Yabberz for AndroidDownload

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

      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?



      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:


      more less
      Pundit Post

      The Case For Beginning Impeachment Immediately!


          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.


          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.


          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


              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.”


              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


                  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.


                  more less

                  Desperately Seeking Jesus - Trump Turns To Evangelicals


                      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.”


                      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"


                          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


                              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

                                  Trump bet all his chips on this one last gasp and lost. The entire problem is this. Trump is used to getting his way and with his Wall, that is not the case at all. Trump is making a demand and is not trying to work on a bipartisan solution, or compromising in the least or is he even negotiating, he is DEMANDING. Even the day before Trump's oval office lie fest Lindsey Graham was on Fox having what is all to common with him lately, one of his hissy fits screaming that it is all the Democrats fault because they won't negotiate and give Trump his wall. What a bunch of cr@p that is. There are no negotiations. There is simply one demand that is presented over and over again and the Democrats will not budge.

                                  Trump’s aides fear he has given himself no way out. “The president put himself in a box,” the former official in touch with the White House told me. “The problem is there’s no endgame. Right now the White House is at a seven on the panic scale. If this thing goes on past the State of the Union they’re going to be at an 11.”

                                  Trump has screwed the pooch and has backed himself into a corner and can't seem to see a way out of his self made dilemma. All his usual ruses will not work. He can't very well blame the Democrats for shutting down the Government when he publicly admitted this is something he did and was proud of it. Trump's legacy is becoming more and more apparent.


                                  more less

                                  Why Trump's Lies Endure Within His Base: One Night At A Neighborhood Bar


                                      A couple of times a week I stop at a local watering hole. Bar on one side, restaurant on the other. I meet friends there. Quite often I stay to just listen to the conversations going on around me. My county voted 82 percent for Trump in 2016. The county has vote "Trump" ever since. Trump's approval rating remains very high.

                                      Given all that has happened and is happening HOW does this continue?

                                      EZ.....they want Trump to WIN! Because they believe, in spite of the facts, that if HE WINS then THEY WIN.

                                      My neighbors include lots of farmers who are being shafted in trade as crops sit unsold. There are people whose jobs have been affected by the impact of tariffs on the factories where they work. My neighbors include people who have their healthcare because of Obamacare but won't admit it. I have neighbors who are on "food stamps" and other assistance which is not flowing now "because the democrats are playing politics.

                                      It comes down to the power of three emotions: hate, anxiety, and anger. They are fuel that feeds the irrational furnace that heats their minds.

                                      And the fevered brow eventually sickens the rest of the body.

                                      Trump, the MOST SUCCESSFUL of WHITE MEN, shares in those emotions with them and provides justification for their thinking and their feeling. He says and does what they want said and done...

                                      I do not know how they change as every challenge to Trump is seen as proof that he is being unfairly treated....just as they are.

                                      more less
                                      Pundit Post

                                      Progressives Will Get Their Debate On Medicare For All


                                          This is what is desperately needed. An open discussion and a hard look at Universal Healthcare or as otherwise known, Medicare for all. Already the Congressional Budget Office has predicted that Medicare for all would have substantial savings over a ten year period. As of now ACA is barely holding on as the Republicans continue to chip away at the program and remove funding from different parts of the program.

                                          One of the major complaints by people is their concern about keeping their doctors. How many people right now are part of an HMO program or an Advantage program where the insurance company limits one's choices of doctors and hospitals? Where is the choice in those programs? I personally joined an Advantage program one year and received a booklet that had a listing of hospitals and doctors in my area from which I can choose. (I live in Chicago and none of the best hospitals like University of Chicago, Northwestern Hospital or Rush Medical was on the list. Just a bunch of smaller 2nd rate hospitals.) First of all you have to choose a primary doctor who will check you and and make recommendations as to which specialist you will see. Within a week of joining an advantage program I called up a doctor to be my primary doctor who was listed in the book given to me by the insurance company to find out he no longer was in the program. Then I decided to call a hospital, Swedish Covenant Hospital near where I live which was listed in the insurance booklet to get a recommendation for a primary doctor. Guess what? The hospital was no longer in the program. WTF? I gave up and weathered out the flu without any medication and relied upon soup, orange juice and plenty of rest.

                                          I am glad that the Democrats have taken it upon themselves to not only start talking about Universal Healthcare but also to start investigating implementing the program and to look to see how it can be funded. To all those nay sayers within the Party. Good luck keeping your job when the majority of people would like to move in the direction of medicare for all.

                                          By the way, drug prices are going to rise about 6% in 2019 including generic drugs. Also, I just got my drug plan booklet for 2019 and noticed a few drugs stopped being covered and some co-pays went up.



                                          more less

                                          Yabberz Search

                                          Topics Found



                                          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

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

                                              Click to confirm you want to see post

                                              more less

                                                  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.
                                                  Last Heard: a minute ago
                                                  Joined: Mar 4' 15
                                                  Followers: 100
                                                  Points: 100,000