Yabberz for AndroidDownload

Respect Life Christian Students Mock Native American At Lincoln Memorial

73
Posts
800
Points
20
Users

      You've seen the video I suspect.

      It was taken at the Friday January 18 Respect Life and Right to Life Annual Rally in Washington DC where a group of Middle School and High School Students from Covington (Kentucky) Catholic took time out from respecting life to mock a group of Native Americans taking part in another rally for Indigenous People focusing their attention on Nathan Phillips , a Vietnam War Vieteran who is an elder in the Omaha tribe, who was leading a traditional chant for peace.

      The student featured in the video stands in front of him blocking his way with a snide smile adorning a Make America Great capped head. He has been identified by local press as an upper classman.


      MY THOUGHTS:

      Kids do stupid things....a lot of stupid things....they mock each other....they mock their parents....they mock their parents......WHAT MAKES THIS PARTICULAR EPISODE UNIQUELY DISTURBING IS THIS:

      • They were accompanied by parents and staff. Where were they? Absent? In agreement with their behavior? Incapable of interacting effectively?
      • They were taking part in a rally that proclaims a fundamental respect for ALL human life and are supposedly from schools and other organizations where this is studied and embraced.
      • They were wearing clothing that proclaimed that they saw themselves as representatives of a man and a movement that is marked by enormous disrespect for others.

      Education at home, at school and in broader society has stood as the tool that draws "kids" into "adulthood." Such behavior: boorish, rude, insensitive, hypocritical, and "racial" in tone......indicates that both home and school and society are failing these kids.

      I wonder how many of the adults accompanying them were were wearing those hats?

      There is talk now, after a hasty and pro-forma apology from the Catholic Diocese, of "serious disciplinary action including the possibility of expulsion".......of whom? The kids? The chaperones? The parents? The teachers? The President whose hat they were wearing?

      P.S. The boy's mom has communicated to with Heavy.com as reported by the Independent. She claims that the boys were being harassed by "Black Muslims". There is video showing a group of black men nearby arguing with some in the Covington group. What is clear is that Mr. Phillips was not part of that group and was actually standing between the students and the group of men.

      more less
      Pundit Post

      Trump's 'Wall Or Nothing' Strategy May Really Become 'Nothing'

      53
      Posts
      2355
      Points
      32
      Users

          Trump's 'Wall Or Nothing' Strategy

          May Really Become 'Nothing'

          Mounting concern he may want the shutdown

          to continue even more than he wants his wall



          By Ray Cunneff

          January 18, 2019


          At this pivotal, perhaps historic, moment in our nation's history, I believe we need to re-examine our assumptions and re-assess our priorities. Because both the legal and political calculus may have dramatically changed for President Donald Trump and we may need to adjust our thinking and our actions accordingly.

          There is mounting concern that, given the latest revelations of perfidy, corruption, and potentially treasonous behavior on the part of the president and his cronies, the shutdown impasse is no longer about a wall, or "barrier", or "steel slats" or even about border and/or national security. It's become about primal survival.

          Barbara Res, former Executive Vice President of the Trump Organization told CNN's Brianna Keilar earlier today that she's never seen him like this, sensing he's like "a cornered animal". She said, “Typically and historically, he always rolled with the punches. He used to say all press is good press. Now I don’t see that. I see him going into a corner, I see him scratching back like a cornered animal. I think he’s afraid.”

          Res speculated that Trump had never encountered a strong 'silk and steel' woman like House Speaker Nancy Peolsi pushing back at him and mocked Trump’s retaliatory cancellation of the Speaker’s military flight to visit our troops in Afghanistan and our NATO allies in Brussels.

          She said, “What’s kind of funny about it is he likes to hit back, where you shoot him with a water pistol and he’ll shoot you back with a Magnum or something.” She added with a laugh, “He likes to hit back ten times harder than he’s been hit or more, and he’s got nothing to hit her back with. This is silly. It looks ridiculous.”

          We know that nothing gets under the president's skin more than ridicule. We also have learned that Trump's obsession with building his medieval behemoth began as a mnemonic device cooked up by dirty-trickster Roger Stone to help keep him on his anti-immigration-message as the primary issue in his campaign. "Trump's wall" morphed from symbolic image to literal concrete when the message resonated powerfully with his roaring, adoring campaign crowds.

