President - Donald Trump en kabinet:
Amerikaans Congres:SPOILERVice President - Mike Pence
Het kabinet
Secretary of State - Mike Pompeo
Secretary of Treasury - Steven Mnuchin
Acting Secretary of Defense - Patrick M. Shanahan
Acting Attorney General - Matthew Whitaker
Secretary of the Interior - ???
Secretary of Agriculture - Sonny Perdue
Secretary of Commerce - Wilbur Ross
Secretary of Labor - Alexander Acosta
Secretary of Health and Human Services - Alex Azar
Secretary of Housing & Urban Development - Ben Carson
Secretary of Transportation - Elaine Chao
Secretary of Energy - Rick Perry
Secretary of Education - Betsy DeVos
Secretary of Veterans Affairs - Ronny Jackson??? Robert Wilkie (Acting)
Secretary of Homeland Security - Kirstjen Nielsen
Cabinet-level officials:
Acting White House Chief of Staff - Mick Mulvaney
Trade Representative - Robert Lighthizer
Director of National Intelligence - Dan Coats
Ambassador to the UN - ???
Director of the Office of Management & Budget - ???
Director of the Central Intelligence Agency - Gina Haspel
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency - ???
Administrator of the Small Business Administration - Linda McMahon
Andere kopstukken:
Ivanka Trump (Advisor to the President), Jared Kushner (Senior Adviser Strategic Planning), Stephen Miller (Senior Adviser Policy), John Bolton (National Security Adviser), Kellyanne Conway (Counselor), Donald McGahn (White House Counsel), Sarah Huckabee Sanders (Press Secretary), Christopher Wray (Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation), Robert Mueller (Special Counsel), Rod Rosenstein (United States Deputy Attorney General).
Verdwenen of voormalige kopstukken:
Kabinet: Tom Price (HHS), David Shulkin (VA), Rex Tillerson (State)
DOJ/FBI: Sally Yates, James Comey, Preet Bharara, Andrew McCabe
Communicatie WH: Mike Dubke, Sean Spicer, Anthony Scaramucci, Hope Hicks
Adviseurs enzo: Michael Flynn, Herbert McMaster, Reince Priebus, Rob Porter, Gary Cohn, Steve Bannon, John McEntee, General Jim 'Mad Dog' Mattis, Jeff Sessions. John F. Kelly, Ryan Zinke, Nikki Haley, Scott Pruitt
Political groups house:
Democratic (235)
Republican (199)
Vacant (1)
Political groups Senate:
Republican (53)
Democratic (45)
Independents (2)
De huidige staat van de Amerikaanse politiek
SPOILER
de waanzin van Fox News.
Wat ik wilde zeggen was: haar verleden als state attorney en attorney general in Californië geeft blijk van een stevigere, meer pragmatische aanpak van criminaliteit dan je vooroordeelsgewijs van een (donkere, vrouwelijke) left-wing liberal zou verwachten.
Kamala Harris’s controversial record on criminal justice, explained
Dat maakt haar misschien verdacht in de ogen van linksere Democraten. Maar voor min of meer gematigde Republikeinen wordt ze daarmee als presidentskandidaat een stuk aantrekkelijker.
Niet iemand die je zomaar in het standaard liberal frame kan plaatsen.
Dus ik ʼbegrijpʼ de tactiek van Foxnews wel, om zich op haar persoonlijke verleden te richten en niet op haar efforts als crimefighter. Het is waarschijnlijk het ʼbesteʼ wat ze kunnen doen.
Heal the worldquote:Op maandag 28 januari 2019 08:40 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:
link
de waanzin van Fox News.
Make it a better place
For you and for me
And the entire human race
Niet zo negatief over de Telegraaf, hoewel ze vaak wel vanuit een bepaald standpunt reageren en schrijven staan er weinig echte leugens in hun verhaal. Als je voorbij de chocoladeletters leest staat er meestal wel een gebalanceerd waarheidsgetrouw verhaal, zeker in vergelijking met FOXquote:
Ik krijg over het algemeen een beetje de kriebels van Fox News. Ze komen eigenlijk nét aanwaaien, en bedrijven effectjournalistiek, meer niet. Het kwalijke is dat ze dit in quantiteit doen, niet met kwaliteit. Er zijn sinds 1996 223 kanalen gelanceerd en de meeste worden gratis aangeboden, gelijk de metro in de trein. Dan heb je snel een media overwicht. Gerenommeerde nieuwsbureaus worden overschreeuwd door fox geblaat, en dit is uitermate zorgelijk. Het is alsof je alleen nog maar de Telegraaf met grote chocoladeletter koppen kunt kopen bij de kiosk, en verder niets.
Ik wilde alleen aangeven dat wanneer je dagelijks een beperkte nieuwsbron gepresenteerd krijgt, je langzaam veranderd in een FP adept. De Telegraaf had net zo goed een voorbeeld kunnen zijn als het Financieel Dagblad. Het is de massaliteit dan dit alles.quote:
[..]
Niet zo negatief over de Telegraaf, hoewel ze vaak wel vanuit een bepaald standpunt reageren en schrijven staan er weinig echte leugens in hun verhaal. Als je voorbij de chocoladeletters leest staat er meestal wel een gebalanceerd waarheidsgetrouw verhaal, zeker in vergelijking met FOX
quote:
Ik krijg over het algemeen een beetje de kriebels van Fox News. Ze komen eigenlijk nét aanwaaien, en bedrijven effectjournalistiek, meer niet. Het kwalijke is dat ze dit in quantiteit doen, niet met kwaliteit. Er zijn sinds 1996 223 kanalen gelanceerd en de meeste worden gratis aangeboden, gelijk de metro in de trein. Dan heb je snel een media overwicht. Gerenommeerde nieuwsbureaus worden overschreeuwd door fox geblaat, en dit is uitermate zorgelijk. Het is alsof je alleen nog maar de Telegraaf met grote chocoladeletter koppen kunt kopen bij de kiosk, en verder niets.
quote:New: Treasury Dept has officially lifted sanctions on three companies tied to Kremlin ally Oleg Deripaska saying they’ve cut his “direct and indirect shareholding stake in these companies and severed his control”. Majorities in both House and Senate opposed the move.
Howard Schultz is een Amerikaanse zakenman (CEO Starbucks) die als onafhankelijke centrische kandidaat wil meedoen aan de verkiezingen van 2020. Hij is een voormalig democraat en vindt dat de democraten te links worden. Hij zal vooral stemmen krijgen van gematigde democraten, wat Trump zal helpen.
twitter:HowardSchultz twitterde op maandag 28-01-2019 om 01:04:16I love our country, and I am seriously considering running for president as a centrist independent. reageer retweet
twitter:HowardSchultz twitterde op maandag 28-01-2019 om 01:21:38
twitter:IsaacDovere twitterde op zaterdag 26-01-2019 om 13:06:12NEWS Former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz says in a “60 Minutes” interview airing tomorrow that he’s getting close to a self-funded independent presidential run - which is freaking out Democrats who think he’ll deliver the election to Trump https://t.co/L7MTOR0IgP reageer retweet
twitter:IsaacDovere twitterde op zaterdag 26-01-2019 om 13:46:06
twitter:draftschultz twitterde op zondag 27-01-2019 om 17:41:36Run, Howard, Run! Great piece by @NickTroiano – Americans are #ReadyForSchultz! https://t.co/Hi8R7xHIjc reageer retweet
twitter:thehill twitterde op maandag 28-01-2019 om 07:26:03Howard Schultz "seriously considering" 2020 run as "centrist independent" https://t.co/zlzP4oB2U2 https://t.co/JENWUajeTF reageer retweet
Dat is voor je eigen mentale gezondheid de juiste stellingname, maar voor veel mensen is Fox News gewoon wat het pretendeert het te zijn, nl. een onafhankelijk nieuwsmedium, en het is daarmee een machtsfactor van belang.quote:Op maandag 28 januari 2019 12:29 schreef Re het volgende:
Fox is geen nieuws, het is entertainment, extreme rechtse entertainment, dat wel
Natuurlijk. Men wil echt graag iemand die de VS gaat runnen als een bedrijf. Ja.quote:
De democraten zijn een beetje in paniek.
Howard Schultz is een Amerikaanse zakenman (CEO Starbucks) die als onafhankelijke centrische kandidaat wil meedoen aan de verkiezingen van 2020. Hij is een voormalig democraat en vindt dat de democraten te links worden. Hij zal vooral stemmen krijgen van gematigde democraten, wat Trump zal helpen.twitter:HowardSchultz twitterde op maandag 28-01-2019 om 01:04:16twitter:HowardSchultz twitterde op maandag 28-01-2019 om 01:21:38twitter:IsaacDovere twitterde op zaterdag 26-01-2019 om 13:06:12twitter:IsaacDovere twitterde op zaterdag 26-01-2019 om 13:46:06twitter:draftschultz twitterde op zondag 27-01-2019 om 17:41:36twitter:thehill twitterde op maandag 28-01-2019 om 07:26:03
Hij heeft op 26 januari een exploratory committee opgericht en heeft al een eigen website https://www.howardschultz.com/.quote:
Ah, het plichtmatige maandelijkse 'help we krijgen een third party kandidaat'-berichtje.
Dat is verder dan Bloomberg ooit is gegaan. DIe overwoog alleen, maar nam nooit echte concrete stappen.
quote:Pres. Trump is not liked even by some of his base: 29% of evangelical white Protestants, 24% of strong conservatives and 22% of Republicans see him unfavorably as a person, per new @ABC News/WaPo poll. https://t.co/kfb1FkGdVI
Het geeft mensen dan ook wel eens het idee: Wie bestuurt het land eigenlijk: Een media netwerk of de president?quote:Op maandag 28 januari 2019 12:56 schreef Ringo het volgende:
[..]
Dat is voor je eigen mentale gezondheid de juiste stellingname, maar voor veel mensen is Fox News gewoon wat het pretendeert het te zijn, nl. een onafhankelijk nieuwsmedium, en het is daarmee een machtsfactor van belang.
quote:
Ah, het plichtmatige maandelijkse 'help we krijgen een third party kandidaat'-berichtje.
Dat is sowieso een lastige vraag in een democratie. Het woord zelf zegt: het volk. Dat is dus iedereen. De macht ligt in elk niet bij één persoon. Of één televisiezender.quote:
Het geeft mensen dan ook wel eens het idee: Wie bestuurt het land eigenlijk: Een media netwerk of de president?
Het uitzonderlijke van de éne persoon Donald Trump is dat hij zich zo direct laat beïnvloeden door wat er op die éne tv-zender wordt gezegd.
Alsof Mark Rutte tijdens zijn wekelijkse praatje almaar met de Telegraaf staat te zwaaien.
En terecht. Als een rechter meineed lijkt te hebben gepleegd mag best dat worden onderzocht.quote:As @RepJerryNadler says, this is something his Judiciary Committee isn’t “eager to do.” But the Senate’s failure to engage in an adequate review of then Judge Kavanaugh’s testimony makes a full House Judiciary review necessary even if awkward and painful
https://t.co/89J6V3wfUU
Echt hoe geloof jij nou weer dat de democraten in paniek zijn. Je kopieert wat meninkjes waar nergens uit blijkt wat jij hier stelt. Wishful thinking wederom.quote:
De democraten zijn een beetje in paniek.
-knip-
Oh, hij heeft een eigen website, dan zal het wel serieus zijn. Zeker als op die website alleen zijn boek wordt gepromoot en verder geen woord wordt gerept over een mogelijke presidentschapskandidatuur.quote:
Hij heeft op 26 januari een exploratory committee opgericht en heeft al een eigen website https://www.howardschultz.com/.
Howie Wolf is de man die Bloomberg overtuigde dat hij geen kans had als onafhankelijke kandidaat en hiermee alleen Trump hielp en mede hierdoor deed Bloomberg niet mee.quote:Op maandag 28 januari 2019 14:39 schreef Bernhard.von.Galen het volgende:
[..]
Echt hoe geloof jij nou weer dat de democraten in paniek zijn. Je kopieert wat meninkjes waar nergens uit blijkt wat jij hier stelt. Wishful thinking wederom.
Als onafhankelijk kandidaat kan je wel de populair vote winnen, maar je haalt niet de 270 kiesmannen. Als niemand de 270 haalt, dan mag het congres de president en VP kiezen, die kiezen dan gewoon voor hun eigen kandidaat.
twitter:howiewolf twitterde op maandag 28-01-2019 om 01:48:14I have seen enough data over many years to know that anyone running for POTUS as an independent will split the anti-incumbent, anti-Trump vote. The stakes couldn’t be higher. We can not afford the risk of spoiler politics that result in Trump’s re-election. reageer retweet
twitter:CBSNews twitterde op maandag 28-01-2019 om 04:54:23Democrats to Howard Schultz: Don't do it https://t.co/xKpFqYddcZ https://t.co/kSL45vQtc8 reageer retweet
twitter:
Zelfs in NL is al een docu/reportage uitgezonden waarbij aardig wat Amerikaanse Christelijke kiezers aangaven zich te realiseren dat Trumpie een zondaar en een lul eersteklas is. Het uiteindelijke oordeel daarover is echter niet aan hen, vinden zij.quote:
Zolang Trump voor deze groepen mensen het door hen gewenste beleid nastreeft, hoeft er voor hem niet zoveel aan de hand te zijn. Dat was destijds de voornaamste reden om op hem te stemmen, en dat is ook de reden waarom een aanzienlijk gedeelte hem blijft steunen.
Zolang de Republikeinen er niet in slagen om een krachtig, conservatief en een zich op zijn minst fatsoenlijk gedragend alternatief aan te dragen, is in het Republikeinse land Trump Eenoog nog steeds koning.
Vreemde claim. Waarom zou je wel de PV kunnen winnen, maar niet de 270 kiesmannen? Dat ligt maar net aan de kiezersdistributie.quote:
[..]
Howie Wolf is de man die Bloomberg overtuigde dat hij geen kans had als onafhankelijke kandidaat en hiermee alleen Trump hielp en mede hierdoor deed Bloomberg niet mee.
Als onafhankelijk kandidaat kan je wel de populair vote winnen, maar je haalt niet de 270 kiesmannen. Als niemand de 270 haalt, dan mag het congres de president en VP kiezen, die kiezen dan gewoon voor hun eigen kandidaat.
Dat kwam uit het onderzoek dat Bloomberg en co hadden uitgevoerd.quote:
[..]
Vreemde claim. Waarom zou je wel de PV kunnen winnen, maar niet de 270 kiesmannen? Dat ligt maar net aan de kiezersdistributie.
Enkel wanneer beide partijen een fringe kandidaat hebben, maakt een onafhankelijke kandidaat kans. Bloomberg dacht aan Sanders VS Trump of Cruz. Maar wanneer 1 van de partijen een gewone kandidaat heeft, heb je geen kans.
Hij had ook een map, kijken of ik die nog kan vinden.
Dat is heel wat anders. Dat gaat over een match-up tussen specifieke kandidaten. Dat kun je niet zomaar veralgemeniseren tot één of andere wetmatigheid.quote:
[..]
Dat kwam uit het onderzoek dat Bloomberg en co hadden uitgevoerd.
Enkel wanneer beide partijen een fringe kandidaat hebben, maakt een onafhankelijke kandidaat kans. Bloomberg dacht aan Sanders VS Trump of Cruz. Maar wanneer 1 van de partijen een gewone kandidaat heeft, heb je geen kans.
Hij had ook een map, kijken of ik die nog kan vinden.
Mapjes gevonden:quote:
[..]
Dat is heel wat anders. Dat gaat over een match-up tussen specifieke kandidaten. Dat kun je niet zomaar veralgemeniseren tot één of andere wetmatigheid.
Bloomberg tegen Trump en Clinton(gematigde kandidaat) was kansloos.
Bloomberg tegen Trump en Sanders(Fringe kandidaat) wel kans.
$1.5 trillion U.S. tax cut has no major impact on business capex plans: survey
84% van de ondervraagde bedrijven is niet meer gaan investeren of meer meer mensen gaan aannemen.
quote:The National Association of Business Economics' (NABE) quarterly business conditions poll published on Monday found that while some companies reported accelerating investments because of lower corporate taxes, 84 percent of respondents said they had not changed plans. That compares to 81 percent in the previous survey published in October.
The White House had predicted that the massive fiscal stimulus package, marked by the reduction in the corporate tax rate to 21 percent from 35 percent, would boost business spending and job growth. The tax cuts came into effect in January 2018.
Het komt over alsof je dit toejuicht.quote:
Whoooooopsssssss
$1.5 trillion U.S. tax cut has no major impact on business capex plans: survey
84% van de ondervraagde bedrijven is niet meer gaan investeren of meer meer mensen gaan aannemen.
[..]
Klinkt meer alsof hij Will & Grace's 'I told you so!'-dansje aan het doen is...quote:
[..]
Het komt over alsof je dit toejuicht.
Nee hoor, ik wacht op duiding van de experts die zeiden dat reaganomics-on-steroids zou gaan werken.quote:
[..]
Klinkt meer alsof hij Will & Grace's 'I told you so!'-dansje aan het doen is...
Leuk, maar wat heeft dat van doen met hetgeen ik stel?quote:
[..]
Mapjes gevonden:
Bloomberg tegen Trump en Clinton(gematigde kandidaat) was kansloos.
[ afbeelding ]
[ afbeelding ]
Bloomberg tegen Trump en Sanders(Fringe kandidaat) wel kans.
[ afbeelding ]
quote:Roger Stone on his indictment by special counsel Robert Mueller: "I've been under investigation for two years. I've destroyed nothing but if I were to destroy evidence wouldn't I have done it a long time ago?" https://t.co/ICmxtdl1mt #ThisWeek https://t.co/mLwZ0WrcdD
quote:I endorse @KamalaHarris for President.
Known Kamala for many years & worked together on various issues. She embraces the future, not the past, and is the person we need to move America forward.
Watch the #HarrisTownHall tonight at 7 pm PT / 10 pm ET to learn more about Kamala. https://t.co/P4ywl9U3Op
W76-2, 5 a 7 kiloton (1/3 tot 1/2 Hiroshima).
Voor zover ik weet de eerste endorsement van een Democratische Congressman/woman?quote:
Hij is nummer 3.quote:
[..]
Voor zover ik weet de eerste endorsement van een Democratische Congressman/woman?
Joaquin Castro steunt zijn broer Julian Castro.
David Trone steunt John Delaney.
Mike Bloomberg Statement on Independent Runs
JAN. 28, 2019
Last fall I spent over $100 million of my own money to elect Democrats to the House because I believed it was absolutely imperative to ensure a congressional counterweight to President Trump.
Thankfully, we were successful. But that was just the first step — the next and most important step is to defeat Donald Trump in 2020.
Now I have never been a partisan guy — and it’s no secret that I looked at an independent bid in the past. In fact I faced exactly the same decision now facing others who are considering it.
The data was very clear and very consistent. Given the strong pull of partisanship and the realities of the electoral college system, there is no way an independent can win. That is truer today than ever before.
In 2020, the great likelihood is that an independent would just split the anti-Trump vote and end up re-electing the President. That's a risk I refused to run in 2016 and we can't afford to run it now.
We must remain united, and we must not allow any candidate to divide or fracture us. The stakes couldn’t be higher.
Ook leuk om te lezen:
twitter:politico twitterde op maandag 28-01-2019 om 18:40:50Howard Schultz spent Sunday getting mauled by fellow Democrats for his announcement that he may run for president as an independent -- not a Democrat https://t.co/fcttDUvRTm reageer retweet
Dat zeg ik. Alleen minder cynisch.quote:
[..]
Nee hoor, ik wacht op duiding van de experts die zeiden dat reaganomics-on-steroids zou gaan werken.
Oef fijn... Dan vliegen er ICBM's op een doelwit af zonder dat duidelijk is of het de 5kt of 100kt versie is.quote:
US nuclear weapons: first low-yield warheads roll off the production line
W76-2, 5 a 7 kiloton (1/3 tot 1/2 Hiroshima).
Maakt weinig uit lijkt me. Of iemand nou een 5kt of 100kt bom op je land afvuurt, een tegenreactie zal nodig zijn.quote:
[..]
Oef fijn... Dan vliegen er ICBM's op een doelwit af zonder dat duidelijk is of het de 5kt of 100kt versie is.
https://www.politico.com/(...)e-house-book-1128704
https://twitter.com/PopTartsUS/status/1089901330687250432?s=19
Echter is Steak-umm eerder geweest met de kandidatuur.quote:Hello I am considering a presidential run in 2020. Please RT if you would support this endeavor for me.
De vraag die Poptarts hier oproept is wel legitiem. Kun je een gebakje -een Orange Cupcake wordt genoemd- in het WH kiezen?quote:
Voor de liefhebbers: de schrijver van dit boek is vanavond te gast bij Stephen Colbert.quote:
Er komt nog weer een boekje uit over de gang van zaken in het Witte Huis:
https://www.politico.com/(...)e-house-book-1128704
Die zit er toch al?quote:
[..]
Natuurlijk. Men wil echt graag iemand die de VS gaat runnen als een bedrijf. Ja.
McConnell zat het wel tegenhouden. Maar dat Grassley co-sponsor is geeft wel een beetje hoop.quote:Inbox: Sens. Blumenthal and Grassley have introduced the Special Counsel Transparency Act, which requires a Special Counsel to submit a report directly to Congress and the public at the conclusion of an investigation, if the Special Counsel is fired, or if s/he resigns.
twitter:DevlinBarrett twitterde op maandag 28-01-2019 om 23:07:05AG Whitaker: the Mueller investigation is "close to being completed." reageer retweet
Sowieso denk ik dat Schultz ook voor Trump heel vervelend kan zijn aangezien die mogelijk wel bij de centrumrechtse kiezer in de smaak valt. Die hebben ineens een ondernemer die wel iets kan als alternatief.quote:
Ah, het plichtmatige maandelijkse 'help we krijgen een third party kandidaat'-berichtje.
Dat Trump als een mongool reageert zegt genoeg
https://www.telegraaf.nl/(...)ar-ex-baas-starbucks
twitter:bradheath twitterde op maandag 28-01-2019 om 21:47:51Roger Stone's legal representation in DC is not off to a great start. https://t.co/QZV8fRe0IE reageer retweet
SPOILER
twitter:johnson_carrie twitterde op maandag 28-01-2019 om 22:49:06Just in: Judge in Virginia CANCELS Feb. 8th sentencing for Paul Manafort. "Bc it appears that resolution of the current dispute in defendant's prosecution in DC may have some effect on the sentencing decision in this case, it is prudent and appropriate to delay sentencing." reageer retweet
twitter:NatashaBertrand twitterde op maandag 28-01-2019 om 23:16:24.@RepAdamSchiff says Michael Cohen has agreed to testify privately before the House Intel Committee on Feb. 8. https://t.co/JVriGw3imF reageer retweet
SPOILER
Ze sprak tegen de cameraman van Fox news en zichzelf.quote:
Waarom zijn de democraten een beetje in paniek?quote:
De democraten zijn een beetje in paniek.
Howard Schultz is een Amerikaanse zakenman (CEO Starbucks) die als onafhankelijke centrische kandidaat wil meedoen aan de verkiezingen van 2020. Hij is een voormalig democraat en vindt dat de democraten te links worden. Hij zal vooral stemmen krijgen van gematigde democraten, wat Trump zal helpen.twitter:HowardSchultz twitterde op maandag 28-01-2019 om 01:04:16twitter:HowardSchultz twitterde op maandag 28-01-2019 om 01:21:38twitter:IsaacDovere twitterde op zaterdag 26-01-2019 om 13:06:12twitter:IsaacDovere twitterde op zaterdag 26-01-2019 om 13:46:06twitter:draftschultz twitterde op zondag 27-01-2019 om 17:41:36twitter:thehill twitterde op maandag 28-01-2019 om 07:26:03
Deze man wil Trump vervangen en partijen verbinden.
twitter:nycsouthpaw twitterde op maandag 28-01-2019 om 22:58:58“5,000 troops to Colombia” -Bolton’s yellow pad https://t.co/pvxJUayvlD reageer retweet
SPOILER
@acostaquote:Noteworthy comments from Acting AG Whitaker: "Right now the investigation is, I think, close to being completed. And, i hope that we can get the report from Director Mueller as soon as possible." via @LauraAJarrett
Omdat hij nu eindelijk een briefing heeft gehad over het onderzoek en hij gewichtig wil overkomen?quote:
Een beetje raar bericht. Waarom levert hij commentaar op een lopend onderzoek?
