DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Trump and Republicans 2020

Colorado governor mocks Trump for saying he's building wall there

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch...ding-wall-there

smh

Hurry, someone needs to get out a map and a sharpie and scratch out New Mexico and put in Mexico

It’s good for biz....it adds roughly 1200 miles of wall to be built. Think of it as a buffer zone. It’s going be the best thing ever. And we won’t get anymore New Mexicans.

He must have gotten that idea from Turkey.

a big part of the reason why government is so inept is because we got politicians confirming judges who have no business being appointed to the bench:

Senate Confirms Another Trump Court Pick Rated 'Not Qualified' To Serve

https://news.yahoo.com/justin-walker-not-qualified-federal-judge-senate-confirms.html

WASHINGTON ― Senate Republicans voted Thursday to confirm Justin Walker to a lifetime seat on a federal court, despite the fact that he earned a rare and embarrassing “not qualified” rating from the American Bar Association.

Every Republican present voted to put Walker, 37, onto the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky. Every Democrat present voted no. The full vote tally is here.

Walker “does not presently have the requisite trial or litigation experience” to be a federal judge, the ABA’s Standing Committee concluded in a July review.

The nonpartisan ABA, which thoroughly reviews each of a president’s judicial nominees, typically requires that someone chosen for a lifetime court seat have at least 12 years of experience practicing law. It’s not an automatic disqualifier, though, if a nominee has other substantial trial or courtroom experience. Walker falls short on both counts.

“Mr. Walker’s experience to date has a very substantial gap, namely the absence of any significant trial experience,” the ABA found. “Mr. Walker has never tried a case as lead or co-counsel, whether civil or criminal. ... In addition, based on review of his biographical information and conversations with Mr. Walker, it was challenging to determine how much of his ten years since graduation from law school has been spent in the practice of law.”

So why did Walker get nominated? Because Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) wanted him to. He recommended Walker to the White House.

“This is unquestionably the most outstanding nomination that I’ve ever recommended to Presidents to serve on the bench in Kentucky,” McConnell tweeted in July, just a day after the ABA issued its rating of Walker’s qualifications.

McConnell praised Walker again on Thursday on the Senate floor, calling him “brilliant” and an “outstanding choice” by the president (even though McConnell chose him).

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) noted how rare it is for the Senate to move forward with a judicial nominee with a “not qualified” rating.

“It seems the only reason Mr. Walker has been nominated for an austere judgeship is his membership in the Federalist Society,” Schumer said on the Senate floor, referring to the conservative legal group driving many of the White House’s court picks. “And his far-right-wing views on health care, civil rights and executive power.”

Walker, a University of Louisville law professor, previously clerked for Brett Kavanaugh, also a Federalist Society member, when he was a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. After Kavanaugh was nominated to the Supreme Court in 2018, Walker went out of his way to defend his former boss against credible allegations by Christine Blasey Ford that he sexually assaulted her in high school. Walker participated in more than 70 media interviews challenging Ford.

“She may believe that assailant was Brett Kavanaugh,” Walker said in a Fox News interview in September 2018. “I believe she’s mistaken.”

Walker’s ascension marks the fifth time that Republicans have confirmed one of President Donald Trump’s court picks who earned a “not qualified” rating from the ABA.

Others include U.S. Circuit Judge Leonard Steven Grasz, who the ABA concluded was “unable to separate his role as an advocate from that of a judge,” given his strong anti-LGBTQ and anti-abortion views; U.S. District Judge Charles Goodwin, who the ABA said lacked the ability to fulfill the demands of a federal judge given his frequent absence from the courthouse in his former role as a magistrate judge; and U.S. Circuit Judge Jonathan Kobes, who the ABA found “was unable to provide sufficient writing samples of the caliber required” of a circuit judge.

By contrast, in his entire eight years in the White House, President Barack Obama didn’t nominate anyone to be a lifetime federal judge who earned a “not qualified” ABA rating.

KY pffft...They keep Mitch and they don’t even flinch.

Retired four-star general blasts White House over NYTimes, WaPost cancelations

Retired four-star U.S. Army Gen. Barry McCaffrey on Friday slammed the White House for directing federal agencies to end their subscriptions to The New York Times and The Washington Post after President Trump said he didn’t want either outlet in the White House.

“The White House Trump statement telling the entire Federal Government to terminate subscriptions to the NYT and Wash Post is a watershed moment in national history,” McCaffrey tweeted. “No room for HUMOROUS media coverage. This is deadly serious. This is Mussolini.”



The White House said Tuesday that it would cancel subscriptions to both outlets less than a day after Trump told Fox News’s Sean Hannity that “we don’t even want it in the White House anymore” while referring to the Times.

“We’re going to probably terminate that and The Washington Post. They’re fake,” he said.

McCaffrey also took a jab at Trump on Sunday for attacking former Defense Secretary James Mattis as “the world’s most overrated general.”

“At the end of the day what we’re seeing is a total breakdown in the national security process,” he said.