          But is the partial government shutdown about a wall anymore? Arguably, whether the shutdown began as an attempt at extortion and hostage-taking of 800,000 federal workers and the overall American economy in order to get a $5.7 billion down payment on his estimated $60 billion 'sea to shiny sea' wall, it has continued for 28 days and who knows how much longer to keep his rabid base and right-wing media pundits satiated.

          But Trump may also feel the continuing shutdown offers him a degree of both distraction and protection amid the stress of his mounting scandals and investigations into himself, his businesses, and his family.

          Today is the day the money runs out for the Mueller Grand Jury and they will have to either continue without compensation or be furloughed.

          This is also the time when the entire judicial system begins to slow and eventually grinds to a halt.

          Although the Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigations and those of the Southern District of New York appear somewhat insulated at this point, Trump appears to feel he has no incentive to end the shutdown, nor does he care what damage is being done.

          Trump acts only in self-interest. Empathy is not transactional. A "cornered animal" is at its most dangerous. And one of the hallmarks of Trump's psychopathology is vindictiveness.

          On the contrary, Trump may seize upon this moment as an opportunity to further consolidate dictatorial power and muster the darkest forces within his cadre of adherents and sycophants for a last stand, the final 'end times' battle between good and evil, between democracy and tyranny.

          And like all great villains in history and literature, Trump believes he has God and righteousness on his side. Therefore, he will recognize no limits to his vengeance.

          more less
          Pundit Post

          The Women’s March Is Back, With Both Divisions And Much To Celebrate

          53
          Posts
          1195
          Points
          15
          Users

              There is much to celebrate. The first march galvanized many women across the country to become politically active for the first time in their lives. Many poured their energy into helping to elect an unprecedented number of women to Congress last year.

              People gathered at Freedom Plaza in Washington today for the Women’s March.CreditCreditJoshua Roberts/Reuters


              In many cities across the United States, people have gathered together today to celebrate the second anniversary of the Women’s March that took place not only in the U.S. but also in cities in other countries. It is a smaller march than the one two years ago, to be sure, and yes, it has been plagued by dissension and controversy. It is a protest march; but it is also a celebration of how women’s activism has helped to elect a Democratic House and also helped to elect an increased number of knowledgable, enthusiastic, qualified women into Congress.

              In the closest city to where I live, the day is overcast, and shows a potential for rain, yet thousands of demonstrators have gathered at our California Capitol with the aim of empowering women and men by providing support for grassroots activists to engage in local communities.

              The women’s led march is a mass political movement that tells of the power of women to create change. The mission statement reads:
              “Women’s March is committed to dismantling systems of oppression through nonviolent resistance and building inclusive structures guided by self-determination, dignity and respect.” . . . . words from which the current Trump/GOP led government has appeared to be allergic.

              .

              Many of the women who attended the Women’s Unity Rally at Foley Square in New York on Saturday came to support immigrants. CreditAngela Weiss/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

              .
              Excerpts From the New York Times

              Two years after millions marched around the country and the world in an unambiguous rebuke to President Trump, much smaller crowds appeared at Saturday’s events surrounding the second anniversary of the Women’s March.

              There was much to celebrate. The first march galvanized many women across the country to become politically active for the first time in their lives. Many poured their energy into helping to elect an unprecedented number of women to Congress last year.

              But Saturday was also a test of how the Women’s March movement has weathered a storm of controversy in recent months.

              Tamika Mallory, co-president of Women’s March, the group that has planned the march in Washington, has been under fire for ties to Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam, who is widely reviled for anti-Semitic speeches. The Women’s March has issued a series of statements denouncing anti-Semitism and apologized for its delayed response to the controversy.

              .

              Tamika Mallory, CreditMaddie McGarvey for The New York Times
              .
              “I’m disappointed. It’s definitely not the turnout I was looking for” said Peggy Baron, 53, a lawyer from Dublin, Ohio, who said that the first Washington march two years ago had been “wall-to-wall women.”
              But as the morning progressed, throngs of marchers began to fill the plaza, and spirits visibly lifted.

              “I came two years ago. It’s definitely smaller, but the spirit is very much alive,” said Rachel Stucky, 53, an educator from Salem, Ore. “It’s a chance to march, to be with others who are like-minded, to be able to express my energy. People have a lot of say, and that doesn’t change
              Jo Reger, professor of sociology at Oakland University in Michigan, who studies feminist movements, said other factors that can depress turnout include activist burnout, and paradoxically, success.

