[AMV] Amerikaanse politiek #341 Hoeveel mensen passen er in 1 kamer?

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 juli 2017 17:43 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Iemand die zijn leven lang geld heeft moeten lenen wilde de rente verhogen? Ik denk het niet.

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 juli 2017 17:51 schreef Tchock het volgende:

[..]

https://www.theguardian.c(...)-us-economy-will-pay

Wel hoor.

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 juli 2017 18:06 schreef Falco het volgende:
Trump gaat na zijn Franse tripje misschien toch niet uit het Parijs-akkoord stappen volgens Richard Branson: https://www.theguardian.c(...)deal-richard-branson

Nu maar hopen dat ie de komende tijd niet teveel met CEO's van kolencentrales babbelt .

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 juli 2017 18:26 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Arme Trumpanzees. Hoe moet je zoiets dan in vredesnaam spinnen?

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 juli 2017 18:06 schreef Falco het volgende:
Trump gaat na zijn Franse tripje misschien toch niet uit het Parijs-akkoord stappen volgens Richard Branson: https://www.theguardian.c(...)deal-richard-branson

Nu maar hopen dat ie de komende tijd niet teveel met CEO's van kolencentrales babbelt .

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 juli 2017 18:29 schreef Falco het volgende:

[..]

Dit is 4D chess.

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 juli 2017 18:14 schreef Boze_Appel het volgende:
[ afbeelding ]

[ afbeelding ]

Trump hard aan het werk bij US Women's open op zijn NJ tenniscomplex.

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 juli 2017 18:44 schreef Whiskers2009 het volgende:

[..]

Die gezichtsuitdrukking ook weer..

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 juli 2017 18:06 schreef Falco het volgende:
Trump gaat na zijn Franse tripje misschien toch niet uit het Parijs-akkoord stappen volgens Richard Branson: https://www.theguardian.c(...)deal-richard-branson

Nu maar hopen dat ie de komende tijd niet teveel met CEO's van kolencentrales babbelt .

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 juli 2017 19:25 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
En het gekissebis over de travel ban gaat gewoon door

Hawaii judge dilutes Trump travel ban further by expanding family list

Trump's lawyers ask Supreme Court to rein in Hawaii judge

quote:

At issue now is whether the ban can be enforced to deny entry to grandparents, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews and cousins as well as what the government calls "more distant relatives."

On June 26, the high court said the travel ban could be enforced, but not against foreigner travelers who had a "close" family member in the United States. But its short opinion did not carefully define who qualified under that standard.

quote:

Sources: Trump lawyers knew of Russia emails three weeks ago

(..)

“I only heard about it two or three days ago,” he said, according to a transcript of his talk, when asked about the meeting with Veselnitskaya at Trump Tower in June 2016 attended by Donald Trump Jr., Paul Manafort, then Trump’s campaign chief, and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner.

But the sources told Yahoo News that Marc Kasowitz, the president’s chief lawyer in the Russia investigation, and Alan Garten, executive vice president and chief legal officer of the Trump Organization, were both informed about the emails in the third week of June, after they were discovered by lawyers for Kushner, who is now a senior White House official.

(..)

The discovery of the emails prompted Kushner to amend his security clearance form to reflect the meeting, which he had failed to report when he originally sought clearance for his White House job. That revision — his second — to the so-called SF-86, was done on June 21. Kushner made the change even though there were questions among his lawyers whether the meeting had to be reported, given that there was no clear evidence that Veselnitskaya was a government official. The change to the security form prompted the FBI to question Kushner on June 23, the second time he was interviewed by agents about his security clearance, the sources said.

But the information that Trump’s lawyers were told about the emails in June raises questions about why they would not have immediately informed the president.

(..)

Pushing back the discovery of the emails to the third week in June also raises additional questions about the initial public statements made by the White House after the existence of the meeting was first reported by the New York Times on July 8. At that time, Trump Jr. issued a public statement describing the session as a “short introductory meeting” in which the primary topic of discussion was “the adoption of Russian children” by American families. The actual purpose of the meeting, to obtain damaging information about Hillary Clinton ostensibly collected by the Russian government, wasn’t mentioned in Trump’s initial statement.

(..)

Aside from questions about the credibility of White House statements, the disclosure of the emails potentially has raised new questions about Kushner’s security clearance. He initially filed his SF-86 on Jan. 18, leaving out any mention of meetings with foreign government officials during the transition and the campaign. His lawyers have said this was inadvertent and that a member of his staff had prematurely hit the “send” button for the form before it was completed. Within twelve hours, they have said, Kushner notified the FBI that he would make amendments and disclose his meetings with foreign officials.

