Donald Trump

[Section_31]

[polymerpunkah]

https://theintercept.com/2017/03/26/trumps-war-on-terror-has-quickly-become-as-barbaric-and-savage-as-he-promised/

[Neil G]

https://theintercept.com/2017/03/26/trumps-war-on-terror-has-quickly-become-as-barbaric-and-savage-as-he-promised/

Yeah, but Hillary would have nuked the whole Middle East by now.

[Rico1304]

https://twitter.com/yashar/status/846152013389934592

[magicrat]

https://twitter.com/yashar/status/846152013389934592

 

Who can blame him playing golf down in Florida and getting a little downtime. Poor fella must be distraught about all those civilians that have had the shit bombed our of them in Iraq,

[Red Phoenix]

I think this sums things up fairly well : https://twitter.com/PaladinCornelia/status/842494062292865024

[Duff Man]

Yeah, but Hillary would have nuked the whole Middle East by now.

 

Would she have found the time? Keeping the child sex ring ticking along probably takes up quite a lot of her day. Especially as she can't use the imaginary Pizzeria cellar anymore.

[VladimirIlyich]

I think this sums things up fairly well : https://twitter.com/PaladinCornelia/status/842494062292865024

They still obsess about Russia.As if nobody has been doing business with them for years anyhow.

[Red Phoenix]

Would she have found the time? Keeping the child sex ring ticking along probably takes up quite a lot of her day. Especially as she can't use the imaginary Pizzeria cellar anymore.

 

 

 

They still obsess about Russia.As if nobody has been doing business with them for years anyhow.

 

Was having a laugh at this earlier : https://twitter.com/KurtSchlichter/status/846378725834829828

 

Although I don't want to be getting into stuff like that myself if I can help it, it seems a bit like the other sides version of "but the emails!" which does my head in.

[cloggypop]

Look over there! Look at them!

 

@realDonaldTrump: Why isn't the House Intelligence Committee looking into the Bill & Hillary deal that allowed big Uranium to go to Russia, Russian speech....

 

@realDonaldTrump: ...money to Bill, the Hillary Russian "reset," praise of Russia by Hillary, or Podesta Russian Company. Trump Russia story is a hoax. #MAGA!

 

Pathetic.

[Red Phoenix]

@realDonaldTrump: Why isn't the House Intelligence Committee looking into the Bill & Hillary deal that allowed big Uranium to go to Russia, Russian speech....

 

@realDonaldTrump: ...money to Bill, the Hillary Russian "reset," praise of Russia by Hillary, or Podesta Russian Company. Trump Russia story is a hoax. #MAGA!

 

If only they would, Dem fucking hypocrites would have some explaining to do.

 

As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.

 

And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.

 

At the time, both Rosatom and the United States government made promises intended to ease concerns about ceding control of the company’s assets to the Russians. Those promises have been repeatedly broken, records show.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html?_r=0

 

They should maybe investigate the Clinton Foundation too, a shame Drumf didn't mention it.

[Cardie]

He's losing it, we're on the verge of a melt down.

 

Sent from my SM-G928F using Tapatalk

[Rico1304]

If only they would, Dem fucking hypocrites would have some explaining to do.

 

 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html?_r=0

 

They should maybe investigate the Clinton Foundation too, a shame Drumf didn't mention it.

Look, look over there! There's a thing!

[Red Phoenix]

Look, look over there! There's a thing!

 

Yeah, funny when it's Dems and Clintons, all important when it's Reps and Trump. It must be great fun obsessing over Trump's Russia ties and ignoring all of the Clinton ones. It's not hypocrisy though.

[Rick Sanchez C-137]

Yeah, funny when it's Dems and Clintons, all important when it's Reps and Trump. It must be great fun obsessing over Trump's Russia ties and ignoring all of the Clinton ones. It's not hypocrisy though.

 

Doesn't take a genius to figure out why. Clinton isn't the current POTUS and this is a Trump thread. 

[Rico1304]

Yeah, funny when it's Dems and Clintons, all important when it's Reps and Trump. It must be great fun obsessing over Trump's Russia ties and ignoring all of the Clinton ones. It's not hypocrisy though.