              “Marches or movements can lose some momentum when people see some of their issues being addressed,” she said. “With the recent midterm elections, some may feel like the country is going in a different direction after the Trump election and that may lower the numbers participating.”

              But Ms. Compton, who traveled to Washington from her tiny town in northeastern Georgia, said the sense of excitement was only growing. She said the group of Democrats in Rabun County, where she lives, was nearly defunct in 2016, but has 300 members today.

              “We’re hopping busy all the time,” she said. “We came within a hair on a rat’s tail of electing a black woman as governor in Georgia.”

              “If we get busy in a bunch of petty fights, we get nowhere,” she said. “Not working together got us exactly where we are now and look what is in the White House.”

              https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/19/us/womens-march...
              more less
              Pundit Post

              If And When Trump Is Found To Have Been Working For Russia, What Then?

              94
              Posts
              2535
              Points
              25
              Users
                  What if Trump Really is Working for Vladimir Putin?
                  .
                  .

                  The Russia Probe has already found a number of American ‘players' who while aligned with Trump, have been indicted and found guilty of crimes associated with working surreptitiously with Russia during the Trump campaign, and who also have been found to have been involved in subsequent "Trump cover ups."

                  So what about Trump himself? According to recent reports, the FBI suspected that Trump was knowingly working for the Russians when he first fired James Comey. Since then, Trump’s former campaign manager and attorney, Michael Cohen, was found to have made payments in coordination with and at the direction of Trump, that establish Trump as an un-indicted co-conspirator in the Cohen case.

                  So that raises questions of Trumps involvement. What if his lies about Russia (nobody in my campaign ever met with a Russian, there is no collusion, I have nothing to do with Russia) are a cover for his remark on Monday in New Orleans: “I never worked for Russia,” and the Mueller probe determines otherwise?

                  .

                  https://www.rawstory.com/2019/01/trump-really-work...

                  With Trump having denied Russian contacts and then backtracked from them so many times, the logical question is, what if all this Russia stuff is true? What if the Russians made a deal with Trump to help him get elected? What if all those meetings actually were about “collusion?” What if Trump actually does have the connections he went into such detail to deny — “deals” and “dealings,” and “current pending deals” and “loans?”

                  What if Trump really is working for Vladimir Putin?

                  If he is, that would certainly answer why was he so solicitous of Putin during the campaign, why has he consistently refused to say even one critical thing about Putin, why has he has accepted Putin’s word over that of his own government that the Russians didn’t interfere in the presidential election, and why he stood next to Putin at Helsinki and virtually surrendered his nation to the interests of Russia.

                  But it leaves the question, what hold could Putin possibly have over him?

                  Former United States ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul was on MSNBC on Monday night talking about Russia “giving money to Trump in 2008.” “That’s how Putin does business,” McFaul went on to explain. “He gives money to people for free, and then they collect.”

                  Related imageTrump, McFaul, and Putin

                  So if it’s money, that raises even more questions: How long has it been going on? How did it work? Why did it begin in the first place? Was Trump facing bankruptcy and Putin bailed him out, and now Trump owes him?

                  That’s what happened on a smaller scale with Trump’s campaign chairman, Paul Manafort. He worked for Russian interests for at least a decade in the Ukraine and was lavishly paid for it. Court documents unsealed last summer show that when Manafort’s Russia-connected man Viktor Yanukovych was ousted, Manafort ran short on money, and Putin’s pal Oleg Deripaska loaned him $10 million. The affidavit also showed that it was Deripaska who backed Manafort’s political consulting work in Ukraine from the beginning, in 2005 and 2006.

                  As we now know, Deripaska went to Manafort to collect on his debt during the campaign, asking for “briefings” and eventually being given campaign polling data by the former campaign manager. Does this raise questions about why Trump is now moving to lift sanctions on companies controlled by Deripaska? You bet it does.

                  Three Really Big Questions

                  There are three big questions we don’t have answers for. First, what is Putin’s overall aim? It’s known that he believes the break up of the Soviet Union was “a major geopolitical disaster of the century,” as he told the Russian parliament in a kind of “state of the union” address in 2005. We know he has designs on Ukraine and has already annexed Crimea, which was Ukrainian territory. We know that like every Russian leader before him, he would like to see NATO weakened, if not broken up altogether, and he’d like to see the European Union come apart at the seams.

