Coffee boy (or covfefe boy, possibly what maga man Trump calls a foreign policy adviser) George Papa19, according to a current news story, got sloshed in a London bar and let slip that he knew that DNC emails had been stolen. Long before the Russian tool Julian Assange WikiLeaked them.
During a night of heavy drinking at an upscale London bar in May 2016, George Papadopoulos, a young foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign, made a startling revelation to Australia’s top diplomat in Britain: Russia had political dirt on Hillary Clinton.
Exactly how much Mr. Papadopoulos said that night at the Kensington Wine Rooms with the Australian, Alexander Downer, is unclear. But two months later, when leaked Democratic emails began appearing online, Australian officials passed the information about Mr. Papadopoulos to their American counterparts... (How the Russia Inquiry Began: A Campaign Aide, Drinks and Talk of Political Dirt by Sharon LaFraniere, Mark Mazzetti and Matt Apuzzodec. 12/30/2017 NYT).
"This looks like a Watergate moment" according to Democratic Rep Adriano Espaillat of NY (appearing on MSNBC Live with Alex Witt, 12/31/2017). But, hey, many this is something that only the coffee boy knew about (this info didn't come from the Trump team/he didn't tell Trump team). Or, that's what the reporters are saying hasn't been proven yet.
Maybe George alone knew, he never told anyone (aside from the individual in the London bar), and it was just a coincidence that a member of the Trump campaign knew this at all... RIGHT! As per the reports, this was one of the "driving factors that led the FBI to open an investigation in July 2016 into Russia's attempts to disrupt the election and whether any of President Trump's associates conspired".
There *is* a conspiracy here, and Robert Mueller is uncovering it. Trump is going DOWN (*fingers crossed*). A "Watergate moment" is a reference to Nixon's involvement in a physical breaking into of the DNC. Here we have a digital break-in. The question is what was Trump's involvement? Also, does the coffee boy know?
Whatever Papa19 knows he has surely spilled his guts to Mueller. Watergate redux? If so, I do hope it plays out similarly. Although without a pardon for a resigning Trump by a President Pence. We can NOT allow a guilty POS POTUS to get away in this manner again!
Images: (1) low level coffee boy in a high level meeting. (2) Photoshopped TIME cover predicting/hoping that Trump will face prison within a year. Date of the "man of the year" issue was 12/19/2016, so the "in a year" mark has been missed. Sadly. Although prison in under 2 years is still a possibility. God willing. (click image to enlarge).
A useful idiot is someone who supports one side of an ideological debate, but who is manipulated and held in contempt by the leaders of their faction... (Excerpt from the Rationalwiki).
After the passage of the recent tax legislation (a Dickensian horror that will exacerbate inequality as it funnels wealth upward), Congressional Republicans got together with their Fuhrer. It was this disgusting orgy of verbal fellatio that made it clear to me that the Republicans have developed a strategy to manage their puppet.
"No puppet, no puppet" Trump declared prior to the election, during one of the three debates in which Hillary Clinton DESTROYED him. Yet, despite losing all three debates, the Putin puppet ascended to the White House. And the degree to which the election was manipulated by Putin (in order to install his puppet) was further revealed.
Which brings me back to the passage of Trump's bogus "tax cuts and jobs" legislation (which was sold as relief for the so-called "forgotten man", but is aimed squarely at our oligarchs. And will also NOT create jobs, given the FACT that trickle down economics is a total sham). Following the Republican legislative victory the GOP decided a gang bang of praise was in order. So each Congressperson took a turn pleasuring the moron who would be signing their Randian tax code rewrite.
This legislation, btw, is likely what Paul Ryan has dreamt of since he was a young boy (who read Ayn Rand under the sheets while masturbating). It surely is NOT what Trump promised during his campaign. Not that he ever had any intention of following through with any of his campaign promises. He lied, of course. Although, in his mind, I'm positive it was just "campaign rhetoric" designed to get him what he wanted (the adulation of the crowd, votes and the presidency).
Now it seems as though institutional Republicans have finally realized (long after Putin did) that Trump can be easily manipulated by heaping outlandish praise on him. A gang bang, for the record, "is a situation in which several people engage in physical sexual activity with one particular individual sequentially or at the same time. The person is the central focus of the sexual activity".
In the video below Senator Orrin Hatch takes his turn in the sequential gang bang by orally stimulating the engorged ego of BLOTUS (2:33).
Given how OVER THE TOP Hatch's praise is, it is CLEAR to me that he is bullshitting. And spreading the bovine excrement on THICK. Although with Trump (a man with an incredibly fragile ego who lives for praise) it works. Disgusting, but necessary if your goal is to pass legislation that benefits (almost exclusively) the oligarchs. For the most part the American people aren't buying it (why public opinion of the legislation is so low).