If there's evidence of wrongdoing then go after her, I couldn't give a flying fuck. However Trump is currently the President, that makes him the most important person on the planet.

[Red Phoenix]

Clinton isn't the current POTUS and this is a Trump thread. 

 

It's still hypocrisy from the Dems. Of course it's a Trump thread too, cloggypop posted tweets from Trump who was talking about Clinton though and I responded to that. Not trying to start another bullshit argument off about this, it never ends up being worth it.

[Rick Sanchez C-137]

It's still hypocrisy from the Dems. Of course it's a Trump thread too, cloggypop posted tweets from Trump who was talking about Clinton though and I responded to that. Not trying to start another bullshit argument off about this, it never ends up being worth it.

 

I genuinely believe, had Hilary won and someone was still in here at this stage saying "but Trump though" they would be laughed at as their argument is irrelevant. Happy to disagree though. Hilary could fuck a goat for all I care.

[Rico1304]

I genuinely believe, had Hilary won and someone was still in here at this stage saying "but Trump though" they would be laughed at as their argument is irrelevant. Happy to disagree though. Hilary could fuck a goat for all I care.

As far as I can see Hilary herself has dropped off the radar, I'm pretty sure Trump would be all over Hillary if he'd lost. But, it's irrelevant, Trump is under the spotlight.

[magicrat]

Yeah, funny when it's Dems and Clintons, all important when it's Reps and Trump. It must be great fun obsessing over Trump's Russia ties and ignoring all of the Clinton ones. It's not hypocrisy though.

Clinton doesn't have a finger in the nuclear button right now. Absolutely facile argument to point to past failures as a reason for not addressing current issues concerning the abuse of power. The Clinton's are gone get over it.

[Anubis]

If only they would, Dem fucking hypocrites would have some explaining to do.

 

They should maybe investigate the Clinton Foundation too, a shame Drumf didn't mention it.

Probably because it turns out to be guff, like Pizzagate.

 

The Uranium One deal was not Clinton’s to veto or approve

 

Among the ways these accusations stray from the facts is in attributing a power of veto or approval to Secretary Clinton that she simply did not have. Clinton was one of nine cabinet members and department heads that sit on the CFIUS, and the secretary of the treasury is its chairperson. CFIUS members are collectively charged with evaluating the transaction for potential national security issues, then turning their findings over to the president. By law, the committee can’t veto a transaction; only the president can. According to The New York Times, Clinton may not have even directly participated in the Uranium One decision. Then-Assistant Secretary of State Jose Fernandez, whose job it was to represent the State Dept. on CFIUS, said Clinton herself “never intervened” in committee matters.

 

The timing of most of the donations does not match

 

Of the $145 million allegedly contributed to the Clinton Foundation by Uranium One investors, the lion’s share — $131.3 million — came from a single donor, Frank Giustra, the company’s founder. But Giustra sold off his entire stake in the company in 2007, three years before the Russia deal and at least 18 months before Clinton became secretary of state.

 

Of the remaining individuals connected with Uranium One who donated to the Clinton Foundation, only one was found to have contributed during the same time frame that the deal was taking place, according to The New York Times — Ian Telfer, the company’s chairman:

 

His donations through the Fernwood Foundation included $1 million reported in 2009, the year his company appealed to the American Embassy to help it keep its mines in Kazakhstan; $250,000 in 2010, the year the Russians sought majority control; as well as $600,000 in 2011 and $500,000 in 2012. Mr. Telfer said that his donations had nothing to do with his business dealings, and that he had never discussed Uranium One with Mr. or Mrs. Clinton. He said he had given the money because he wanted to support Mr. Giustra’s charitable endeavors with Mr. Clinton. “Frank and I have been friends and business partners for almost 20 years,” he said.

 

The timing of Telfer’s donations might be questionable if there was reason to believe that Hillary Clinton was instrumental in the approval of the deal with Russia, but all the evidence points to the contrary — that Clinton did not play a pivotal role, and, in fact, may not have played any role at all.

I

 

http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-uranium-russia-deal/

[Red Phoenix]

 

 

but all the evidence points to the contrary — that Clinton did not play a pivotal role, and, in fact, may not have played any role at all.