                  If Putin wants NATO weakened, the New York Times reported yesterday that Trump repeatedly told aides in 2018 that he would like the U.S. to withdraw from the 70-year Atlantic alliance. If he wants more influence in Syria, Trump gave it to him when he recently announced the pullout of American troops.

                  The second question is, what will happen if Trump stops giving Putin what he wants? What will they do to him?

                  Which immediately raises the third question: If Trump is actually working for Russia because Putin in effect owns him, how can he extricate himself? Better still, can he extricate himself? People who cross Vladimir Putin tend not to live long and healthy lives. Could Donald Trump be afraid not just for his fortune, but for the well-being of himself and his family if Putin turns on him?


                  When you start looking for the answers to questions like these, Trump’s lies about Russia appear in an entirely different light. Maybe all those lesser lies – nobody in my campaign ever met with a Russian, there is no collusion, I have nothing to do with Russia – have been in service of the biggest lie of them all, the lie we heard him utter on Monday afternoon on his way to address the farmers in New Orleans. “I never worked for Russia.”

                  Maybe this is what he’s been afraid of all along. After asking us to believe all those other lies he’s had to backtrack on, now he needs us to believe the big one to survive. Maybe he’s fighting hard to stay in office not because he wants to be president so badly, but because he’s afraid of what Vladimir Putin will do to him if he’s ousted. Given Putin’s track record, I wouldn’t want to be in his shoes. Would you?

                  .

                  The entire story, written by , can be accessed by clicking on the following link:

                  https://www.rawstory.com/2019/01/trump-really-work...


                  more less
                  Pundit Post

                  The Case For Beginning Impeachment Immediately!

                  116
                  Posts
                  2410
                  Points
                  33
                  Users

                      It no longer matters what Mueller's investigation determines related to whether or not Trump knew of, or directed the 101 connections between his team and Russia.

                      There are three severely compelling reasons to impeach Trump. First, in Germany last year, Trump met with Putin with no other American present. This happened in the middle of a counter intelligence investigation to determine if Trump is working on behalf of Russia. Well, here's your sign! Why would the President of The United States of America meet with Putin with no other American present UNLESS he is a Russian spy and he thinks the American government is too weak to do anything about it??? Trump's and Putin's seeming calculation is that the American government will spend the next two years arguing essentially over whether the president has the constitutional powers to be a traitor, and as long as republicans control the Senate, the conclusion will be that he does.


                      Second, Trump with the support of congressional republicans has done everything he could to PUBLICLY obstruct the Mueller investigation into whether Trump and his team conspired with Putin to steal the 2016 presidential election.

                      Third, Trump and congressional republicans have shut the American government down, which not only threatens the national security of the USA, but also adversely impacts the lives and livelilhood of over 800,000 federal workers and millions of American citizens. Who benefits from the American government being shut down, more than Putin?

                      The Democratic controlled House of Representatives SHOULD begin impeachment of Trump immediately, although it is a foregone conclusion that the republican controlled Senate will not convict him and remove him from office. The remedy for that is for American voters to remove both Trump and republicans from public office in 2020.

                      https://themoscowproject.org/explainers/trumps-rus...

                      Last Updated January 9, 2019

                      On January 6, 2017, the U.S. intelligence community issued a report that showed there were two campaigns to elect Donald Trump: one run by Trump and one run by the Russian government. Trump and many of his senior advisors and close associates have repeatedly denied any connections between the two campaigns, despite the fact that they were working towards the same goal, at the same time, and utilizing the same tactics.

                      Yet over the past year, we’ve learned about a series of meetings and contacts between individuals linked to the Russian government and Trump’s campaign and transition team. In total, we have learned of 101 contacts between Trump’s team and Russia linked operatives, including at least 28 meetings. And we know that at least 28 high-ranking campaign officials and Trump advisors were aware of contacts with Russia-linked operatives during the campaign and transition. None of these contacts were ever reported to the proper authorities. Instead, the Trump team tried to cover up every single one of them.

                      Why were there so many meetings? What was discussed in them? More importantly, why did Trump and his camp lie about them, including to federal law enforcement? What are they hiding?

                      The American people deserve answers.


                      https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/15/us/politics/trump-putin-meetings.html

                      WASHINGTON — The first time they met was in Germany. President Trump took his interpreter’s notes afterward and ordered him not to disclose what he heard to anyone. Later that night, at a dinner, Mr. Trump pulled up a seat next to President Vladimir V. Putin to talk without any American witnesses at all.