"we're going to make this the greatest presidency that we've seen, not only in generations, but maybe ever" Hatch promised. By which he means (I'm convinced) that FINALLY, with Trump as their useful (bill and Executive Order signing) idiot, the Republican dream of bringing FULL oligarchy to the US can finally be brought to fruition (a second Gilded Age).
Below is an ad put out by America First Policies after passage of the GOP's tax theft legislation (0:33).
America First Policies was "founded by a group of Trump loyalists — many of them with deep connections to VP Pence" according to Wikipedia. Trump sycophants and butt-lickers, or the "ministry of propaganda" as per one YouTube commenter. Propaganda? Absolutely. One actor in the commercial (a little girl at the end) says "Thank you president Trump for letting us say Merry Christmas again". A claim we all know is utter rubbish because nobody was preventing people from saying "Merry Christmas" during the Obama presidency.
"Everyday Americans are standing up to thank president Trump" the video narrator claims. A actor (portraying a blue collar worker) thanks Trump for "cutting my taxes". Another says "thank you for fixing the economy". Fixing the economy? This is the Obama economy. Obama fixed the mess left behind by the former President Doofus. Obama is who we should be thanking, not this idiot. Trump's tax cuts for the wealthy will have the same effect that the tax cuts for the wealthy (that were passed under the Doofus Administration) had.
I expect a Wall Street bubble. Share prices will increase after CEOs use their corporation's tax cuts to buy back shares (NOT hire people/give raises), followed by a recession. This is what is predicted by Economic historian Robert McElvaine, "a leading expert on the Great Depression". The recession could be "severe" and "catastrophic".
But (before that happens) Wall Street is going to go bananas. Which will give Republican voters a false impression that "tax reform" is working. And might help Republicans in the midterms. That is, I believe, their gamble, at least. Lock in their oligarch-favoring agenda NOW, then leave it to a Democratic president to deal with the mess (note that Obama never got rid of the bush tax cuts).
The Trump Administration (and the GOP under his "leadership") will cause GREAT human suffering, then blame the next (Democratic) president when it all comes crashing down. As is their MO (Clinton cleaning up Reagan/GHWB's mess and Obama having to deal with gwb's tax cut bubble which burst following a real estate bubble).
In the meantime we'll continue to see continued undignified/repulsive brown-nosing by the oligarchs (via their SuperPacs/other disinformation vehicles) and their bought-and-paid-for institutional Republican stooges (as well as the purging of "RINOS" like Flake, trumpers eagerly awaiting the death of John McCain, etc). And propaganda like the America First "Alternative Facts/Thank you Dear Leader" ego-stroking advert above. Barf!
One individual who absolutely deserves to be taken out in this year's pervert purge is a blog troll who calls himself Paul (currently authoring posts on the blog Words and Music). Previously this loathsome degenerate went by the name Luke. Before that he called himself Steve. I know for a FACT that Paul, Luke and Steve are all the same person because the account all these names link/linked to is 11597062711930899788.
Recently this hate-filled POS had the NERVE to write (on his blog) that Al Franken resigned, "rightfully so" and that I am a "scum bag" because I wrote that (IMO) it wasn't a good thing that Al Franken resigned.
He also repeated the Rusty Shackelfordlie that I "supported the scum bag Rep. Weiner and his sexual perversions". According to Paul/Luke, it is "no surprise he would support this sexual pervert".
Paul/Luke's conclusion is that "these liberals are definitely deplorable". "These Liberals" being those who quoted, agreed with and "praised" Newt Gingrich, who said "comedians often do weird things. He was in the entertainment business. He was doing the kind of things people in the entertainment business do". This was on the 12/7/2017 airing Fox News. Laura Ingraham, to whom Gingrich was speaking, agreed, saying "I think it's minor stuff".
The reason these two are downplaying Al Franken's case is because (IMO) their guys (Trump, Moore, others) are MUCH worse. They can't criticize Franken and demand he leave while an admitted sexual assaulter occupies the White House. A number of Congressional Democrats, following Franken's resignation, called for Trump to resign FOR THE SAME REASON. That reason being credible accusers, that is, and NOT due to the accusations being similar. Which they OBVIOUSLY are not. Franken's "crimes" did amount to "minor stuff". So Gingrich and Ingraham are correct, although I surely would not "praise" them for admitting it. Let them admit that Trump is an admitted sexual assaulter and likely rapist. Then they might get some praise from me.
"The liberal hate is so thick they now quote and praise Newt Gingrich" according to Paul/Luke (aka "Puke"). I don't know what Liberals he refers to. My guess is that there aren't any "praising" Gingrich. Maybe I'm wrong. Puke didn't cite any. He just threw the claim out there as an excuse to accuse Liberals of "hate" again, which is his thing. Puke previously wrote about "Liberal hate" using his "TOM" ID (different account) when he wrote on a blog called Stay A While (that "TOM" is an ID belonging to Puke is a fact I've proven here).