[..]
@acosta
'I think' komt dan weer niet echt overtuigend over
Edit:
twitter:SethAbramson twitterde op dinsdag 29-01-2019 om 00:20:51VIDEO/ Boy, I've got to say, when you watch the full video of what Whitaker said (at an unrelated press conference) it really isn't very convincing as a major news story on the duration of the Mueller probe.I think the media is going to look bad on this. https://t.co/kDrsRRfBma reageer retweet
[ Bericht 53% gewijzigd door Kijkertje op 29-01-2019 00:51:33 ]
Ik denk ook dat de media zijn uitspraak veel te serieus nementwitter:chrisgeidner twitterde op maandag 28-01-2019 om 23:20:08This is going to be WAY overplayed. Listen to his words: They're vague, and hedging, and his opinion. https://t.co/1SZ3otkA4I reageer retweet
Achter gesloten deuren? Waar slaat dit nou weer op? Hij vreest Trump dus niet genoeg om helemaal niet te willen getuigen. Hij wil het alleen niet in het openbaar doen.quote:.@RepAdamSchiff says Michael Cohen has agreed to testify privately before the House Intel Committee on Feb. 8. https://t.co/JVriGw3imF
https://twitter.com/Natas(...)010731855167495?s=19
Hij zal wel moeten, hij is gedagvaard. Achter gesloten deuren kan hij wat vrijer spreken. Niet zo gek toch?quote:
[..]
Achter gesloten deuren? Waar slaat dit nou weer op? Hij vreest Trump dus niet genoeg om helemaal niet te willen getuigen. Hij wil het alleen niet in het openbaar doen.
https://twitter.com/Natas(...)010731855167495?s=19
In #51 staat de verklaring van Schiff erbij
Oh en dit:
twitter:kylegriffin1 twitterde op dinsdag 29-01-2019 om 02:00:24House Intel's Mike Quigley: Mr. Cohen will be back before Congress many times. The fact is, under the concerns he has he's going to begin in closed testimony. And remember, much of what he can share is classified information that he couldn't talk about at a public hearing. @MSNBC reageer retweet
[ Bericht 46% gewijzigd door Kijkertje op 29-01-2019 02:18:51 ]
quote:Here's the video. A heckler shouts at Howard Schultz during an event in New York: "Don't help elect Trump, you egotistical, billionaire asshole." Via CNN https://t.co/oabwfNnsmp
twitter:realDonaldTrump twitterde op dinsdag 29-01-2019 om 03:28:49In the beautiful Midwest, windchill temperatures are reaching minus 60 degrees, the coldest ever recorded. In coming days, expected to get even colder. People can’t last outside even for minutes. What the hell is going on with Global Waming? Please come back fast, we need you! reageer retweet
twitter:goldengateblond twitterde op dinsdag 29-01-2019 om 03:28:55Holy hell @maddow just said Trump’s weird claims (lies) about women tied up with duct tape, Mexican cars being too fast to catch, and prayer rugs found on the border all have a singular source — THEY WERE SCENES FROM THE MOVIE ‘SICARIO.’ https://t.co/zRrhC1f1TD reageer retweet
Cadet Bone Spurs is er iig behoorlijk pissed overquote:
Kyle Griffin
[..]
McConnell zat het wel tegenhouden. Maar dat Grassley co-sponsor is geeft wel een beetje hoop.
twitter:realDonaldTrump twitterde op dinsdag 29-01-2019 om 03:46:02
[ Bericht 3% gewijzigd door Kijkertje op 29-01-2019 04:55:23 ]
Filmpje: Blumenthal questions truthfulness of Trump Jr.'s Senate testimonytwitter:JesseRodriguez twitterde op dinsdag 29-01-2019 om 04:03:09Sen. Blumenthal tells @Maddow that he thinks Donald Trump Jr. (among others) may have made false statements in congressional committee testimony reageer retweet
[ Bericht 9% gewijzigd door Kijkertje op 29-01-2019 05:11:38 ]
Tuurlijk maar niet iedereen zit in de Senate Judiciary Committee. Dat kan je niet gelijk afdoen als FAKE NEWS! dus dan maar weer op de man spelen.quote:
Iedereen ‘weet’ toch al dat Con Jr heeft zitten liegen
Troll van oorlogssnor Bolton of dommigheid?
quote:A defense attorney for Andrew Miller, who's fighting a subpoena from Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, learned Monday afternoon that the special counsel still wants witness testimony for a federal grand jury.
Paul Kamenar, the defense attorney, says the assertion from Mueller's team made clear to him that Mueller and the Justice Department are considering an additional indictment of Roger Stone or have plans to charge others.
The development sets up the potential for another twist in the Russia probe. It comes hours after acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker said that Mueller's investigation was "close to being completed."
Kamenar's client is Miller, a former employee of Stone's whom Mueller subpoenaed in mid-2018 to testify to the grand jury. In a court hearing about Miller's testimony, a judge made clear that Mueller sought information Miller had about Stone's communications regarding Wikileaks and Russian hackers around the time they disseminated damaging hacked Democratic emails.
"The special counsel has advised me the grand jury is still interested in Andrew Miller, and they consider the case still a live case," Kamenar told CNN late Monday afternoon.
Miller faces no criminal charges.SPOILERStone was indicted by the grand jury on Thursday for lying to Congress, witness tampering and obstruction of justice -- but the court papers against him alleged no crimes regarding actual contact between Americans and Julian Assange and the Russians. Stone will be arraigned in Washington Tuesday morning.
A separate but related criminal case against Russian intelligence officers alleges Stone was in contact with them about the hacked documents in 2016, but Stone was not named in that case.
Months ago, Miller spoke to the FBI and turned over digital records to Mueller that he had related to Stone, Wikileaks, Assange, the Democratic National Committee and the online monikers the Russians used after they hacked the Democrats.
When Miller received the subpoena for testimony, he refused to visit the grand jury, and a federal judge held him in contempt of court. The punishment was imprisonment. But Miller hasn't yet been jailed or given the testimony.
Instead, he challenged the subpoena on the grounds that Mueller's appointment as special prosecutor was against the law.
The US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit heard arguments in the case in early November and has not yet ruled.
Kamenar said Mueller's response to him makes clear the grand jury is still active and at work.
"I can only speculate on why they need my client," Kamenar said.
Kamenar reached out to the special counsel on Friday following Stone's indictment about whether Miller would still be needed.
Peter Carr, a spokesman for the special counsel's office, declined to comment on Monday in response to Kamenar. Attorneys for Stone did not immediately provide a comment.
Justice Department guidelines say that a grand jury can only hear evidence after a person is indicted only if the grand jury continues to work on new charges -- either against that person or against additional planned defendants.
In short, when a defendant like Stone is indicted, prosecutors must already have the evidence needed to take the case they open to trial. So Miller's testimony may relate to a still-unknown criminal case.
In recent months, Mueller's team has brought in other parts of the Justice Department to work on the special counsel's cases, including the National Security Division and the US Attorney's Office in DC. It's possible that if Mueller were to conclude his work, those divisions or others within the Justice Department could take the lead on cases Mueller initially pursued.
Ga maar uitleggen waarom je de druk opvoert nadat Mueller's onderzoek Trump's inner circle heeft bereikt.quote:Dear Acting AG @MattWhitaker46: See you on February 8 in the @HouseJudiciary Committee.
In front of the American people.
Under oath. https://t.co/mPL2pKljZm
Onder het genot van een waterig bakje koffiequote:
[..]
Waarom zijn de democraten een beetje in paniek?
Deze man wil Trump vervangen en partijen verbinden.
Ik denk eerder dat het werk een beetje langer gaat duren..quote:
Drie dagen na het oppakken van Stone zoiets roepen is ook gek.
Mocht er op gegeven moment een nieuwe president komen, dan mag ik toch wel hopen dat die Bolton als gewoon soldaat naar het zwaarste front stuurt die er is. Dan kan die aan den lijve aanvoelen hoe het er in een echte oorlog aan toe gaat.quote:
[ afbeelding ]
[ afbeelding ]
Troll van oorlogssnor Bolton of dommigheid?
President Dumbfuck.quote:In the beautiful Midwest, windchill temperatures are reaching minus 60 degrees, the coldest ever recorded. In coming days, expected to get even colder. People can’t last outside even for minutes. What the hell is going on with Global Waming? Please come back fast, we need you!
Lijkt mij sterk dat het een fout is.quote:
[..]
Mocht er op gegeven moment een nieuwe president komen, dan mag ik toch wel hopen dat die Bolton als gewoon soldaat naar het zwaarste front stuurt die er is. Dan kan die aan den lijve aanvoelen hoe het er in een echte oorlog aan toe gaat.
Daar zal hij wel weer kwaad om gaan twitteren. Pakken ze hem alweer een speeltje af!
https://www.marianne2020.com/
quote:
We hebben weer een nieuwe democraat in de race Marianne Williamson, een Amerikaans spiritueel leraar, auteur en spreker.
https://www.marianne2020.com/
[ afbeelding ]
toch wel verfrissend dat dit keer zoveel (betrekkelijk jonge) vrouwen meedoen aan de race. Een keer wat anders dan al die ouwe lullen, al dan niet dementerend.Daar zijn de meningen over verdeeld.quote:Roger Stone claims he's been treated worse than Osama bin Laden https://t.co/VN33092kp2 https://t.co/iFkl8IuFeQ
quote:Except, perhaps, insofar as you didn't get a round through the forehead from a Navy SEAL, wrapped in a sheet and tossed of the fantail of an aircraft carrier into the Indian Ocean.
Clown. https://t.co/kBDJuD4OEe
quote:As far as I can tell from CNN’s exclusive video, nobody crashed—and subsequently detonated—a highly-classified helicopter in his front yard, or shot his son in the face, either.
quote:BREAKING: A third of Republicans and GOP-leaning independents oppose Pres. Trump for the party’s nomination to a second term, and 56% of all adults say they wouldn’t consider voting for him, new @ABC News/WaPo poll finds. https://t.co/TKV1vMOn1U https://t.co/IvMPIiSsbW
Nog even volhouden. 17 feb mag hij weer los.quote:
Een beetje offtopic, maar wat mis ik John Oliver, zeg. Hoor hem graag over de afgelopen weken praten.
Geen speld tussen te krijgen.quote:Op dinsdag 29 januari 2019 03:47 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
twitter:realDonaldTrump twitterde op dinsdag 29-01-2019 om 03:28:49
Wat staat er dan? Moeilijk te lezen...quote:
[ afbeelding ]
[ afbeelding ]
Troll van oorlogssnor Bolton of dommigheid?
-never mind want wel makkelijk te googlen-
https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws(...)-to-take-it-anymore/
Lezenswaardig artikel van Björn Soenens, de VS-correspondent van de VRT.
[ Bericht 1% gewijzigd door J.B. op 29-01-2019 13:38:38 ]
Nutteloze kandidatuur maar wel leuk om naar te kijkenquote:
We hebben weer een nieuwe democraat in de race Marianne Williamson, een Amerikaans spiritueel leraar, auteur en spreker.
https://www.marianne2020.com/
[ afbeelding ]
Mwoah, dat is er gewoon één in het lijstje non-kandidaten, daar zijn er al heel wat van. Inmiddels al 150+ filings bij de FEC.quote:
[..]
quote:CNN Exclusive: Belarusian woman embroiled in collusion allegations between Russia & Trump campaign told CNN she was ordered by Russian security services to keep silent about Russian billionaire & Putin ally Oleg Deripaska, @mchancecnn reporting 1/
Draadje over de dame die wat uitspraken van Deripaska op tape heeft. Omdat het nep is mag ze er van de geheime dienst niet over praten.quote:2/Anastasia Vashukevich, a self-styled “sex coach”, sparked a major international scandal when she claimed to have secret audio recordings of Deripaska that allegedly shed light on President Donald Trump's links to Russia.[quote]
[Quote]
3/In an exclusive interviewMatthew Chance, Vashukevich said she was instructed by Russian security not to talk about Deripaska. “I had some talk when I was in Russian jail. And they explained to me very clear(ly) what should I do, what should I say and what I shouldn’t say.”
Mja, de teller staat inmiddels op 13: Pete Buttigieg, Julian Castro, John Delaney, Tulsi Gabbard, Kirsten Gillibrand, Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Michael E. Arth, Harry Braun, Ken Nwadike Jr., Robby Wells, Marianne Williamson, Andrew Yang. Daarnaast nog Richard Ojeda die zijn kandidatuur alweer ingetrokken heeft.quote:
We hebben weer een nieuwe democraat in de race Marianne Williamson, een Amerikaans spiritueel leraar, auteur en spreker.
https://www.marianne2020.com/
[ afbeelding ]
Eerst eens kijken wie er na de eerste paar primaries overblijven.
Dat zullen er minder dan een handvol zijn.
We moeten er alleen nog ruim een jaar op wachten.
Dat is toch niet goed? Al die tientallen democraten gaan eigen supporters hebben, dat gaat een moddergevecht worden! Mag hopen/bidden dat Trump wint.quote:
Pollsquote:
en voor wie zouden de republikeinen dan wel stemmen?Welnee. Na een of twee primaries geeft driekwart het op.quote:
[..]
Dat is toch niet goed? Al die tientallen democraten gaan eigen supporters hebben, dat gaat een moddergevecht worden! Mag hopen/bidden dat Trump wint.
Die kwast van Starbucks is een ouderwetse rechtse fiscal hawk. Daar kan hij last van krijgen. En het ligt eraan of de RNC de boel flest door geen primaries te houden. Als ze het zo riggen zal er geen GOP kandidaat opstaan. Misschien blijven de Trumpstemmets dan gewoon thuis.quote:
[..]
Polls
Erg sterk stuk, waarin hij wat mij betreft de kern aardig raakt. Ben benieuwd wat Trump/Brexit aanhangers hiervan vinden.quote:
Amerika valt uit elkaar: "I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore!"
https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws(...)-to-take-it-anymore/
Lezenswaardig artikel van Björn Soenens, de VS-correspondent van de VRT.
Ik vind het een groot slachtofferverhaal waarbij alles blijkbaar altijd de schuld van de ander is en eens naar je eigen gedrag kijken blijkbaar volstrekt niet nodig is.quote:
Amerika valt uit elkaar: "I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore!"
https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws(...)-to-take-it-anymore/
Lezenswaardig artikel van Björn Soenens, de VS-correspondent van de VRT.
Tot nu toe mogen we alleen Harris en Warren als serieuze kandidaten zien, lijkt mequote:
[..]
Welnee. Na een of twee primaries geeft driekwart het op.
Waarom zouden Castro, Gillibrand en Gabbard niet serieus zijn?quote:
[..]
Tot nu toe mogen we alleen Harris en Warren als serieuze kandidaten zien, lijkt me
Ik had beter kanshebbers kunnen zeggenquote:
[..]
Waarom zouden Castro, Gillibrand en Gabbard niet serieus zijn?
De vraag blijft dan ook gewoon staan hoor. Ik vind Warren en Harris er nou niet echt al bij voorbaat bovenuit springen qua kans hebben zoals bijvoorbeeld Clinton dat deed in 2016.quote:
[..]
Ik had beter kanshebbers kunnen zeggen
Gillibrand en Harris zijn serieuze kandidaten, in genoemde volgorde wat mij betreft. De VS zal toch eerder voor een blanke, blonde vrouw stemmen dan een zwarte vrouw met de wel erg Afrikaans aandoende naam Kamala. Gabbard heeft potentie, maar is erg jong.quote:
[..]
Mja, de teller staat inmiddels op 13: Pete Buttigieg, Julian Castro, John Delaney, Tulsi Gabbard, Kirsten Gillibrand, Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Michael E. Arth, Harry Braun, Ken Nwadike Jr., Robby Wells, Marianne Williamson, Andrew Yang. Daarnaast nog Richard Ojeda die zijn kandidatuur alweer ingetrokken heeft.
De rest is brandhout tot dusver. Warren heeft geen enkel charisma. Castro ziet eruit alsof hij een legercoup zou kunnen leiden in Centraal of Zuid-Amerika. Castro is ook geen naam die hem zal helpen.
[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door Oostwoud op 29-01-2019 15:43:32 ]
Dat lijkt me vooral een erg beperkte stukje projectie. Het gedeelte van het electoraat dat heel veel moeite heeft met 'zwarte vrouwen' en 'Afrikaans aandoende namen' stemt al never nooit niet op de Dems natuurlijk.quote:
[..]
Gillibrand en Harris zijn serieuze kandidaten, in genoemde volgorde wat mij betreft. De VS zal toch eerder voor een blanke, blonde vrouw stemmen dan een zwarte vrouw met de wel erg Afrikaans aandoende naam Kamala. Gabbard heeft potentie, maar is erg jong.
De rest is brandhout tot dusver. Warren heeft geen enkel charisma. Castro ziet eruit alsof hij een legercoup zou kunnen leiden in Centraal of Zuid-Amerika. Castro is ook geen naam die hem zal helpen.
2020 National Democratic Primary:
Biden 23%
Sanders 21%
O'Rourke 8%
Harris 7%
Bloomberg 5%
Warren 4%
Booker 3%
Gillibrand 2%
Gabbard 2%
Castro 1%
@Harvard-@HarrisPoll 1/15-16
Biden 27%
Sanders 18%
Warren 9%
Bloomberg 8%
Harris 6%
O'Rourke 6%
Brown 2%
Gillibrand 2%
Delaney 1%
Booker 1%
Zogby Analytics 1/18-20
Biden 26%
Sanders 16%
Harris 9%
Warren 6%
O’Rourke 6%
Booker 4%
Gillibrand 2%
Klobuchar 2%
@MorningConsult/@politico 1/18-22
2020 National Republican Primary:
Trump 64% (+55)
Romney 9%
Kasich 8%
Haley 6%
Bush 2%
Flake 1%
Zogby Analytics 1/18-20
Als zowel Biden als Sanders meedoen, dan wordt het gras voor de voeten weg gemaaid van de meeste andere kandidaten. Als ik niet in moest inzetten gaat het een 3-race worden tussen Biden-Sanders en een derde kandidaat die daar politiek tussenin zit zoals Beto of Harris.quote:
[..]
Gillibrand en Harris zijn serieuze kandidaten, in genoemde volgorde wat mij betreft. De VS zal toch eerder voor een blanke, blonde vrouw stemmen dan een zwarte vrouw met de wel erg Afrikaans aandoende naam Kamala. Gabbard heeft potentie, maar is erg jong.
De rest is brandhout tot dusver. Warren heeft geen enkel charisma. Castro ziet eruit alsof hij een legercoup zou kunnen leiden in Centraal of Zuid-Amerika. Castro is ook geen naam die hem zal helpen.
Gelukkig bekte Barrack Obama heel Amerikaans. 🙄quote:
[..]
Dat lijkt me vooral een erg beperkte stukje projectie. Het gedeelte van het electoraat dat heel veel moeite heeft met 'zwarte vrouwen' en 'Afrikaans aandoende namen' stemt al never nooit niet op de Dems natuurlijk.
quote:Russia and other foreign actors will try new techniques to interfere in the 2020 elections, building off the tactics they used in the 2016 and 2018 campaigns, America's top intelligence official warned Tuesday.
"We assess that foreign actors will view the 2020 U.S. elections as an opportunity to advance their interests," Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats told the Senate intelligence committee. "We expect them to refine their capabilities and add new tactics as they learn from each other's experiences and efforts."
Intelligence officials have warned consistently throughout the last several years that Russia has sought to disrupt American elections and divide the electorate against itself.
That will continue, Coats said.
But he also named other nations he felt were growing threats in this area, arguing that China could use cyber attacks against the United States to censor or suppress viewpoints it sees as "politically sensitive."
Iran, he added, has already used social media campaigns to target U.S. audiences, and will continue to do so.SPOILERSen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the committee, said that the intelligence community has adapted to these perils since the 2016 campaign, although the threat continues.
"While we did see Russia continue to try to divide Americans on social media, and we saw cyber activity by unknown actors targeting our election infrastructure in 2018, the good news is that the IC did not see successful efforts to disrupt the vote, or the kind of "hack and leak" operations we saw in 2016 against the DNC and Clinton campaign," Warner said.
But Warner also said that the core problem started within the United States itself — something the intelligence community can't address.
"Let us remember that while Russia can amplify our divisions, it cannot invent them," he said at Tuesday's hearing. "When a divisive issue like the "take a knee" NFL controversy or a migrant caravan dominates the national dialogue, these are issues that can be – and are – taken advantage of by Russian trolls. Let's not make their work easier."
Coats also addressed a range of worldwide threats, repeating — as intelligence bosses do every years — that the U.S. has never faced as varied an array of dangers from so many places around the globe.
China seeks to overtake the United States, he warned. Iran seeks to continue to develop its ballistic missile capabilities.
And although North Korea's leader, Kim Jong Un, has signaled an openness to negotiate with President Trump about the regime's nuclear weapons program, Coats says the intelligence community does not believe that Kim ultimately would give up his strategic weapons.
Kim views the nuclear program as essential to his survival, Coats said. That's an awkward message from the nation's top intelligence officer as the White House prepares for a second summit with Kim and Trump somewhere in Asia next month.
Warren, Harris en Gillibrand hebben uit hoofde van hun functie een nationaal platform waardoor ze media aandacht kunnen blijven genereren. Figuren als Gabbard of Castro hebben dat niet en daarom worden ze als minder serieuze kanshebbers gezien.quote:
[..]
De vraag blijft dan ook gewoon staan hoor. Ik vind Warren en Harris er nou niet echt al bij voorbaat bovenuit springen qua kans hebben zoals bijvoorbeeld Clinton dat deed in 2016.
twitter:jpaceDC twitterde op dinsdag 29-01-2019 om 17:05:57WASHINGTON (AP) — Trump confidant Roger Stone pleads not guilty to charges of lying to Congress, obstruction in Russia probe. reageer retweet
Via Natasha Bertrand.quote:! Senate panel postpones attorney general nominee William P. Barr’s confirmation vote amid Democrats’ concerns https://t.co/qy2hL54hjm
Intetesting. Ik had dit niet verwacht.
En de witness tampering?quote:Op dinsdag 29 januari 2019 17:23 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
twitter:jpaceDC twitterde op dinsdag 29-01-2019 om 17:05:57
De eerste zin klopt ook zonder de eronder genoemde punten.quote:The nation's senior-most intel officials are making clear many of Trump's claims are not based on intelligence:
- ISIS is not defeated
- North Korea is not denuclearizing
- Russia still interfering in US elections
- Climate change is real & endangers US national security
Ook:quote:
quote:Roger Stone, a longtime Republican campaign adviser and confidant of President Donald Trump, pleaded not guilty Tuesday morning to seven criminal charges of false statements, witness tampering and obstruction of justice. CNN
quote:
Er komt nog weer een boekje uit over de gang van zaken in het Witte Huis:
https://www.politico.com/(...)e-house-book-1128704
twitter:realDonaldTrump twitterde op dinsdag 29-01-2019 om 14:45:55
Hij impliceert dat hij 'm al gelezen heeft...quote:Op dinsdag 29 januari 2019 17:36 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
[..]twitter:realDonaldTrump twitterde op dinsdag 29-01-2019 om 14:45:55
Als dat waar is dan besteedt hij z'n kostbare tijd als president in een roerige periode aan de meest onbelangrijke randzaken rond z'n eigen ego.
Als dat niet waar is zit hij weer uit z'n nek te zwetsen.
kolderiek
Klopt hij besteedt ook totaal geen aandacht aan dreigingen die wel belangrijk zijnquote:
[..]
Hij impliceert dat hij 'm al gelezen heeft...
Als dat waar is dan besteed hij z'n kostbare tijd als president in een roerige periode aan de meest onbelangrijke randzaken.
