The State of the Nation

[b***@gmail.com]

I keep hearing the voice of King Henry II saying, "Will someone not rid
us of this troublesome president?" Disclaimer: This is not a call for
assassins.
Every day it gets worse. Now he is glibly passing on highly
confidential information to the Russians so he can brag about what great
intelligence he gets every day.
And if anyone still thinks he is sane, they should read the 19 page
transcript of his interview with The Economist. He just goes on and on,
incoherently rambling and accidentally revealing how his staff
manipulated him into not terminating NAFTA, and by the way he tells it,
he still does not know he was manipulated.
Francis A. Miniter

Well, it's the wages of sin, Francis. Nemesis strikes again. Even at this
distance, it's beyond belief that the Democrats were so out of touch with
reality that they did not realise that Clinton was utterly toxic as a
candidate to anyone who was not a true believer, and that such a sizeable
minority were so disgusted with the political establishment that they
simply could not stomach the prospect of another four years of business as
usual.

Toxic? Out of touch? Reminder: Hillary won more votes than both Trump AND Obama in separate final contests. Are we losing our memories, here?

Also, to pull off the following feat, you can't exactly be out-of-touch or toxic:

"House Dems Smash Fundraising Records Ahead of Midterms"
NBC News (22 hours ago)

-- http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/democrats-vs-trump/house-dems-smash-fundraising-records-ahead-midterms-n761466

[Mike Burke]

Post by b***@gmail.com

I keep hearing the voice of King Henry II saying, "Will someone not rid
us of this troublesome president?" Disclaimer: This is not a call for
assassins.
Every day it gets worse. Now he is glibly passing on highly
confidential information to the Russians so he can brag about what great
intelligence he gets every day.
And if anyone still thinks he is sane, they should read the 19 page
transcript of his interview with The Economist. He just goes on and on,
incoherently rambling and accidentally revealing how his staff
manipulated him into not terminating NAFTA, and by the way he tells it,
he still does not know he was manipulated.
Francis A. Miniter

Well, it's the wages of sin, Francis. Nemesis strikes again. Even at this
distance, it's beyond belief that the Democrats were so out of touch with
reality that they did not realise that Clinton was utterly toxic as a
candidate to anyone who was not a true believer, and that such a sizeable
minority were so disgusted with the political establishment that they
simply could not stomach the prospect of another four years of business as
usual.

Toxic? Out of touch? Reminder: Hillary won more votes than both Trump AND Obama in separate final contests. Are we losing our memories, here?
"House Dems Smash Fundraising Records Ahead of Midterms"
NBC News (22 hours ago)
-- http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/democrats-vs-trump/house-dems-smash-fundraising-records-ahead-midterms-n761466

That's the amazing thing for a foreign observer, admittedly one
utterly biassed against the Clintons and a couple of other Democratic
saints, eg Ted Kennedy and, in hindsight, JFK whom I admired a lot at
the time. But I was young and stupid then. Mixed feelings about LBJ.
Apart from blind loyalty to the Democratic Party, I cannot think of a
single reason anyone could have a positive opinion of either of the
Clintons. We're talking about a potential Head of State here, not a
local Mayor or Governor whose criminal behaviour will have little or
no effect beyond their own little dunghill. Of course, the
counter-argument is that Trump hardly shines in that department,
either, but I've been saying that ad nauseam since he won the
Republican nomination. In my opinion, both candidates were
unsuitable, but Trump less unsuitable than Clinton.

Some commentators have argued what seems obvious to me, ie that the
raw numbers game is irrelevant under the US electoral system. As some
have said, if the electoral college didn't exist, and if Trump had to
win a majority of the popular votes to secure office, he'd have run a
different campaign. When you look at the county electoral map, with
the heavily populated east and west bright blue with one or two
patches in the middle, while the rest of the country was virtually
solid red, you can understand why whoever designed the electoral
college system did what they did. It clearly worked as planned.
Clinton and her team should have known that, as Trump clearly did, and
worked harder to win the rust belt much of which she effectively
ignored.

But the clincher which absolutely encapsulates everything that is
wrong with her and her elitist constituents, if not the entire modern
Democratic Party (also exactly so with its Anglosphere counterparts)
was the "basket of deplorables" remark. For the candidate of a
leftist party, allegedly the party of the working class, to even think
such a thing, let alone to say it in a public comment, is really all
that needs to be said to explain why Hillary Clinton was a toxic
candidate. Democrats need to accept that and stop trying to blame the
electoral system for something that they themselves caused by their
blind loyalty to an absolutely corrupt party. Ditto Republicans.

We have similar problems throughout the Anglosphere.

Mique

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Francis A. Miniter]

Post by Mike Burke

Post by b***@gmail.com

I keep hearing the voice of King Henry II saying, "Will someone not rid
us of this troublesome president?" Disclaimer: This is not a call for
assassins.
Every day it gets worse. Now he is glibly passing on highly
confidential information to the Russians so he can brag about what great
intelligence he gets every day.
And if anyone still thinks he is sane, they should read the 19 page
transcript of his interview with The Economist. He just goes on and on,
incoherently rambling and accidentally revealing how his staff
manipulated him into not terminating NAFTA, and by the way he tells it,
he still does not know he was manipulated.
Francis A. Miniter

Well, it's the wages of sin, Francis. Nemesis strikes again. Even at this
distance, it's beyond belief that the Democrats were so out of touch with
reality that they did not realise that Clinton was utterly toxic as a
candidate to anyone who was not a true believer, and that such a sizeable
minority were so disgusted with the political establishment that they
simply could not stomach the prospect of another four years of business as
usual.