Note that, as TOM, Puke wrote about how he had surgery for his "brain cancer". It was back in June of 2010 that Puke (writing as "TOM") reported that "prognosis is not good". Yet he's still alive more than 7 years later. I guess he was "cured" after all. Although he vehemently denies that TOM was his account or that he ever wrote at the blog "Stay A While" .
This is a lie. They (Paul/Luke and TOM) are/were both obsessed with what they call "Liberal hate", a catchphrase that allows Puke to blame Liberals for whatever bad things Republicans do. In one of his latest posts, for example, he blames Democrats for the Republican tax deform. According to this idiot, that the Senate passed the bill is because "Liberal Hate Loses Again".
But, in regards to the reason I'm calling for Paul/Luke to "resign" from Blogger... if this moron thinks Al Franken should resign, "rightfully so", from Congress, then I say Puke should resign/quit blogger for his sexual misconduct. Sexual misconduct (or Sexual bullying*) that took the form of MANY homophobic, as well as sexually explicit and graphic, comments he submitted to my blog. I'm talking about many similar comments I received from ALL of this sick pervert's IDs/non de plumes. TOM, Steve, Luke and Paul.
An example of one such comment would be the one where he wrote, "I wish I could get a Jew hating, fag boy, liar to comment on my blog! I guess I have to learn how to suck dick as good as you do to get such greats to comment at my blog! Enjoy sucking his dick Nazi Boy!". Note that I did NOT publish this comment (although I did catalogue it here).
The comment I just mentioned is in regards to me and another blogger Puke hates. The same one he referenced in an earlier comment in which he wrote, "go get butt fucked by your boyfriend RN Trump Dervish". I'm "Trump Dervish" because (Puke says) I lie as much as Trump does.
Is this sexual harassment? The comments surely are sexually charged. As well as extremely homophobic. While comments from a person I've never met (and will never meet) aren't the same as in-person sexual harassment, the comments were UNWANTED and definitely qualify as trolling, which is a form of harassment. This kind of behavior is certainly not within the realm of what most people would consider acceptable.
Subsequently, I feel that, given Puke's belief that Franken should resign (and naming me a "scum bag" for disagreeing), it is appropriate that Paul/Luke resign from Blogger. By which I mean he should quit. Actually, I thought he had. It was back around May 2017 that I noticed he had removed (reverted to draft) all his posts. If you went to his blog before 12/2/2017 (but before May of 2017) all you see is "no posts" (and he also, for some reason, renamed his blog "A Nation"). Now, as of 12/2/2017 all his posts are back. Along with two new ones (Liberal Hate Loses Again and Franken Quits).
The "Franken Quits" post is the one where he (in a comment) calls Al Franken a "sexual pervert", lies about me supporting Anthony Weiner "and his sexual perversions", then speaks of how "liberal hate is so thick". Me, as well as people who are friendly to me (comment on my blog, allow me to comment on their blogs) are "evil hypocrites" (as per his post Christmas Was Fun). And he claims (over and over) that *I* send him "vile comments".
Sure. In addition to the two examples I gave of Puke's VILE homophobic (and sexually explicit) comments I quote in this post, there are MANY more. Comments you can view here (his comments as Luke) and here (his comments as Steve). If you look you'll see that, in addition to the homophobia, this sicko also writes that I'm also a "Jew hater". An accusation with no proof whatsoever to validate it.
For these reasons I am calling for Paul/Luke/Steve (whoever is actually the owner of this account) to RESIGN from Blogger. Quit. Delete your account. Or not. I doubt you will, hypocrite. But don't think FOR ONE SECOND that I'm going to take any advice, insults or lecturing from you seriously, given the FACT that you have absolutely ZERO moral authority to express outrage/disapproval of anyone. Due to the fact that Puke is a hypocrite, a blog troll/submitter of sexually explicit/harassing comments.
*Note: Puke's actions could probably be more accurately described as Sexual bullying. As per Wikipedia, "Sexual bullying is a type of bullying and harassment that occurs in connection with a person's sex, body, sexual orientation or with sexual activity. It can be physical, verbal, or emotional". "Verbal", I think, would include the written word, given the fact that people have been prosecuted for cyberbullying. Sexual bullying, btw, includes "any bullying behaviour, whether physical or nonphysical".
12/25/2017 Update: Puke responded to this post with a 12/24/2017 comment, writing "It's amazing how evil and deluded Dervish is; he calls himself a Christian, yet... A few of his favorite things is calling his perceived enemies sexual perverts and sending death threats". [Note: "sending death threats" is a link inserted by me].
The "pervert purge" is a line from an article by Tina Dupuy, "I Believe Franken's Accusers Because He Groped Me, Too".