Als dat niet waar is zit hij weer uit z'n nek te zwetsen.
twitter:KenDilanianNBC twitterde op dinsdag 29-01-2019 om 17:15:25One big picture takeaway from this intelligence hearing: There are huge new challenges to the U.S. The president isn't talking about any of them. He's focused on the southern border, which doesn't come up in the threats assessment as a significant security issue. reageer retweet
Als hij niet ongelooflijk rijk geweest zou zijn door de poen van pa dan had 'the Don' niet eens een baantje bij de helpdesk gehad zo a-productief is hij. Beetje de Sjonnie de Mol van de US of A, al doet Sjonnie net iets meer voor z'n geld.quote:Op dinsdag 29 januari 2019 17:51 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
[..]
Klopt hij besteedt ook totaal geen aandacht aan dreigingen die wel belangrijk zijntwitter:KenDilanianNBC twitterde op dinsdag 29-01-2019 om 17:15:25
En dat gelul over die NDA. Stap dan naar de rechter.quote:
[..]
Hij impliceert dat hij 'm al gelezen heeft...
Als dat waar is dan besteedt hij z'n kostbare tijd als president in een roerige periode aan de meest onbelangrijke randzaken rond z'n eigen ego.
Als dat niet waar is zit hij weer uit z'n nek te zwetsen.
kolderiek
Bij de Dems is gezondheidszorg een issue. Dit klinkt niet alsof hij stemmen gaat pakken. Ik zie hem eerder bij Trump stemmen trekken. Verder is het ook gewoon gelul.quote:Howard Schultz tells @TheView it would be "disingenuous" if he ran as a Democrat because "in order to run as a Democrat today, you have to fall in line with free Medicare for everybody, free college for everybody," but "we can't afford to do it free" https://t.co/mK0Ke6DwKS https://t.co/sjpEA4UJfR
Hij doet niet mee als Dem omdat hij nooit de primaries gaat winnen en duurbetaalde consultants die hem alles wijs kunnen maken zolang ze maar door hem betaald worden hem hebben verteld dat hij als Indy enige kans maakt.quote:
[..]
Bij de Dems is gezondheidszorg een issue. Dit klinkt niet alsof hij stemmen gaat pakken. Ik zie hem eerder bij Trump stemmen trekken. Verder is het ook gewoon gelul.
Lijkt me ook meer een soort Ross Perot die overal stemmen vandaan kan halenquote:
[..]
Bij de Dems is gezondheidszorg een issue. Dit klinkt niet alsof hij stemmen gaat pakken. Ik zie hem eerder bij Trump stemmen trekken. Verder is het ook gewoon gelul.
https://foreignpolicy.com(...)a-trans-pacific-nato
Paris was meer een act. Die dame was een stuk intelligenter dan de media deed geloven.quote:
Trump is meer Paris Hilton in de huid van een oude man
Trump is geen act.
https://www.npr.org/2019/(...)p-than-jared-kushner
Quote: ...“In my experience as U.S. attorney for seven years in New Jersey, dumb people and bad people lie all the time — all the time even when they don't have to — and I think when you look at this group of folks, this is not a group of of stellar folks with great integrity, I mean, and so I'm not surprised at their lying. I don't think you can draw the conclusion that, well, if they're lying they must be lying about something. At some point you have to come forward with evidence.”...
Wat ik begrijp, dat trump en consorten zó ongestructureerd bezig waren, dat er ( bijna ) geen sprake kan zijn van ‘collusion’.
Trump krijgt een hartverzakking denk ik.quote:Reps. Waters, Schiff, and Engel want Steve Mnuchin to hand over all documents and records pertaining to the Treasury Department's decision to lift sanctions on companies tied to Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska. https://t.co/8ElbYrhxGY
Dat lijkt me kolder. "We klooiden maar wat aan en dus zijn we onschuldig."quote:
Stukje insight read.
https://www.npr.org/2019/(...)p-than-jared-kushner
Quote: ...“In my experience as U.S. attorney for seven years in New Jersey, dumb people and bad people lie all the time — all the time even when they don't have to — and I think when you look at this group of folks, this is not a group of of stellar folks with great integrity, I mean, and so I'm not surprised at their lying. I don't think you can draw the conclusion that, well, if they're lying they must be lying about something. At some point you have to come forward with evidence.”...
Wat ik begrijp, dat trump en consorten zó ongestructureerd bezig waren, dat er ( bijna ) geen sprake kan zijn van ‘collusion’.
quote:
[..]
Paris was meer een act. Die dame was een stuk intelligenter dan de media deed geloven.
Trump is geen act.
Sommige mensen ontwikkelen, Trump is een rechte lijn van niks..
Een tijdloos kind en een ouwe zeemlap in hetzelfde lichaam... dit was ergens tussen 78 en 80
Hier wordt ie al net zo bekritiseerd als nu voor z'n gestuntel.. en z'n 'fillers' zijn dezelfde.
[ Bericht 4% gewijzigd door Beathoven op 29-01-2019 22:43:26 ]
"Life is a pretty short experience," is wel een goede quote hier van hem. Dat is zoals hij tot nu toe geleefd heeft en om die reden het meest ware stukje wijsheid wat hij ooit gezegd heeft. Toont maar weer aan dat het geloof voor hem bullshit is.
Ietsje later was trouwens dit: https://video.twimg.com/e(...)UT764wLtOZ1u10AG.mp4 <-- echt een aanrader!
Geef ons allen hier een dikke erfenis van een magnaat en we leven ook iedere dag alsof 't de laatste isquote:
Het boek 'The Art of the Deal' is van 1987, dus het zal denk ik een decennium later geweest zijn?
"Life is a pretty short experience," is wel een goede quote hier van hem. Dat is zoals hij tot nu toe geleefd heeft en om die reden het meest ware stukje wijsheid wat hij ooit gezegd heeft. Toont maar weer aan dat het geloof voor hem bullshit is.
Ietsje later was trouwens dit: https://video.twimg.com/e(...)UT764wLtOZ1u10AG.mp4 <-- echt een aanrader!
dan bazel ik ook wel wat boekjes vol
"So suddenly California became a medieval society ... "
congrats.
https://twitter.com/tedlieu/status/1090382108038701057?s=19quote:Getting a snack. https://t.co/3gmwxoNTfn
Via Kyle Griffin.quote:Trump sat down with Putin for several minutes of conversation at the end of an event at the G20 in November, with no translator or note-taker from the U.S. side to record the dialogue between the leaders, sources with knowledge of the encounter tell FT. https://t.co/qFBrQttdY7
https://thehill.com/polic(...)om-launching-nuclearquote:Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) and Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) on Tuesday announced that they will reintroduce a bill that would stop the president from being able to launch a first strike nuclear attack without first having congressional approval.
Lijkt me een goed idee, zeker nu die low yield W76-2 beschikbaar komen.
Ik betwijfel sterk dat Trump leest. laat staan dat hij een mening kan hebben over een boek.quote:
[..]twitter:realDonaldTrump twitterde op dinsdag 29-01-2019 om 14:45:55
https://www.axios.com/jar(...)6e-627eb1a8a9c1.html
de vraag is of Mnuchin die documenten wil overhandigen.quote:
[..]
Trump krijgt een hartverzakking denk ik.
quote:Democratic Rep. Joe Neguse, a freshman member of the House Judiciary Committee, told constituents last week that the panel will "likely" investigate perjury claims against Brett Kavanaugh and may move to impeach him depending on their findings. https://t.co/fpocVKnaXm
https://www.telegraph.co.(...)nge-nuclear-weapons/
Hahaha prachtig dit.quote:
Wat zijn het toch een slechte verliezers. Uiteraard compleet kansloos dit.
De blauwste, meest anti-Trump staat van het land is in verval? Verrassing! Heeft vast niets te maken met massaimmigratie.quote:
Deze is van eind vorig jaar, zelfs bij Fox News stellen ze vragen over de slechte staat van het land. In dit geval California.
"So suddenly California became a medieval society ... "
congrats.
Verontrustend? Je wil dat Kim die kernwapens behoudt?quote:
Uitermate verontrustend.
https://www.telegraph.co.(...)nge-nuclear-weapons/
Bill Clinton had met Noord Korea een gelijkaardige deal afgesloten: een kerncentrale in ruil voor het stopzetten van plutoniumproduktie. Bush (in feite Bolton) verbrak die deal toen bleek dat Korea uranium verrijkte (wat niet tegen de afspraken was, want dat was niet besproken). Waarna de N Koreanen de zegels van de IAEA verbraken, het opgeslagen plutonium weer terugnamen, en hun eerste kernbom bouwden.
Het verontrustende is het feit dat Putin zich nu met de nucleaire "bevoorrading" van Noord Korea bezig houdt, en zodoende indirect de Amerikaanse westkust in zijn grip kan krijgen.quote:
[..]
Verontrustend? Je wil dat Kim die kernwapens behoudt?
Bill Clinton had met Noord Korea een gelijkaardige deal afgesloten: een kerncentrale in ruil voor het stopzetten van plutoniumproduktie. Bush (in feite Bolton) verbrak die deal toen bleek dat Korea uranium verrijkte (wat niet tegen de afspraken was, want dat was niet besproken). Waarna de N Koreanen de zegels van de IAEA verbraken, het opgeslagen plutonium weer terugnamen, en hun eerste kernbom bouwden.
want waar is de controle mbt tot deze nucleaire systemen? Door de russen?
[ Bericht 3% gewijzigd door klappernootopreis op 30-01-2019 11:46:23 ]
Och, een rechter die meineed pleegt om een baantje te krijgen mag je wel impeachen. En wat Kavanaugh zei in het Congres leek niet helemaal te kloppen. Dus prima om dat nog een keer te onderzoeken. En dit keer goed.quote:
[..]
Hahaha prachtig dit.
Uiteraard compleet kansloos dit.
Als Kavanaugh niets misdaan heeft heeft hij niks te vrezen.
Het is dan ook het enige middel om hem er weg te krijgen.quote:
[..]
Och, een rechter die meineed pleegt om een baantje te krijgen mag je wel impeachen. En wat Kavanaugh zei in het Congres leek niet helemaal te kloppen. Dus prima om dat nog een keer te onderzoeken. En dit keer goed.
Als Kavanaugh niets misdaan heeft heeft hij niks te vrezen.
quote:
[..]
Howie Wolf is de man die Bloomberg overtuigde dat hij geen kans had als onafhankelijke kandidaat en hiermee alleen Trump hielp en mede hierdoor deed Bloomberg niet mee.
Als onafhankelijk kandidaat kan je wel de populair vote winnen, maar je haalt niet de 270 kiesmannen. Als niemand de 270 haalt, dan mag het congres de president en VP kiezen, die kiezen dan gewoon voor hun eigen kandidaat.twitter:howiewolf twitterde op maandag 28-01-2019 om 01:48:14twitter:CBSNews twitterde op maandag 28-01-2019 om 04:54:23[ afbeelding ]twitter:
*Theirtwitter:realDonaldTrump twitterde op woensdag 30-01-2019 om 14:56:00
Donald Trump 59%
Mitt Romney 28%
@NewHampJournal 1/16-21
Trump is aan het dalen bij de GOP aanhang.
4 miljard belastingvoordeeltjes om de Average Joe aan het werk te helpen down de drain.quote:The $10B Wisconsin Foxconn plant Trump touted - like the Harrisburg plant - was NEVER going to be built. It was a lie perpetrated by the company, Trump, Walker and Ryan https://t.co/The23jdtPy
Via NBC
Je kunt natuurlijk best denken dat de Dems allemaal veranderd zijn in activistische, hyperprogressieve lieden die stuk voor stuk globalistische ideeën hebben en de smeltkroes toejuichen. Ik denk dat de realiteit weerbarstiger is. Je persoonlijke sneer laat ik maar even voor wat het is.quote:
[..]
Dat lijkt me vooral een erg beperkte stukje projectie. Het gedeelte van het electoraat dat heel veel moeite heeft met 'zwarte vrouwen' en 'Afrikaans aandoende namen' stemt al never nooit niet op de Dems natuurlijk.
Gillibrand is historisch gezien een vrij conservatieve Democraat, al papt ze nu een beetje aan met de meer activitische flank om brede steun te verwerven.
Want er zit natuurlijk niets tussen deze absurdistische hyperbool en het niet zo op negers hebben.quote:
[..]
Je kunt natuurlijk best denken dat de Dems allemaal veranderd zijn in activistische, hyperprogressieve lieden die stuk voor stuk globalistische ideeën hebben en de smeltkroes toejuichen. Ik denk dat de realiteit weerbarstiger is. Je persoonlijke sneer laat ik maar even voor wat het is.
Gillibrand is historisch gezien een vrij conservatieve Democraat, al papt ze nu een beetje aan met de meer activitische flank om brede steun te verwerven.
https://www.politico.com/(...)020-election-1136435
Lijkt me ook een kansloze exercitie. Er zijn nu simpelweg teveel andere keuzes.quote:
Overigens gaat Clinton zich toch echt niet kandideren volgens Podesta:
https://www.politico.com/(...)020-election-1136435
https://amp.nos.nl/artike(...)stand-van-trump.html
Ze stemden ooit Barack Obama het witte huis in dus het zal zo'n probleem niet zijn.quote:
[..]
Je kunt natuurlijk best denken dat de Dems allemaal veranderd zijn in activistische, hyperprogressieve lieden die stuk voor stuk globalistische ideeën hebben en de smeltkroes toejuichen. Ik denk dat de realiteit weerbarstiger is. Je persoonlijke sneer laat ik maar even voor wat het is.
[img][/img]
- Ranchers found prayer rugs at the borders
- [immigrants] have stronger, bigger, and faster vehicles than our police have
- Women are tied up with duct tape on their faces, put in the back of vans
Zet eerst mensen zonder werk en inkomen en steekt dan als POTUS een lulverhaal af van iets dat hij in z'n vrije tijd met een zak chips heeft zitten kijken.
[ Bericht 41% gewijzigd door Beathoven op 30-01-2019 20:15:47 ]
Neen.quote:
Trump heeft trouwens (en dit is geen grap) al z'n 'bold claims' uit deze film gehaald
[ afbeelding ]
- Ranchers found prayer rugs at the borders
- [immigrants] have stronger, bigger, and faster vehicles than our police have
- Women are tied up with duct tape on their faces, put in the back of vans
[ afbeelding ]
Zet eerst mensen zonder werk en inkomen en steekt dan als POTUS een lulverhaal af van iets dat hij in z'n vrije tijd met een zak chips heeft zitten kijken.
Uit Sicario: day of the soldado (2018)komen die prayer rugs.
Je poster is van Sicario (2015)
Goeien filmpjen overigens.
aangepastquote:Op woensdag 30 januari 2019 20:12 schreef Hyperdude het volgende:
[..]
Neen.
Uit Sicario: day of the soldado (2018)komen die prayer rugs.
Je poster is van Sicario (2015)
Goeien filmpjen overigens.
niet mijn soort films.. maar aangepast
Ieder het zijnequote:Op woensdag 30 januari 2019 20:16 schreef Beathoven het volgende:
[..]
aangepast
niet mijn soort films.. maar aangepast
Aardige "wall" in fragmentje hierboven.
Geef me een seintje als deze dwaas geen POTUS meer is, ik ga er vandoor.quote:
[..]
Ieder het zijne
Aardige "wall" in fragmentje hierboven.
Oleg Deripaska's company hires former Trump transition official as soon as Treasury sanctions are lifted
quote:A member of President Trump’s transition team was announced as a new board member of a company owned by Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska as soon as the Treasury Department lifted sanctions on Deripaska’s companies Sunday.
On Sunday, the Treasury Department lifted the sanctions on three companies owned by Deripaska 10 months after it imposed them, citing Russia’s “malign activity around the globe.” Deripaska, a close ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin, was also personally sanctioned because the government accused him of threats to rivals, bribing government officials and links to organized crime.
As part of the deal to have the sanctions lifted, Deripaska agreed to dilute his control of EN+, the parent company of the Russian aluminum giant Rusal.
Democrats strongly opposed the deal and voted in the House to keep the sanctions but the measure was defeated in the Republican-controlled Senate. The Treasury Department claimed that the deal required Deripaska to “sever” his control of the companies but The New York Times reported that leaked documents revealed a scheme that allowed Deripaska to retain majority ownership of EN+. The Times added that the deal could possible free Deripaska from “hundreds of millions of dollars in debt.”
On Monday, EN+ announced seven new board directors, including Christopher Burnham, who served on Trump’s State Department transition team and previously worked as an executive at Deutsche Bank. Burnham also previously worked as undersecretary general for management of the United Nations under George W. Bush, when Trump’s national security adviser John Bolton was the UN ambassador. A news release from EN+ cited his work in the Bush administration and at Deutsche Bank but did not mention his role on the Trump team.SPOILERBloomberg News previously reported that Deutsche Bank loaned Trump around $300 million when American banks refused to do business with him because of his extensive outstanding debt. The bank has also loaned billions to Deripaska.
Deutsche Bank is now the subject of a joint investigation by the House Intelligence and Financial Services committees over its dealings with Trump, Politico reported. Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., who now heads the Financial Services panel, has vowed to pursue the “Trump money trail” and Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., agreed that Deutsche Bank is “one obvious place to start.”
"The interesting thing about Deutsche Bank is they seem to be pretty much the only entity out there willing to lend to The Trump Organization," Rep. Jim Himes, D-Conn., who sits on both committees, told Politico.
Deripaska has also been closely linked to former Trump campaign chief Paul Manafort, who was $10 million in debt to the Russian oligarch at the time he agreed to work for free on the Trump campaign, according to a court filing in Robert Mueller's investigation. Manafort then promised Deripaska private briefings on the Trump campaign, according to The Washington Post.
Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas, who sits on the House Ways and Means Committee, told Quartz that Deripaska’s “sordid deal” shows that “the Trump Administration is working seven days a week with favoritism for Russia.”
“This represents just one more step in undermining the sanctions law, which President Trump has obstructed at every opportunity, while Russian aggression remains unabated,” he said, adding that the deal amounts to little more than “a shell game [that] only encourages Putin to pursue his destabilizing activities around the world.”
Doggett also slammed Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin on Twitter for refusing to testify to Congress about the deal.
Rep. Jackie Speier, D-Calif., who sits on the House Intelligence Committee, is now looking at whether Mnuchin may have had his own ties to Deripaska.
Speier sent a letter to Mnuchin last week asking about a 2017 deal he made to divest from a Hollywood film company he co-owned with Ukrainian billionaire Leonid Blavatnik, BuzzFeed News reported. According to the letter, Blavatnik also co-owns Sual Partners with sanctioned Russian oligarch Viktor Vekselberg. The company is a “major shareholder” in Rusal, the letter said. Blavatnik served on Rusal’s board and one of his companies donated $1 million to Trump’s inaugural fund.
“Blavatnik had a clear financial interest in the outcome of the Treasury action,” Speier wrote, adding that Mnuchin’s relationship with the billionaire and his involvement in the lifting of sanctions “is clearly a conflict of interest.”
It’s unclear whether the Taiwanese firm will create the jobs it promised.
quote:A major jobs deal President Trump has touted with former Wisconsin governor Scott Walker now looks uncertain: Foxconn, a supplier for Apple and other technology firms, says it’s scrapping plans to build a giant new factory in Wisconsin, opting to hire American engineers and researchers instead of a promised fleet of blue-collar workers.
“In Wisconsin we’re not building a factory,” Louis Woo, special assistant to Foxconn chief executive Terry Gou, told Reuters. “You can’t use a factory to view our Wisconsin investment.”
The Taiwanese technology juggernaut initially pledged in 2017 to construct a $10 billion liquid-crystal display panel plant and create up to 13,000 jobs in the state’s southeastern corner over the next 15 years. The positions would pay an average annual wage of $53,000, the firm said — a solid salary in the manufacturing realm.
In exchange, Wisconsin agreed to give Foxconn at least $3 billion in state tax credits and breaks, according to the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation, a public-private agency that helped negotiate the package. The deal drew criticism after it emerged that Wisconsin would not make money for 25 years.
Under the contract, however, Wisconsin would cancel some payouts if Foxconn did not stick to its word.SPOILERState officials on Wednesday said Foxconn will not qualify for tax incentives until the company meets its job creation and facility investment targets.
“WEDC’s performance-based contract with Foxconn provides the company the flexibility to make these business decisions, and at the same time, protects Wisconsin’s taxpayers,” said Kelly Lietz, vice president of marketing at the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation in a statement.
She added: “Foxconn’s long-term success both globally and within Wisconsin is centered around the alignment of its business model with ever-changing global economic conditions, including evolving customer demands.”
Foxconn and the White House did not immediately respond Wednesday to requests for comment.
Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), who asked the U.S. Government Accountability Office in November to investigate the Foxconn deal and other enormous state subsidy packages, said Wisconsin has already poured cash into new roads, campus construction and paying families who lived on the tentative factory site to move. He declined to name a figure.
“These companies play communities against each other to get the very best deal at the expense of the taxpayer, and they don’t live up to the deal they promised," Pocan said.
Trump celebrated the deal in the East Room of the White House in 2017 and attended a groundbreaking ceremony last summer in Racine County.
“I would see Terry, and I would say, ‘Terry, you have to give us one of these massive places you do great work with,’ ” he said two years ago in front of news cameras, adding that he told the company head, “The American worker will not let you down.”
Woo, the Foxconn official, told reporters the firm wasn’t sure how to proceed in Wisconsin, citing the high cost of assembling TV screens in the United States. Labor costs are steep, he told Reuters in the Wednesday report.
“In terms of TV, we have no place in the U.S.,” Woo said. “We can’t compete.”
The comments reflect a sharp reversal in a plan Walker and state officials had said would transform Wisconsin.
“The state of Wisconsin is investing in a once-in-a-lifetime economic development opportunity that will be transformational as the state will become home to the only LCD manufacturing facility outside of Asia,” Mark Maley, spokesman for the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation, told The Washington Post in a November email.
Foxconn has a history of retracting its hiring announcements.
The company grabbed headlines in 2013 when it unveiled plans to invest $30 million and generate 300 jobs at a new high-tech factory in central Pennsylvania. The state’s governor applauded the news, and economists predicted Foxconn would lead a local manufacturing revival.
But after the spotlight faded, Foxconn dropped its plans in the state.
Trump and Walker’s deal with the company also sparked criticism.
Wisconsin’s nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau forecast the move wouldn’t bring profits to the state until 2042.
Walker lost his race in November to Democrat Tony Evers, who has slammed the Foxconn deal a as a “Hail Mary pass on the part of the governor.”
The reaction among residents was mixed. One Marquette University Law School poll found 46 percent of registered voters said they thought Wisconsin was overpaying Foxconn, while 40 percent said the plant will generate as much value as the state’s investment.
Wisconsin’s offer of economic sweeteners to Foxconn was unprecedented in scale, analysts say. The bundle of financial incentives was larger than what New York, Virginia and Tennessee collectively pledged to Amazon.com to win its new offices, a Post comparison of the two development projects showed. (Amazon founder Jeffrey P. Bezos owns The Post.)
twitter:StevenTDennis twitterde op woensdag 30-01-2019 om 18:19:26On Senate floor Mitch McConnell rips a federal holiday for Election Day as part of a “power grab” by Democrats to win elections. reageer retweet
twitter:MrDanZak twitterde op woensdag 30-01-2019 om 18:46:50This is the majority leader of the U.S. Senate admitting that, if voting were easier instead of harder, Republicans would be in trouble. https://t.co/J9Ul7pSHd2 reageer retweet
[ Bericht 51% gewijzigd door crystal_meth op 30-01-2019 21:32:37 ]
twitter:kylegriffin1 twitterde op woensdag 30-01-2019 om 21:25:09
Draadje met details:twitter:kylegriffin1 twitterde op woensdag 30-01-2019 om 21:35:11
twitter:nycsouthpaw twitterde op woensdag 30-01-2019 om 21:03:01
[ Bericht 21% gewijzigd door Kijkertje op 30-01-2019 21:46:02 ]
Daar stond de Dow een jaar geleden ook.quote:Dow just broke 25,000. Tremendous news!
twitter:EricTrump twitterde op woensdag 30-01-2019 om 04:42:15It is shocking that aside from their corporate office, @Amazon doesn’t use E-Verify for their 600,000+ employees yet we are attacked by the @WashingtonPost for a few golf properties. Hypocrisy at its finest. https://t.co/dYnFl5qram reageer retweet
twitter:amazon_policy twitterde op woensdag 30-01-2019 om 23:11:43@EricTrump @amazon @washingtonpost https://t.co/d6f1rzL8MC, Inc. and its affiliates and subsidiaries use E-Verify in the U.S. for our more than 300,000 U.S.-based employees, corporate or otherwise. We enrolled in the program on May 17, 2010. We process E-Verify cases through an E-Verify Employer Agent. reageer retweet
quote:Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders and Sherrod Brown say the new NAFTA needs big changes. Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Beto O’Rourke and Amy Klobuchar, among others, haven’t yet offered firm opinions.