                      Their third encounter was in Vietnam when Mr. Trump seemed to take Mr. Putin’s word that he had not interfered in American elections. A formal summit meeting followed in Helsinki, Finland, where the two leaders kicked out everyone but the interpreters. Most recently, they chatted in Buenos Aires after Mr. Trump said they would not meet because of Russian aggression.

                      Mr. Trump has adamantly insisted there was “no collusion” with Russia during his 2016 presidential campaign. But each of the five times he has met with Mr. Putin since taking office, he has fueled suspicions about their relationship. The unusually secretive way he has handled these meetings has left his own administration guessing what happened and piqued the interest of investigators.

                      “What’s disconcerting is the desire to hide information from your own team,” said Andrew S. Weiss, who was a Russia adviser to President Bill Clinton. “The fact that Trump didn’t want the State Department or members of the White House team to know what he was talking with Putin about suggests it was not about advancing our country’s national interest but something more problematic.”

                      more less
                      Pundit Post

                      The Case For Treason Revisited

                      23
                      Posts
                      555
                      Points
                      15
                      Users

                          We know publicly only a fraction of what Special Counsel Robert Mueller knows, but what we do know already constitutes impeachable offenses, starting with the violation of the Emoluments Clause of the U.S. Constitution. It has been recently revealed through public records that Trump business interests benefited in excess of $100 million in the first two years of his presidency.

                          And it can only get worse, much worse, if Mueller has evidence of the president acting as an agent or "asset" of the Russian government as the FBI counter-intelligence inquiry following the firing of FBI Director James Comey would indicate. (There is a very high evidentiary standard for even opening such an investigation such as wiretaps or other "intel intercepts", well beyond what is known publicly.)

                          We've learned that the president went to extraordinary lengths to keep the content of his private meetings with Russian president Vladimir Putin secret even from his inner circle of advisers and cabinet members, including confiscating the notes from his interpreters and swearing them to silence.

                          Incidentally, a counter-intelligence investigation is not a criminal inquiry, but looks into whether an individual is acting on behalf of a foreign adversary and poses a threat to national security. And the potential penalties, whether a president or not, are more severe than impeachment.

                          The following piece from October 31, 2017 did not have the benefit of all we've learned since. But these latest revelations by The New York Times and the Washington Post have led to open public references to "The Manchurian Candidate" and a far wider use of the "T-word"...

                          RVC 1-14-2019


                          The Case For Treason

                          Beyond Collusion Or Obstruction of Justice,

                          More Than Impeachment Or Removal From Office


                          (EPA | Russian Foreign Ministry handout)

                          President Trump talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Ambassador

                          Sergey Kislyak during their May 15, 2017 meeting in the Oval Office at the White House.

                          Only Russian media were allowed to attend.

                          By Ray Cunneff

                          October 31, 2017


                          "Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open Court. The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason."

                          - Section 110 of Article III, the Constitution of the United States

                          In 1790, the U.S. Congress specified the penalty for those convicted of treason as death and added additional penalties for "any person or persons, having knowledge of the commission of any of the treasons aforesaid, shall conceal, and not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to the President of the United States, or some one of the Judges thereof, or to the President or Governor of a particular State, or some one of the Judges or Justices thereof..."

                          The framers of the American Constitution adopted the traditions of English law, specifically the Statute of Treason in the reign of Edward III derived from "trahir", signifying to betray; and "trahison", by contraction, treason, the betraying itself. Under the Constitution, the power of punishing the crime of treason against the United States is exclusive to Congress; and the trial of the offence belongs exclusively to the Federal courts.

                          Few cases have occurred in the United States in which it has been necessary for the federal courts to act, and in those few instances they have generally concerned "levying war", i.e. raising armies, capturing forts or other examples of taking up arms against the federal government. However, the statute's underpinnings remain betrayal and "traitorous acts" or conspiracies committed against the vital interests or even the continued existence of the American democracy.

                          Alex Wong | Getty Images

                          Special counsel Robert Mueller arrives at the U.S. Capitol for a closed

                          door meeting with members of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

                          Ever since Monday's unsealing of indictments against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and his associate Rick Gates, news outlets have been trying to interpret what it could mean.

                          But the shock-wave revelation that former Trump National Security adviser George Papadopoulos had been secretly arrested in July and had pled guilty in early October of lying to the FBI, having struck a "cooperation deal" with Robert Mueller’s special counsel, not only the media but legal scholars have concluded that this is a much bigger problem for Trump than Manafort or Gates and raised the questions of where this all might lead?