It happened at a Media Matters party during the first Obama inauguration. ... Then I saw Al Franken... I asked to get a picture with him. We posed for the shot. He immediately put his hand on my waist, grabbing a handful of flesh. I froze. Then he squeezed. At least twice. I'd been married for two years at the time; I don't let my husband touch me like that in public because I believe it diminishes me as a professional woman. Al Franken's familiarity was inappropriate and unwanted... he knew exactly what he was doing. (Excerpt from a 12/6/2017 Atlantic article).
As per the article subtitle "the Democratic Party needs to stand with women who have been harassed - and not defend the politicians who abused them". The "pervert purge" re politicians is DEMOCRATS ONLY. As Franken, who resigned today said, "I of all people am aware that there is some irony in the fact that I am leaving, while a man who has bragged on tape about his history of sexual assault sits in the Oval Office and a man who has repeatedly preyed on young girls campaigns for the Senate with the full support of his party".
Franken refers to the sexual predators Donald Trump and Roy Moore. Their Party warmly embraces them. Or initially decries their perverts, then walk back that sentiment and say it's "for the voters to decide". The trumpanzee Roy-Moore-defending blogger FreeThinkesez "I believe we are entering an age of neo-puritanism".
Now, for as long as I can remember, we've been in the midst of something called the "culture war". This is an argument put forward by Conservatives that says the sexual permissiveness and acceptance of sexual deviance by the Left has caused a decades long moral decay that will eventually destroy the family and thus civilization as we know it. "Secular-Progressives" are the enemy, as per the disgraced and fired sexual predator Bill O'Reilly 2006 treatise culture warrior.
So Democrats are, apparently (according to FreeThinke) both the Party of Secular Progressivism, as well as the Party of "puritanism", which is an "extreme strictness in moral or religious matters, often to excess". Secular Progressives being hostile to Christianity and traditional American values. I don't know about you, but these two ideologies seem to be diametrically opposed. How can one be a "neo-puritan" and a "secular progressive"?
Mr Thinke, I'd like to note, is a big believer in a paranoid and racist conspiracy theory known as Cultural Marxism that says the "decay" of Western Civilization (rock'n'roll, the Sixties counterculture, the civil rights movement, Affirmative Action, the anti-war movement, homosexuality and modern feminists aka feminazis) can be blamed on Jews, Communists and their useful idiots.
This Thinke guy is clearly a moron. At least his argument (that "far Left" is responsible for a Neo-Puritanical movement, while, at the same time, their Cultural Marxist agenda demands they destroy all that traditionalists like FT hold dear) is moronic. What FT holds dear being (apparently) that older men dating young teens be perfectly acceptable. That he acknowledges happened (I think). That Roy Moore groped any of these girls is an outright lie. "You can repeat allegations over and over again, but it doesn't make them true" Roy Moore spokeswoman Janet Porter told Anderson Cooper on 12/6/2017.
"How these gals came up with this, I don't know. They must have had some sweet dreams somewhere down the line" sez Roy Moore supporter Pastor Earl Wise. Trump's accusers are also all liars, which is how the Right is justifying standing by these scumbags. Trump and Moore claim their accusers are liars, while Al Franken has "admitted" what he's done. Because there was photographic proof. Although it was clearly intended as a "joke". Though an unfunny one (and he only mimed groping Tweeden).
I do, however, believe Tina Dupuy's account of what happened to her. The other women; I don't know them. Dupuy, I am familiar with from her appearances on The Stephanie Miller Show (SMS). So Franken apparently occasionally gropes women's asses. And, if you hug him and his hand is near your breast, he'll cup it. Or he did so at least once. Although I'm not convinced he tried to kiss a woman and, when she resisted, insisted it was his "right as an entertainer". Mostly because that is such an ridiculously absurd thing to say (if he said it).
But Franken had to go because enough of his fellow Congressional Dems decided he should resign. "Enough is enough" NY Democratic Senator Kirsten Gillibrand declared. That is what happened with Anthony Weiner (his House colleagues teamed up and forced him out). But, as it turned out, what Weiner did was a lot worse (got him a prison sentence). Franken's "crimes" obviously do not rise to the level of a Wiener. Weiner resigned and he absolutely should have. Even though I admit that I did not want to believe that he'd be stupid enough to be tweeting pics of his junk to women he'd never met.
I still think Franken is a good, though flawed, man. While I concede now that Weiner is a scumbag (that tipping point came for me after it was revealed that he was engaged in inappropriate tweeting after leaving the House). But they are both OUT. While Roy Moore will likely be sent to the Senate by the voters of Alabama. And the orange-anus-lipped admitted sexual assaulter in the White House supports Moore. And the RNC restored financial support for his campaign. "All you have to do is deny it and be a Republican and you get off scot free" a caller to the SMS pointed out.
So the Democrats are unilaterally disarming; purging our Party of "pervs", while the Republicans are embracing their pervs. The head Republican perv currently occupying the White House (though hopefully not for much longer).