Their opinions now matter. Any one of these current and possible Democratic presidential candidates could determine the fate of the agreement, either as the party nominee or as the president.
Although the leaders of the U.S., Canada and Mexico signed the agreement last November, this is not a done deal: there is a real chance more negotiations will be necessary to satisfy the Democrats, who now control the U.S. House of Representatives. And there is a real chance that the approval process will drag on into the next presidential term, which begins in 2021.
Congressional Democrats say they will not approve the agreement unless President Donald Trump, who calls it the USMCA, agrees to add language that would make it easier to enforce provisions on labour and on the environment. Democrats, like Trump, have long expressed concerns about U.S. jobs being lost to Mexico, where wages and labour standards are lower.
Politics are also a factor. Democrats are reluctant to give Trump perceived wins as the 2020 election approaches. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who used procedural tools to delay votes on George W. Bush trade agreements, will eventually start taking cues from the person who emerges as the party nominee.SPOILERJennifer Hillman, a senior official with the U.S. trade representative’s office during the Bill Clinton administration, said she thinks there is only a 10 per cent chance the current Congress will ratify the agreement.
“What is the incentive for Nancy Pelosi to put this up on the floor of the House?” said Hillman, now a Georgetown Law professor.
Republicans have a whole separate set of concerns with the text. And Rep. Kevin Brady, a senior Republican on the trade file, said at a Washington event Tuesday that members of both parties have told him they are not even willing to “consider” the agreement until the steel and aluminum tariffs on Canada and Mexico are “ensured to be lifted” and Trump abandons his threat of imposing quotas in their place.
The process will be delayed at least slightly by Trump's just-concluded government shutdown. The U.S. International Trade Commission said this week that its report analyzing the economic impact of the new agreement, which Congress originally expected by mid-March, will now come as many as 35 days later.
Current and likely Democratic presidential candidates differ in their trade views. Warren, Sanders and Brown are vehement opponents of NAFTA. Former vice-president Biden voted for NAFTA but has since said it needs to be changed, while O’Rourke, a former congressman from Texas, has been a vocal NAFTA supporter.
Nunes mag zichzelf gaan onderzoeken.quote:New: The Republican members of House Intel have been named, which will allow House Intel to be constituted. The members are: Mike Conaway, Mike Turner, Brad Wenstrup, Chris Stewart, Rick Crawford, Elise Stefanik, Will Hurd and John Ratcliffe. (Devin Nunes had already been named.)
Trump met Putin without staff or note takers present — again.
twitter:kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 31-01-2019 om 01:35:14
twitter:ddale8 twitterde op donderdag 31-01-2019 om 01:44:57Senior Republicans (yesterday Brady, today Grassley) are calling on Trump to drop the steel and aluminum tariffs on Canada and Mexico before Congress considers the new NAFTA deal: https://t.co/hVIrX8VVF5. Brady said many members won't consider the deal before that happens. reageer retweet
Eerst zien, dan geloven.quote:twitter:ddale8 twitterde op donderdag 31-01-2019 om 01:44:57
twitter:kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 31-01-2019 om 03:25:51
SPOILER
SPOILER
[ Bericht 9% gewijzigd door Kijkertje op 31-01-2019 16:59:45 ]
De manier waarop hij publiekelijk de hele geheime dienst beledigde, geeft aan dat Trump écht een herseninhoud van een pantoffeldiertje heeft. "educate him". Laat ze eerst maar eens gaan beginnen met zijn volgelingen. Dat lijkt me meer een opmaat voor succes. Waar geen verstand zit, gaat er ook niet komen.quote:twitter:kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 31-01-2019 om 03:25:51[ afbeelding ]SPOILER[ afbeelding ]SPOILER[ afbeelding ]
Da's geen mond maar een :quote:
Trump verwacht echt dat iedereen die hij aanstelt hem naar de mond praat.
Ja, toen vierde hij het ook:quote:
Trump heeft ook weer wat:
[..]
Daar stond de Dow een jaar geleden ook.
twitter:realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 04-01-2018 om 16:48:04
Morgen is het weer vrijdag, Mueller time!
Trump heeft hun goedkeuring nodig, maar ik dacht dat hij wel in z'n eentje de oude Nafta kan opzeggen. Wat gaan ze doen als hij daarmee dreigt (of kan het congres dat blokken?)quote:
Deze keer kunnen ze wel niet zeggen dat hij liever het Kremlin dan z'n eigen intelligence services gelooft, want die zeggen voor één keer hetzelfde. Nu kiest hij voor Netanyahu's versie...quote:twitter:kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 31-01-2019 om 03:25:51[ afbeelding ]SPOILER[ afbeelding ]
Logo van een Russische online poker website?quote:SPOILER[ afbeelding ]
[ Bericht 5% gewijzigd door crystal_meth op 31-01-2019 11:52:45 ]
Een Amerexit? Dan gaat Mexico meedoen met de TPP en verdwijnt het werk uit de VS.quote:
[..]
Trump heeft hun goedkeuring nodig, maar ik dacht dat hij wel in z'n eentje de oude Nafta kan opzeggen. Wat gaan ze doen als hij daarmee dreigt (of kan het congres dat blokken?)
Ik mag toch wel hopen dat een eventuele toekomstige president vóór die intrek neemt in het Witte Huis die heel goed op afluisterapparatuur laat controleren.quote:
Trump heeft weer gechillt met Putin zonder dat er White House staff of een notulist bij was. Zo gezellig. Was vast omdat het zulke lieve jongens zijn.
Trump met Putin without staff or note takers present — again.
Die zijn over het algemeen niet geïnteresseerd in werken. Dat zit ingebakken op de manier waarop ze zeggen: "making money" en niet EARNING Money.quote:
[..]
Een Amerexit? Dan gaat Mexico meedoen met de TPP en verdwijnt het werk uit de VS.
De muur wordt al gebouwd. Mmmkaaaaay.....quote:Republicans on the Homeland Security Committee are wasting their time. Democrats, despite all of the evidence, proof and Caravans coming, are not going to give money to build the DESPERATELY needed WALL. I’ve got you covered. Wall is already being built, I don’t expect much help!
Kan een Trumpfan mij uitleggen wat het nut van die hele shutdown dan was?
Ted Lieu's reactie:quote:Lets just call them WALLS from now on and stop playing political games! A WALL is a WALL!
quote:I miss when our kids were in Kindergarten; it was sooo cute how they talked when they couldn't get what they wanted.
Don't know why I just thought of that, but wanted to share.
#thursdaymorning thoughts https://t.co/pM6z9k7aoc
Altijd weer die Russen!quote:
Logo van een Russische online poker website?
Heb m nu van een andere site geplukt
Dit citeert hij:quote:Mystery maybe-(probably)-Mueller grand jury case might soon get a bit less secret -> https://t.co/ybIabGsOKr
Heeft iemand enig idee wat dit is?quote:New in In Re Grand Jury Subpoena: Response to motion for an order directing the Clerk to file an unredacted version of petitioner's supplemental brief from respondent United States filed. (Distributed)
Dit ging over dat mysterieuze buitenlandse staatsbedrijf dat niet wil meewerken aan een dagvaarding van Mueller, toch?quote:
Brad Heath post dit:
[..]
Dit citeert hij:
[..]
Heeft iemand enig idee wat dit is?
Russen natuurlijk!quote:
Brad Heath post dit:
[..]
Dit citeert hij:
[..]
Heeft iemand enig idee wat dit is?
Maar geen idee wie...
Law firm that represented Russian interests confirmed to be involved in mystery Mueller case
twitter:SethAbramson twitterde op donderdag 31-01-2019 om 05:50:24
twitter:Cirincione twitterde op woensdag 30-01-2019 om 13:58:50Has anyone else noticed that Donald Trump has stopped working? For weeks, he’s had little or nothing on his schedule. Today, for example, his entire schedule is “intelligence briefing.” So far this week, the only other appointment was lunch with Pence. Nothing else. reageer retweet
quote:
[..]
Russen natuurlijk!
Maar geen idee wie...
Law firm that represented Russian interests confirmed to be involved in mystery Mueller case
quote:Russian Direct Investment Fund, whose CEO Kirill Dmitriev met with Erik Prince in the Seychelles? RDIF is a subsidiary of VEB Bank, whose CEO met with Jared Kushner in Dec 2016. https://t.co/6ivwNzE0F7
quote:FBI agents seized several years worth of Roger Stone's communications following his arrest, prosecutors have told a federal judge.
Feds say the discovery is "both voluminous and complex," adding up to "several terabytes of information." https://t.co/tLLYeRcEj9
Lekker lezen! Het onderzoek zal nog wel even duren.
Trolololoquote:Dear @POTUS: Many people say you get your facts from fictional sources. We are concerned you may not understand the difference between our intelligence agencies and movies/entertainment shows. Here is a memo that explains the difference. https://t.co/Fsy3vzEaQj
Fotos van de Saudi prins en Netanyahu waren in dit geval toepasselijker geweest.quote:
Intelligence voor Holle Bolle Gijs is Netflix kijken.quote:twitter:Cirincione twitterde op woensdag 30-01-2019 om 13:58:50
quote:In a brief but biting order, a federal judge in Oklahoma dismissed a defamation lawsuit Carter Page brought against the Democratic National Committee and its lawyers related to the involvement of the DNC’s law firm in funding the Trump-Russia dossier.
Chief Judge Joe Heaton of the Western District of Oklahoma, who is a George W. Bush appointee, said the court lacked jurisdiction over the case, given that the defendants have no relationship to Oklahoma, nor did their alleged actions.
“Plaintiff has offered nothing to suggest that the individual defendants are domiciled in Oklahoma and it appears undisputed that none of them are,” Heaton said, before critiquing Page’s arguments that the DNC has a relationship to Oklahoma, via its affiliate, the Oklahoma state Democratic Party.
“The DNC is a national organization with local affiliates throughout the United States. It cannot be ‘at home’ in every state,” the judge said.
In filing the lawsuit pro se, meaning that it was filed by Page himself rather than by lawyers on his behalf, Page pointed to an LLC in Oklahoma where he is a managing partner to explain why he brought the case in Oklahoma.
Page told Oklahoma City’s News 9 that, through the business, he had “longstanding Oklahoma ties,” despite not having a residence there, and even called Oklahoma “his main home.”
The judge on Thursday rejected that argument for jurisdiction as well.
“Plaintiff alleges that he owns a corporation based in Oklahoma, but there is no plausible basis alleged for concluding that defendants alleged actions were somehow directed at that corporation or plaintiff’s interest in it, or that defendants even knew of its existence,” the order said.
quote:Breaking: Senate advances amendment highly critical of President Trump's push to remove troops from Syria and Afghanistan. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell authored the amendment and forced a vote on it. The vote was 68-23.
twitter:Yamiche twitterde op donderdag 31-01-2019 om 22:30:16President Trump was asked if he talked to intelligence officials(Gina Haspel and Dan Coats) about his displeasure with their testimony before Congress. He said, “I did and they said they were totally misquoted and taken out of context.” reageer retweet
twitter:Yamiche twitterde op donderdag 31-01-2019 om 22:32:12
En hij heeft het rapport niet eens gelezen
twitter:ddale8 twitterde op donderdag 31-01-2019 om 22:39:32
[ Bericht 11% gewijzigd door Kijkertje op 31-01-2019 23:28:46 ]
Het is jammer dat Lieu in Taiwan geboren is.quote:Dear @realDonaldTrump: Do you know how congressional hearings work? The Senate testimony was live. There is videotape.
The media didn't testify; the Intel Chiefs did. We all saw and heard the same testimony.
Many people are saying that they worry about your grasp of reality. https://t.co/CtMi57KSXK
Waarom?quote:
@tedlieu
[..]
Het is jammer dat Lieu in Taiwan geboren is.
kan ie niet voor president opgaanquote:
Lijkt me ook wat te hoog gegrepen, bovendien is er al zat keus dacht ik zo.quote:
twitter:Santucci twitterde op vrijdag 01-02-2019 om 00:44:20The calls to blocked numbers, which came on June 6, and after it on June 9, were between Trump Jr.’s cell phone and two family friends -- NASCAR CEO Brian France and real estate developer Howard Lorber, according to the sources https://t.co/Vh0S9LKn7l reageer retweet
Blijft toch bizar dat de President van de VS alle info kan opvragen die hij maar wil, maar ervoor kiest om via Fox News zijn briefings te krijgen.quote:twitter:Yamiche twitterde op donderdag 31-01-2019 om 22:30:16[ afbeelding ]twitter:Yamiche twitterde op donderdag 31-01-2019 om 22:32:12
En hij heeft het rapport niet eens gelezentwitter:ddale8 twitterde op donderdag 31-01-2019 om 22:39:32
twitter:kylegriffin1 twitterde op vrijdag 01-02-2019 om 00:30:10
twitter:kylegriffin1 twitterde op vrijdag 01-02-2019 om 01:00:03
twitter:kylegriffin1 twitterde op vrijdag 01-02-2019 om 01:30:12
GOP rejects bill to give back pay to federal contractors, wants to repeal estate tax instead
Maar Trump is slim want hij is rijk!quote:twitter:Yamiche twitterde op donderdag 31-01-2019 om 22:30:16[ afbeelding ]twitter:Yamiche twitterde op donderdag 31-01-2019 om 22:32:12
En hij heeft het rapport niet eens gelezentwitter:ddale8 twitterde op donderdag 31-01-2019 om 22:39:32
Wanneer zullen zijn aanhangers realiseren dat ze er in zijn getuind?
“As long as he stands to build his Wall and keep the raping Muslim from invading our Southern borders, heʼs our Man!”quote:
Wanneer zullen zijn aanhangers realiseren dat ze er in zijn getuind?
Ik weet het nog goed. Dagenlang beheerste dit lulverhaal de media. Don jr. had persoonlijk, in opdracht van zijn vader, met de Russen samengespannen.quote:President Donald Trump welcomed a report Thursday that said his son, Donald Trump Jr., did not talk with him on a blocked phone number before and after a meeting at Trump Tower between top campaign officials and Russians linked to the Kremlin.
Https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/31/trump-donald-trump-jr-trump-tower-calls-1140930
En nu, net zoals het Fusion GPS dossier, net zoals dat Buzzfeed fake news, blijkt het weer onzin. Impeachment is weer een stuk verder weg.
Kan niet wachten tot Mueller eindelijk zijn verslag uitbrengt. Het tranendal van team TDS wordt EPISCH.
Moet jij niet trollen op de FP?quote:
Oh nee, weer een tegenslag voor de anti-Trump rukkertjes. Wanneer stopt de pijn.
[..]
Ik weet het nog goed. Dagenlang beheerste dit lulverhaal de media. Don jr. had persoonlijk, in opdracht van zijn vader, met de Russen samengespannen.
En nu, net zoals het Fusion GPS dossier, net zoals dat Buzzfeed fake news, blijkt het weer onzin. Impeachment is weer een stuk verder weg.
Kan niet wachten tot Mueller eindelijk zijn verslag uitbrengt. Het tranendal van team TDS wordt EPISCH.
Wat probeer je nou eigenlijk te bereiken met dit soort posts?quote:
Oh nee, weer een tegenslag voor de anti-Trump rukkertjes. Wanneer stopt de pijn.
[..]
Ik weet het nog goed. Dagenlang beheerste dit lulverhaal de media. Don jr. had persoonlijk, in opdracht van zijn vader, met de Russen samengespannen.
En nu, net zoals het Fusion GPS dossier, net zoals dat Buzzfeed fake news, blijkt het weer onzin. Impeachment is weer een stuk verder weg.
Kan niet wachten tot Mueller eindelijk zijn verslag uitbrengt. Het tranendal van team TDS wordt EPISCH.
Wat ben jij makkelijk uit de tent te lokken, zeg...
Die weten dit al lang, ze durven dit vanwege misplaatste trots niet toe te geven.quote:
[..]
Maar Trump is slim want hij is rijk!
Wanneer zullen zijn aanhangers realiseren dat ze er in zijn getuind?
Beetje aandacht genereren, meer is het niet. Paar jaar terug stond hij nog op de barricades als linkse rakker, nu levert dit meer aandacht op. Gewoon negeren.quote:
Wat probeer je nou eigenlijk te bereiken met dit soort posts?
Zieltjes winnen voor Baudet. In maart gaan we weer naar de stembus, en hij is bang dat de mensen na de Brexit en Trump wijzer zijn geworden.quote:
[..]
Wat probeer je nou eigenlijk te bereiken met dit soort posts?
Wat ben jij makkelijk uit de tent te lokken, zeg...
“POTUS wanted an OTR meeting with our publisher, AG Sulzberger. The publisher declined that opportunity, saying he would like an interview on-record for two of the NYT White House reporters”.
SPOILERblijkbaar is er een trump interview met nytimes.
Heeft iemand de tekst in spoiler voor mij, please
https://www.nytimes.com/2(...)tions-interview.htmlquote:
Maggie Habermann:
“POTUS wanted an OTR meeting with our publisher, AG Sulzberger. The publisher declined that opportunity, saying he would like an interview on-record for two of the NYT White House reporters”.SPOILERblijkbaar is er een trump interview met nytimes.
Heeft iemand de tekst in spoiler voor mij, please
SPOILERTrump, in Interview, Calls Wall Talks ‘Waste of Time’ and Dismisses Investigations
Video
In an interview with The New York Times on Thursday, President Trump indicated he will most likely take action on his own after talks with Congress end in two weeks, amongst other subjects.CreditCreditTom Brenner for The New York Times
By Peter Baker and Maggie Haberman
Jan. 31, 2019
WASHINGTON — A defiant President Trump declared on Thursday that he has all but given up on negotiating with Congress over his border wall and will build it on his own even as he dismissed any suggestions of wrongdoing in the investigations that have ensnared his associates.
In an interview in the Oval Office, Mr. Trump called the talks “a waste of time” and indicated he will most likely take action on his own when they officially end in two weeks. At the same time, he expressed optimism about reaching a trade deal with China and denied being at odds with his intelligence chiefs.
“I think Nancy Pelosi is hurting our country very badly by doing what she’s doing and, ultimately, I think I’ve set the table very nicely,” Mr. Trump said. He made no mention of closing the government again, a move that backfired on him, but instead suggested he plans to declare a national emergency to build the wall. “I’ve set the table,” he said. “I’ve set the stage for doing what I’m going to do.”
Addressing a wide range of subjects, Mr. Trump brushed off the investigations that have consumed so much of his presidency, saying that his lawyers have been reassured by the departing deputy attorney general, Rod J. Rosenstein, that the president himself was not a target. “He told the attorneys that I’m not a subject, I’m not a target,” Mr. Trump said. But even if that is the case, it remains unknown whether the matter would be referred to the House for possible impeachment hearings.
[Read excerpts from the interview with the president.]
Mr. Trump added that he never spoke with Roger J. Stone Jr., his longtime associate who was indicted last week, about WikiLeaks and the stolen Democratic emails it posted during the 2016 election, nor did he direct anyone to do so.
“No, I didn’t. I never did,” he said of speaking with Mr. Stone on the subject. Did he ever instruct anyone to get in touch with Mr. Stone about WikiLeaks? “Never did,” he repeated.
You have 4 free articles remaining.
Subscribe to The Times
The president dismissed the importance of the proposed Trump Tower his team was seeking to build in Moscow at the height of the 2016 campaign, and he denied his own current lawyer’s account of how late in the campaign he was still discussing the project. He also denied that his Twitter messages about former associates who are cooperating with prosecutors amount to witness tampering.
Mr. Trump said he played no role in directing White House officials to arrange for Jared Kushner, his son-in-law and senior adviser, to receive a top-secret clearance. Mr. Kushner’s application was rejected at least once after concerns were raised by the F.B.I. about his foreign contacts. The C.I.A., which also raised concerns, has continued to deny him access to “sensitive compartmentalized information.”
The interview with Mr. Trump came on a busy day at the White House as the president seeks to rebound from the 35-day partial government shutdown that failed to force Democrats to finance his wall and took a toll on his poll numbers. With most Americans blaming him for the standoff, Mr. Trump expressed frustration that he has not gotten credit for what he sees as his accomplishments, including deregulation, increased military spending and nuclear talks with North Korea.
Fresh from a meeting on trade with China’s vice premier, Mr. Trump seemed relaxed and confident as he sought to make his case, distributing handouts including, at one point, printed copies of two tweets sent out in his name even as he was speaking with his visitors.
The interview was arranged after Mr. Trump reached out to A. G. Sulzberger, the publisher of The New York Times, and invited him for an off-the-record dinner. Mr. Sulzberger declined, saying he would prefer an on-the-record interview that included two of his reporters. The president agreed.
‘I Love This Job’
Mr. Trump sat behind the Resolute Desk, sipping periodically from a glass of Diet Coke with ice cubes floating in it and resting on a gold coaster. His acting chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney; his senior communications adviser, Bill Shine; and his press secretary, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, sat in on the session with Mr. Sulzberger and the two reporters.
Mr. Trump spoke with a low voice, his arms folded tightly during questions about the Russia inquiry as his aides grew fidgety. But he was more good-humored at other points. He grew most animated when condemning media coverage he considers unfair.
He disputed persistent reports of dysfunction in the White House, noting that members of his staff write up summaries of kiss-and-tell books that have been published for him to peruse. “I have somebody — boom boom, they give me the quotes.”
At one point, he scoffed at the notion that he was making money from the presidency, calling the job a “loser” financially.
“I lost massive amounts of money doing this job,” he said. “This is not the money. This is one of the great losers of all time. You know, fortunately, I don’t need money. This is one of the great losers of all time. But they’ll say that somebody from some country stayed at a hotel. And I’ll say, ‘Yeah.’ But I lose, I mean, the numbers are incredible.”
Still, he rejected speculation that he might not run for re-election next year. “I love this job,” he said. And he said he did not think he would face a challenger for the his party’s presidential nomination, even though several Republicans are considering running. “I don’t see it,” he said. “I have great support in the party.”
Watching the emerging Democratic field, Mr. Trump said the opposition party has “really drifted far left,” and he derided Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts as damaged while expressing admiration for the campaign kickoff of Senator Kamala Harris of California, who drew thousands of supporters.
“I would say the best opening so far would be Kamala Harris,” he said, pronouncing it “Kameela.” “I would say in terms of the opening act, I would say, would be her.” He added, “A better crowd — better crowd, better enthusiasm.”
“Some of the others were very flat,” he added. “I do think Elizabeth Warren’s been hurt very badly with the Pocahontas trap,” he added, using a favorite slur to refer to the senator’s effort to prove she has Native American heritage. “I think she’s been hurt badly. I may be wrong, but I think that was a big part of her credibility, and now all of a sudden it’s gone.”
The president had tough words as well for Ms. Pelosi, who has adamantly refused to approve even a dollar of the $5.7 billion he has sought for his border wall, which she has denounced as “immoral.” Mr. Trump had gambled that he could force her to back down through the government shutdown and was vexed when he could not.
“I’ve actually always gotten along with her, but now I don’t think I will anymore,” Mr. Trump said. “I think she’s doing a tremendous disservice to the country. If she doesn’t approve a wall, the rest of it’s just a waste of money and time and energy because it’s desperately needed.”