Toxic? Out of touch? Reminder: Hillary won more votes than both Trump AND Obama in separate final contests. Are we losing our memories, here?
"House Dems Smash Fundraising Records Ahead of Midterms"
NBC News (22 hours ago)
-- http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/democrats-vs-trump/house-dems-smash-fundraising-records-ahead-midterms-n761466

That's the amazing thing for a foreign observer, admittedly one
utterly biassed against the Clintons and a couple of other Democratic
saints, eg Ted Kennedy and, in hindsight, JFK whom I admired a lot at
the time. But I was young and stupid then. Mixed feelings about LBJ.
Apart from blind loyalty to the Democratic Party, I cannot think of a
single reason anyone could have a positive opinion of either of the
Clintons. We're talking about a potential Head of State here, not a
local Mayor or Governor whose criminal behaviour will have little or
no effect beyond their own little dunghill. Of course, the
counter-argument is that Trump hardly shines in that department,
either, but I've been saying that ad nauseam since he won the
Republican nomination. In my opinion, both candidates were
unsuitable, but Trump less unsuitable than Clinton.
Some commentators have argued what seems obvious to me, ie that the
raw numbers game is irrelevant under the US electoral system. As some
have said, if the electoral college didn't exist, and if Trump had to
win a majority of the popular votes to secure office, he'd have run a
different campaign. When you look at the county electoral map, with
the heavily populated east and west bright blue with one or two
patches in the middle, while the rest of the country was virtually
solid red, you can understand why whoever designed the electoral
college system did what they did. It clearly worked as planned.
Clinton and her team should have known that, as Trump clearly did, and
worked harder to win the rust belt much of which she effectively
ignored.
But the clincher which absolutely encapsulates everything that is
wrong with her and her elitist constituents, if not the entire modern
Democratic Party (also exactly so with its Anglosphere counterparts)
was the "basket of deplorables" remark. For the candidate of a
leftist party, allegedly the party of the working class, to even think
such a thing, let alone to say it in a public comment, is really all
that needs to be said to explain why Hillary Clinton was a toxic
candidate. Democrats need to accept that and stop trying to blame the
electoral system for something that they themselves caused by their
blind loyalty to an absolutely corrupt party. Ditto Republicans.
We have similar problems throughout the Anglosphere.
Mique
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

You remind me of the quote from Mark Twain, "In my youth I feared to be
a liberal lest in my old age I be a conservative."


Francis A. Miniter
Still a liberal

[Mike Burke]

On Fri, 19 May 2017 22:55:33 -0400, "Francis A. Miniter"

<Snipt>

In my youth I, being a farmer's son, but otherwise a normal youth, was
economically conservative-ish while being rabidly liberal in just
about every other respect, at least until my mid-30s.

Then I grew up.

Mique

Post by Francis A. Miniter
You remind me of the quote from Mark Twain, "In my youth I feared to be
a liberal lest in my old age I be a conservative."
Francis A. Miniter
Still a liberal

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Francis A. Miniter]

Post by Mike Burke
But the clincher which absolutely encapsulates everything that is
wrong with her and her elitist constituents, if not the entire modern
Democratic Party (also exactly so with its Anglosphere counterparts)
was the "basket of deplorables" remark. For the candidate of a
leftist party, allegedly the party of the working class, to even think
such a thing, let alone to say it in a public comment, is really all
that needs to be said to explain why Hillary Clinton was a toxic
candidate. Democrats need to accept that and stop trying to blame the
electoral system for something that they themselves caused by their
blind loyalty to an absolutely corrupt party. Ditto Republicans.
We have similar problems throughout the Anglosphere.
Mique

Yes, Clinton made a mistake when she said that. And she apologized soon
after. But she said it because of all the white supremacists that have
formed the core of Trump's support since the first day he announced his
candidacy. And they ARE deplorable. And so is he. Did you hear him
telling his rowdies to beat up protesters at his rallies? One of those
cases is going to court, and one of the defendants is taking the
position that it was ok for him to assault the protester because Trump
told him to do it!

On the other hand, Trump has insulted women and every minority and every
ethnicity (other than those males of white, European background) and is
held to a far, far lower standard than Clinton was. Now why is that?
Other than misogyny, of course. And other than racism, of course,
because that core of white supremacists (who are now raising hell in
America) love to hear that stuff.

I can think of no other reason.


Francis A. Miniter

[Mike Burke]

On Sat, 20 May 2017 23:00:46 -0400, "Francis A. Miniter"

Post by Francis A. Miniter

Post by Mike Burke
But the clincher which absolutely encapsulates everything that is
wrong with her and her elitist constituents, if not the entire modern
Democratic Party (also exactly so with its Anglosphere counterparts)
was the "basket of deplorables" remark. For the candidate of a
leftist party, allegedly the party of the working class, to even think
such a thing, let alone to say it in a public comment, is really all
that needs to be said to explain why Hillary Clinton was a toxic
candidate. Democrats need to accept that and stop trying to blame the
electoral system for something that they themselves caused by their
blind loyalty to an absolutely corrupt party. Ditto Republicans.
We have similar problems throughout the Anglosphere.
Mique

Yes, Clinton made a mistake when she said that. And she apologized soon
after. But she said it because of all the white supremacists that have
formed the core of Trump's support since the first day he announced his
candidacy. And they ARE deplorable. And so is he. Did you hear him
telling his rowdies to beat up protesters at his rallies? One of those
cases is going to court, and one of the defendants is taking the
position that it was ok for him to assault the protester because Trump
told him to do it!