Stephanie Miller & Caller discuss Al Franken resignation on the SMS Show, 12/7/2017.
Sue in Rockville: Sexual misconduct is bad, but the false equivalency of equating Tina Dupy (who I admire and respect) getting grabbed by her waist, versus pedophilia and sexual assault of children is a vast difference.
Stephanie Miller: I agree. And I love Tina. I said the same thing. As she described it [was a lesser "crime" than sexual assault].
The Fox Nooz sexual assaulting hypocrite Bill O'Reilly specifically calls out Al Franken in his "Culture Warrior" book. As a member of the "secular-progressive movement". These horrible people who are out to destroy our country are (as per Bill-o) "a minority left wing group of Americans" who have non-traditional ideals. They aren't "good Christians" (who elected an admitted sexual assaulter and who will likely send a sexual assaulter of teens to the Senate).
The "neo-puritanism" tactic, btw, has been a total flop. Or so I'd say if it was real. As opposed to the delusion of trumpy fools and tools like FreeThinke and Newt Gingrich. What with Democrats only succeeding in "eating their own". A phrase I've seen a number of gleeful trumpanzees use in regards to who has been taken out by the #meetoo movement thus far. Not that I believe that THE MAJORITY of those who've lost their jobs didn't deserve to lose them. John Conyers is retiring and that is a good thing, imo (he announced he would not seek re-election). Franken resigning is not so good, imo.
As per Mckay Coppins on the 12/7/2017 airing of MTP Daily, "I've talked to Democrats who... will say, I think he [Franken] had to be sacrificed; both for the sake this argument, which is important in this cultural tipping point we've reached, but also, frankly, there is a political calculus there. As much as Democrats don't want to talk about it now. They're looking at Roy Moore. They're looking at 2018...".
Image: panel from uber Trump supporting hypocrite cartoonist Ben Garrison. So this Garrison scumbag thinks Franken committed a "crime" for a pic in which his hands hover over Leeann Tweeden's boobs (a mimed groping), but Trump, who has been accused of rape and attempted rape 3 times, shouldn't have the cuffs slapped on him? This hypocrisy reminds me of when the trumpy Roy-Moore-supporting blogger Rusty Shackelford went after me for (initially) defending Anthony Weiner. The a-hole wrote "WD, you yourself seem a tad creepy... are you perhaps on some sort of list yourself?".
Once you realize that trickle-down economics does not work, you will see the excessive tax cuts for the rick as what they are - a simple upward redistribution of income, rather than a way to make all of us richer, as we were told ~ Economist Ha-Joon Chang (dob 10/7/1963) In 2013 Prospect magazine ranked Chang as one of the top 20 World Thinkers.
Tax "deform". As opposed to "reform". Repub tax "reform" means tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy and scraps for everyone else (or even higher taxes). Which will, of course, increase the national debt.
Video: Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) unloaded on Senator Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) Thursday night (11/16/2017) after Brown accused Republicans of only protecting the rich in their new tax plan during a Senate Finance Committee hearing (2:13).
"Companies don't just give away higher wages" according to Sherrod Brown. Indeed, they do not. That a tax cut for corporations will cause them to pay higher wages or hire more workers is trickle down bullcrap. Demand causes corporations to hire more workers and a tight labor market forces corporations to pay higher wages.
Yet FOOLS like Rusty Shackelford continue to buy this bullcrap. The trumpy blogger recently wrote that it is his belief that Trump's tax cuts will be akin to "rocket fuel [for] America's economic engine".
Orrin Hatch's feigned outrage pisses me off. I'm sick and tired of these same lies from the Right, over and over. I don't give a damn about Hatch being from the "lower middle class". He's about to create a HUGE mess.
The following from an article by Paul Gambles, a Securities Fundamental Investment Analyst and an Investment Planner.
...my empirically-based model of the new administration's tax, infrastructure and government spending policies (especially the tax policies) forecasts that they'd combine to make a bad situation far worse, derailing the U.S. economy and if enacted now, Trumponomics... would almost certainly tip America into a recession that would most likely become known as America's second Great Depression... (Trump's tax reform could tip America into recession and possibly serfdom. 3/6/2017 CNBC Commentary).
These wealthy-oriented cuts could trigger a "re-run of the 1930s" according to Mr. Gambles. So, calling them "rocket fuel" is accurate, I think. Rocket fuel that will propel us into full blown oligarchy. But this is what Trump supporters wanted, I guess. To cut taxes on the wealthiest while cutting services that many of them rely on.
Fortune Magazine says "Trump's tax cuts are the biggest wealth grab in modern history". But Republicans know the wealthy man is incredibly eager to share what he has with those in lower economic stratas. They just don't have enough wealth yet.