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-...se-over-nytimes

You see that General saying Trump is acting like a fascist dictator? Hmmm....

2019 deficit nears $1 trillion, highest since 2012: Treasury

The federal deficit for fiscal 2019 reached close to $1 trillion for the first time since 2012, according to final Treasury Department figures released Friday.

In the final accounting, the deficit came in at $984 billion, more than $200 billion, or 25 percent, higher than last year and the same figure the Congressional Budget Office projected earlier in the month.

The deficit, which is projected to grow in 2020, has only surpassed $1 trillion four times in the nation's history, during the four-year stretch following the 2008 global financial crisis.

While President Trump as a candidate had promised to wipe out the nation's debt altogether, it now stands above $22 trillion. The annual deficit, which adds to the nation's overall debt burden, was $587 billion in the last full fiscal year before Trump took office.

“America remains on the fast track to trillion-dollar deficits, rising rapidly as far as the eye can see," said Michael Peterson, CEO of the Peterson Foundation, which advocates for debt reduction.

"With all of the important investments we need to make in our future, we find ourselves in a situation where interest costs are the fastest growing program in the federal budget. That’s not where we want growth," he said.

Net interest, the amount the government pays to service the debt, reached $376 billion, larger than the combined cost of veterans benefits and services and education, and more than half as much as the cost of defense.

The main drivers of the deficit are mandatory programs such as Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, but recent legislation has contributed to it as well.

The GOP tax law added substantially to the deficit by scaling back revenues, while two bipartisan spending deals added financial resources for both defense and domestic priorities.

CBO has warned that the nation is on an "unsustainable" fiscal path. Treasury projected that the 2020 deficit would amount to $1.045 trillion.

The rise in the deficit during a booming economy is particularly worrying to economists and budget watchers.

A deficit of this size following the longest span of economic growth in history shows just how reckless our leaders have become," said former Obama Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, a co-chairman for the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

"This is exactly the time when deficits should be contracting, not expanding," he added.

https://thehill.com/policy/finance/467488-2019-deficit-nears-1-trillion-highest-since-2012-treasury

The facts just keep piling up that Trump is a complete failure in all areas. Going to wipe out the debt... I'll wait for the GOPers to explain that away.

We don't need to listen to him, because
#scrotus45© knows more than the Generals.

______________


Most of the people I've aimed this post at won't even read the article, because it's longer than 4-5 paragraphs. I don't care.
I'll place it here anyway, so that anyone else who's remotely interested in the larger issue can take it in for themselves.

The people interviewed in this article are career military. People of substance, who live by moral/ethical codes the likes of which we mere citizens are never beholden.
They are people who have served this nation faithfully and consistently through both Republican and Democratic presidencies.
They are clear-eyed, no-nonsense, fact-based operators who have risen through one of the most demanding hierarchies ever devised by Man.

This link spells out for us exactly what The Best of America's Best think of this individual.


In another thread, an Original Poster asked where all the Republican patriots were. I posit that they are fairly easy to find in our 24 hr news feed.

The Republican patriots you asked about? They are abundant, and readily found. They are the former, recent, latest, and ongoing targets of this current POTUS.


A man who views American Law Enforcement as The Enemy is most likely a criminal.
A man who casts American Military Brass as The Enemy is most likely a terrorist.
A man who routinely sets public sentiment against society's conventions/standards is most likely a subversive.

Until 2015, this was the mantra/mantle/watch-cry of almost every conservative I ever read at this web address.

What is different now?

A guy you voted for turned out to be America's Public Enemy Number One- and the exact opposite of the kind of guy you always thought you were.

I don't love Donald Trump, but I love how Donald Trump has managed to expose us American citizens to each other. If anything, that might be the most complementary depiction of his legacy in American history books: how his presidency separated America's patriots from her cultists.

Fascinating article.

indeed.

https://www.factcheck.org/2017/09/obamas-final-numbers/

Given that Trump inherited a booming economy and considering the chit show Obama took over - Trump has a ton of catching up to do.

Corporate profits Trump trails wildly. S&P gains. Job openings. . . . wasn't the trade deficit declining at the end of the Obama years?

Hey but Trump has more Border apprehensions - should make the base real happy.

We are going to absolutely bury the trump ideology,

Poor representation of tUSA at best

White House Denies John Kelly's Impeachment Remark: He Can't Handle Trump's Genius

https://www.yahoo.com/news/white-house-john-kelly-trumps-genius.html

Trump could start a religion, and these nut bags would convert and worship him.

Tuned in for Trump's announcement announcement about killing Baghdadi this morning. Glad they got him but damn is Trump hard to listen to. smh

He is not easy to look at either.

He said none of our soldiers were hurt just the k9, I call it a dog, a beautiful talented dog. The k9 was hurt and brought back...

smh. Just an FYI, that k9 is a soldier. But he wouldn't know that so I'll give him a pass. But damn it's hard to listen to him make any kind of announcement of facts because he always needs to embellish and fit his own ego strokes in, while trying to explain things that it is obvious he has zero clue about.