Don't ask me to defend Trump. I won't.

But in general, Trumps supporters were relatively well-behaved
compared to their liberal counterparts. The overwhelming majority of
the violence reported down here, even by the liberal media to the
extent it reported anything against Clinton, was caused by Democrat
supporters protesting at Trump rallies.

Post by Francis A. Miniter
On the other hand, Trump has insulted women and every minority and every
ethnicity (other than those males of white, European background) and is
held to a far, far lower standard than Clinton was. Now why is that?
Other than misogyny, of course. And other than racism, of course,
because that core of white supremacists (who are now raising hell in
America) love to hear that stuff.
I can think of no other reason.

I see no sign of white supremacism, Francis, except perhaps in the
wildest reaches of the small minority of extremists who inhabit the
remote rural areas of the old south. I read or at least browse a
pretty wide spectrum of the American print and on-line media, although
I hear no radio and watch very little TV. What I do see is a
super-sufficiency of anti-white prejudice emanating from the
virtue-signalling left, particularly in the colleges and universities.
The whole white privilege meme is a classic example of brainless
prejudice. The term "white man" has become a pejorative. Those who
use the term or condone it are simply fools, and objecting to that
sort of rubbish does not a white supremist make.

In Trump's defence, to the extent that fairness demands it, Trump
*said* foul things, Bill Clinton *did* foul things, and Hillary
Clinton a) defended Bill, b) enabled Bill, c) attacked the women Bill
preyed on, and d) finally, most inexplicably except for her own career
advantage, stayed with Bill.

In a race to the bottom, Clinton leads Trump by miles.

Mique

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Carol Dickinson]

Post by Francis A. Miniter
On the other hand, Trump has insulted women and every minority and every
ethnicity (other than those males of white, European background) and is
held to a far, far lower standard than Clinton was.

On the news the other day there was a report of a study done by a major university (I can't remember if it was Harvard or Yale) regarding the
stories journalism has done on Trump. NY Times was 99% negative followed
by Washington Post, ABC, and CBS all above 92%. Fox came in at 52% negative. Those were the only media measured.

So I don't see that the holding him to a lower standard carries any water, sincestories about Hilary have never come close to those percentages.

Just saying. Not a Trump groupie. Will admit to voting for him as the least
objectionable but had to hold my nose. And I pray daily that he will grow into
the job, and learn to and stop tweeting or speaking off the cuff.

Carol

[Francis A. Miniter]

Post by Carol Dickinson

Post by Francis A. Miniter
On the other hand, Trump has insulted women and every minority and every
ethnicity (other than those males of white, European background) and is
held to a far, far lower standard than Clinton was.

On the news the other day there was a report of a study done by a major university (I can't remember if it was Harvard or Yale) regarding the
stories journalism has done on Trump. NY Times was 99% negative followed
by Washington Post, ABC, and CBS all above 92%. Fox came in at 52% negative. Those were the only media measured.
So I don't see that the holding him to a lower standard carries any water, sincestories about Hilary have never come close to those percentages.
Just saying. Not a Trump groupie. Will admit to voting for him as the least
objectionable but had to hold my nose. And I pray daily that he will grow into
the job, and learn to and stop tweeting or speaking off the cuff.
Carol

The reason that so many news stories are negative is that Trump has
needlessly involved himself in so many scandals in such a short time.
He has also engaged in unconstitutional actions that the courts have had
to halt, and that because he really knows nothing about the law or the
Constitution - a bad trait for a head of state.

He should never have hired Flynn. President Obama told him not to.
Rep. Elijah Cummings wrote a letter to Pence (who was vetting Flynn)
telling them not to hire Flynn. But Trump went ahead anyways (and Pence
boldly lied about it later.)

Think of it, when he said that he fired Comey to end the pressure on
himself over Russia, he was admitting to committing a federal felony -
obstruction of justice. But I think he had no idea that he knew he was
making a confession, because he has never thought about the law and
because he confuses president with king.

Then there are all the attempts he made to set up a secret line of
communication with Putin beyond the reach of our intelligence community.
Former CIA Director Brennan testified to numerous phone calls by Trump
people dealing with that subject. And in January, Trump sent Erik
Prince (founder of Blackwater and brother to Betsy DeVos) to the
Seychelles to meet with a Russian agent to try to work out details of
such a secret means of communication. In the Revolutionary War, we
hanged Major Andre for that, and would have hanged General Benedict
Arnold if he had not escaped.

The other thing I have been thinking of late is that his cognitive
abilities are dropping like a stone in air, let alone water. Download
the 19 page transcript of his interview with The Economist and read it.
He had Mnuchin along side for assistance (which turned out to be none
since the only thing that Mnuchin did was to say - falsely and rather
toady-like - that China only began to support its currency after Trump
took office [they did so in 2014]). Trump's statements are highly
repetitive, use simple words (no economic jargon at all), and his
sentences structures are total messes. His vocabulary is shrinking, his
memory is gone (he claimed in the interview to have invented the phrase
"prime the pump"), and he could not remember the questions put to him.
It may be the pressures of the office, or it may be his fears of what is
coming, but Trump is coming undone.

So, what has Trump done that is worthy of praise in the media? Well,
some people liked his missile raid on Syria. Curiously, it was his base
that most disliked it. Some like his tough talk on North Korea, but it
is even scaring our top generals who have gone public to state that any
war would be disastrous to the peoples on the Korean Peninsula. Seoul
is only a few miles from the border. Millions might die there before
the US could quiet the North Korean artillery. He has done nothing for
the economy. The Trump Bump has quickly turned into the Trump Slump,
and the economic gains we are having are the result of continuation of
President Obama's policies.