According to Democratic Underground poster groundloop, country music artist Mark Wills (during a 2006 USO performance in Iraq) "was playing a song when she [Tweeden] started rubbing her butt on him, looks like he was trying to gently push her away. She moved on, but grabbed his ass as she walked away" (comment #83 in the thread).
This widely disseminated picture of Wills being groped by Tweeden (unwelcomed ass grab) was surprisingly commented on by predator-in-chief Trump. The predisent implies that Tweeden goes on to grab Willis by his junk, perhaps slipping her hand down his pants first? At least he wonders if that might be what happened (or, so this tweet implies to me, at least).
But I think it unlikely that Tweeden's assault of Wills went any further, as I think this is something we would have heard about. Just as I think it's as unlikely that Al Franken did anything other than mime groping Tweeden's boobs while she slept. You'd have to ask Mark Wills if he felt violated, though. We already know that Tweeden felt violated by Franken's actions (kissing her in a rehearsal for a skit and posing for a picture in which he pretends to grab her breasts as she sleeps).
For the record, while the picture is real, the tweet by the hypocrite-in-chief was photoshopped by me. "Tweedenstien" was actually "Frankenstien" (which should be "Frankenstein"). And Trump, the sexual predator who admitted on tape that he grabs (or has grabbed) women by their privates, wondered if Al Franken further groped Tweeden after the first picture was snapped.
Over on Democratic Underground commenters are theorizing that Franken called for an investigation into his actions because he can't disclose all the facts without looking bad. Those facts being the fact that everyone involved in the tour was engaging in sexually suggestive behavior.
Or Tweeden was, at least. As per another commenter, Tweeden (during an earlier 2005 USO tour), "introduces Robin Williams, humps him, then he pretends to zip up his pants after. It's just the nature of these shows for the troops, they get rowdy" (comment #8 in the thread by BevMarie).
Now, I'm absolutely not saying that (if Tweeden's description of the kiss is what really happened) that gave license to Franken to unexpectedly stick his tongue in her mouth (gross) when the pretense was to rehearse a pretend/stage kiss. Franken apologized, as he should have. And he should have been able to figure out that the picture might not be a good idea. Because it wasn't funny and could come back to haunt him at a latter date (as we know it has).
But I think there are some questions to be answered here. Like (as Shaw Kenawe of Progressive Eruptions noted) "political operative Roger Stone knew about the Weeden accusation and tweeted about it before it became public". Leeann Tweeden is a Conservative Trump supporter who has appeared on Sean Hannity's program.
Additionally, as twitter-er Puesto Loco points out, in the picture of Franken "groping" a sleeping Tweeden's breasts, she is seated in military "jump seats" and military planes that transport civilians have regular seats for such passengers. Puesto Loco's conjecture is that the photo is a joke that Tweeden was in on (she posed for the picture and wasn't sleeping).
Now, you'd think that Franken, if Tweeden had posed for that picture, would have said so. Or maybe he thought "a picture is worth a thousand words", nobody would believe him, and decided that he'd call for an investigation in which the truth would come out. I have no idea, although I'm inclined to believe that Tweeden is recounting the events as she remembers them.
As least as far as the unwanted kiss is concerned. That picture, while she might find it humiliating (and to humiliate her and show his dominance might be why he mugged for it), there clearly was no "groping". As Conservative blogger Silverfiddlepoints out on FreeThinke's blog "you cannot feel a woman's boobs through kevlar body armor. You'll just have to trust me on that one".
Although the trumpy Silverfiddle goes on to say (in a later comment) that "Al Franken calling for himself to be investigated by the senate ethics committee is a pander. It's a scared man [offering an] apology so he can hold on to his power". A comment to which my response would be "bullshit". But I might be wrong. Either Franken knows (or hopes) the truth will exonerate/allow him to hold on to his Senate seat and/or contriteness will. Certainly running for a Senate seat is a lot of work and he doesn't want to see that flushed away.
SNL alum Jane Curtinsaid "If he did that, that's really stupid, but I have never seen him in a situation where he has been sexually aggressive with anybody". Larine Newmantweeted in support of Franken, one tweet pointing out that "former female staffers of Franken... issued a statement in support of the senator that noted he treated us with the utmost respect" (WaPo article says "the statement is co-signed by eight former [female] Franken staffers who have worked for him since he was elected to the Senate in 2008").
My opinion thus far is that Franken absolutely should not resign. Certainly when the Republicans just sent a serial sexual assaulter with more than a dozen accusers to the White House AND when it looks like the Republican voters of Alabama are going to send a dater and assaulter of underage girls to the Senate.
Surely when Franken himself has said there should be an Ethics Committee investigation into his digressions and who knows how that might turn out (as per my commentary above). I say this knowing that a 2nd accuser has come forward, btw. Some woman who says Franken grabbed her buttocks in 2010 when she posed for a picture with him (taken by her husband). Lindsay Menz, a Trump voter (as per the NYP) "wasn't sure if she voted for Franken in Minnesota". Yeahhh... she doesn't remember if she voted for Franken and then for Trump.