Mr. Trump has been considering an emergency declaration to spend money on a wall even without congressional approval, an action that even some Republicans have objected to and that would certainly draw a court challenge. “I’ll continue to build the wall and we’ll get the wall finished,” he said. “Now whether or not I declare a national emergency — that you’ll see.”
Defends Syria Policy
The president defended his decisions to pull troops out of Syria and draw down forces in Afghanistan on the same day that the Senate advanced a Republican-sponsored measure condemning a “precipitous withdrawal” from those two countries. “I got elected on saying we’re getting out of these endless wars,” he said.
Given that, however, Mr. Trump did not explain why he has taken such an assertive stance in trying to force out President Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela, even leaving open a military option, while not criticizing other autocratic countries like Saudi Arabia. “I’m just saying this: Terrible things are going on,” he said. “Terrible things are going on in Venezuela.”
“Now in Saudi Arabia, a lot of improvement has been made in Saudi Arabia,” he said, while adding that the assassination of the Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi was “a terrible crime.”
On another point of contention, the president noted that he summoned his intelligence chiefs, including Dan Coats, the national intelligence director, to the White House on Thursday because he had heard they had contradicted his foreign policy during testimony this week to Congress. Mr. Coats and the others told lawmakers that North Korea was unlikely to give up its nuclear arsenal, that Iran has not restarted work to build one and that the Islamic State was not defeated, all assessments that clash with the president’s worldview.
But Mr. Trump said the intelligence chiefs told him their presentation was misinterpreted. “They said, ‘Sir, our testimony was totally mischaracterized,’” Mr. Trump said. “I said, ‘What are you talking about?’ And when you read their testimony and you read their statements, it was mischaracterized by the media.” Even though he had assailed the chiefs earlier in the week, he said, “I’m happy with Dan Coats.”
Mr. Trump said he has likewise received reassurances from Mr. Rosenstein, who until Attorney General Jeff Sessions was fired in November was overseeing the Russia investigation by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III.
“Rod told me I’m not a target of the investigation,” he said at one point, but then later suggested he had not talked with him directly. “The lawyers ask him. They say, ‘He’s not a target of the investigation.’” Asked if that also covered the separate investigation by federal prosecutors in New York, he said, “I don’t know about that.”
Neither Mr. Rosenstein nor Mr. Mueller has said whether Mr. Trump is a target, and the president could not recall when Mr. Rosenstein would have assured him. Mr. Mueller has been known to explore whether the president’s actions amounted to obstruction of justice. But since Justice Department policy bars indicting a sitting president, it is unclear whether the term “target” would apply.
Mr. Trump denied having anything to do with Mr. Stone’s involvement with WikiLeaks, which during the 2016 campaign posted Democratic emails online that were stolen by Russian intelligence services. He expressed sympathy for Mr. Stone for his arrest at the hands of heavily armed F.B.I. agents.
“I’ve always liked — I like Roger, he’s a character,” Mr. Trump said, insisting that the F.B.I. agents charging “a house like they did at six o’clock in the morning. I think that was a very sad thing for this country.”
The Moscow Project
Mr. Trump offered a vague account of his involvement in the proposed Moscow project. Michael D. Cohen, his former personal lawyer, has pleaded guilty to lying to Congress about the project and told the authorities that talks continued into the summer of 2016, even as Mr. Trump was securing the Republican nomination.
Rudolph W. Giuliani, the president’s current lawyer, said recently that talks went all the way through the November election, only to later claim that he was mistaken and speaking only hypothetically.
“He was wrong,” Mr. Trump said on Thursday. “Rudy has been wrong a little bit. But what has happened is this: I didn’t care. That deal was not important. It was essentially a letter of intent or an option.”
Asked when in 2016 the last conversation he had about the project was, he said, “I would say it was early to middle of the year. Now, I don’t know that Cohen didn’t go a little bit longer than that. I don’t think it would be much longer.” He added: “I was running for president; I was doing really well. The last thing I cared about was building a building.”
Mr. Cohen has been the focus of Mr. Trump’s ire lately, including hostile tweets that his former lawyer and others interpreted as threats. Among other things, the president has written that the authorities should be looking into Mr. Cohen’s father-in-law.
“It’s not witness tampering,” Mr. Trump said. “It’s not witness tampering at all.”
Asked what the point was then, he said, “I think people have the right to speak their mind. You know, speaking your mind. I’ve heard that for a period of time. But other people have said it, too. I mean, many people have said it.”
Mr. Trump denied that he was upset to see William P. Barr, his nominee for attorney general, attest to his long relationship with Mr. Mueller during his confirmation hearing and commit to letting the special counsel finish his investigation. “I did hear the statement and it was totally acceptable to me,” the president said.
He said he was not initially aware that Mr. Barr, as a private lawyer, had drafted a memo criticizing Mr. Mueller’s possible approach to obstruction of justice. “I mean, I read it afterwards,” he said. “But I did not know.” He added, “I never read the memo.”
Waaruit blijkt dat? Zoals ik de tekst van Habermann lees, heeft de uitgever aan Trump aangegeven dat ze een on-the-record interview met hem willen voor de NYT, maar er wordt niet duidelijk gemaakt of Trump heeft toegezegd, laat staan of het interview al heeft plaatsgevonden.quote:
blijkbaar is er een trump interview met nytimes.
Heeft iemand de tekst in spoiler voor mij, please
Edit: al beantwoord door Tweek
SPOILERPresident Trump spoke with The New York Times on Thursday, sitting in the Oval Office for an interview with two White House correspondents, Peter Baker and Maggie Haberman, and A. G. Sulzberger, the newspaper’s publisher.
[For more coverage and analysis of the discussion, read here.]
The following are excerpts from that conversation, transcribed by The Times. They have been lightly edited for content and clarity, and omit off-the-record comments and asides.
_____________________________________
PRESIDENT TRUMP: How you guys doing? You’re O.K.?
PETER BAKER, chief White House correspondent: We’re good. How are you?
TRUMP: Very good. We had a busy day.
A.G. SULZBERGER, publisher of The New York Times: I can imagine.
TRUMP: So, we just had, this is from, they just delivered that to me from President Xi. You’ll get a transcript of the meeting. The press was here. A lot of the press was here. A nice letter. They have a nice way of giving letters.
But we’re doing very successfully.
______________
BAKER: So you had the meeting today with the vice premier.
TRUMP: Yeah.
BAKER: Do you feel like you got a deal, or close to a deal?
TRUMP: Well, we’re getting closer. It’s a big deal. It’s a big deal. And we’re going comprehensive. We’re not just — He announced that he was buying — today — a tremendous amount of soybeans and various farm products. And I think you’ll be given that information in a little while, too. But he announced. What he did was the vice premier came in. He was here for two days having meetings. He’s leaving tomorrow. They’re meeting again now. And negotiations are going very well.
______________
TRUMP: That doesn’t mean there are any guarantees. But I will say there’s a very good feeling. There’s a very good relationship. This is the letter. You can actually read it. This is the translated version. So you can get a print out of that. But that was given out, and it was also, I guess it was read. They had the interpreter read it.
BAKER: And do you feel like they’re going to get a deal by March 1st? Would it take longer, do you think?
Editors’ Picks
How Does a Writer Put a Drug Trip Into Words?
Every Building on Every Block: A Time Capsule of 1930s New York
A Private Investigator Wanted to Prove His Clients Innocent. Will His Methods Be His Own Undoing?
TRUMP: It’s possible. It’s a very short period of time for a deal this big. But it’s very possible. But many of the points were agreed to. And some haven’t been. I believe that a lot of the biggest points are going to be agreed to by me and him. In other words, they’re just not going to be authorized to agree to certain things that you folks write about and read about — intellectual property and lots of other things. And I think that will be agreed to by me and him at the right time. Like when you make a big deal, or a big scoop, you have to approve that little thing. And I think they’re probably waiting, they’re waiting for me and him to sit down and agree on five points at the end, or 10 points at the end.
BAKER: What would that be?
TRUMP: Well, I think control is very important. I think the checking to make sure that — we’re putting in a very strong system of checks and balances so that when we make a deal we know that it’s happening. In other words, that it’s being followed. And we’ve asked for the most stringent controls on that, because there’s been difficulty over the years with certain places. And that’s a very important element that’s been agreed to. But you have to get it down in writing.
You’re going to have intellectual property. You’re going to have theft, because so many things have been, in theory, done a little bit differently. And I think that in the end we’re going to have something that’s going to be very special, if it happens.
I could have had a deal done, if I wanted to make — you know, most people thought it was going to be a deal where they buy a tremendous amount of corn and soybeans and that’ll be it and everybody’s happy and the farmers are happy. But he actually announced today — I wish you were here, because it was sort of a great thing to watch. The press was packed. A lot of Chinese press, too. And he announced that he’s buying a massive amount of soybeans and various other farm products today. Starting immediately. And that’s going to make a lot of farmers very happy. So you know, that was very nice.
BAKER: Do you think it’s possible that you might still go, even if you reach a deal on all of the points you’re trying to reach, leave some of the tariffs on? Is that a possibility?
TRUMP: Yes.
BAKER: Indefinitely left on?
TRUMP: Peter, without the tariffs, we wouldn’t be talking. And I make this point clear to them. We’ve never had a deal with China. We’ve never had a trade deal with China. You have the World Trade Organization, which is a disaster for the United States. The World Trade Organization is probably the worst trade deal ever made with Nafta being second. The World Trade Organization helped create China. If you look at China, it’s flatlined. And from the day the World Trade Organization came into existence, it’s a rocket ship. But just the opposite for the United States. That was a terrible deal for the United States and it was an unbelievably good deal for China.
BAKER: So some tariffs could remain permanent even with a good deal?
TRUMP: Yeah, sure. We have 25 percent now on $50 billion. And by the way, Peter, that’s a lot of money pouring into our Treasury, you know. We never made 5 cents with China. We’re getting right now 25 percent on $50 billion. And then I was putting 25 percent at a later date, which date came and went — 25 percent or $200 billion.
Sign Up for On Politics With Lisa Lerer
A spotlight on the people reshaping our politics. A conversation with voters across the country. And a guiding hand through the endless news cycle, telling you what you really need to know.
SIGN UP
______________
MAGGIE HABERMAN, White House correspondent: You’ve talked about the sacrifice that this has presented for yourself, for your family, being president. For your business. Could you ever see a point in the next year where you say, “You know what, I don’t need to do this again, I don’t need to run for re-election”?
TRUMP: I don’t see it, because — so I just gave you a list of a lot of the things we’ve done. And this list isn’t even complete. I don’t even know if you have it.
HABERMAN: No, I have it. I’ve got it.
TRUMP: Just grab it. Reading material for the night. I’ve actually had, because they’ve done things that are artificial. So there’s been more of a burden on me than other presidents.
HABERMAN: Past presidents have done things that were artificial?
TRUMP: Past presidents, yeah. I think for the most part, yeah, past presidents. I really believe, when I say that we’ve accomplished — when you look at that list, whether it’s the biggest regulation cuts in history, that’s one of the reasons the economy is doing well. Before the taxes, actually. But the tax cuts, but so many other things when you look at that and you go down the list: Veterans Choice, V.A. Choice. They’ve been trying — as long as you’ve been writing they’ve been trying to get V.A. Choice. And now I’m going to do Phase 2 on V.A. Choice, which is, you know, the next step. But the first step was just a massive step. Nobody thought it could be done.
HABERMAN: What’s left? What do you have that you would want to — why — what’s the goal for the next term?
TRUMP: I think what we’ll be focusing on will be national security, very much. So we’ve very largely — we’re in the process of rebuilding the military. Which was truly depleted.
______________
HABERMAN: So, there is no scenario in which you’d say, “I’ve done what I can,” right?
TRUMP: No, because it’s a very big job and there is a lot to do. And I would say that I would really start focusing — you know, we’ve done a lot on health care, and people haven’t given us too much credit. We have a lot of the different plans, the cooperative plans and other plans. Health care was terminated, and if the Obamacare were repealed and replaced — except for John McCain, it would have been, you know, he campaigned against it for six years, and then when he had the chance, he went thumbs down at 2:00 in the morning.
Um, but, I believe it’s going to be terminated, whether it be through the Texas case, which is going through the court system as a victory right now, because of, you know, the various elements of that case, you would think it would have to be terminated. But a deal will be made for good health care in this country. That’s one of the things I’ll be doing.
National security is very important and we’re fighting over — a very important element is the southern border. When we talk about drugs coming from China, the fentanyl — you look at the heroin and a lot of the other drugs, they come from — 90 percent, more than 90 percent — from right across the southern border. And unlike what the Democrats say, they don’t, you don’t bring trucks of drugs through the checkpoints. You bring trucks of drugs by making a right 20 miles, and a left into the country. They’re not bringing, you know, they bring massive amounts of drugs, and they do it because there’s no barrier, there’s no hardened wall that you can’t knock down with your breath.
So, Maggie, here’s the bottom line: I love doing it. I don’t know if i should love doing it, but I love doing it.
We just had a deal —and I was so looking forward to introducing you because it was very impressive. You know the whole — this room was totally, it was a sea of seats, we had the entire cabinet. They are very impressive people, and I had it all teed up and I said, “Where are they?” Right? I said, “Where the hell are they?”
HABERMAN: We were in the security tent, sorry.
TRUMP: Anyway.
HABERMAN: [Inaudible]
TRUMP: What I’m saying, there’s a lot, there’s always a lot to do, no matter how much you do. I’ve done a lot, and there’s a lot to do.
BAKER: Do you think you’ll have a Republican challenger for the nomination? Is that something you —
TRUMP: I don’t see it. You know, we’ve had polls as high as 93 percent. Which is the highest there is. Reagan was 86.
HABERMAN: W. was the only other one, right? George W. Bush?
TRUMP: Um —
HABERMAN: They seemed higher —
TRUMP: During, during a tiny little period, during the World Trade Center. That ended quickly.
HABERMAN: Do you look at Larry Hogan? Or Bill Weld, has that crossed your mind —
TRUMP: No. No. I have great support in the party. We have great support. I guess anything is possible. But look, we have among the highest polls — and actually the highest polls — but among the highest polls ever in the history of the Republican party.
Democrats, I mean the Democrats, I’m watching what’s going on. They’ve really drifted far left. They may even be too left for you folks, you know. I’m not even sure. But they’ve gone pretty far out there. And, uh —
BAKER: Who do you think is their toughest candidate?
TRUMP: So, you never know that answer. You — somebody that you think would be the least tough is the toughest. I would say, the best opening so far would be Kamala [pronouncing as Kameela] Harris. I would say, in terms of the opening act, I would say, would be her. I think she probably —
HABERMAN: What stood out to you about it?
TRUMP: I just think she seemed to have a little better opening act than others. I think.
BAKER: Incredible crowd.
TRUMP: A better crowd — better crowd, better enthusiasm. Some of the others were very flat. I do think Elizabeth Warren’s been hurt very badly with the Pocahontas trap. I think she’s been hurt badly. I may be wrong, but I think that was a big part of her credibility and now all of a sudden, it’s gone. And I may be wrong about that but, you know, I don’t see it. Some — you know, a lot of the folks have not decided to run yet. They might not run.
HABERMAN: Joe Biden?
TRUMP: I don’t — you know, I’d like to see him run. I’d like to see him run.
Because you pit him, and — you take what happened to Obama. When you look at my numbers, and you look how we’ve done for the economy, we had a news conference before, where we had a lot of workers behind us, manufacturers and workers from manufacturing plants, and it was really impressive to see what they’ve done. And they said, “Two years ago, we were dead,” and now they’re thriving.
You know, we’ve created over 500,000 manufacturing jobs, and the previous administration lost 200,000 over eight years and said that was the magic wand. I believe, I believe, Peter, right? The magic wand to get manufacturing back. I mean, manufacturing jobs are great jobs. Those are high paying, great jobs, and they make things. It’s a very important thing.
So, I just think, I think when we have the lowest black unemployment ever —lowest Hispanic, you saw the Hispanic numbers. We were at, what, 19 points up? Where we have the lowest Asian [unemployment]. Where the women are the best in 52 years now. Where the unemployment numbers are the best in 51 years. Um, you know. That’s a good record.
HABERMAN: Can I switch gears for a second? There’s been a story in the news the last two weeks about your son-in-law’s security clearance.
TRUMP: Yeah.
HABERMAN: Did you tell General Kelly or anyone else in the White House to overrule security officials? The career veterans —
TRUMP: No. I don’t think I have the authority to do that. I’m not sure I do.
Haberman: You do have the authority to do it.
Trump: But I wouldn’t. I wouldn’t do it.
HABERMAN: O.K.
TRUMP: Um, Jared is a good —
HABERMAN: You never —
TRUMP: I was never involved with the security. I know that he — you know, just from reading — I know that there was issues back and forth about security for numerous people, actually. But I don’t want to get involved in that stuff.
HABERMAN: O.K. Why would you want to — why stay out? You do have the authority to —
TRUMP: I don’t know. I just don’t — I just, I never thought it was necessary. I also know him. He’s a very solid person, and I just can’t imagine he would have — I guess even, Ivanka, they, they, I heard that, uh, something with Jared and Ivanka —
HABERMAN: Mhm.
TRUMP: But, uh, I don’t believe I’ve ever met any of the national security — of the people that would do clearances. Um, and there’d be nothing wrong, I don’t think, with me calling them up to the Oval Office and say, “Hey give these people, you know, clearances” —
HABERMAN: You just told me — [inaudible]
TRUMP: Yeah, yeah, so there, I, I mean, I take back the other — I didn’t, I was answering a little bit different question. Uh, I have the right to do it, but I never thought it was necessary, Maggie. I never thought it was necessary.
HABERMAN: And you didn’t direct General Kelly or anyone like that to do it?
TRUMP: No. And, and frankly, I never thought it was necessary to do so.
______________
TRUMP: So I’ll tell you a story that just happened. So it just happened. [To an aide] Will you get that thing we just sent out? Will you do that? I had a meeting — and bring the picture in, bring the picture — so I had a meeting with Gina [Haspel] who’s very good and [Dan] Coats. And I was shocked and I was surprised because I saw it on television and I said, “Iran is a bad actor because if you read what they said.”
HABERMAN: You mean you saw her testimony?
TRUMP: Yeah. I said, “Iran is a bad actor.” And I could tell you stories of things that we were going to do to them as recently as a week ago. I said, “Iran is a very bad actor. What’s this like Iran is kindergarten stuff?” They said, “Sir, we never said it.” I said, “What are you talking about?”
Then I said, “And ISIS — we almost have the caliphate 100 percent. What are you talking about?” Like ISIS has got — and I mean, I’m not, by the way — the defeat is an interesting word. Because you can say you have the caliphate, but you’re always going to have people that escape the caliphate and you’ll have people around. There’s nothing — but that doesn’t mean you’re going to keep your armies there and everything. Because you’re always going to have that. Somebody is going to walk into a store unfortunately.
But I said, “What is that all about? Second of all, third of all, you know how well we’re doing with North Korea, what’s that?”
They said, “Sir, our testimony was totally mischaracterized.” I said, “What are you talking about?” And when you read their testimony and you read their statements, it was mischaracterized by the media.
HABERMAN: The media mischaracterized it?
TRUMP: You know what I mean. Because when you read their statement, it’s not like it was portrayed in the media. Because I came in —
HABERMAN: What did they think they were saying? What did they tell you that they were —
TRUMP: When you see what they said, and they’re, they’re — let’s put it this way. It was really very different when I read it. Because I came in here saying what is this? You mean you’re — because one of the things they said very strongly, according to, was that Iran is, essentially, a wonderful place. And I said, “It’s not a wonderful place, it’s a bad place, and they’re doing bad things.”
And they said, “We agree.” I said, “What do you mean you agree. You can’t agree —” And they said the testimony was totally mischaracterized.
______________
HABERMAN: So you’re happy with Dan Coats?
TRUMP: I’m happy with Dan Coats. I am. That doesn’t mean —
HABERMAN: Is that a change?
TRUMP: Well, no, everybody changes. You know, this business, other than me, everybody changes. You know, if you look at my staff.
So I wish you could have been here before. Because we had this whole side of the room with secretaries, every one of them. Sonny Perdue. Linda McMahon, big, a big sleeper, she’s phenomenal. Somebody said, she’s one of our best — you know and you don’t ever hear about her or anything. We had Mike Pompeo. We had all of our secretaries, many of our secretaries here, probably half of them.
And then you had the China group over here, the delegation. And I’m looking and I’m saying these are really outstanding people. They’re outstanding. Did you notice that today? How outstanding? We have a lot of great people.
Now I do tell the story about driving down Pennsylvania Avenue, you know. Because I’d been in Washington probably 17 times in my life. And on the 18th time, I was president of the United States. And you know, Washington wasn’t really my place. And I didn’t know people. I didn’t know a lot of people. And I got — I put some people in that I wasn’t happy with and I put some people in that I was very happy with.
But we’ve gotten it very — you know, as I’ve — now I know a lot of people.
HABERMAN: Do you ever — and I want to go back to your point about military intervention in a second — but do you have any thoughts about defense secretary and where that’s getting in terms of —
TRUMP: So I wasn’t happy with Mattis. I told Mattis to give me a letter. He didn’t just give me that letter. I told him. And you could have seen that on “60 Minutes.” I did “60 Minutes” and Lesley Stahl asked me a question: “What do you think of General Mattis?”
HABERMAN: You called him a Democrat, didn’t you?
TRUMP: And I said let me be generous. But I just — I didn’t like the job he was doing. I wasn’t happy with it. I wasn’t happy with the — I got him more money than the military has ever seen before. And I wasn’t happy with the job that he was doing at all. And I said it’s time.
That’s why in the letter he wrote, “You have to have your own choice.” The reason he said that was because I said, “You’re just not my choice.”
HABERMAN: Who is your choice then, sir?
TRUMP: Well, I have a lot of great people that want it. I also have somebody there who’s really been very good. Pat, Pat Shanahan. He’s acting. And he’s been doing — Maggie, he’s been doing a great job. Yeaaaaah?
AIDE: You just have some important calls whenever you’re finished.
TRUMP: O.K., I’ll be in in a little while. What’s more important than The New York Times? Ok, nothing, nothing.
HABERMAN: We ask that of ourselves all the time.
TRUMP: So I’m sure you hear good things about him. He’s a very solid guy. You know it’s interesting, historically, you just never — you rarely put a military person in, which surprises me. When I first got here, I said what do you mean? That’s the natural of all naturals. Actually you need special approvals to put them in, you know, etc., etc. Normally a business person goes in and I mean you have one exception or two exceptions, but historically a business person goes in to the secretary of defense.
BAKER: He might stay in?
TRUMP: Pat — he could stay. Pat Shanahan is doing a terrific job. A tremendous number of people would like that position. One thing — first of all, there’s really no chaos in the White House, ’cause the chaos thing — you see it, you’re here, you see what’s going on.
HABERMAN: Why do people keep writing books saying that’s the way things are?
TRUMP: Because that’s the way they sell.
HABERMAN: So they’re just making up all this? What about Cliff Sims?
TRUMP: Well, I had this aide. I didn’t even know who it was. I said who is Cliff Sims? Who is he? And he would take me to — you know I’d do like a little address — he’d come to — he’d say we’re ready for the president. And he’d walk me down to wherever room we’re doing a weekly recording or a monthly recording. I hardly knew the guy.
Now I — once they — I said show me what he looks like. And they showed me a picture. I said, oh, yeah, I know him. He’s the video guy. This guy, now he made it sound like he’s a top aide. What happens — and I’ve also had some very good books — but what — and I made a mistake.
The mistake I made is on a couple of books, I never spoke to the people. When you don’t speak to the people, it’s impossible to get—
HABERMAN: [Bob] Woodward?
TRUMP: Woodward was a mistake. And that was a mistake where they — where I believe he did, he notified a number of people. “I really want to speak to” — I would have spoken to him in two seconds. But I didn’t speak to him and that was a mistake not speaking to him.
And it was a mistake of my staff. [Turning to the White House press secretary, Sarah Huckabee Sanders] You understand that? It was a mistake of my staff.
SARAH HUCKABEE SANDERS: To this day, I’ve never had a conversation with him.