Trump said he would help the coal miners. But his new deal with China
helps natural gas producers at the expense of the coal industry. His
deregulation of effluents into the water supply will only poison miners.
His American Health Care Act will kill off those miners with black
lung and COPD.

Tell me, what has he done that is good?


Francis A. Miniter

[Mike Burke]

Post by Francis A. Miniter

Post by Carol Dickinson

Post by Francis A. Miniter
On the other hand, Trump has insulted women and every minority and every
ethnicity (other than those males of white, European background) and is
held to a far, far lower standard than Clinton was.

On the news the other day there was a report of a study done by a major
university (I can't remember if it was Harvard or Yale) regarding the
stories journalism has done on Trump. NY Times was 99% negative followed
by Washington Post, ABC, and CBS all above 92%. Fox came in at 52%
negative. Those were the only media measured.
So I don't see that the holding him to a lower standard carries any
water, sincestories about Hilary have never come close to those percentages.
Just saying. Not a Trump groupie. Will admit to voting for him as the least
objectionable but had to hold my nose. And I pray daily that he will grow into
the job, and learn to and stop tweeting or speaking off the cuff.
Carol

The reason that so many news stories are negative is that Trump has
needlessly involved himself in so many scandals in such a short time.
He has also engaged in unconstitutional actions that the courts have had
to halt, and that because he really knows nothing about the law or the
Constitution - a bad trait for a head of state.

Can't remember reference, I've seen quoted the law which gives the
President the power to deny entry to the US of anyone for any reason he
sees fit.

The reason so many stories are so negative is that the mainstream media is
terminally biassed towards the left. They have been totally negative to
the extent that no sane person believes a word from the NYT, WashPO, CNN,
MSNBC, to name just a few. Two scoops of icecream is a story?

Post by Francis A. Miniter
He should never have hired Flynn. President Obama told him not to.
Rep. Elijah Cummings wrote a letter to Pence (who was vetting Flynn)
telling them not to hire Flynn. But Trump went ahead anyways (and Pence
boldly lied about it later.)

If Obama said not to hire Flynn, that is the strongest reason to do so.
That said, Flynn lied about his contact with the Russians (why I don't know
because there is nothing inherently wrong with speaking to Russian
diplomats: it's what they are there for), and for that alone he deserved to
be fired.

Post by Francis A. Miniter
Think of it, when he said that he fired Comey to end the pressure on
himself over Russia, he was admitting to committing a federal felony -
obstruction of justice. But I think he had no idea that he knew he was
making a confession, because he has never thought about the law and
because he confuses president with king.

I disagree, Francis, with all due respect to your legal expertise. Even
Dershowitz says there is no probable cause.

Post by Francis A. Miniter
Then there are all the attempts he made to set up a secret line of
communication with Putin beyond the reach of our intelligence community.
Former CIA Director Brennan testified to numerous phone calls by Trump
people dealing with that subject. And in January, Trump sent Erik
Prince (founder of Blackwater and brother to Betsy DeVos) to the
Seychelles to meet with a Russian agent to try to work out details of
such a secret means of communication. In the Revolutionary War, we
hanged Major Andre for that, and would have hanged General Benedict
Arnold if he had not escaped.

I've never seen that story anywhere in the left or right media.

Post by Francis A. Miniter
The other thing I have been thinking of late is that his cognitive
abilities are dropping like a stone in air, let alone water. Download
the 19 page transcript of his interview with The Economist and read it.
He had Mnuchin along side for assistance (which turned out to be none
since the only thing that Mnuchin did was to say - falsely and rather
toady-like - that China only began to support its currency after Trump
took office [they did so in 2014]). Trump's statements are highly
repetitive, use simple words (no economic jargon at all), and his
sentences structures are total messes. His vocabulary is shrinking, his
memory is gone (he claimed in the interview to have invented the phrase
"prime the pump"), and he could not remember the questions put to him.
It may be the pressures of the office, or it may be his fears of what is
coming, but Trump is coming undone.

So what? Nothing he's done thus far is as bad as Obama's least
infringements. Remember the open mike incident in discussions with the
Russians.

Post by Francis A. Miniter
So, what has Trump done that is worthy of praise in the media? Well,
some people liked his missile raid on Syria. Curiously, it was his base
that most disliked it. Some like his tough talk on North Korea, but it
is even scaring our top generals who have gone public to state that any
war would be disastrous to the peoples on the Korean Peninsula. Seoul
is only a few miles from the border. Millions might die there before
the US could quiet the North Korean artillery. He has done nothing for
the economy. The Trump Bump has quickly turned into the Trump Slump,
and the economic gains we are having are the result of continuation of
President Obama's policies.

Sorry, Francis. But anything Trump has done so far in the Middle East or
SEAsia has had a positive effect when compared with the mess left by Obama
an his Secretaries of State. There won't be a war on the Korean Peninsular
because China will intervene and clip Kim's feathers.

Post by Francis A. Miniter
Trump said he would help the coal miners. But his new deal with China
helps natural gas producers at the expense of the coal industry. His
deregulation of effluents into the water supply will only poison miners.
His American Health Care Act will kill off those miners with black
lung and COPD.

Rubbish.

Post by Francis A. Miniter
Tell me, what has he done that is good?