 

Ok.

[Duff Man]

Pizzagate is real, all you deniers are just rubbish at Google!

[Section_31]

Fascinating piece. Scarily the Trump healthcare bill was torpedoed because it was too liberal. 

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39410555

 

Got to be some civil unrest brewing there soon surely, not sure how people can continue to accept being treated like an animal by a government comprised almost entirely of clones of the warden from Shawshank Redemption. 

 

 

A group of about three dozen men stopped President Trump's healthcare bill cold. Who are they, and how much power do they have?

President Donald Trump's first major legislative push came to a halt last week as the American Health Care Act (AHCA) failed to be given a vote. Much of the blame for the bill's failure was placed on the Freedom Caucus, a secretive group of Republicans who refused to get in line behind Speaker of the House Paul Ryan and Mr Trump.

The Freedom Caucus emerged in 2015, in response to complaints that then-Speaker of the House John Boehner tried to jam through legislation in defiance of House rules - specifically, legislation they thought wasn't conservative enough.

The caucus is "concerned about procedure, but also concerned about procedure because they're concerned about policy," said Dr Laura Blessing, a senior fellow at the Georgetown Government Affairs Institute.

The group formed to restore power to the rank-and-file Republicans, and lead the charge in opposition to the Affordable Care Act. Popular ideals among Freedom Caucus members include balanced budgets and shrinking the size of government.

How disastrous for Trump is healthcare collapse?

During the Obama administration, members drummed up so much resistance to Mr Boehner's approach to budget cuts and legislation that the speaker chose to resign rather than face a bitter intra-party battle.

Knowing exactly who is in the Freedom Caucus and how they will vote is tough. Joining the caucus is an invitation-only affair with a secret membership.

Jump media player

Media player help

 

Out of media player. Press enter to return or tab to continue.

 

Media captionHealthcare bill 'first real test for Trump'

They assemble in closed-door meetings. Individual members often refuse to commit to a vote before consulting the rest of the caucus.

"These folks really do stick together," Dr Blessing said. "You don't really have any moderate Republicans left in the Republican conference, but these folks are markedly more conservative than their colleagues."

Image copyrightGETTY IMAGESImage captionMark Meadows leads the Freedom Caucus

Therein lies their power. The Freedom Caucus has about three dozen members, or a little more than 15% of House Republicans. As a voting block, it's enough to upset the 237-193 advantage Republicans have over Democrats.

Assuming a bill gets no Democratic support, Ryan cannot afford to lose a mere 23 Republican votes. That means the Freedom Caucus can make or break a bill.

Though the Caucus itself took no official position on the Trump-endorsed AHCA, meaning members could vote how they chose on the bill, most members of the Caucus wanted a full repeal of the existing healthcare law known as Obamacare.

When they didn't get it - or what they felt was a good-faith negotiation from President Trump - they refused to vote for the AHCA.

Moving forward, Dr Blessing expects to see turbulence between the Republican leadership and the Freedom Caucus on issues like tax reform, the federal budget and infrastructure spending - a costly endeavor that won't sit well with a group in favour of austerity.

That leaves Paul Ryan, tasked with drumming up support for his party's bills, facing a difficult choice.

"If he tries to get Democrats' votes, he's going to pay a price within his conference," Dr Blessing said.

Courting the Freedom Caucus may have fewer political consequences, but "he's going to face the challenge of negotiating with people who haven't had a history of negotiating much".

There's not much incentive for Freedom Caucus members to start negotiating now.

Many moderates also disliked the bill, but weren't so public - or unified - in their opposition.

The Freedom Caucus is facing much of the blame for the failure of the healthcare act, and they lost one member, Ted Poe, who said that their obstinance was counterproductive.

"Saying no is easy, leading is hard, but that is what we were elected to do," he said.

However, individual members are polling well, and the president is not.

In Washington, that's where the real power lies.

[Red Phoenix]

Pizzagate is real, all you deniers are just rubbish at Google!

 

http://www.liverpoolway.co.uk/index.php?/topic/61194-top-ten-conspiracy-theories/?p=4744744