This was followed by a revised security clearance submission on May 11 in which Kushner reported more than 100 meetings with officials from over 20 countries, including a meeting with the Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak and another with Sergey Gorkov, head of a Russian state-owned bank.

The revised security clearance led to Kushner’s first FBI interview about the matter in mid-May, the sources said. The bureau is now reviewing Kushner’s second amended form following the new disclosure about his meeting with the Russian lawyer. His lawyers are confident that it won’t raise any additional problems since, as they have asserted, Kushner had forgotten the meeting — he was only briefly present — and had no intent to conceal it. In the meantime, he has an interim security clearance, sources said.

https://www.yahoo.com/amp(...)-june-000320831.html

quote:

Kellyanne Conway just set the modern record for political spin

Here's what Conway said on “Fox and Friends” on Friday morning:

Even the goal posts have been moved. We were promised systemic — hard evidence of systemic, sustained, furtive collusion that not only interfered with our election process but indeed dictated the electoral outcome.

(..)

Conway seems to be suggesting a little bit of collusion or attempted collusion might have been okay. She is setting the standard at “hard evidence of systemic, sustained, furtive collusion.” But this is quite a bit different from the White House's repeated promises that there was no collusion, period — dozens of them in total, according to some counts. This is a statement that has been made over and over again, and never qualified in the way Conway just did.

(..)

“Zero collusion” and “simply no collusion” is apparently creeping into “no systemic or sustained collusion.” Conway seems to be saying, yes, this meeting was yucky and probably a bad idea, but it wasn't part of anything bigger.

The second part of her statement is equally brazen. She says those looking into collusion have said this effort “not only interfered with our election process but indeed dictated the electoral outcome.”

Conway's standard now apparently isn't just a concerted collusion effort; it's now a concerted collusion effort that was the determining factor between having a President Clinton and a President Trump. In other words, it has to have actually made the difference.

This just isn't true. Nobody who is seriously looking at this can say with any certainty that this Russian interference or alleged collusion truly made the difference, and the intelligence community has explicitly said it wouldn't weigh in on that question.

There may be some people who believe the collusion was systemic and sustained and that it changed the outcome. But the media and the intelligence community have been much more circumspect about all of this. This is laughable spin from Kellyanne Conway, and it suggests just how much trouble Donald Trump Jr. and the White House are in.

https://www.washingtonpos(...)-for-political-spin/

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 juli 2017 22:18 schreef Boze_Appel het volgende:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zaterdag 15-07-2017 om 19:56:57 Next week the Senate is going to vote on legislation to save Americans from the ObamaCare DISASTER. #WeeklyAddress🇺🇸 https://t.co/xjVDkgo1NK reageer retweet

Obamacare is bad mmmhkay.

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 juli 2017 22:18 schreef Boze_Appel het volgende:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zaterdag 15-07-2017 om 19:56:57 Next week the Senate is going to vote on legislation to save Americans from the ObamaCare DISASTER. #WeeklyAddress🇺🇸 https://t.co/xjVDkgo1NK reageer retweet

Obamacare is bad mmmhkay.

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 juli 2017 23:48 schreef Boze_Appel het volgende:

[..]

In de link zit een filmpje.

quote:

Op zondag 16 juli 2017 00:43 schreef Boze_Appel het volgende:

[..]

Hij heeft niet echt veel aangewezen personeel, dus wellicht moest iemand die er geen/weinig verstand van heeft het maar doen.

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 juli 2017 21:09 schreef clumsy_clown het volgende:

[..]

Kellyanne is ook heel goed in het uitleggen van collusion.

http://edition.cnn.com/20(...)-trump-jr/index.html

Stephen Recreates Kellyanne Conway's 'Fun With Words'

quote:

Op zondag 16 juli 2017 00:43 schreef Boze_Appel het volgende:

[..]

Hij heeft niet echt veel aangewezen personeel, dus wellicht moest iemand die er geen/weinig verstand van heeft het maar doen.

quote:

Op zondag 16 juli 2017 08:22 schreef Ulx het volgende:
http://www.politico.com/s(...)d-jr-aftornde-240592

D'r gaat campagnegeld naar Don Jr's advocaten. Het mag, maar raar vind ik het wel. Don Jr heeft tenslotte geen binding met Don Sr en het Witte Huis meer.

quote:

