave like a person and also cook you a meal. Just give it a chance.

xpost If he's seen them, he probably doesn't even need convincing.

People are still out there putting forth the proposition that they should 'just give him a chance' aren't they?
Do they have a default switch off point?

Well yeah, we all do; it's called "death"

People are still out there putting forth the proposition that they should 'just give him a chance' aren't they?

yeah, i hear this a lot from trump's faithful. they support (or at least shruggingly accept) everything he does & think the "msm" are liberal crybabies on a vengeful witch hunt.

Well yeah, we all do; it's called "death"

speak for yourself - i'm cursed to walk the earth forevermore

xp yeah and the "if they would just let him do his thing" argument, the narrative that he is being hamstrung by the swamp/deep state is already being constructed

Someone in my office was making that argument a couple of weeks ago--admittedly a perhaps not-too-swift twenty-something from Staten Island, so he's a nice boy but I wouldn't set too much store by his opinions if it weren't for the fact that he gets to vote.

"we woulda won in vietnam"

the whole fucking point of a congress is so a president can't "just do his thing"

and yet his supporters say Trump is right to pull out of this since it didn't go through Congress.

Trump pulls out of Paris Accord, stocks rise. Why isn't the end of civilization priced into the market?

— Scott Adams (@ScottAdamsSays) June 1, 2017

Too long term. What will it do to next quarter’s earnings? https://t.co/Wz8cz5WzFl

— Doug Henwood (@DougHenwood) June 1, 2017

markets dont act rational, fucko. just because people worship them doesn't mean they're right.

how can you be 60 years old and have not know that the long-term stability of environmental factors doesn't price into the stock market

you know whats also not priced into the market? people's well-being.

“Labor is being paid first again”: American Airlines investors complain after company gives pilots and flight attendants raises

http://www.salon.com/2017/04/28/labor-is-being-paid-first-again-american-airlines-investors-complain-after-company-gives-pilots-and-flight-attendants-raises/

Meanwhile:

Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC) on Thursday indicated that he’s not optimistic about the Senate’s chances to pass a comprehensive bill to repeal and replace Obamacare this year.

ADVERTISING

“I don’t see a comprehensive health-care plan this year,” he told North Carolina television station WXII 12 News.

Burr also said that the House bill is “dead on arrival” in the Senate.

The senator’s comments come after Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said last week that he’s not sure how the Senate will pass an Obamacare repeal bill.

“I don’t know how we get to 50 at the moment,” he told Reuters. “But that’s the goal.”

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/burr-no-senate-health-plan-this-year

aaaand about that testimony:

President Donald Trump could invoke executive privilege to prevent fired FBI director James Comey from delivering his scheduled testimony before Congress next week, White House counselor Kellyanne Conway suggested Friday.

Conway first told ABC’s “Good Morning America” that the Trump team would be “watching with the rest of the world” to see what Comey said in his congressional testimony.

Then, asked directly if Trump would use his presidential authority to block Comey’s testimony, Conway hedged: “The President will make that decision.”

good luck w that

isn't that exactly what landed Nixon before the SC

DO IT, TRUMP!!!

yeah, do it!

I am so completely adamant about my innocence that I will do everything in my power to prevent the possibility of my official exoneration.

Meantime...

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-flynn-turkey-exclusive-idUSKBN18T276

Robert Mueller, the special counsel investigating possible ties between the Trump election campaign and Russia, is expanding his probe to include a grand jury investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn, three sources told Reuters.

The move means Mueller’s politically charged inquiry will now look into Flynn’s paid work as a lobbyist for a Turkish businessman in 2016, in addition to contacts between Russian officials and Flynn and other Trump associates during and after the Nov. 8 presidential election.

Federal prosecutors in Virginia are investigating a deal between Flynn and Turkish businessman Ekim Alptekin as part of a grand jury criminal probe, according to a subpoena seen by Reuters.

Alptekin’s company, Netherlands-based Inovo BV, paid Flynn's consultancy $530,000 between September and November to produce a documentary and research on Fethullah Gulen, an exiled Turkish cleric living in the United States. Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan blames Gulen for a failed coup last July.

Alptekin, an ally of Erdogan, told Reuters he hired Flynn to provide research on how Gulen is “poisoning the atmosphere” between Turkey and the United States.

Gulen has denied any role in the coup and dismisses Turkey’s allegations that he heads a terrorist organization.

Bernie interview:

Is Trump in his eyes an autocrat, or does he simply fail to understand the constitutional limits of the presidency? "The answer is both," Sanders replies. "I think he has authoritarian tendencies. The fact that he feels comfortable with authoritarians like Russian President Vladimir Putin, Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte and others around the world, suggests to me that he is an authoritarian-type personality." Trump, says Sanders, is also working "hand in glove" with the "billionaire class to move this country in a very oligarchic direction."...

The essence of his argument is that he doesn't want people to believe that (impeachment talk) is just a political attack on Trump and that he wants to bring Republicans along. "If Bernie Sanders says something, people say, 'Well, you don't like Donald Trump.'" That, he adds, is why it's a good thing that former FBI Director Robert Mueller has been appointed as special counsel. "You have somebody who a lot of people respect," says Sanders.