Franken says he doesn't remember. Grabbing the butt of a constituent, that is. Maybe she's just mistaken? I say this as a Franken fan. Scratch that, make that a SUPER fan. I'd watched him on SNL, read his books and listened to his Air America radio program prior to him being elected to the Senate. Perhaps it's a conspiracy concocted by the Right to turn the #metoo movement against the Left. That is surely not outside the realm of whats possible.
Roger Stone, the "dandified dirty trickster" (as per Vanity Fair), is about to have HIS time in the barrel. Although it is in regards to his time with the Trump campaign and what he knows about Russia collusion and being questioned by the House Intelligence committee. How he knew ahead of time that Leeann Tweeden was going to "tell her story" about Franken likely won't come up.
Gloria Allred representing Roy Moore accuser Beverly Young Nelson is enough to convince trumpanzees Freethinke and Lisaof WYD (with 100% certainty) that the GOP Alabama Senate candidate is being framed. Silverfiddle (whose quoted comment on Franken I agreed with) writes that "Roy Moore got rolled by a well-planned attack" (it was just "creepy" that Moore dated teens and that he doesn't consider any of them victims).
So, Roger Stone being involved (info shared by Stone-associated and now suspended twitter account Enter the Stone Zone), as well as Tweeden's association with slimebag Trump sycophant Sean Hannity (and the other woman being a Trump voter), does give me PAUSE. I'm not saying I know AT ALL that this is a conspiracy against Franken, but I think it warrants looking into. And, yeah, I'm a Democrat who'd have voted for Franken if I live in MN, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.
Roy Moore (a hate-filled "good Christian man" who has been twice removed from the AL Supreme Court and is supportive of laws to make homosexuality illegal) is obviously guilty, what with his multiple accusers (accusing him of a LOT worse, btw).
(Image: Tweeden and Franken kissing on stage during the performance of his skit. Note that Tweeden has her arm around Franken's neck. She is not turning her head, or placing her hand over her mouth to avoid the kiss as she says was her plan. Does this pic exonerate Franken re her rehersal kiss story?).
Youtube Videos
USO Show 2006 Part One, Camp Phoenix Afghanistan (12:41) Leeann Tweeden rubs her butt against the leg of Mark Willis (5:50). Now that I watch the video I'm thinking Mark Wills probably wouldn't describe it as a "sexual assault". But you can judge for yourself. This video proves, contrary to what I write above, that Tweeden does not next grab Wills by his ding-a-ling.
Leeann Tweeden republican evidence of lies revealed! (3:26) This is a video that says Leeann Tweeden's body language says she is lying about Al Franken. While I don't place much stock in novice body language analysis, Lisa of WYD put up a photo on her blog that, according to her, proves that when Obama cried re the Sandy Hook shootings he was faking it because he's a psychopath. And his body language gave him away. But behavior analyst Lillian Glass says her quote "when people cry genuine tears they cry with both eyes, and so tend to wipe both eyes at once" being applied to this meme is "unequivocally false" (pic is of Obama wiping one eye. See SWTD #370).
Melanie Morgan: Al Franken harassed me after TV appearance (11:13) Laura Ingraham covers Tweeden revelations, interviews Melanie Morgan (2:59) who says Al Franken "stalked and harassed her" and is "not surprised at all" by the Tweeden allegations. Brian Maloney of MediaEqualizer says he warned that Dems would be sorry that they brought him forward as a political candidate. "So much of what he's done hasn't even been mentioned today". Laura and guests laugh at predisent's "where does his hands go" tweet. Laura calls it "humorous commentary", totally ignoring the fact that Trump himself has over a dozen accusers.
The Gun Lobby's interpretation of the Second Amendment is one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word fraud, on the American People by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime ~Warren Burger (9/17/1907 to 6/25/1995) Conservative Nixon-appointed SCOTUS Chief Justice (1969-1986).
The National Rifle Association, or the "NRA", in my opinion, is an organization that perpetrates evil in the name of the almighty dollar. I have been made fun of for voicing this opinion previously, although that was on the blog of a "disgruntled patriot" and gun nut going by Constitutional Insurgent.
I ended up getting banned from Libertas and Latte for my anti/gun-grabbing views. I think the bottom line for this guy was, because of the 2nd amendment, guns cannot be regulated. Even the little regulation we have is an outrage, as who would put up with regulating the 1st amendment (for example)?
But back to the NRA. For those at the top of that organization, money is more important that human lives. Of course they will say that what they're doing is protecting "2nd amendment freedoms", but that's bullshit. The Founding Fathers, instead of compromising on an issue the slave states felt strongly about (their slave patrols needed to stay heavily armed in order to prevent any uprisings that would deprive them of free labor), came up with an oddly worded amendment that protected the right of militia members to have guns.