                          For the first time, the discussions and speculation moved beyond questions of collusion with an adversarial foreign government or that government's attempts to sew distrust and dissension within American society, to undermine American democracy by manipulating a U.S. election and influencing the outcome in favor of one candidate, namely Donald Trump.

                          EPA | Andrew Harrer/Pool

                          At the now infamous Oval Office meeting, Trump told his Russian guests,

                          "I just fired the head of the FBI. He was crazy, a real nut job. I faced

                          great pressure because of Russia. That's taken off."


                          No longer were the issues limited to obstruction of justice by impeding the Senate and House investigations and the firing of FBI Director James Comey or violations of the Emoluments Clause of the U.S. Constitution through self-enrichment.

                          The conversations had even moved beyond possible removal of a president, due to temperament or even mental instability, deemed to be unfit for office by means of the 25th Amendment or impeachment, to a word that only last week would have seemed wildly overblown hyperbole - "treason".

                          What had changed? Potential proof of a treasonous conspiracy.

                          From the "cooperation deal" agreement:

                          "In truth and in fact, however, and as set forth above, defendant Papadopoulos met the Professor for the first time on or about March 14, 2016, after defendant Papadopoulos had already learned he would be a foreign policy adviser for the Campaign; the Professor showed interest in defendant Papadopoulos only after learning of his role on the Campaign; and the Professor told defendant Papadopoulos about the Russians possessing “dirt” on then-candidate Clinton in late April 2016, more than a month after defendant Papadopoulos had joined the Campaign.”


                          SOCIAL MEDIA / HANDOUT / VIA REUTERS

                          George Papadopoulos (center, left)


                          The mysterious Russian "professor" and a young woman who claimed to be "Putin's niece" (and wasn't) aside, the case for conspiracy with a foreign adversary by the Trump campaign and administration was heightened by the very real possibility than Papadoplous had been "wearing-a-wire" for the FBI for as long as three weeks and recording conversations with top White House officials about the scheme and the cover-up.

                          And that the person described as his "senior Trump adviser" who had encouraged these Russian contacts, told him "great work", may still be a senior White House adviser. (Speculation centers on Steven Miller.)

                          AP Photo-Carolyn Kaster

                          Son-in-law Jared Kushner, a "person of interest".

                          Combined with information about the June 2016 “secret meeting” at Trump Tower between Donald Trump Jr, son-in-law Jared Kushner, campaign chairman Paul Manafort, Kremlin lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya and several Russian operatives, recorded conversations of coaching about what to say as part of a cover-up could now be in Bob Mueller's possession.

                          While these latest revelations are being described by many observers (except those in the White House) as "the end of the beginning", the scrutiny and suspicion is now moving toward a coordinated and possibly traitorous conspiracy scheme at the highest levels of the Trump administration.

                          Hillary Clinton's 2016 running mate, U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), said actions within Trump's inner circle, including family members, were "moving into perjury, false statements and even potentially treason". Richard Painter, chief ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush, told NPR that the definition of treason would include helping "a foreign adversary against one's own country".

                          The word, one that few dared say only days ago, is now out.

                          * * *

                          That was October 31, 2017 - not by accident Halloween. Since then, we've seen patterns of behavior and relationships between the Trump campaign, the Trump administration and Russian operatives that can no longer be dismissed as coincidence due to their sheer volume.

                          With Democrats in a majority in the House, with investigative and subpoena power restored by the mid-term elections, unanswered questions during Republican control primarily about what the president knew and when he knew it, are likely to be answered.

                          Of particular interest is the infamous June 9, 2016 Trump Tower meeting between three senior members of the Trump campaign – Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort – and at least five other people, including Russian operatives and lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya. And we may learn who was on the other end of Don Jr's call after the meeting to a "blocked" number and the story behind the president's attempts at a cover-up.

                          We've learned that in the week between the Comey firing and the appointment of Special Counsel Mueller, the FBI had become sufficiently suspicious about Trump's Russia ties that they felt compelled to open the counter-intelligence inquiry. And it appears that, for some in the bureau, the meeting with senior Russian officials in the Oval Office the day after the Comey firing, with only Russian media present, in which the president revealed sources and methods of intelligence-gathering related of Israel, was the last straw.