TRUMP: If I would have spoken to him, even if it was for a fairly short period of time, I think it would have been a little different. The other guy was a huckster, who did the book that did very well.
HABERMAN: Michael Wolff?
TRUMP: “Fire and Fury.” It took my name — my name from my Korean situation — “Fire and fury like the world has never seen.”
HABERMAN: I recall.
TRUMP: And again, I didn’t speak to him. And I would have. I definitely — I never saw him. I did an article with him a couple of years before. And I met him at a house that I have in Beverly Hills. We did an interview. It was a decent story to be honest. It was, you know, a pretty nice story. But I should have seen him too as he was in the White House a lot — that was a [Stephen] Bannon deal. And yet Bannon, now, if you’ve seen him on an interview over the last six months, I think there’s nobody that speaks better. It’s a crazy situation.
BAKER: Do you talk to him?
TRUMP: I have not. No, I haven’t spoken to him in a year and a half.
HABERMAN: The last time you talked to him was when you fired him?
TRUMP: Have I what?
HABERMAN: When he was fired, it was the last time you spoke to him? Or soon after?
TRUMP: I would say in that territory, yeah. I’m not sure that I spoke to him at all during. You know, maybe a phone call. But not, no, I don’t think so.
HABERMAN: Speaking of former aides, we wanted to talk to you about [Roger] Stone.
TRUMP: Sure, now you know Roger didn’t work for me in the campaign.
HABERMAN: Initially and then he —
TRUMP: Well, yeah, but that was before I — you know, that was either early primary or before primary.
HABERMAN: It was August or September [2015].
TRUMP: That was a long time. I will say this, I’ve always liked — I like Roger, he’s a character. But I like Roger. For a team of 29 people with AK27s, or whatever they were using, to charge a house like they did at 6:00 in the morning. I think that was a very sad thing for this country.
HABERMAN: Did you ever talk to him about WikiLeaks? Because that seemed —
TRUMP: No.
HABERMAN: You never had conversations with him.
TRUMP: No, I didn’t. I never did.
HABERMAN: Did you ever tell him to — or other people to get in touch with them?
TRUMP: Never did.
HABERMAN: You saw that was in the indictment.
TRUMP: Can I tell you? I didn’t see it. I know what was in the indictment if you read it, there was no collusion with Russia. But that’s in a lot of these things. And a lot of them are: They come in, they interview somebody and they get them for lying. I mean, you know.
I’ll give you an example. So I never met Carter Page. I think to this day I never met Carter Page. I never met Carter Page. [George] Papadopoulos, I never met him, other than one time, where he sat at a table along with maybe 10 or 15 other people, because they wanted to set up a national security team. And I guess he has a certain expertise in national security. So he was at a table very briefly. I don’t believe I ever spoke to him. You know there were a lot of people. I was there for a very short period of time. Never met him.
People have been treated very, very badly. This is a very bad thing.
HABERMAN: Who else has been treated very badly, in your opinion?
TRUMP: Well, I’d rather save it for later. We’ll do something on it at the right time, but I did think this. When Roger Stone, who all of us know, I mean everybody knows Roger.
______________
TRUMP: He was not my consultant. But if you read the papers you know it’s like — the media, it’s like — but I’ve always liked him. He’s a character, and I’ll tell you what people respect what he said. Bearing false witness, etc. But yeah, people do respect what he said.
HABERMAN: What he said about what?
TRUMP: Bear false witness. I will never testify against the president. He actually said at one time — you know he’s said it numerous times, but I heard him say it one time he’s done a great job, he’s a great president, and I will not, you know, lie in order to — people respect that so much. They respect that.
BAKER: Sir, can we clarify the Trump Tower Moscow proposal, right? There was this discussion. And we’ve learned since the last, since the campaign, that this went on longer through the campaign than we had expected —
TRUMP: So let me tell you about about Trump Tower Moscow. This was a very unimportant deal. This was a very unimportant deal. No. 1. No. 2, this was a deal, the only thing you heard is through Rudy [Giuliani]. Is that what you heard? Through Rudy?
BAKER: More recently we heard through Rudy, he quotes you.
TRUMP: Rudy was incorrect. No. 1, he was incorrect, and we’ve explained that, he was wrong. Rudy has been wrong. A little bit. But what has happened is this. I didn’t care. That deal was not important. It was essentially a letter of intent or an option. I’m not even sure that they had a site. And if you look at where that was sent to, that was a Michael Cohen thing. If you look, I always say, Why don’t you bring this up, to Jay Sekulow, good guy. I think it was sent to almost like a public address for Moscow. If you take a look at it. Take a good solid look. The original letter or something was sent. They didn’t even have anybody to send it to. But that deal is just like other deals. I was doing other deals. I was running for president, but I was also running a business.
BAKER: How late do you remember having any conversations about it in 2016? What was the latest that you remember?
TRUMP: I would say it was early to middle of the year. Now, I don’t know that Cohen didn’t go a little bit longer than that. I don’t think it would be much longer. But then he could have come back to me and said, “Listen, I put it together.” Because that stuff happens. You know, you think a deal — I was running for president, I was doing really well. The last thing I cared about was building a building.
BAKER: But you told people that you didn’t have any business there. People might have misunderstood.
TRUMP: That wasn’t business. Peter, that wasn’t business.
BAKER: Isn’t that misleading to say you weren’t pursuing business there, right?
[Crosstalk]
TRUMP: I had no money invested. It was a letter of intent, or option. It was a free option. It was a nothing. And I wasn’t doing anything. I don’t consider that even business. And frankly, that wasn’t even on my radar. If you take a look at that, take a look at the deal. There was no money put up. There was no transfer. I don’t think they had a location. I’m not even sure if they had a location.
BAKER: Clearly there was a hope of having money. That was the reason you were pursuing it, right?
TRUMP: My point is this — It was a free option to look at a deal, to look at deals. That was not like, “I’m going to buy a property in Moscow. I’m going to do — or I’m building a building in Moscow.” Now, I would have had every right to do a deal. That’s what I did. That’s what I did.
Rudy was wrong in that he went — I think what Rudy was looking at, I think, was that in the statement I made to the Mueller group, we talked about during that period of a year, up until the election, we talked about that. So he may have been referring to that.
But the way I view it is early in the year to middle of the year, no interest. I had very little interest in the first place, and again, I viewed it as a free option. It may have been a letter of intent. I don’t know exactly what it was called. But it was unimportant. And you know what was very important to me? Running for president. And doing well. But I was running a business. I mean, I would have been allowed to build 20 buildings. I was doing other things. I was doing a lot of other things. I was running a business. Because as you would know, there weren’t a lot of people at the time that thought I was going to win. So I don’t want to give up a year and a half of my life, not do anything, run for president, then have to go back and say, you know, “I could have kept running my business.”
Very interestingly, you know, George Washington ran his business. You can, I guess, you can go long beyond the election, if you wanted to. You know. But I didn’t do that.
BAKER: But there’s a difference between running a domestic business and being possibly in business with Russian figures at the same time, right? You can imagine why people might find that concerning?
TRUMP: I have nothing. All I did was be a good candidate. Russia didn’t help me. Russia did not help me. There was no collusion. There was none of that. I was a good candidate. I did a good job. I won’t say whether she was a good candidate or not. I mean, the primary collusion was Hillary Clinton. If you take a look, Peter. I mean, look at that phony dossier. Some of that money, they say, went to Russia. [Tony] Podesta was involved with Russia. You look at the kind of relationships they had. They had real relationships with Russia. I had a potential, a deal that frankly wasn’t even a deal. It was literally — I viewed it as an option. But maybe it was called a letter of intent. Something like that.
BAKER: Has Attorney General [Matthew] Whitaker given you any indication of whether you face any exposure in this investigation?
TRUMP: No.
HABERMAN: Or your family?
TRUMP: I don’t even talk to him about it.
HABERMAN: You never talk to Matt Whitaker?
TRUMP: I don’t talk to him about it. How can you have exposure when you haven’t done anything? I had nothing to do with any of this, other than that I was a good candidate that won an election.
HABERMAN: Has Rod Rosenstein given you any sense over the course of the last year about whether you have any exposure, either in — or there’s any concerns, or whether you’re a target of the Mueller report?
TRUMP: Well he told the attorneys that I’m not a subject, I’m not a target.
HABERMAN: He told your attorneys?
TRUMP: Yeah. Oh, yeah.
HABERMAN: Did he say that about the S.D.N.Y. [Southern District of New York] investigation, too?
TRUMP: About which?
HABERMAN: The S.D.N.Y. investigation. Because there’s two. There’s Mueller, and then there’s the Cohen investigation.
TRUMP: I don’t know about that. That I don’t know about.
HABERMAN: Rod has never said anything to you about whether you’re a target at all in terms of what they were looking for on Cohen? Has that ever come up?
TRUMP: No. I don’t. We didn’t discuss it.
AIDE: Mr. President, we’re coming up on 45 minutes.
TRUMP: Yeah, that’s O.K. Rod told me I’m not a target of the investigation.
HABERMAN: He did?
TRUMP: He did. He told me.
HABERMAN: Do you remember how long ago he said that?
TRUMP: I think the lawyers would speak to him a lot about that. Not a lot. But a number of times. He never said — I never asked him that question.
HABERMAN: But your lawyers have?
TRUMP: The lawyers ask him. They say, “He’s not a target of the investigation.”
BAKER: Can I ask, speaking of Mr. Cohen, you’ve said that investigators should be looking at his father-in-law. What did you mean by that?
TRUMP: Well, that’s what I’ve heard. I’ve heard his father-in-law was — I’m not saying investigation.
______________
BAKER: Can I ask, on the record, what’s the purpose of saying that? Some people are wondering whether or not this kind of thing might count as witness tampering, that you’re kind of publicly —
TRUMP: It’s not witness tampering. It’s not witness tampering at all. It’s not witness tampering.
BAKER: What’s your purpose, then? Help us understand that.
TRUMP: I did have to read what I said. What did I say? I don’t know. What did I say?
HABERMAN: Just that people ought to be taking a look at Michael Cohen’s father-in-law. And House Democrats have said they thought that —
TRUMP: Well, I will say this: I think people have the right to speak their mind. You know, speaking your mind. I’ve heard that for a period of time. But other people have said it, too. I mean, many people have said it.
HABERMAN: I want to switch back to something I wanted to ask you about before: You talked about, accurately, that you won in part because you’ve talked about these foreign engagements.
TRUMP: Because of what?
HABERMAN: Ending foreign engagements. And you have said we’re not going to lecture the world. But you seem to be leaving open the idea of a military option in Venezuela. Am I reading that right?
TRUMP: It’s true.
HABERMAN: Why there, and not 100 other countries?
TRUMP: Well, I’m not saying I’m doing anything in terms of the military option in Venezuela. But I can say very pointedly we’re not taking that off the table.
HABERMAN: Why is that?
TRUMP: We’re involved in wars that are 6,000 miles away. We’re involved in wars where it’s just absolutely insane what we’re doing, and the money we’re spending, where in Afghanistan, we’re spending $50 billion. That’s more than most countries spend for everything.
HABERMAN: But why leave it open in Venezuela as opposed to somewhere — what is it about Venezuela specifically?
TRUMP: Well, I think I’m not closing. I don’t close it anywhere. I don’t close it. Somebody just asked me, “Is there a military option?” I said all options are on the table. I’m not taking anything off the table.
BAKER: In Saudi Arabia, when you were in Saudi Arabia and I was with you, sir, and you said in Riyadh, “We’re not going to lecture you, we’re not going to tell you how to run your countries.” What about Venezuela seems different than that? Because obviously it’s a terrible situation there, but there are terrible situations in a lot of places.
MAGGIE: Peter’s asking it better than I did.
TRUMP: There are terrible things happening in Venezuela.
BAKER: Absolutely.
TRUMP: I have access to things, Peter, that are absolutely terrible, what’s going on in Venezuela.
BAKER: So that makes it an exception, in effect, to your standard you talked about in Saudi Arabia, of not lecturing other countries?
TRUMP: I’m just saying this: Terrible things are going on. Terrible things are going on in Venezuela. And I look at that, and I see what’s happening. Now in Saudi Arabia, a lot of improvement has been made in Saudi Arabia. But you look at Iran, and they kill many, many people in Iran. You have the access and we have the access also. And Saudi Arabia also has a lot to do with economic development. They’re a country that pays us a tremendous amount of money, creates a tremendous amount of jobs. And Saudi Arabia, I’m not making excuses for anybody. I think that was a terrible event. It was a terrible tragedy. It was a terrible crime.
HABERMAN: [The journalist Jamal] Khashoggi?
TRUMP: Yeah. Khashoggi. I thought it was a terrible crime. But if you look at other countries, many other countries. You look at Iran, not so far away from Saudi Arabia, and take a look at what they’re doing there. So you know, that’s just the way I feel. Venezuela is very much in flux. We’ve been hearing about it for probably 14 years now, between the two of them. And some terrible things are happening in Venezuela. So if I can do something to help people. It’s really helping humanity, if we can do something to help people, I’d like to do that.
BAKER: What’d you say to Mr. [Juan] Guaidó, the opposition leader that you talked to?
TRUMP: We had a very good talk. Just more than anything else, I guess, I wished him good luck. It’s a dangerous journey. He’s in a very dangerous place. And it’s a very dangerous journey. I watched him —
______________
HABERMAN: There was a report that you were upset when you saw the Senate testimony of Bill Barr [the nominee for attorney general], when he was talking about his personal closeness with Robert Mueller. Were you surprised by that? And —
TRUMP: No. I didn’t know Bill Barr, but I’ve always heard he was an outstanding man.
HABERMAN: Did that bother you?
TRUMP: And that’s what I wanted for that position.
HABERMAN: It doesn’t bother you that he’s friendly with Bob Mueller? That’s not a —
TRUMP: I did hear the statement and it was totally acceptable to me. I just want somebody that’s a very outstanding person and who’s going to be — I think he has a chance to be a great attorney general.
And they need it. They really need it. I mean they — You see what’s happening. There’s been turmoil between the Justice Department, the F.B.I. You look at all of the statements made. You look at all of the firings, not firings by me, by the way. But you look at all of the people that have left and been fired and terminated and all of the terrible statements being made. And it is a terrible thing that’s gone on there.
BAKER: Have you talked about what he should do once he takes over, about those things?
TRUMP: Very little. I’ll tell you what: What I talked about is the fact — I went into his past almost two years of being attorney general. I went into his life, as a, you know, after being the attorney general, which was very successful. He’s had a very successful life, Bill Barr. He’s very respected. I didn’t know him, you know, until this whole situation — until, you know, it was time to look for an attorney general. So many people recommended him. So many people.
BAKER: [inaudible]
TRUMP: And again this isn’t somebody — and I think I probably would be able to put up somebody that I know very well. I mean Kennedy used his brother, and so I would have been able to. But I wanted somebody that was respected. I think that he did very well at the hearing, really well, as well as, some people say it was as good as you can do. And I think he’ll be a great attorney general. I certainly hope so.
BAKER: Were you aware of the memo that he had written and submitted to I think the White House counsel criticizing Mueller’s approach.
TRUMP: I did not know that.
HABERMAN: You didn’t know that?
TRUMP: I did not know. I mean, I read it afterwards. But I did not know.
BAKER: Did you know it when you picked him or you didn’t know it at the time?
TRUMP: I didn’t see the memo. I never read the memo.
HABERMAN: Since you’re still in the middle of this negotiations about the continuing resolution, about the wall funding —
TRUMP: Yeah.
HABERMAN: This is your first experience dealing with Nancy Pelosi having the gavel as the speaker. Do you feel that you properly estimated her strengths?
TRUMP: Yeah, I did. I did. I’ve actually always gotten along with her, but now I don’t think I will anymore. I think that she’s hurting the country very badly. I think she’s doing a tremendous disservice to the country. If she doesn’t approve a wall, the rest of it’s just a waste of money and time and energy because it’s, it’s desperately needed. People are flowing in.
I mean, we have caravans coming in right now, 12,000 people. We have three of them lined up. And you know they’re lining up from Honduras and Guatemala and El Salvador. And they’re coming in.
With a wall, you don’t need very much help. We just had to move more military down there to handle the one that’s coming up now: 12,000 people or whatever it might be. But they say it’s about 12,000 people.
No, I think Nancy Pelosi is hurting our country very badly by doing what she’s doing. And ultimately I think I’ve set the table very nicely.
BAKER: For —
HABERMAN: For what?
TRUMP: Well, they understand, Peter. They didn’t know what was going on with the southern border. Now they know. They had no idea the amount of crime, the amount of drugs, the amount of human trafficking, which can be stopped with a proper system —
BAKER: So set the table for emergency declaration.
TRUMP: I’ve set the table. I’ve set the stage for doing what I’m going to do.
BAKER: And you’ll wait out the 21 days before you take any action?
TRUMP: Yeah, I’m going to wait until the 15th. I think it’s a waste of time —
[Crosstalk]
TRUMP: Well, based on everything I hear. Now they’ll probably be overly generous with things that you don’t need in terms of money. They’ll give you more money than you need for things that won’t help very much. And they’ll give you money for good things, too. But based on what I hear and based on what I read, they don’t want to give money for the wall.
You know I’m building the wall. You know that. I’m building the wall right now. I’m building — it’s been funded, and we’re buying it right. And we’re renovating large sections of wall. We’re building new sections of wall. We’re building the wall. The wall is going up as we speak. We’ll be up to, by the end of this year, 115 miles.
[inaudible]
TRUMP: At least.
AIDE: That’s either finished or under construction.
TRUMP: And that doesn’t include large amounts of wall that we’ll be starting before the end of the year. So we’ll be up to hundreds of miles of wall between new wall and renovation wall in a fairly short period of time. It’s the one thing. So I’m building the wall now, as we speak. And I’ll continue to build the wall, and we’ll get the wall finished. Now whether or not I declare a national emergency, that you’ll see.
HABERMAN: You tweeted, sir, I guess it was yesterday, these all days feel like one day, but you tweeted that essentially that your intel chiefs, and this is what we were talking about earlier, needed to go back to school. You have at various points taken issue with things that your government has told you on climate change, on ISIS, on what we saw, though I understand that you’re saying you think the press misrepresented what was said..
TRUMP: Well, you’ll have to see, I mean you’ll have to see. And you should call Dan and you should call Gina. I would like you to. You know them [inaudible].
HABERMAN: But just broadly, sir: Why do you find yourself at odds with your government —
TRUMP: I don’t.
HABERMAN: — and why do you feel in terms of what the advice —
[Crosstalk]
TRUMP: Well, first of all, when I walked into the room, there’s your picture, I guess you have it. [Hands reporters a photograph of intelligence chiefs meeting with him.] But when I walked into the room, I said, “What’s the story with Iran?”
[Inaudible]
“We were totally misrepresented.”
I said, “What are you talking about?”
“They misrepresented — ”
HABERMAN: There was that time, though. What about the other times with climate change, or —
TRUMP: Well, you have to really take a look at everybody else. And if you would have been here today, and you would have seen this whole side of the room filled up with secretaries and people that are running government, you would have said, I don’t get, I don’t have a problem with anybody. I don’t dispute anything.
You’re talking about very little by comparison to the people that we’re talking about. Great relationship with Mike Pompeo. That was a great choice. Great relationship with — Sonny Perdue is fantastic. Agriculture. He was very happy because China said we’re going to buy tremendous amounts of farm products, O.K., agriculture products, in front of him. It was a gesture — a very big gesture — but it was a gesture. Very substantial amount of product. And he said he’s starting today, which is pretty amazing. You know we’re not going to have an agreement for a little while yet, if we have an agreement.
So when you look at the overall government, there’s really very little dispute.
I mean Sarah, could I ask you two to speak up about that?
SANDERS: Yeah, I think the report you’re referring to is the climate change thing is a career official’s report, so it’s not his appointees. And there’s a lot of people within your administration —
TRUMP: You have a lot of people that are in from other administrations that frankly you keep because you’re not allowed to do anything but keep them, O.K.? And so they’ll do reports. And by the way, you’re going to have people that are from my administration in years from now that would be very critical of perhaps another president where they disagree with something.
But as you know, you have many, many people in this administration and every other administration that wasn’t put there by me, and they have to stay there. It’s a job for life.
HABERMAN: You mean civil servants —
TRUMP: And they can be critical. And just like we put in a lot of great people, they’ll be critical into the future. That doesn’t happen at The New York Times.
Federal contractors zijn geen ambtenaren, het zijn bedrijven die diensten leveren aan de overheid (schoonmakers, catering etc.). Tijdens shutdowns leveren ze geen diensten en worden ze meestal niet betaald (al kunnen agencies dat wel doen, ook zonder nieuwe wet).quote:
GOP wil in plaats van de ambtenaars met terugwerkende kracht betalen na de shutdown liever de estate tax afschaffen. Alsof het nog niet duidelijk genoeg was.
GOP rejects bill to give back pay to federal contractors, wants to repeal estate tax instead
Eerder las ik al wat quotes.quote:Op vrijdag 1 februari 2019 10:43 schreef chibibo het volgende:
[..]
Waaruit blijkt dat? Zoals ik de tekst van Habermann lees, heeft de uitgever aan Trump aangegeven dat ze een on-the-record interview met hem willen voor de NYT, maar er wordt niet duidelijk gemaakt of Trump heeft toegezegd, laat staan of het interview al heeft plaatsgevonden.
Edit: al beantwoord door Tweek
Dank dank.
Wordt nu op cnn uitgekauwd: wat zei trump wel/niet ...wist hij wat hij zegt...wist hij wat hij bedoelde...
Ah ok, dank je. Maakt het niet minder hilarisch natuurlijk.quote:
[..]
Federal contractors zijn geen ambtenaren, het zijn bedrijven die diensten leveren aan de overheid (schoonmakers, catering etc.). Tijdens shutdowns leveren ze geen diensten en worden ze meestal niet betaald (al kunnen agencies dat wel doen, ook zonder nieuwe wet).
twitter:USATODAY twitterde op vrijdag 01-02-2019 om 13:15:13Sen. Cory Booker announces presidential run, joining the crowded field of Democrats looking to beat Donald Trump in 2020 https://t.co/G5OtbMsm9B reageer retweet
Hier zijn aankondiging met filmpje van een paar minuten:quote:twitter:USATODAY twitterde op vrijdag 01-02-2019 om 13:15:13
twitter:CoryBooker twitterde op vrijdag 01-02-2019 om 13:14:55I’m running for president. Join me on this journey. https://t.co/fEDqOVIfwh https://t.co/h1FTPUYRzo reageer retweet
Goed luisteren naar de miljardairs, die weten als geen ander wat goed is voor het grauw.quote:Aides have to be on alert at Mar-a-Lago to intercept notes or policy proposals from supporters—including one from a guest who tried showing Trump an executive order he drafted. Trump has directed aides to give those people ample listening time, NYT notes. https://t.co/KbJjh7534U
Concurrentie voor Harris voor de AA vote.quote:
[..]
Hier zijn aankondiging met filmpje van een paar minuten:twitter:CoryBooker twitterde op vrijdag 01-02-2019 om 13:14:55
https://www.reuters.com/a(...)ficial-idUSKCN1PQ418quote:USAID assistance in the West Bank and Gaza has ceased: U.S. official
The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has ceased all assistance to Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and Gaza, a U.S. official said on Friday.
The decision was linked to a Jan. 31 deadline set by new U.S. legislation under which foreign aid recipients would be more exposed to anti-terrorism lawsuits.
The deadline also sees the end of about $60 million in U.S. aid for the Palestinian security forces, whose cooperation with Israeli forces helps maintain relative quiet in the West Bank.
Congress’ Anti-Terrorism Clarification Act (ATCA) empowers Americans to sue foreign aid recipients in U.S. courts over alleged complicity in “acts of war”.
The Palestinian Authority declined further U.S. funding over worries about its potential legal exposure, although it denies Israeli accusations that it encourages militant attacks.
“At the request of the Palestinian Authority, we have wound down certain projects and programs funded with assistance under the authorities specified in ATCA in the West Bank and Gaza, a U.S. official told Reuters on Friday.
“All USAID assistance in the West Bank and Gaza has ceased.”