He's kept Hillary and Bill out of the White House. For that alone he
should be canonised. As for the rest of it, I'm just amazed, as is
everyone not a committed left wing zealot, at the vicious so called
resistance movement, and the scurrilous behaviour of Democrats in general.
It's beyond pathological, and demonstrates beyond all reasonable doubt
that in its current state the Democratic Party is unfit to govern.
There's far too much obstructionism going on, and I say that with no
admiration for Trump. But keep it up, because it will guarantee that Trump
will get a second term, and probably put the Reps in power for a
generation. Fair-minded people resent clear partisan bastardry.

[Mike Burke]

Further to my last, Francis, here's a recent Victor Davis Hanson piece that
brings a bit of balance to the argument, and that rarest of all liberal
traits, a sense of proportion.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/447864/trump-critics-left-right-want-him-removed

[Francis A. Miniter]

Post by Mike Burke

Post by Francis A. Miniter

Post by Carol Dickinson

Post by Francis A. Miniter
On the other hand, Trump has insulted women and every minority and every
ethnicity (other than those males of white, European background) and is
held to a far, far lower standard than Clinton was.

On the news the other day there was a report of a study done by a major
university (I can't remember if it was Harvard or Yale) regarding the
stories journalism has done on Trump. NY Times was 99% negative followed
by Washington Post, ABC, and CBS all above 92%. Fox came in at 52%
negative. Those were the only media measured.
So I don't see that the holding him to a lower standard carries any
water, sincestories about Hilary have never come close to those percentages.
Just saying. Not a Trump groupie. Will admit to voting for him as the least
objectionable but had to hold my nose. And I pray daily that he will grow into
the job, and learn to and stop tweeting or speaking off the cuff.
Carol

The reason that so many news stories are negative is that Trump has
needlessly involved himself in so many scandals in such a short time.
He has also engaged in unconstitutional actions that the courts have had
to halt, and that because he really knows nothing about the law or the
Constitution - a bad trait for a head of state.

Can't remember reference, I've seen quoted the law which gives the
President the power to deny entry to the US of anyone for any reason he
sees fit.

That generalized law cannot override (a) the specific law denying the
president the right to discriminate by national origin, or (b) the
Constitution's guarantee of non-discrimination on the basis of religion.
That specific laws prevail over general laws has been a principle of
legal interpretation for centuries, and is derived from ancient English
court decisions.

Post by Mike Burke
The reason so many stories are so negative is that the mainstream media is
terminally biassed towards the left. They have been totally negative to
the extent that no sane person believes a word from the NYT, WashPO, CNN,
MSNBC, to name just a few. Two scoops of icecream is a story?

Post by Francis A. Miniter
He should never have hired Flynn. President Obama told him not to.
Rep. Elijah Cummings wrote a letter to Pence (who was vetting Flynn)
telling them not to hire Flynn. But Trump went ahead anyways (and Pence
boldly lied about it later.)

If Obama said not to hire Flynn, that is the strongest reason to do so.

That makes no sense. And I notice that you evade the Cummings letter.

Post by Mike Burke
That said, Flynn lied about his contact with the Russians (why I don't know
because there is nothing inherently wrong with speaking to Russian
diplomats: it's what they are there for), and for that alone he deserved to
be fired.

Post by Francis A. Miniter
Think of it, when he said that he fired Comey to end the pressure on
himself over Russia, he was admitting to committing a federal felony -
obstruction of justice. But I think he had no idea that he knew he was
making a confession, because he has never thought about the law and
because he confuses president with king.

I disagree, Francis, with all due respect to your legal expertise. Even
Dershowitz says there is no probable cause.

I have read Dershowitz's comments and I disagree with him. Probable
cause is rather easy to find, and a confession has always been
considered probable cause. The thing is that Trump even admitted it
twice, once to the Russians and once in an interview with NBC Journalist
Lester Holt. People go to prison based only on confessions. So, it is
good enough for probable cause.

Post by Mike Burke

Post by Francis A. Miniter
Then there are all the attempts he made to set up a secret line of
communication with Putin beyond the reach of our intelligence community.
Former CIA Director Brennan testified to numerous phone calls by Trump
people dealing with that subject. And in January, Trump sent Erik
Prince (founder of Blackwater and brother to Betsy DeVos) to the
Seychelles to meet with a Russian agent to try to work out details of
such a secret means of communication. In the Revolutionary War, we
hanged Major Andre for that, and would have hanged General Benedict
Arnold if he had not escaped.

I've never seen that story anywhere in the left or right media.

Bloomberg, Newsweek, Washington Post, Business Insider, Snopes, Salon,
Vanity Fair, Daily Mail, Slate, New York Daily News, CBS News, New York
Magazine, USA Today. To name a few.

Post by Mike Burke

Post by Francis A. Miniter
The other thing I have been thinking of late is that his cognitive
abilities are dropping like a stone in air, let alone water. Download
the 19 page transcript of his interview with The Economist and read it.
He had Mnuchin along side for assistance (which turned out to be none
since the only thing that Mnuchin did was to say - falsely and rather
toady-like - that China only began to support its currency after Trump
took office [they did so in 2014]). Trump's statements are highly
repetitive, use simple words (no economic jargon at all), and his
sentences structures are total messes. His vocabulary is shrinking, his
memory is gone (he claimed in the interview to have invented the phrase
"prime the pump"), and he could not remember the questions put to him.
It may be the pressures of the office, or it may be his fears of what is
coming, but Trump is coming undone.

So what? Nothing he's done thus far is as bad as Obama's least
infringements. Remember the open mike incident in discussions with the
Russians.