                          From The New York Times:


                          "The inquiry carried explosive implications. Counterintelligence investigators had to consider whether the president’s own actions constituted a possible threat to national security. Agents also sought to determine whether Mr. Trump was knowingly working for Russia or had unwittingly fallen under Moscow’s influence.

                          Agents and senior F.B.I. officials had grown suspicious of Mr. Trump’s ties to Russia during the 2016 campaign but held off on opening an investigation into him, the people said, in part because they were uncertain how to proceed with an inquiry of such sensitivity and magnitude. But the president’s activities before and after Mr. Comey’s firing in May 2017, particularly two instances in which Mr. Trump tied the Comey dismissal to the Russia investigation, helped prompt the counterintelligence aspect of the inquiry..."



                          more less
                          Pundit Post

                          Fox - Let's Just Make Stuff Up. Our Viewership Is To Dumb To Notice

                          40
                          Posts
                          1070
                          Points
                          20
                          Users

                              We wonder why a large segment of the USA is uninformed. Well look no further than Fox for your reason. These Righties are so scared of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez that they will make stuff up about her and the Fox viewership is so dumb they will believe what is said about AOC. Yes, one of Fox's brightest is worried that AOC is going to run for the presidency in 2020. Well doh!


                              United States Constitution. Article Two Section One


                              No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States

                              How stupid does one have to be in order to work for Fox? What is even more astonishing than this woman saying something so incredibly stupid is that there sits 3 other women and this guy who are just as dumb as Faulkner and accept was was said as truth and didn't know enough to even correct Faulkner. Watch this short video. It is actually comical.

                              There are only two places people like this Faulkner person could find a job, on Fox or in the Trump administration.

                              https://crooksandliars.com/2019/01/fox-host-fearmo...


                              more less

                              Desperately Seeking Jesus - Trump Turns To Evangelicals

                              188
                              Posts
                              5013
                              Points
                              38
                              Users

                                  Desperately Seeking Jesus

                                  Trump Turns To Evangelicals

                                  In early 2016, Trump is anointed by Christian evangelicals in Cleveland

                                  to protect him from "concentrated satanic attack"

                                  By Ray Cunneff

                                  January 11, 2019

                                  A report today in The Guardian underscores what may be President Donald Trump's last line of defense against a sea of troubles - from the tightening noose of the Mueller investigations, pending ally and family indictments, and a painfully protracted and unnecessary government shutdown - the devoted white Christian evangelicals who stand by him despite his very un-Christian offenses.

                                  The Guardian article paints a portrait of the president and members of his regime increasingly invoking their supposed faith in a mutual support system with evangelical Christians, i.e. white nationalists, seen as a major component of his zealous, unwavering base.

                                  Reporter Julian Borger notes that an important part of Trump's appeal is in the people he chooses to surround himself, people deeply immersed in white Christian nationalism and a belief in the “end times”.

                                  Borger: “In setting out the Trump administration’s Middle East policy, one of the first things (Secretary of State) Mike Pompeo made clear to his audience in Cairo is that he had come to the region as ‘as an evangelical Christian'”.

                                  Borger recounted an episode at a Wichita, Kansas church at which then-congressman Pompeo told congregants "It is a never-ending struggle … until the rapture. Be part of it. Be in the fight”. Borger writes, “For Pompeo’s audience, the rapture invoked an apocalyptical Christian vision of the future, a final battle between good and evil, and the second coming of Jesus Christ, when the faithful will ascend to heaven and the rest will go to hell.”

                                  Selecting Pompeo as Secretary of State, combined with the overly fervent "can't be alone with a woman" Christian Mike Pence as his vice president, reassured and endeared Trump to evangelicals who are willing to accept Trump’s monumental imperfections.

                                  “Trump himself embodies the very opposite of a pious Christian ideal. Trump is not churchgoer. He is profane, twice divorced, who has boasted of sexually assaulting women. But white evangelicals have embraced him,” the Guardian reports, adding, “Trump’s choice of Pence as a running mate was a gesture of his commitment, and four of the six preachers at his inauguration were evangelicals, including White and Franklin Graham, the eldest son of the preacher Billy Graham, who defended Trump through his many sex scandals, pointing out: ‘We are all sinners.'”

                                  Katherine Stewart, who writes extensively about the Christian right, says Trump is frequently compared to a modern day King Cyrus, a model for "a nonbeliever appointed by God as a vessel for the purposes of the faithful”, adding that evangelicals welcome his readiness to break democratic norms to combat perceived threats to their values and way of life.