I am confident in saying that my clearance would have been immediately revoked had I, as a career CIA officer, been accused of a fraction of these activities. In my case, the clearance process culminating in my first day at Langley lasted approximately a year, fairly standard for the period. It consisted of interviews, psychological exams and a lie detector test, while my family, friends and neighbors were subjected to questions about everything from my financial health to my drinking habits by humorless federal agents. When I ultimately was cleared to join the ranks of the CIA, the imperatives of unimpeachable integrity and sound judgment were stressed at every turn. It’s a mantra that becomes an ethos for our national security officials.
And the consequences for falling short were always on our minds. On more than one occasion, a co-worker was unceremoniously escorted from CIA headquarters without anything resembling an official explanation. But even when explanations were offered, the offenses seemed rather inconsequential. In one case, a career official had her clearance revoked for failing to stay current with student loans.
I, too, was visited by the security powers-that-be at one point. I was summoned to a secure facility where I was subjected to a videotaped interview with an investigator. He relayed that my discussion with a renowned American scholar—part of my master’s thesis research—was cause for concern. The scholar, it turned out, also blogged, leading the CIA to consider him a reporter (with whom intelligence officials are not supposed to have unsanctioned contact). How did the agency learn of this unintended transgression? I cited the interview in the bibliography of my thesis, which I submitted to the CIA to ensure it did not contain any classified information.
My run-in was minor in the scheme of things, but it underscored the seriousness with which security officials treated potential security violations by career officers. And rightly so. National security professionals with access to Top Secret information are entrusted with material whose release—by its very definition—could cause “grave damage” to our national security.
If Kushner indeed still retains his clearance, there’s an unmistakable double standard at play. Career officials, many of whom spend decades in service of their country, are subject to a different set of rules than those under the protection of the powerful. That’s never how the system has worked, nor is it how it should work. The classified information Kushner has access to is no less sensitive, and, in fact, his position in the West Wing—where I spent the past few years—exposes him to a much broader array of the most classified information and programs in the U.S. government than he would in most other executive branch roles.
These are the facts: Jared Kushner held suspicious meetings with Russians officials and operatives that he failed to disclose when he applied for a security clearance. If he weren’t the president’s son in law, he’d have been frogmarched out of the White House long ago. Why does he still have access to America’s biggest secrets?

quote:

Op zondag 16 juli 2017 08:30 schreef Boze_Appel het volgende:
White House pre-buts CBO healthcare score: 'Little more than fake news'

[..]

quote:

Op zondag 16 juli 2017 08:43 schreef Vis1980 het volgende:
Hebben we het al gehad over de emails van de advocaat van Trump?
Fire me if old.

http://www.independent.co(...)maddow-a7840286.html

"You don’t know me. I don’t know you. But I believe it is in your interest and the long-term interest of your firm for you to resign from your position advising the President,” he wrote.

Mr Kasowitz initially responded, simply: “F*** you.”

Over the course of the next 30 minutes, however, the lawyer continued to harangue the man, urging him to “Call me. Don’t be afraid, you piece of s*** Stand up”.

quote:

Op zondag 16 juli 2017 08:50 schreef Montov het volgende:

[..]

Donald Trump weet altijd de beste mensen aan te trekken, zo is mij verzekerd, zeker nu hij politiek onervaren is. Het kan toch niet zijn dat dat een foutieve aanname bleek te zijn?

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 juli 2017 22:18 schreef Boze_Appel het volgende:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zaterdag 15-07-2017 om 19:56:57 Next week the Senate is going to vote on legislation to save Americans from the ObamaCare DISASTER. #WeeklyAddress🇺🇸 https://t.co/xjVDkgo1NK reageer retweet

Obamacare is bad mmmhkay.

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 juli 2017 11:04 schreef Barbusse het volgende:

[..]

Ik ben geen Obama idolaat. Maar al je posts zijn gewoon bewezen bullcrap. De humor ligt juist in het feit dat je je eigen bullcrap gelooft. Als een religieuze volger van de heilige bullcrapkerk.

quote:

Op zondag 16 juli 2017 09:16 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Naast Richard Branson die al zoiets zei nu ook Macron: Trump may reverse decision on climate accord, France's Macron says: JDD

quote:

Op zondag 16 juli 2017 09:16 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Naast Richard Branson die al zoiets zei nu ook Macron: Trump may reverse decision on climate accord, France's Macron says: JDD

quote:

Op zondag 16 juli 2017 09:18 schreef Elzies het volgende:

[..]

Trump creëert hier een uitstekende onderhandelingspositie voor de Amerikanen.

quote:

Op zondag 16 juli 2017 09:18 schreef Elzies het volgende:

[..]

Trump creëert hier een uitstekende onderhandelingspositie voor de Amerikanen.