Iconic photo released of President Trump and his team during Al-Baghdadi raid.

Shealah Craighead/The White House via Getty Images

Why does he have to embellish the details ("his mutilated body", "whimpering and crying")? Just have a bit of dacorum and tell us that the mission was successful. Spare the public of its details. Why the need to glorify its violence?

I hope Trump and his supporters realize that this does not mean the end of IS and that there will be another leader in Baghdadi's place. I'm sure they (IS) have had a plan for succession knowing that their leaders were targets.

Kinda like this cabinet!

Fair point. Neither represent how America truly looks. But, at least one photo has a POC and women in it!

and this photo looks way more intense than Trump's loser face on it.

Agreed. The Obama photo of Bin Laden mission is candid, honest & shows human emotion. Trump's posed photo is lame as was his embellishment of the grisly details of the mission.

Really? I guess I don't see that.

You should try listening to Obama's announcement after Bin Laden was killed and Trump's after Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was killed.

Don't get me wrong, they got another bad guy and that's always a good thing.

But still, his presser was a laugh and he couldn't help but make the claim this was bigger than killing Bin Laden. You just couldn't make this crap up if you tried.

Psssst...........I was talking about the pictures. You can find something terrible about Trump in ANYTHING. And it shows. That's why .........ah, nevermind. Carry on.

What don't you see? That everybody is a white male or that it is posed and lacks any emotion? Or, both?

Dude, come on..........really? They are both posed. If you think otherwise, you're dreaming.

The looks on all of their faces in the Obama one looks candid. But, at the end of the day that's not the point...I'm not debating one photo or another. I simply commented on Fish's pic that Trump's was a bunch of angry white men. No diversity. He replied with Obama's assassination of Bin Laden cabinet pic and I said it at least has a POC and a couple women in the photo. Swish and I commented on it showing some human emotion considering the gravity of what they were watching. Trump's? "Let's look like we are angry and mean, gents".

On the bigger scheme of things? Arguing over a photo is trivial, but I will stand by the lack of diversity. Our nation (as of 2018) is approx 40% POC and a greater ratio of women to men. Why then are there only men in this photo? Why were the majority of Republicans who stormed the hearing white men? If we expect equitable representation then I think these are fair questions.

Seriously? I'll give you this: Obama is in the 1 picture.

But you think that picture shows human emotion, and the other one doesn't? Come on man.........are you ALSO biased by hatred of Trump?

In either picture, I see people staring at some unseen screen.

Posed pictures, both of them.

You have hillary in one........uh, white lady, secretary of state.........and another lady in the back who apparently drew the short straw.

Come on.

But I'll take this statement of yours and ponder it:

Why is O getting a pass for being all inclusive when there is exactly ONE poc in his photo, with only 1 female and some lady hanging out in the background? THAT, is diversity for you?

1 photo good, 1 photo bad. ??????

I didn't give him a pass. Look at my reply to Fish when he posted Obama's pic. I actually said "Fair point", but at least there were 2 women and of course a POC in his pic. But yeah, still a lot of white dudes.

And yes, I do have a serious problem with Trump. He admitted and bragged about sexual assault and harassment, yet people still voted for him. I have absolutely no respect for him and I find it scary that 49% seem to not have a problem with that one admission alone (not to mention the numerous other problematic and deeply concerning issues of his character).

1 poc - the president. 1 woman - secretary of state.

The other woman, who seems to be trying to sneak a peek? Who is/was she?

Sorry man, I respect you, but creating a fuss over posed pictures, and somehow making 1 look bad, while bragging on the other? I don't go for it.

You're level headed, unlike about 5-7 people on here.

Washington Post publishes al-Baghdadi headline referring to ISIS leader as ‘austere religious scholar’

The Washington Post published a gasp-inducing headline for the ages Sunday, describing ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi as an "austere religious scholar."

The obituary, written by The Post’s National Security reporter Joby Warrick, followed confirmation of al-Baghdadi's death in a U.S. military operation in Syria on Saturday night. It detailed al-Baghdadi’s rise to the terrorist group's shadow leader from what the paper described as his origins as a "religious scholar with wireframe glasses."
https://www.foxnews.com/media/washington-post-al-baghdadi-obituary-headline-isis

SHAME!!!

Why President Trump says he didn't tell Pelosi details of raid that killed ISIS boss

Trump says he kept details of ISIS operation from Pelosi to avoid leaks.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-s...-to-avoid-leaks

Wise call.

Trump didn't tell the Dems because he either didn't know himself until it was about to go down, or because he is being impeached and didn't want dems to have any opportunity for feedback before hand.

"It's genuinely fascinating watching Democrats in real-time struggle to figure out what to say about this," journalist Glenn Greenwald wrote on Sunday. "They want to be patriotic and anti-ISIS, but also need a way to malign Trump without contradicting their gushing Obama praise over Osama bin Laden: not an easy balancing act. Good luck!"

respond to this:



The dems are only using Trump's own logic, afterall.

unless ofcourse you dont believe in practicing what you preach.