It was unclear how long the cessation would be in effect. The official said no steps were currently being taken to close the USAID mission in the Palestinian territories, and no decision had been made about future staffing at the USAID mission in the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem.
USAID is the main agency administering U.S. foreign assistance in the Palestinian territories. According to it website, the agency spent $268 million on public projects in the West Bank and Gaza as well as Palestinian private sector debt repayment in 2017, but there were significant cuts to all new funding through the end of June 2018.
twitter:kylegriffin1 twitterde op vrijdag 01-02-2019 om 14:45:02
SPOILER
[ Bericht 26% gewijzigd door Kijkertje op 01-02-2019 17:18:29 ]
Alles beter dan Trump.quote:
Heb Booker een paar keer horen spreken en hij kwam op mij over als een goede kandidaat. Ik lees wel veel reacties dat hij ooit beinvloed is door 'big pharma' dus dat zal hem wel achtervolgen.
Me dunkt dat je de lat dan te laag legt voor een Democratische presidentskandidaat..quote:
Deze man lijkt me gewoon geschikt, heb 'm weleens voorbij zien komen in talkshows. De tijden dat men als argument had dat iemand wel een klein smetje had ergens en daardoor niet geschikt zou zijn, zijn ook vvt na Trump.quote:
[..]
Me dunkt dat je de lat dan te laag legt voor een Democratische presidentskandidaat..
Onderschat de republikeinse propagandamachine niet.quote:
[..]
Deze man lijkt me gewoon geschikt, heb 'm weleens voorbij zien komen in talkshows. De tijden dat men als argument had dat iemand wel een klein smetje had ergens en daardoor niet geschikt zou zijn, zijn ook vvt na Trump.
Booker komt inderdaad heel sympathiek over.quote:
[..]
Deze man lijkt me gewoon geschikt, heb 'm weleens voorbij zien komen in talkshows. De tijden dat men als argument had dat iemand wel een klein smetje had ergens en daardoor niet geschikt zou zijn, zijn ook vvt na Trump.
Ik denk dat die op zich niet zo'n heel groot probleem is. De grootste valkuil is denk ik de de lakmoesproef waaraan een deel van de potentiële Democratische stemmers hun kandidaten onderwerpen.quote:
[..]
Onderschat de republikeinse propagandamachine niet.
Bij de GOP lijken de kiezers enorm vergevingsgezind, terwijl sommige Democraat hun kandidaten aan onmogelijke perfectionistische standaarden lijken te willen houden.
Als Booker al als president in de wieg lag heeft hij het voor de wind. Als hij een doorsnee student is geweest dan krijgt hij waarschijnlijk hier en daar wel wat balonnen die men opblaast.quote:
[..]
Ik denk dat die op zich niet zo'n heel groot probleem is. De grootste valkuil is denk ik de de lakmoesproef waaraan een deel van de potentiële Democratische stemmers hun kandidaten onderwerpen.
Bij de GOP lijken de kiezers enorm vergevingsgezind, terwijl sommige Democraat hun kandidaten aan onmogelijke perfectionistische standaarden lijken te willen houden.
https://www.volkskrant.nl(...)et-bevalt-~bcbd1b37/
Dus Trump kan zich ook gewoon vrijkopen als hij een celstraf toegewezen zou krijgen. Dat is nogal wat, hier staat het Somalië van het westen wel in de steigers. Zal 'm zo even verder lezen.quote:
Interview met Eelco Bosch van Rosenthal in de VK:
https://www.volkskrant.nl(...)et-bevalt-~bcbd1b37/
Trump is ook de eerste president in de geschiedenis die al vroeg na z'n inhuldiging vol ingezet heeft op z'n herverkiezing en momenteel een magistraal budget heeft klaarliggen voor de 2020 campagne.
[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door Beathoven op 02-02-2019 10:32:00 ]
Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line. Een cliché natuurlijk maar er zit wel een kern van waarheid in.quote:
[..]
Ik denk dat die op zich niet zo'n heel groot probleem is. De grootste valkuil is denk ik de de lakmoesproef waaraan een deel van de potentiële Democratische stemmers hun kandidaten onderwerpen.
Bij de GOP lijken de kiezers enorm vergevingsgezind, terwijl sommige Democraat hun kandidaten aan onmogelijke perfectionistische standaarden lijken te willen houden.
Wow, gewoon ordinair politiek achterkamertjesonderhandeling in de SC zo te zien. Zijn er gevallen bekend dat iets als dit eerder in de openbaarheid kwam?twitter:lawrencehurley twitterde op vrijdag 01-02-2019 om 16:33:43.@JoanBiskupic has new details on Chief Justice's vote in the Obamacare case in her new book, per review in the Atlantic: https://t.co/tD1pyleZC5 https://t.co/1UkoE5vEgc
reageer retweet
twitter:WouterZwart twitterde op zaterdag 02-02-2019 om 00:47:19De Democratische gouverneur Ralph Northam van Virginia is in grote problemen nadat een jaarboekfoto is opgedoken uit zijn studententijd met blackface en kkk-outfit. Hij biedt zijn excuses aan voor “duidelijk racisme”. Maar of het daarmee ok is? https://t.co/1WTyg1hzHN reageer retweet
Ai. Da's vrij pijnlijk. Lijkt me niet dat die nog aan kan blijven.quote:twitter:WouterZwart twitterde op zaterdag 02-02-2019 om 00:47:19
Het is me niet duidelijk welke keuze hij hierin had? Ik zou eerder de editor van dat jaarboek eens bestraffend toespreken.quote:
[..]
Ai. Da's vrij pijnlijk. Lijkt me niet dat die nog aan kan blijven.
Northams reactie:
Dus kennelijk heeft hij zelf destijds keuzes gemaakt. Deze keuzes waren dan in zijn tiener-jaren, waar met Kavanaugh wel een precedent gezet is.quote:"This behavior is not in keeping with who I am today and the values I have fought for throughout my career in the military, in medicine, and in public service. But I want to be clear, I understand how this decision shakes Virginians' faith in that commitment," Northam said. "I recognize that it will take time and serious effort to heal the damage this conduct has caused. I am ready to do that important work. The first step is to offer my sincerest apology and to state my absolute commitment to living up to the expectations Virginians set for me when they elected me to be their Governor."
[ Bericht 19% gewijzigd door ExtraWaskracht op 02-02-2019 01:24:17 ]
Welke keuze? Wat dacht je van jezelf aankleden als klansman en dan poseren voor een foto?quote:
[..]
Het is me niet duidelijk welke keuze hij hierin had? Ik zou eerder de editor van dat jaarboek eens bestraffend toespreken.
Northams reactie:
[..]
Dus kennelijk heeft hij zelf destijds keuzes gemaakt. Deze keuzes waren dan in zijn tiener-jaren, waar met Kavanaugh wel een precedent gezet is.
Oh ja, fair point, ik was idd abuis.quote:
[..]
Welke keuze? Wat dacht je van jezelf aankleden als klansman en dan poseren voor een foto?
De kwestie van wie dat soort foto's in jaarboeken plaatst is denk ik wel een aardige, want, WTF?!
Ik kan me zo voorstellen dat dit soort studentikoze verkleedpartijen in dat wereldje als 'grappig' werd ervaren?quote:
[..]
Oh ja, fair point, ik was idd abuis.
De kwestie van wie dat soort foto's in jaarboeken plaatst is denk ik wel een aardige, want, WTF?!
twitter:JulianCastro twitterde op zaterdag 02-02-2019 om 01:07:07It doesn’t matter if he is a Republican or a Democrat. This behavior was racist and unconscionable. Governor Northam should resign. reageer retweet
twitter:KamalaHarris twitterde op zaterdag 02-02-2019 om 01:37:44Leaders are called to a higher standard, and the stain of racism should have no place in the halls of government. The Governor of Virginia should step aside so the public can heal and move forward together. reageer retweet
SPOILERDerde:En nummertje vier:twitter:ewarren twitterde op zaterdag 02-02-2019 om 04:15:17These racist images are deeply disturbing. Hatred and discrimination have no place in our country and must not be tolerated, especially from our leaders - Republican or Democrat. Northam must resign. reageer retweet
De vijfde:twitter:SenGillibrand twitterde op zaterdag 02-02-2019 om 03:51:24There aren't two sets of rules for our friends and our foes: Right is right and wrong is wrong. Americans deserve to be respected by their leaders, and racism cannot be excused in our government or anywhere else. Having seen the photo, I believe Governor Northam should resign. reageer retweet
twitter:CoryBooker twitterde op zaterdag 02-02-2019 om 04:45:44
[ Bericht 14% gewijzigd door Kijkertje op 02-02-2019 05:00:50 ]
Ja, mss wel.quote:
[..]
Ik kan me zo voorstellen dat dit soort studentikoze verkleedpartijen in dat wereldje als 'grappig' werd ervaren?
twitter:ddale8 twitterde op vrijdag 01-02-2019 om 23:07:31
twitter:FairfaxJustin twitterde op vrijdag 18-01-2019 om 16:01:00History repeats itself. I will be stepping off the dais today in protest of the Virginia Senate honoring Robert E. Lee. I’ll be thinking of this June 5, 1798 manumission document that freed my great-great-great grandfather Simon Fairfax from slavery in Virginia. #WeRiseTogether https://t.co/tG0QB9hHdR reageer retweet
[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door Kijkertje op 02-02-2019 04:26:54 ]
twitter:SethAbramson twitterde op zaterdag 02-02-2019 om 06:01:19
https://www.volkskrant.nl(...)n-vloeien-~b8462c26/
SPOILERTHE NEW YORK TIMES COHERENT BUITENLANDBELEID
Zou de serieuze overkoepelende strategie van Trump zo uit zijn brein vloeien?
De Trump-regering heeft haast per ongeluk een coherent buitenlandbeleid neergezet, schrijft Ross Douthat in zijn column in The New York Times.
Ross Douthat1 februari 2019, 16:57
Donald Trump Beeld New York Times
Na twee jaar in het Witte Huis heeft Donald Trump geen duidelijke wetgevings-strategie, geen beleidsagenda en geen plan om iets te doen aan zijn impopulariteit. En hij zou kunnen worden afgezet.
advertentie
Maar tegelijkertijd blijft deze regering, tussen alle binnenlandse chaos, incompetentie en politieke wanpraktijken, in haar buitenlandbeleid optreden alsof ze een serieuze overkoepelende strategie volgt. Een die coherent en plausibel genoeg is om te kunnen worden nagevolgd door toekomstige presidenten.
Deze Trump-doctrine is niet het isolationisme dat hij tijdens de verkiezingscampagne beloofde; noch is het de oorlogszucht die veel van zijn critici vreesden. Het is een doctrine van ontwarring, inkrimping en herijking, waarin Amerika probeert zijn meest idealistische verwachtingen en zijn meest onrealistische militaire verplichtingen van zich af te schudden, zijn lijst met mogelijke vijanden korter te maken, en zijn pogingen invloed uit te oefenen in de wereld te consolideren. Het doel is niet om Amerika’s eerste plaats af te staan of Amerikaanse bondgenootschappen op te geven, zoals Trumps tegenstanders vaak beweren; het is eerder om Amerika’s eerste plaats te behouden op een behapbare manier, en tegelijk meer energie te steken in het indammen van de macht en invloed van China.
Kijk naar twee acties van de regering-Trump deze week. Het Witte Huis besloot de oppositieleider in Venezuela te steunen en een coalitie te smeden om het dictatoriale Maduro-regime te ondermijnen. En er werd vooruitgang geboekt bij het onderhandelen van een akkoord met de Taliban, dat Amerika’s bijna 18-jarige militaire bemoeienis met dat land zou beëindigen.
Als zo’n akkoord wordt bereikt en onze troepen zich echt terugtrekken, zal Trumps persoonlijke scepsis over de interventie in Afghanistan een uitkomst hebben bevorderd waar veel van onze buitenlandexperts zich lang tegen hebben verzet – een eindspel met de mogelijkheid van een echte nederlaag en een volledige overname door de Taliban als prijs voor het terugdringen van Amerikaanse verplichtingen en het naar huis brengen van Amerikaanse troepen.
Tegelijkertijd valt het optreden jegens Venezuela helemaal binnen de standaardreactie van de buitenlandexperts. Proberen een linkse Latijns-Amerikaanse dictator te ondermijnen, terwijl je mooie woorden spreekt over mensenrechten is het soort beleid dat je had mogen verwachten als Marco Rubio president was geworden (die inderdaad achter de schermen een grote rol speelt).
Uri Friedman beschreef in The Atlantic hoe de strategie zich ontvouwde op on-Trumpiaanse wijze, ‘als een goed geoliede diplomatieke machine en gecoördineerd met bondgenoten’. Friedman vindt deze ‘normaliteit’ vreemd en hypocriet, ook vanwege Trumps openlijke bewondering voor dictators als Vladimir Poetin en Kim Jong-un.
Maar er is wel degelijk een zekere harmonie in deze aanpak te ontdekken. Geen enkele Amerikaanse president zou het voor het einde van de Koude Oorlog raar hebben gevonden om een interventionistische koers te varen in Latijns-Amerika en tegelijk te flirten met autocraten in verder weg gelegen gebieden. Sinds de Monroe-doctrine hebben de VS hun buren op het eigen continent anders behandeld dan Euraziatische machten – omdat deze landen dicht bij ons liggen en landen als Syrië en Afghanistan niet.
Deze wijze van redeneren werd opgegeven door presidenten na de Koude Oorlog, en vooral door George W. Bush, in dagen dat het erop leek dat Amerika net zo makkelijk zijn macht kon doen gelden in Kabul als in het Caribisch gebied. En ondanks de Irak-ramp hielden veel voorname Republikeinen vast aan dezelfde basishouding, waarin elk gebied ‘van cruciaal belang’ is, elke tiran een potentiële vijand, en waarin we klaar moeten staan om net zo makkelijk te vechten in Afghanistan, Syrië, Libië en Oost-Oekraïne als voor een Navo-bondgenoot.
Vergeleken met die visie, heeft de Trump-doctrine beperktere doelen. Optreden tegen jihadisme; tegengas bieden aan twee grote statelijke vijanden, China en Iran; en een harde lijn tegen potentiële bondgenoten en cliënten in Noord- en Zuid-Amerika. Maar de doctrine behelst geen ‘nation-building’ in het Midden-Oosten en geen dromen over het uitbreiden van de Navo tot in de Kaukasus. In Oost-Azië probeert het Noord-Korea’s leider te verlokken tot een soort bizarre vriendschap in plaats van Pyongyang te zien als langetermijndreiging van hetzelfde formaat als zijn beschermheer in Beijing.
De officiële Europese doelen (en dus niet Trumps anti-Navo-erupties achter de schermen) passen in het grotere doel: een sterkere militaire aanwezigheid op de Russische flank van de Navo en grotere bijdragen daaraan van andere landen. Dit is de meest plausibele manier om de westerse alliantie intact te houden terwijl de VS zich richten op China. En op de lange termijn past ook Trumps droom van een betere werkrelatie met Rusland in dit raamwerk van terugtrekking en herijking – met het grote voorbehoud dat Poetin te geïnteresseerd lijkt in ontregeling om een echte en coöperatieve detente nu denkbaar te maken.
Ik denk niet dat Trumps grote strategie zo uit zijn brein vloeit. De doctrine verschijnt als een organisch product van zijn quasi-isolationistische impulsen en de meer internationalistische en havikachtige meningen van zijn adviseurs. En natuurlijk zijn er zwakheden. Maar voor de verkiezingen snakte ik naar een Republikeins buitenlandbeleid dat minder op hoogmoed was gestoeld en bereid was tot minder interventies, terwijl het zich zou richten op behoud van Amerika’s eerste plek in een meer multipolaire, door China beïnvloede wereld. Met zekere beperkingen, is dat wat Trump heeft geleverd.
Dit is een vertaalde en ingekorte versie van Ross Douthats column in The New York Times.
Ook nog initieel de editor de schuld geven in plaats van de persoon die zich racistisch verkleed heeft. Waanzin.quote:
[..]
Het is me niet duidelijk welke keuze hij hierin had? Ik zou eerder de editor van dat jaarboek eens bestraffend toespreken.
Northams reactie:
[..]
Dus kennelijk heeft hij zelf destijds keuzes gemaakt. Deze keuzes waren dan in zijn tiener-jaren, waar met Kavanaugh wel een precedent gezet is.
Deze vent moet gewoon aftreden.zoals zovelen voor hem.
[ Bericht 6% gewijzigd door trein2000 op 02-02-2019 20:20:56 (Media afzeiken) ]
Je kan helaas bij dit soort dingen op het moment bijna zeker zijn dat het een republikein betreft. Hij zou er wmb ook goed aan doen op te stappen, maar vind je trouwens dan ook dat Cindy Hyde-Smith zich uit de verkiezing had moeten terug trekken nadat video opdook waarin ze zei vooraan te willen staan bij een public hanging, gezien de connotatie met lynchings van zwarten in Mississippi?quote:
[..]
Ook nog initieel de editor de schuld geven in plaats van de persoon die zich racistisch verkleed heeft. Waanzin.
Deze vent moet gewoon aftreden.zoals zovelen voor hem.
[ Bericht 3% gewijzigd door trein2000 op 02-02-2019 20:21:22 ]
Whataboutism.quote:
[..]
Hij zou er wmb ook goed aan doen op te stappen, maar vind je trouwens dan ook dat Cindy Hyde-Smith zich uit de verkiezing had moeten terug trekken nadat video opdook waarin ze zei vooraan te willen staan bij een public hanging, gezien de connotatie met lynchings van zwarten in Mississippi?
Maar om je een plezier te doen. Inderdaad, ook deze democraat zou zich terug moeten trekken.
[ Bericht 13% gewijzigd door trein2000 op 02-02-2019 20:21:45 ]
De quote:
https://thehill.com/homen(...)-late-term-abortionsquote:When asked about third trimester abortions specifically, the governor said, "If a mother is in labor ... the infant would be delivered."
"The infant would be kept comfortable," he continued. "The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and mother."
https://thehill.com/opini(...)abortion-legislation
Ik vermoed dat dat de aanleiding was om z'n verleden door te pluizen...
twitter:Balliauw twitterde op zaterdag 02-02-2019 om 11:42:04Ook #Rusland stapt nu uit het #INF verdrag, kondigt president #Poetin aan. https://t.co/sIJFQfCaV5 reageer retweet
Immigrant rights attorneys and journalists denied entry into Mexicotwitter:BobMooreNews twitterde op zaterdag 02-02-2019 om 06:36:04This is a really disturbing development on the border. https://t.co/K11az4eLMu reageer retweet
quote:Two U.S. immigrant rights attorneys and two journalists who have worked closely with members of a migrant caravan in Tijuana said they had been denied entry into Mexico in recent days after their passports were flagged with alerts by an unknown government.
Their stories are nearly identical: All four report being detained by Mexican immigration authorities while trying to enter the country, and eventually being turned back because the authorities said their passports had been flagged.
It is unclear which government or governments, if any, might have issued the alerts.
The U.S. State Department declined to comment Friday, and the Homeland Security Department and Customs and Border Protection did not respond to requests for comment. The Justice Department directed The Times to Mexican officials. Representatives for the Mexican government did not respond to requests for comment.SPOILERThe two attorneys who were denied entry into Mexico, Nora Phillips and Erika Pinheiro, are leaders of Al Otro Lado, a nonprofit group based in Los Angeles and Tijuana that has been a vocal critic of the Trump administration’s immigration policies.
In 2017, the group filed a lawsuit accusing the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency of unlawfully depriving asylum seekers access to the U.S. asylum process.
In recent months, Al Otro Lado has sent lawyers to Tijuana to advise members of a Central American migrant caravan that arrived late last year at the Mexican border city. Some of the caravan’s members are seeking asylum in the U.S. Al Otro Lado recently partnered with two members of Congress to escort a group of asylum seekers to the Otay Mesa Port of Entry, where the group waited overnight until Customs and Border Protection officials agreed to accept the migrants for processing.
Phillips, the legal and litigation director for Al Otro Lado, said she was detained Thursday evening after flying to Guadalajara for a planned vacation with her husband and 7-year-old daughter.
Mexican immigration agents scanned her passport and told her it triggered “an alert,” she said.
Phillips said she was separated from her daughter and husband and escorted into a separate room in which Mexican officials peppered her with questions, including about how much money she was carrying, whether she had weapons training, and whether she ever had been arrested or convicted of a crime.
Her daughter was standing just outside the room and started crying. She was allowed to join her mother while the pair were detained for nine hours and had to sleep on a cold floor without food or water, Phillips said. Ultimately, they were turned away and placed on a flight back to Los Angeles.
At a news conference upon her return at Los Angeles International Airport on Friday, Phillips said Mexican officials insinuated that it wasn’t Mexico that had placed the alert. She believes the U.S. government is to blame, although she provided no evidence.
Trump administration officials have repeatedly accused immigration attorneys of coaching migrants to make false asylum claims. In 2017, then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions criticized what he called “dirty immigration lawyers who are encouraging their otherwise unlawfully present clients to make false claims of asylum.”
“I think this is retaliation,” Phillips said. “I think this is because we sued the U.S. government. I think it’s that we’re pointing out gross, flagrant human rights violations being committed by the U.S. government, and they don’t like that.”
Pinheiro, the group’s policy and litigation director, said Mexican immigration officials turned her away under similar circumstances Monday as she sought to cross into Tijuana on foot.
Pinheiro, a U.S. citizen who lives in Tijuana, said she was denied the chance to fetch her 10-month-old son, who has dual citizenship and was in Tijuana at the time.
Two journalists who covered the migrant caravan and are not associated with Al Otro Lado described having similar experiences.
Kitra Cahana, a freelance photographer who holds U.S. and Canadian passports, said she was denied entry to Mexico twice in recent weeks.
After flying from Detroit to Mexico City on Jan. 17, she said, Mexican immigration agents detained her at the airport for 13 hours, explaining that her passport had been flagged. She said one official said that when her passport had been scanned, it triggered an Interpol alert. She said the official told her the alert had been triggered by “the Americans.”
Cahana flew back to the U.S. and later flew to Guatemala, where she tried to enter Mexico at a port of entry by foot Jan. 26. She said she was detained for about five hours and was again denied entry.
Cahana, whose work has been published in the New York Times and National Geographic, spent six weeks in Tijuana this winter photographing the caravan.
She spent some of that time at the border, taking pictures of migrants as they sought to cross a fence into the U.S. Cahana said she and other photographers present were occasionally harassed by U.S. Border Patrol agents, who on several occasions took photographs of her and other journalists who were working on the Mexican side of the border.
Cahana said she also once was stopped by a Mexican police officer, who took a photograph of her passport.
She is now waiting on the Guatemalan side of the border, still hoping to access Mexico to continue her work.
“I’m in limbo,” she said. “What kind of list am I on? Who put me on this list? And how many journalists is this affecting?”
Associated Press photographer Daniel Ochoa, a Spanish citizen, said he was denied entry into Mexico as he tried to cross into Tijuana from San Diego on Jan. 20. He was detained for four hours before being turned back.
Like Cahana, Ochoa had photographed members of the migrant caravan, including those who sought to cross the border illegally. He said he too had been photographed by Border Patrol agents and that Mexican police also had taken a photograph of his passport.
Former San Diego U.S. Attorney Charles LaBella, who was a federal prosecutor for some 25 years, said the reports were surprising.
“I’ve never seen it,” LaBella said Friday.
Typically, he said, putting out an alert on someone’s passport through Interpol or a law enforcement agency “usually requires some sort of legal process,” with a judge required to approve the request or charges filed.
Hiroshi Motomura, an immigration law expert and professor at UCLA, said the reports, if true, were troubling.
“I ask the question whether this is a retaliatory move on the part of the government,” he said. “It represents an attempt to interfere with the right to counsel.”
twitter:vademocrats twitterde op zaterdag 02-02-2019 om 16:29:59We made the decision to let Governor Northam do the correct thing and resign this morning - we have gotten word he will not do so this morning. reageer retweet
A new filing by Special Counsel Robert Mueller shows how Russia uses the federal courts to go after its adversaries.
quote:A new court filing submitted on Wednesday by Special Counsel Robert Mueller revealed that a Russian troll farm currently locked in a legal battle over its alleged interference in the 2016 election appeared to wage yet another disinformation campaign late last year—this time targeting Mueller himself.