                                  She said, “The Christian nationalist movement is characterized by feelings of persecution and, to some degree, paranoia – a clear example is the idea that there is somehow a ‘war on Christmas’. People in those positions will often go for authoritarian leaders who will do whatever is necessary to fight for their cause.”

                                  https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jan/11/tr...

                                  Donald Trump at the Republican national convention in Cleveland, Ohio, on 18 July 2016.

                                  Photograph: Mike Segar/Reuters

                                  more less
                                  Pundit Post

                                  Trump Said, "I Never Said That"

                                  62
                                  Posts
                                  1630
                                  Points
                                  21
                                  Users

                                      The orange freak is now saying he never said mexico would pay for the wall...and you know what, his cult will agree with him..even tho he ran the whole time on that, it won't matter...he lies he denies his cult sucks it up.they wonder why we call them a cult? Maybe because they act like a cult. No matter what he says or does they suck it up. You can show them many many videos of him saying it , they will either deny it or say well he was just joking..or he did not mean it that way..umm yeah he did.

                                      more less

                                      Trump LOSES If He Gets His WALL In ANY Agreement With Congress: SOVNO DEAL

                                      253
                                      Posts
                                      6200
                                      Points
                                      37
                                      Users

                                          THE ONLY WALL TRUMP HAS ANY REAL INTEREST IN...

                                          "Illegial Immigration" was the cornerstone of Candidate Donald Trump's bit for the Oval Office. He made it the center of his campaign, declaring that he will “build a big, beautiful concrete/rebar wall” on the border with Mexico, paid for by Mexico to stop illegal immigration


                                          Trump’s core supporters cheered the idea as he whipped crowds into a frenzy by blaming illegal immigrants as the source of American violence and the loss of American jobs. "THE WALL" played into their anger, their fear, their anxiety, their sense of unfairness and loss....all the result of "THEM." Build a wall and keep THEM out. Build a wall and toss those of THEM who should not be here. Yeah....



                                          It was classic demagoguery and fear-mongering. It’s been done in this nation in the past against Italians, Chinese, Germans, Jews and other groups who become convenient punching bags of political and social frustration.

                                          Of course he does not really want a wall. Getting it would be very bad news.

                                          If he were to get his wall then the failure of that wall (and it would fail to do what he claims it will do), the delay in getting it built (ten years is the best estimate I have seen) and the cost of that wall (and it would cost hundreds of billions once all related line items were accounted for) will be massive baggage.

                                          If he gets his wall, what will his crowds chant? What will he turn to in rallies when the energy flags and the faces look bored? What will he talk about in reporter gaggles?

                                          He he were serious he would be addressing the real problems.
                                          • The first real problem of course is a poorly designed visa system, a complex and confused process leading to asylum, permanent residency, and/or citizenship.
                                          • The second real problem is that American business has been a source of countless low paying, and temporary jobs and that American social service systems provide some level of care for all who are here.
                                          • The third real problem is a constitutional guarantee that those born here are automatically citizens.
                                          • The fourth real problem is that border security, on ALL of our borders, needs to be modernized to use an array of measures that help to plug holes in the many points of entry.

                                          Trump is totally unqualified to handle any of this....and worse, he has no interest in doing so.


                                          more less
                                          Pundit Post

                                          Yabberz Search

                                          Topics Found

                                          Members

                                          Posts

                                          Load More Posts
                                          Hi There,

                                          Do you want to quickly add followers, meet new friends, or simply connect with existing contacts to discuss the news?

                                          Do you have an email group that shares news items?

                                          It's now super easy and rewarding to find and add friends on Yabberz.

                                          This post has either already been PowerShared, not eligible for PowerShare or is not your post. Return Home
                                          0

                                              Click to confirm you are 18 yrs of age or older and open

                                              Click to confirm you want to see post

                                              more less

                                              Posts
                                              Points
                                              Users
                                                  more less
                                                  Block User
                                                  This user will be blocked and not see your posts when logged in. You will also not see this user's posts when logged in. In order to later unblock this user, visit the blocked user tab found on your about me profile page. Click confirm block to complete.
                                                  loading...
                                                  Last Heard: a minute ago
                                                  Joined: Mar 4' 15
                                                  Followers: 100
                                                  Points: 100,000