That was an incredibly minor incident, quite unlike Trump blabbing this
week on the phone as to the secret locations of U. S. submarines off
North Korea, or stabbing Israel in the back with the Russians. The man
is an out of control braggart.

Post by Mike Burke

Post by Francis A. Miniter
So, what has Trump done that is worthy of praise in the media? Well,
some people liked his missile raid on Syria. Curiously, it was his base
that most disliked it. Some like his tough talk on North Korea, but it
is even scaring our top generals who have gone public to state that any
war would be disastrous to the peoples on the Korean Peninsula. Seoul
is only a few miles from the border. Millions might die there before
the US could quiet the North Korean artillery. He has done nothing for
the economy. The Trump Bump has quickly turned into the Trump Slump,
and the economic gains we are having are the result of continuation of
President Obama's policies.

Sorry, Francis. But anything Trump has done so far in the Middle East or
SEAsia has had a positive effect when compared with the mess left by Obama
an his Secretaries of State. There won't be a war on the Korean Peninsular
because China will intervene and clip Kim's feathers.

No, he has not done anything right in the Middle East. Certainly, his
openly taking the sides of the Sunnis against Shias at the Arab Summit
was the wrong thing to do. ISIS and Al Qaeda are extremist Sunni
organizations. Shias have nothing to do with them. Iran, the most
powerful Shia nation - and the one that Trump attacked at the Arab
Summit, has never attacked the USA in any way. Nor has it attacked
Europe in any way. Trump put his lot with the bad guys.

Post by Mike Burke

Post by Francis A. Miniter
Trump said he would help the coal miners. But his new deal with China
helps natural gas producers at the expense of the coal industry. His
deregulation of effluents into the water supply will only poison miners.
His American Health Care Act will kill off those miners with black
lung and COPD.

Rubbish.

No, reality. Check out my points. They are all supported by articles
on the Internet. Example:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-china-coal-deal-agreement_us_5915df85e4b00f308cf4f0b6

Post by Mike Burke

Post by Francis A. Miniter
Tell me, what has he done that is good?

He's kept Hillary and Bill out of the White House.

I have to vigorously disagree on that.

Post by Mike Burke
For that alone he
should be canonised. As for the rest of it, I'm just amazed, as is
everyone not a committed left wing zealot, at the vicious so called
resistance movement, and the scurrilous behaviour of Democrats in general.
It's beyond pathological, and demonstrates beyond all reasonable doubt
that in its current state the Democratic Party is unfit to govern.
There's far too much obstructionism going on, and I say that with no
admiration for Trump. But keep it up, because it will guarantee that Trump
will get a second term, and probably put the Reps in power for a
generation. Fair-minded people resent clear partisan bastardry.

It has just come out this evening (Washington Post report) that Jared
Kushner was also involved in the secret attempts to establish
untraceable communications between Trump and Putin. This goes to treason.


Francis A. Miniter

[Mike Burke]

Post by Francis A. Miniter

Post by Mike Burke

Post by Francis A. Miniter

Post by Carol Dickinson

Post by Francis A. Miniter
On the other hand, Trump has insulted women and every minority and every
ethnicity (other than those males of white, European background) and is
held to a far, far lower standard than Clinton was.

On the news the other day there was a report of a study done by a major
university (I can't remember if it was Harvard or Yale) regarding the
stories journalism has done on Trump. NY Times was 99% negative followed
by Washington Post, ABC, and CBS all above 92%. Fox came in at 52%
negative. Those were the only media measured.
So I don't see that the holding him to a lower standard carries any
water, sincestories about Hilary have never come close to those percentages.
Just saying. Not a Trump groupie. Will admit to voting for him as the least
objectionable but had to hold my nose. And I pray daily that he will grow into
the job, and learn to and stop tweeting or speaking off the cuff.
Carol

The reason that so many news stories are negative is that Trump has
needlessly involved himself in so many scandals in such a short time.
He has also engaged in unconstitutional actions that the courts have had
to halt, and that because he really knows nothing about the law or the
Constitution - a bad trait for a head of state.

Can't remember reference, I've seen quoted the law which gives the
President the power to deny entry to the US of anyone for any reason he
sees fit.

That generalized law cannot override (a) the specific law denying the
president the right to discriminate by national origin, or (b) the
Constitution's guarantee of non-discrimination on the basis of religion.
That specific laws prevail over general laws has been a principle of
legal interpretation for centuries, and is derived from ancient English
court decisions.

Post by Mike Burke
The reason so many stories are so negative is that the mainstream media is
terminally biassed towards the left. They have been totally negative to
the extent that no sane person believes a word from the NYT, WashPO, CNN,
MSNBC, to name just a few. Two scoops of icecream is a story?

Post by Francis A. Miniter
He should never have hired Flynn. President Obama told him not to.
Rep. Elijah Cummings wrote a letter to Pence (who was vetting Flynn)
telling them not to hire Flynn. But Trump went ahead anyways (and Pence
boldly lied about it later.)

If Obama said not to hire Flynn, that is the strongest reason to do so.

That makes no sense. And I notice that you evade the Cummings letter.

Post by Mike Burke
That said, Flynn lied about his contact with the Russians (why I don't know
because there is nothing inherently wrong with speaking to Russian
diplomats: it's what they are there for), and for that alone he deserved to
be fired.

Post by Francis A. Miniter
Think of it, when he said that he fired Comey to end the pressure on
himself over Russia, he was admitting to committing a federal felony -
obstruction of justice. But I think he had no idea that he knew he was
making a confession, because he has never thought about the law and
because he confuses president with king.