In his opinion, would the Democrats be making a mistake by focusing solely on Russia? If everything is about Russia, says Sanders, many people will say: "Hey, all of that is interesting, but you know what? I can't afford health care. I don't have a job. My kid can't afford to go to college. Why don't you pay attention to our needs?"

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/interview-with-bernie-sanders-about-donald-trump-a-1149427.html

the "if they would just let him do his thing" argument, the narrative that he is being hamstrung by the swamp/deep state is already being constructed

Forsooth; indeed it was thusly foretold before the election. Resistance on the part of entrenched elites was expected, and continually saying so is a common means of managing expectations. "It's going to take more than 100 days to dismantle an infrastructure of corruption dating back to the New Deal; jeez, guys."

If everything is about Russia, says Sanders, many people will say: "Hey, all of that is interesting, but you know what? I can't afford health care. I don't have a job. My kid can't afford to go to college. Why don't you pay attention to our needs?"

otmfm, Bernie

the biggest problem is that the dems have a valid excuse for not passing helpful legislation, bcz they don't have control of the House, the Senate, or the Presidency, but the same people bernie cites above as asking those questions will not accept even valid excuses. this is why somebody in the dems needs to think about a gingrich-style 'contract with america' in lieu of the fact that no one pays attention to party platforms any more. it needs to be specific and it needs to be simple for voters to grasp.

I feel like a juicy newsbomb has dropped every Friday around COB for the last few weeks, so I'm gonna be pretty disappointed if it doesn't happen again today.

i could use a break tbh

leakers gonna leak

and the tweakers gonna tweak tweak tweak

The president told mainline Protestant pastors he did great with evangelicals. Then asked if they were Christian. https://t.co/XghYKhQxIc pic.twitter.com/g4JrOvbYhP

— Daniel Dale (@ddale8) June 2, 2017

"I see you have two eyes, a mouth. Are you some sort of dog? Or a bird, maybe?"

In his opinion, would the Democrats be making a mistake by focusing solely on Russia?

I guess that would be a mistake if ... it were even remotely a possible thing Democrats might do? In fact there seems to be a swarm in all directions, besides Russia a constant stream of "GOP is trying to take away your health insurance" + "Trump is an incompetent idiot whose only policy goal is to be flattered" + "give money to this special election candidate" and "Trump doesn't think climate change is real" etc. and etc. I think they're doing a good job keeping a lot of balls in the air and they're doing a good job focusing on the many aspects in which Trump admin's priorities are broadly unpopular

Yeah I don't know anyone whose only beef with Trump is Russiastuff.

It's more like, hit him on all fronts with whatever ammunition comes to hand.

That he's so committed to giving people more reasons to think there's something fishy there (re Russia) is on him.

CNN and MSNBC seem to be covering Russia more than is warranted, and the right has managed to equate those networks with the Democratic Party, so that may explain some of that thinking. I was flipping between the two last night while waiting for the Finals to start and there was plenty of Russia talk even though Paris really should have been the only story.

from what I've read and heard, actual Democratic candidates like Quist and Ossof seem to be wisely leaning very heavy on health care in making their case.

obvs. Quist is past tense now.

Brett Stephens hire was a++++++ NYT... =|

another good one from der spiegel

http://cdn3.spiegel.de/images/image-1149622-640_panofree-qfwb-1149622.jpg

I guess that would be a mistake if ... it were even remotely a possible thing Democrats might do? In fact there seems to be a swarm in all directions, besides Russia a constant stream of "GOP is trying to take away your health insurance" + "Trump is an incompetent idiot whose only policy goal is to be flattered" + "give money to this special election candidate" and "Trump doesn't think climate change is real" etc. and etc. I think they're doing a good job keeping a lot of balls in the air and they're doing a good job focusing on the many aspects in which Trump admin's priorities are broadly unpopular

This is all well and good but at some point they're gonna need to do better in their own platform than "15$ min wage in eight years" (lol) if they want anyone to actually show up

or as Jon Schwarz put it last October

Democrats: "Nothing's free kids we'll never have free healthcare or free college or a living wage or hey how did Trump become president"

— Jon Schwarz (@tinyrevolution) February 20, 2016

make that 2/16

they're gonna need to do better in their own platform than "15$ min wage in eight years" (lol) if they want anyone to actually show up

Why? Trump had nothing except "I'm not like those liberal pansies", and he beat 15 Republicans and a Democrat.

I mean, he did say "everything will be great for you and everyone will have well-paying jobs and be rich and everything will be free," I guess, but he was just lying, but the point can't be "Democrats should lie more," can it?

its pretty safe to say that trump's administration has shattered the belief that lying has consequences

Have you read the Democratic Party's platform?

https://www.democrats.org/party-platform

Has anyone?

Yeah, their "reign in Wall Street" angle is super credible.

https://www.rt.com/usa/378616-dnc-votes-corporate-lobby-money/

I guess i'm not sure what point you're making, DJP; is the point that Dem candidates should be talking more loudly about the policy stuff in that platform? To a first approximation it looks pretty similar to what I hear them saying: rich people should pay their share, women should have rights, etc.