According to the filing, the special counsel’s office turned over one million pages of evidence to lawyers for Concord Management and Consulting as part of the discovery process. The firm is accused of funding the troll farm, known as the Internet Research Agency. But someone connected to Concord allegedly manipulated and leaked those documents to reporters, hoping the documents would make people think that Mueller’s evidence against the troll farm and its owners was flimsy. The tactic didn’t seem to convince anyone, but it appeared to mark yet another example of Russia exploiting the U.S. justice system to undercut its rivals abroad.
Last year, I detailed how Russia has figured out how to use the U.S. immigration courts and so-called “Red Notices” issued by Interpol to harrass and even detain its enemies. But it doesn’t end there. Experts say Kremlin proxies have targeted their rivals and other disfavored individuals by exploiting U.S. courts to pursue bogus claims via “superficially legitimate lawsuits,” Anders Aslund, a resident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, said in a recent report. He worked as an economic adviser to the Russian government from 1991 to 1994. The Kremlin proxies have done so not only to perpetuate global harassment campaigns against their perceived enemies, Anders argued, but also to “enrich themselves through bad faith claims made possible by the Russian state’s abuse of disfavored individuals and their businesses.”
When Mueller indicted Concord Management and Consulting in February 2018, along with two other corporate entities and 13 Russian nationals allegedly connected to the Internet Research Agency, it seemed highly unlikely that the indictment would result in a trial because Russians cannot be extradited to the United States. But Concord unexpectedly hired the well-connected American law firm, Reed Smith, to fight Mueller, arguing that the charges should be dropped because the special counsel was illegally appointed. The judge in the case, Dabney Friedrich, has twice refused to dismiss the case and recently lambasted Concord’s American lawyers for submitting “unprofessional, inappropriate and ineffective” court filings, and the legal battle has raged on.
Now, according to the Mueller filing this week, unidentified actors working out of Russia appear to have weaponize the U.S. discovery process to Concord’s benefit. Over 1,000 files on the website that hosted the leaked documents “match those produced in discovery,” the special counsel said. The documents were published from a computer with a Russian IP address, according to Mueller, and whoever released them clearly “had access to at least some of the non-sensitive discovery produced by the government.” But forged documents were mixed in to the trove, too, apparently in an attempt to accuse Mueller of characterizing American websites and Facebook pages like Occupy Democrats as Russian disinformation operations. The website also inserted irrelevant documents into the unique folder names—known only to those with access to the discovery materials—and characterized them as the sum-total of Mueller’s evidence “in an apparent effort to discredit the investigation,” the special counsel said.SPOILERIn a statement issued on Thursday, Reed Smith denied responsibility for the breach, claiming that the data at issue was hosted by a third party vendor working for Concord and was never stored on Reed Smith’s internal computer systems. “Reed Smith and its lawyers have at all times complied with the protective order in this case,” they said. A Reed Smith attorney representing Concord didn’t return a request for comment.
In October, legal and national security experts expressed concern to ABC News that, in the Concord case specifically, the Russian government may be trying to use the discovery process in a “graymail” strategy designed to make Mueller drop the case in order to prevent sensitive U.S. national security information from being made public. Mark Zaid, a Washington, D.C.-based attorney who focuses on national security law, said he viewed the latest incident involving Concord and the hoax website “as part of a consistent strategy by the Russians to hinder, obstruct and derail” Mueller’s probe. “One wonders whether pursuing the criminals charges against the Russians was worth the difficulty and these current problems,” Zaid said, “particularly given the odds of ever gaining custody of any individual is unlikely.”
But the Concord Management case is just one example of this phenomenon—and it “helps expose the deliberate efforts of the Russians to continually attack our democratic systems,” he added.
In 2017, the Russian state-owned Deposit Insurance Agency (DIA) filed two applications for judicial assistance from the federal courts in New York and Massachusetts to obtain discovery on two former shareholders of the privately owned Probusinessbank, Sergey Leontiev and Alexander Zheleznyak. Leontiev and Zheleznyak had fled to the U.S. by that point, but that didn’t stop the DIA from pursuing them through the U.S. courts. Leontiev had run afoul of Putin when one of the bank’s subsidiaries attempted to launch the “Navalny Card”—a debit card that would donate a percentage of transactions to an anti-corruption organization led by Russian dissident Alexei Navalny. The Central Bank of Russia revoked Probusinessbank's operating license shortly thereafter and forced the company into bankruptcy, despite having deemed the bank financially sound just two months before it was seized. The DIA immediately began dividing up Probusinessbank’s assets to Kremlin-friendly institutions such as B&N Bank after being appointed its temporary administrator and liquidator in 2015.
When Leontiev moved to quash a federal court subpoena against him in 2017—arguing that it had been orchestrated by two Russian agents sanctioned under the Magnitsky Act, Andrey Pavlov and Victor Grin—the court denied his motion. The court wrote that it was "not blind to Leontiev’s claims that the discovery sought here is intended for other proceedings or impermissible purposes" and had its own concerns “about the legitimacy of these requests”—which was “heightened by the involvement of two sanctioned individuals.” Despite all of those reservations, it ruled against Leontiev on the narrow grounds that it was only helping provide discovery in “underlying litigation … before a foreign tribunal.” When Leontiev's lawyers asked that the discovery documents not be provided to any entity that Pavlov was associated with, the DIA's lawyers refused. “The same cast of Russian operatives sanctioned by the U.S. government for their participation in the Magnitsky Affair now attempt to exploit Western institutions, including the U.S. judicial system and Interpol, to further their corrupt pursuit of Mr. Leontiev and others using the cover of legitimate courts and institutions,” Bob Weigel, Leontiev’s lead outside counsel in the case, said in a statement.
Michelle Estlund, a criminal defense attorney who focuses on international criminal prosecutions and politically motivated prosecutions, told me last year that the problem is that while the U.S. courts operate in good faith to assist Russian authorities, the Russian courts frequently do not. “Our courts act like, and think, that they are operating on the same type of playing field as the Russians,” Estlund said. “But they’re not—the system there is completely different from here. And when the courts are properly responding to what appears to be a legally authorized request for assistance with discovery, often what they’re doing is assisting with an extremely corrupt court proceeding.” Another lawyer who follows this phenomenon closely and requested anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the press echoed Estlund’s assessment: “The Russians have figured out how to weaponize this,” he said. “We have this tremendous system of justice here which isn’t equipped to address nonjudicial questions, like ‘Is this litigant seeking to abuse our entire judicial system?’”
The issue arose again just last month, when the Southern District of New York unsealed an indictment against a Russian lawyer named Natalia Veselnitskaya. According to prosecutors, Veselnitskaya had tried to obstruct an investigation into her client, Prevezon—a company founded by a Kremlin ally that was accused of laundering millions of stolen Russian taxpayer dollars through Manhattan real-estate. Veselnitskaya had secretly worked with the Russian government to draft a document purporting to be an independent assessment, made by Russian prosecutors, that Prevezon was innocent of laundering funds, the indictment said. That document was then filed in federal court in an attempt “to affect the outcome” of a lawsuit filed against Prevezon by federal prosecutors, according to Geoffrey Berman, the U.S. Attorney in Manhattan. The scheme threatened “the ability of our courts and our government to ensure that justice is done,” he said. And it worked: the court decided to deny the U.S. government’s motion for summary judgment against Prevezon based on the fraudulent document, according to the indictment.
Mueller, for his part, appears to have foreseen how the Russians connected to Concord Management (it is owned by Yevgeniy Prigozhin, often referred to as "Putin's chef”) might try to exploit the legal process: In June 2018, he asked Judge Friedrich for a protective order that would prevent Concord’s lawyers from sharing any discovery documents with the Russians named in the troll farm indictment, as well as with other foreigners such as lawyers outside the U.S. If the data were to be distributed outside of American law firms, Mueller said, "foreign individuals may try to use that avenue as a way to obtain sensitive materials as part of an intelligence collection effort.” The hoax website aimed at discrediting his investigation largely failed, but seemed to prove Mueller’s prescience, beyond any doubt.
twitter:AP twitterde op zaterdag 02-02-2019 om 16:54:17BREAKING: A Virginia Democrat who has spoken with Gov. Ralph Northam tells The Associated Press that the governor now does not believe he was in a racist picture in his 1984 medical yearbook and has no immediate plans to resign. https://t.co/Mf1w7Vi9dr reageer retweet
Mooie soap dit.quote:Op zaterdag 2 februari 2019 17:04 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
twitter:AP twitterde op zaterdag 02-02-2019 om 16:54:17
SPOILER
https://www.nytimes.com/2(...)rbook-blackface.htmlquote:But he sustained another blow when CBS News, citing a 1981 Virginia Military Institute yearbook, reported that Mr. Northam had been known as “Coonman” as an undergraduate student there.
Hmm, "Goose, Coonman"... Coon is een scheldnaam voor negers, maar waarom werd hij coonman genoemd? Omdat hij negers coons noemde, of omdat hij er "te vriendschappelijk" mee omging?SPOILER
Waarom heeft hij dan gisteravond nog zijn excuses aangeboden?quote:
quote:[..]SPOILER[ afbeelding ]
https://www.nytimes.com/2(...)rbook-blackface.htmlHmm, "Goose, Coonman"... Coon is een scheldnaam voor negers, maar waarom werd hij coonman genoemd? Omdat hij negers coons noemde, of omdat hij er "te vriendschappelijk" mee omging?SPOILER[ afbeelding ]
Ok, en dan? Dan scoren ze wat punten bij een segment aan kiezers waar ze sowieso al geen concurrentie hoefden te dulden.quote:
Zo ongeveer iedere prominente Democraat heeft zich nu tegen Northam uitgesproken. Binnen 24 uur. Een respons die je bij de Republikeinse partij nooit zou zien. Als Northam snel opstapt eindigt het misschien nog wel als een goed PR moment voor het imago van Democrats en hun morele autoriteit als het op dit soort rassen zaken aankomt.
Ze hebben anders best wat concurrentie van "niet stemmen".quote:
[..]
Ok, en dan? Dan scoren ze wat punten bij een segment aan kiezers waar ze sowieso al geen concurrentie hoefden te dulden.
African Americans vormen zo ongeveer de belangrijkste base van de Democratische partij. Concurrentie van de Republikeinen hebben ze wat dat betreft nauwelijks maar het is een groep die niet consequent komt opdagen. Een goed imago op het terrein van discriminatie en racisme is voor de Democratische partij dus cruciaal om verkiezingen te kunnen winnen. Anders blijven African Americans gewoon thuis en dat is netto verlies.quote:
[..]
Ok, en dan? Dan scoren ze wat punten bij een segment aan kiezers waar ze sowieso al geen concurrentie hoefden te dulden.
Peter Plasman is een geduchte concurrent.quote:
[..]
Ze hebben anders best wat concurrentie van "niet stemmen".
Zullen de republikeinen wel leuk vinden. Ze kunnen democraten onverkiesbaar of dwingen af te treden zodra er ook maar 1 domme actie van tientallen jaren geleden gevonden wordt.quote:
Zo ongeveer iedere prominente Democraat heeft zich nu tegen Northam uitgesproken. Binnen 24 uur. Een respons die je bij de Republikeinse partij nooit zou zien. Als Northam snel opstapt eindigt het misschien nog wel als een goed PR moment voor het imago van Democrats en hun morele autoriteit als het op dit soort rassen zaken aankomt.
Zowel Warren als Harris dalen hiermee in mijn achting. Opportunistische snowflakes
Ik denk dat je onderschat wat de impact is van een foto als dit in een staat als Virginia.quote:
[..]
Zullen de republikeinen wel leuk vinden. Ze kunnen democraten onverkiesbaar of dwingen af te treden zodra er ook maar 1 domme actie van tientallen jaren geleden gevonden wordt.
Zowel Warren als Harris dalen hiermee in mijn achting. Opportunistische snowflakes
Het Nederlandse equivalent hiervan zou zijn als ineens zou blijken dat iemand als Buma in zijn studententijd rondliep in een SS uniform. En dan eerst toegeeft dat hij dat inderdaad deed, om een dag later 180 graden te draaien en te claimen dat hij dat nooit heeft gedaan.
twitter:kylegriffin1 twitterde op zaterdag 02-02-2019 om 23:50:03
Deutsche Bank in Late 2016 Raced to Shed Loan It Made to Russian Bank VTBtwitter:kylegriffin1 twitterde op zaterdag 02-02-2019 om 23:55:40
German lender sold a chunk of the loan to Russian financial institution Alfa Bank but Citigroup took a pass, documents and people familiar with the matter indicate
quote:Deutsche Bank AG, seeking to slash its exposure to Russia in late 2016, scrambled to shed a $600 million loan it had outstanding to VTB Group, a large Russian state-owned bank, according to documents and people familiar with the funding.
The German lender sold $300 million of the loan to another Russian financial institution, Alfa Bank, in December 2016; Deutsche wasn’t able to sell the rest of the loan, and VTB paid it back in August 2017, the documents show and the people said.
Deutsche Bank’s effort to shed the VTB loan—which hasn’t been previously reported—came as the German bank worried about its financial contacts with Russia, which U.S. intelligence officials accused of interfering in the 2016 presidential election while the campaign was still under way. The bank sought to reduce as much exposure as possible to Russian entities and was shedding assets to boost its own cash position.
The Wall Street Journal couldn’t determine where the loan money went. Deutsche Bank considered the VTB financing standard bank-to-bank funding, provided to VTB in U.S. dollars, according to the people familiar with the funding. VTB said in a statement to the Journal that the loan “was intended for the purposes of VTB’s treasury business activities,” and wasn’t directed to President Trump or any business affiliated with him.
A spokesman for Deutsche Bank said, “Any assertion that our financing to VTB was intended to benefit President Trump or anyone else connected to him is false.”SPOILEROn Jan. 6, 2017, the U.S. intelligence community formally accused the Russian government of interfering in the U.S. election on behalf of Mr. Trump, a longtime client of the bank. During the campaign and after Mr. Trump’s election victory, Deutsche Bank had been facing increasing media scrutiny for its lending to Mr. Trump and his businesses.
Earlier in 2016, Deutsche Bank rebuffed a request from the Trump Organization to expand by several million dollars a loan to Trump National Doral, one of Mr. Trump’s Florida golf properties, according to other people familiar with this matter.
That decision, in March 2016, was based in part on concerns within Deutsche Bank about whether it had enough information about the ultimate use of the funding, the people said.
Mr. Trump had been largely self-funding his primary campaign and had loaned the operation $36 million at that point, according to Federal Election Commission records. He later forgave $50 million in personal loans, FEC records show.
The House Intelligence Committee and House Financial Services Committee, which are controlled by Democrats, currently are preparing fresh investigations into Deutsche Bank’s financial dealings as part of a broader effort to scrutinize any Trump administration ties to Russia. In January 2017, the U.S. intelligence community said in a report that Russian President Vladimir Putin had ordered a campaign to bolster Mr. Trump in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, as part of a broader ambition to undermine Western liberalism. Moscow has denied interfering in the election.
Deutsche Bank’s relationship with Mr. Trump goes back decades. Since 1998, the bank has led or participated in loans of at least $2.5 billion to companies affiliated with Mr. Trump, the Journal has previously reported.
The financing helped Mr. Trump build or purchase some of his highest-profile projects, including in Washington, New York, Chicago and Florida. Public disclosures during his candidacy showed borrowings from Deutsche Bank of more than $300 million by entities affiliated with Mr. Trump.
The long-term loan to VTB—first originated by Deutsche Bank in 2007 at around $1 billion and restructured in 2009—gave the Russian bank leeway to use the funding as it wished, according to people familiar with the terms and bank records. As is customary in such wholesale financing, no specific purpose of the loan was earmarked on Deutsche Bank documents, according to the bank records and people familiar with the terms.
VTB’s financial dealings have been under the spotlight. Felix Sater, a longtime Trump business partner, repeatedly told Mr. Trump’s then-lawyer Michael Cohen during the 2016 campaign that he’d received assurances from Russian business associates with ties to the government that VTB was willing to finance a deal for a Trump Tower in Moscow, according to people familiar with the discussions.
In May 2016, the month Mr. Trump effectively clinched the GOP nomination, Messrs. Cohen and Sater made plans to attend a conference in Russia the following month to hold meetings to advance the project, including, they believed, with VTB’s chairman, one of the people said. The trip didn’t ultimately happen.
VTB in its statement to the Journal denied ever negotiating with Mr. Sater or having any discussions related to the Trump Tower Moscow project, adding: “No VTB Group subsidiary ever had any dealings with Mr. Trump, his representatives, or any companies affiliated with him.” Though Mr. Trump signed a letter of intent with a Russian real-estate development firm in October 2015, the proposal never went ahead. Mr. Cohen in November pleaded guilty to lying to Congress to minimize Mr. Trump’s involvement in the deal, and he has since been sentenced to three years in prison.
Russia’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 election first came to light in the summer of 2016, when the Democratic National Committee said Russia was behind the hacking of the organization’s computer systems. In October of that year, U.S. intelligence agencies publicly accused Moscow of trying to interfere in the next month’s elections by leaking emails hacked from the DNC and other entities. The intelligence agencies, in a joint statement, alleged the hacks were directed by the most senior officials in the Russian government.
VTB is Russia’s second-largest bank and is majority-owned by the Russian government. Senior VTB executives have close ties with Mr. Putin, recently working together on a plan to wean Russia off U.S. dollars to counter damage to the Russian economy from Western sanctions.
The head of VTB, Andrey Kostin, has defended Mr. Putin’s government and criticized sanctions against Russia. The Moscow-born Mr. Kostin himself is a former Russian diplomat who was stationed in the U.K. in the 1980s. He joined VTB in 2002 and is president and chairman of its management board.
Deutsche Bank and VTB have worked together frequently in the past, collaborating on deals and swapping employees. VTB poached employees from the German lender’s Moscow office to launch its own Moscow-based investment bank in 2008, former bank employees said.
The unsecured VTB loans originated in 2007 and 2008 deals, when Deutsche Bank extended long-term loans totaling about $1 billion to VTB, according to the documents and people familiar with the matter. Those were restructured in 2009 into a single $790 million loan, the deal records show and people close to the bank said.
Deutsche Bank’s London-based emerging-markets and interest-rates trading desks oversaw the financing, according to the records and the people. Deutsche Bank bought hedges, or offsetting positions, to protect itself against losses in case VTB defaulted on the loan.
In 2014, VTB was hit with U.S. and European economic sanctions stemming from Russia’s annexation of the Crimea region. The sanctions limited VTB’s ability to get new financing from banks in the U.S. and Europe.
Sanctions made VTB’s U.S.-dollar funding from Deutsche Bank more valuable to VTB, and harder for Deutsche Bank to sell, people close to Deutsche Bank say. The German lender did manage to sell about $150 million of the VTB financing in 2014 to a bank in India, leaving more than half a billion dollars still on its books, according to the records and people close the bank.
In late 2015, Deutsche Bank shut down the bulk of its investment-banking business in Russia, closing trading desks and cutting or moving hundreds of Russia-based employees.
The bank faced intensifying scrutiny from U.S. and European authorities over “mirror trades” that regulators have said helped Deutsche Bank improperly move billions of dollars’ worth of Russian rubles out of the country.
With that heat on in 2015, the bank’s executives promised regulators they were moving as swiftly as possible to distance itself from risky deals and sanctioned entities like VTB, some of the people said.
The VTB loan shows how substantive its financial ties with Deutsche Bank remained. In December 2016, Deutsche Bank agreed to sell about $300 million of the VTB loan to Alfa Bank, according to deal records and people familiar with the transaction. Deutsche Bank suffered a net loss on the transaction, the people said.
A separate effort by Deutsche Bank to sell about $280 million of the VTB loan to Citigroup Inc. fell through, according to people familiar with the matter.
In January 2017, Deutsche Bank paid roughly $629 million to end probes by U.K. and New York regulators into the Russian mirror trades. The bank signed a consent order laying out facts to which Deutsche Bank agreed, including compliance and control deficiencies. A U.S. Justice Department investigation of the trades has yet to be resolved.
Het is en blijft een leugenachtige democraat. (Ondanks dat CNN melde dat hij een republikein was).quote:
Tja. Een bedje gespreid door de dems... nu mogen ze er zelf ook in gaan liggen.quote:
[..]
Zullen de republikeinen wel leuk vinden. Ze kunnen democraten onverkiesbaar of dwingen af te treden zodra er ook maar 1 domme actie van tientallen jaren geleden gevonden wordt.
Zowel Warren als Harris dalen hiermee in mijn achting. Opportunistische snowflakes
Hoe is het eigenlijk met Steve King? Is die al opgestapt?quote:
[..]
Het is en blijft een leugenachtige democraat. (Ondanks dat CNN melde dat hij een republikein was).
[ afbeelding ]
Wel fijn dat jij onpartijdig bent. Mis af en toe wel wat nuance in deze topics.quote:
[..]
Het is en blijft een leugenachtige democraat. (Ondanks dat CNN melde dat hij een republikein was).
[ afbeelding ]
Whataboutism.quote:
[..]
Hoe is het eigenlijk met Steve King? Is die al opgestapt?
quote:REPUBLICANS DEMAND RESIGNATIONS:
When Clinton’s unfaithful. But not Newt Gingrich.
When Eliot Spitzer sees a hooker. But not David Vitter.
When Al Franklin touches. But not Trump.
When Ralph Northam is racist. But not Steve King. Or Donald Trump. Or Mitch. Or etc etc etc.
Republiekeinen en democraten zijn allebei natuurlijk gewoon heel kut. Ik snap niet dat je als Nederlander helemaal fan van 1 van beide partijen kunt zijn.
Een strijd om de poppetjes en niet om de ideeën.quote:
En die democraat mag gewoon z'n biezen pakken.
Eensquote:
Echt, wat een land
Republiekeinen en democraten zijn allebei natuurlijk gewoon heel kut. Ik snap niet dat je als Nederlander helemaal fan van 1 van beide partijen kunt zijn.
Leuk stukje bothsiderism.quote:
Echt, wat een land
Republiekeinen en democraten zijn allebei natuurlijk gewoon heel kut. Ik snap niet dat je als Nederlander helemaal fan van 1 van beide partijen kunt zijn.
Maar de Dems lijken wèl oprecht wat te doen terwijl de GOP vooral goed is in vingerwijzen naar Dems en niets doen als het om de eigen mensen gaat.
Dat de reps heel erg kut zijn maakt niet dat de dems niet kut zijn.quote:
Eigenlijk is dit wel een beetje waar het probleem ligt in de VS, je hebt maar 2 smaken en daar moet je tussen kiezen. Bij de verkiezingen van 2016 had je 2 kandidaten die eigenlijk bijna niemand wil.
Tsja, kanker en aids. Ik zou voor aids kiezen uiteindelijk, maar blij word ik er niet van.quote:Maar de Dems lijken wèl oprecht wat te doen terwijl de GOP vooral goed is in vingerwijzen naar Dems en niets doen als het om de eigen mensen gaat.
Middellangeafstandswapens zijn geen bedreiging voor de VS. Wel voor Europa.quote:Russia says it will build weapons previously banned under a nuclear disarmament treaty and will no longer initiate talks with the U.S. on any matters related to nuclear arms control. https://t.co/HhNtzEfMZc
Nee dat is geen equivalent. Het equivalent zou zijn dat Buma in zijn studententijd ergens op een een of ander verkleedpartijtje dat had gedaan, als misplaatste grap. Dan had Buma excuses gemaakt en had niemand meer er over geluld.quote:
[..]
Ik denk dat je onderschat wat de impact is van een foto als dit in een staat als Virginia.
Het Nederlandse equivalent hiervan zou zijn als ineens zou blijken dat iemand als Buma in zijn studententijd rondliep in een SS uniform. En dan eerst toegeeft dat hij dat inderdaad deed, om een dag later 180 graden te draaien en te claimen dat hij dat nooit heeft gedaan.