I disagree, Francis, with all due respect to your legal expertise. Even
Dershowitz says there is no probable cause.

I have read Dershowitz's comments and I disagree with him. Probable
cause is rather easy to find, and a confession has always been
considered probable cause. The thing is that Trump even admitted it
twice, once to the Russians and once in an interview with NBC Journalist
Lester Holt. People go to prison based only on confessions. So, it is
good enough for probable cause.

Post by Mike Burke

Post by Francis A. Miniter
Then there are all the attempts he made to set up a secret line of
communication with Putin beyond the reach of our intelligence community.
Former CIA Director Brennan testified to numerous phone calls by Trump
people dealing with that subject. And in January, Trump sent Erik
Prince (founder of Blackwater and brother to Betsy DeVos) to the
Seychelles to meet with a Russian agent to try to work out details of
such a secret means of communication. In the Revolutionary War, we
hanged Major Andre for that, and would have hanged General Benedict
Arnold if he had not escaped.

I've never seen that story anywhere in the left or right media.

Bloomberg, Newsweek, Washington Post, Business Insider, Snopes, Salon,
Vanity Fair, Daily Mail, Slate, New York Daily News, CBS News, New York
Magazine, USA Today. To name a few.

Post by Mike Burke

Post by Francis A. Miniter
The other thing I have been thinking of late is that his cognitive
abilities are dropping like a stone in air, let alone water. Download
the 19 page transcript of his interview with The Economist and read it.
He had Mnuchin along side for assistance (which turned out to be none
since the only thing that Mnuchin did was to say - falsely and rather
toady-like - that China only began to support its currency after Trump
took office [they did so in 2014]). Trump's statements are highly
repetitive, use simple words (no economic jargon at all), and his
sentences structures are total messes. His vocabulary is shrinking, his
memory is gone (he claimed in the interview to have invented the phrase
"prime the pump"), and he could not remember the questions put to him.
It may be the pressures of the office, or it may be his fears of what is
coming, but Trump is coming undone.

So what? Nothing he's done thus far is as bad as Obama's least
infringements. Remember the open mike incident in discussions with the
Russians.

That was an incredibly minor incident, quite unlike Trump blabbing this
week on the phone as to the secret locations of U. S. submarines off
North Korea, or stabbing Israel in the back with the Russians. The man
is an out of control braggart.

Post by Mike Burke

Post by Francis A. Miniter
So, what has Trump done that is worthy of praise in the media? Well,
some people liked his missile raid on Syria. Curiously, it was his base
that most disliked it. Some like his tough talk on North Korea, but it
is even scaring our top generals who have gone public to state that any
war would be disastrous to the peoples on the Korean Peninsula. Seoul
is only a few miles from the border. Millions might die there before
the US could quiet the North Korean artillery. He has done nothing for
the economy. The Trump Bump has quickly turned into the Trump Slump,
and the economic gains we are having are the result of continuation of
President Obama's policies.

Sorry, Francis. But anything Trump has done so far in the Middle East or
SEAsia has had a positive effect when compared with the mess left by Obama
an his Secretaries of State. There won't be a war on the Korean Peninsular
because China will intervene and clip Kim's feathers.

No, he has not done anything right in the Middle East. Certainly, his
openly taking the sides of the Sunnis against Shias at the Arab Summit
was the wrong thing to do. ISIS and Al Qaeda are extremist Sunni
organizations. Shias have nothing to do with them. Iran, the most
powerful Shia nation - and the one that Trump attacked at the Arab
Summit, has never attacked the USA in any way. Nor has it attacked
Europe in any way. Trump put his lot with the bad guys.

Post by Mike Burke

Post by Francis A. Miniter
Trump said he would help the coal miners. But his new deal with China
helps natural gas producers at the expense of the coal industry. His
deregulation of effluents into the water supply will only poison miners.
His American Health Care Act will kill off those miners with black
lung and COPD.

Rubbish.

No, reality. Check out my points. They are all supported by articles
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-china-coal-deal-agreement_us_5915df85e4b00f308cf4f0b6

Post by Mike Burke

Post by Francis A. Miniter
Tell me, what has he done that is good?

He's kept Hillary and Bill out of the White House.

I have to vigorously disagree on that.

Post by Mike Burke
For that alone he
should be canonised. As for the rest of it, I'm just amazed, as is
everyone not a committed left wing zealot, at the vicious so called
resistance movement, and the scurrilous behaviour of Democrats in general.
It's beyond pathological, and demonstrates beyond all reasonable doubt
that in its current state the Democratic Party is unfit to govern.
There's far too much obstructionism going on, and I say that with no
admiration for Trump. But keep it up, because it will guarantee that Trump
will get a second term, and probably put the Reps in power for a
generation. Fair-minded people resent clear partisan bastardry.

It has just come out this evening (Washington Post report) that Jared
Kushner was also involved in the secret attempts to establish
untraceable communications between Trump and Putin. This goes to treason.
Francis A. Miniter

Then we should continue to disagree vigorously. :-)

I take your point about specific v general law.

Mique

[Carol Dickinson]

Post by Francis A. Miniter
Tell me, what has he done that is good?
Francis A. Miniter

Well I can't disagree with anything you say. As I said I am not one of his base so much as I just felt he was the least objectionable. Don't feel like being his defender.

Best I could say that has done that is not bad, is he seems to have developed a better relationship with China. He seems in the last couple days to have made some progress in building relationships in the middle east, if he really has got some commitments for Suni & Shia Muslim states to work together against the
disorganized territories controlled by Isis.

He hasn't actually done anything except "talk" so I'm not sure how much credit he could be given for the stock market being up, the new unemployment claims being at a 28 year (generational) low or the 60% drop in illegal immigration since hie inauguration. Those things are all good, but what did he DO other than make campaign promises to make these things happen. They are in response to assumptions by others.

Carol

[Francis A. Miniter]

Post by Carol Dickinson

Post by Francis A. Miniter
Tell me, what has he done that is good?
Francis A. Miniter

Well I can't disagree with anything you say. As I said I am not one
of his base so much as I just felt he was the least objectionable.
Don't feel like being his defender.
Best I could say that has done that is not bad, is he seems to have
developed a better relationship with China. He seems in the last
couple days to have made some progress in building relationships in
the middle east, if he really has got some commitments for Suni &
Shia Muslim states to work together against the disorganized
territories controlled by Isis.
He hasn't actually done anything except "talk" so I'm not sure how
much credit he could be given for the stock market being up, the new
unemployment claims being at a 28 year (generational) low or the 60%
drop in illegal immigration since hie inauguration. Those things are
all good, but what did he DO other than make campaign promises to
make these things happen. They are in response to assumptions by
others.
Carol

About undocumented immigration, the following article from the Pew
Research folks shows that it peaked from Mexico in 2008, along with the
economy, and has been going down ever since. Not something Trump can
take credit for.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/03/02/what-we-know-about-illegal-immigration-from-mexico/

As to the 60% figure, that came from Trump himself on April 4th. Not a
really credible source.

We finally get to the truth in a Washington Post article of April 11th,
which looks at the facts published by the U. S. Customs and Border
Patrol. Southwest Border Apprehensions peaked in year 2000, with 1,
643,679 apprehensions. In 2016, the number was 408,870. The number has
fallen just about every year since 2000.

The Post goes on to say (the "he" is Trump):
-------
"March 2017 total apprehensions were, indeed, very low. It’s the lowest
monthly number CBP has reported since at least 2000. The 64 percent
figure he uses is the total number of people apprehended or “deemed
inadmissible” at the southwest border in March 2017 (16,600), compared
to the total number in March 2016 (46,150).

"Actually, the best apples-to-apples measure would be to compare the
number of people apprehended or deemed inadmissible for February and
March of 2016 with February and March of 2017. That calculation shows
there was a 52.4 percent (40,170) decrease in 2017 compared to 2016
(84,466). This would be a more accurate look at the impact of Trump’s
policy changes to date, rather than focusing on just the month of March.

"Still, experts caution against putting too much emphasis on the annual,
quarterly or monthly numbers, because immigration trends are about
flows, not raw numbers. But what is notable about recent apprehensions
is that it doesn’t fit the seasonal trends. Usually, there’s a seasonal
lull through winter months, before apprehensions start climbing back up.
Apprehensions tend to peak from March to May, before coming back down in
the late summer and through the fall."
--------

Too early to tell anything, and certainly not the basis for bragging
rights at this time.


Francis A. Miniter

[Francis A. Miniter]

Post by Carol Dickinson

Post by Francis A. Miniter
Tell me, what has he done that is good?
Francis A. Miniter

Well I can't disagree with anything you say. As I said I am not one
of his base so much as I just felt he was the least objectionable.
Don't feel like being his defender.
Best I could say that has done that is not bad, is he seems to have
developed a better relationship with China. He seems in the last
couple days to have made some progress in building relationships in
the middle east, if he really has got some commitments for Suni &
Shia Muslim states to work together against the disorganized
territories controlled by Isis.
He hasn't actually done anything except "talk" so I'm not sure how
much credit he could be given for the stock market being up, the new
unemployment claims being at a 28 year (generational) low or the 60%
drop in illegal immigration since hie inauguration. Those things are
all good, but what did he DO other than make campaign promises to
make these things happen. They are in response to assumptions by
others.
Carol

As to the stock market, the DJIA went up until March 1st. Since then it
has flatlined at 21,000. While volume has markedly increased since
early December, the inability of the market to move in three full months
has many worried that the Trump bump is becoming a Trump slump. The
market likes stability and good economic sense. Trump provides neither.
His budget proposal even twice counts the same money going into the
private sector, the kind of error a first year business student should
not make.

Looking at economic realities, rather than anticipation, Trump has done
nothing to improve the economy. Economically, the country is still
gliding along the path set for it by President Obama. And that includes
the unemployment numbers which Trump screamed were FAKE through
December, but which at the end of January, he claimed were real and all
brought about by him. No, Mr. Trump, President Obama gets credit for
the lower unemployment rate.


Francis A. Miniter

[b***@gmail.com]

Post by Carol Dickinson

Post by Francis A. Miniter
On the other hand, Trump has insulted women and every minority and every
ethnicity (other than those males of white, European background) and is
held to a far, far lower standard than Clinton was.

On the news the other day there was a report of a study done by a major university (I can't remember if it was Harvard or Yale) regarding the
stories journalism has done on Trump. NY Times was 99% negative followed
by Washington Post, ABC, and CBS all above 92%. Fox came in at 52% negative. Those were the only media measured.
So I don't see that the holding him to a lower standard carries any water, sincestories about Hilary have never come close to those percentages.
Just saying. Not a Trump groupie. Will admit to voting for him ...

Hmmm, why would you want to distance yourself from his groupies? Or his core supporters? Shouldn't that be kept to one's self? Doesn't that seem strange?