A right that morphed into an individual (someone not the member of a militia) right to possess just about any firearm (and as many of them) as they desire. There was also the worry that a standing army could (at some future date) overthrow the government and we could end up with a military dictatorship. Of course, as everyone knows, we do have a standing army. So, in that regard, the 2nd amendment failed. We have a standing army that presidents use to wage war without the consent of Congress.
Additionally, due to the Conservative Supreme Court (and their "original intent" bullshit), an individual right to own weapons of death has expanded (Heller). As opposed to militia members having firearms to protect our country in case of invasion. Improbable as a Red Dawn-type occupation of the United States most certainly is.
So, the dotard-in-chief recently got rid of a rule put into place under Obama that restricted some mentally ill people from purchasing firearms. Just because he has to destroy anything that bears Obama's fingerprints. And because he's a Republican, and upholding our "2nd amendment freedoms" is expected of a Republican. Even though, following the Sandy Hook massacre, then not-seeking-to-be-BLOTUS Trump tweeted in SUPPORT of more gun control.
...[Trump] had previously criticized Republicans who "walk the NRA line" and wrote in his 2000 book, The America We Deserve, that he supported both a "ban on assault weapons" and a "slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun". (Trump Supported Obama's Sandy Hook Massacre Response Calling for Gun Control by Tim Marcin. Newsweek 10/2/2017).
Now, of course, there will be no support for reasonable gun control legislation. After Newtown, and after Pulse there were calls for such legislation (which a majority of Americans agree with) that went nowhere. I have heard even less from the Democratic side following the Las Vegas shooting.
As per usual, all the talk shows following the shooting did the "somber open" and all the hosts said that THIS time something has to be done. But nothing will be done except for everyone getting somber and offering prayers. Useless shit, in other words. The Democrats staged a sit in last time. Seems that this time there will be no pointless and futile act of protest. The NRA has won. The carnage will continue.
Perhaps, eventually, the American people will come to accept it and eventually agree with Bill O'Reilly? The fired from Fox sexual assaulter said, following the Las Vegas incident, that these kinds of mass shootings are the price of "freedom". The freedom of the gun industry to sell to a (minority) of paranoid and stupid gun nuts as many deadly weapons as they can stockpile.
Apparently the NRA spent 30.3 million on pro-Trump and anti-Hillary ads during the election, which was "the most the NRA has ever spent on an election in history". So obviously Trump, who actually suggested that Pro-Gun-Death folks assassinate HRC if she won, isn't going to go against his "friends" in the NRA.
btw, did you hear that the NRA might be open to legislation banning bump stocks (device that allows auto-firing of a semi-automatic weapon)? Well, that turns out to have been bullshit. Not that it matters, as bump shooting can be accomplished without a bump stock, as a RW sockpuppet calling himself Beantown AntiFascist pointed out to me on the WYD blog.
(Video: How to bump fire a semi-automatic rifle from the waist 1:00).
Here's another video I found where the YouTuber shows how to bump fire from the shoulder. So the Beantown idiot said banning a bump stock was akin to banning a "stick". Although, it appears as though bump firing makes aiming tricky and can be tiring. Obviously the bump stock (while not necessary) does make bump firing easier.
Otherwise why would the Vegas shooter have purchased 12 of them? Why was there a rush on bump stocks following the shooting? As per Newsweek, the bump stock Paddock used (and remember he had 12) cost $389.99 each. I think that even someone completely ignorant when it comes to guns could deduce that bump stocks make bump firing easier. Otherwise why spend so much money to buy one?
And, just because you can't prevent people from doing something does not mean you can't deter them by making it harder (to do what you don't want them to). But if you can't solve a problem completely you shouldn't bother trying to do anything at all. At least that's the Republican take on the situation. That, plus the right to own guns "shall not be infringed", not the right to not be shot and killed by a nut wielding a semi-automatic weapon with a huge clip. That's a right you don't have. Sorry.
Image: Fake quote attributed to Hillary Clinton. Snopes says HRC "wasn't interviewed by the Register on that date, nor was she quoted in the Register on that date". But this is the kind of BS that Right-wing gun nuts and their supporters buy withOUT question.
Note that this is a real "conspiracy theory" that also involves Mike Pence clones from the distant future, an Egyptian god and the use of magic (by DJT followers) to help Trump win the presidency (in addition to racism that is. The hate filled bigots also used ACTUAL magic).
As I discussed in "Shitposters of Free Kekistan" (WYM #15), (as per Wikipedia) "Esoteric Kekism... is a term for the parody religion of worshipping Pepe the Frog". "Kekism" is derived from the name of the Egyptian god Kek[1]. Kek, who has both a male and a female form, has "the head of either a frog or a cat".
The female form, "Kekuit", that is. The male form, "Kekui", has the head of a serpent. This is where Pepe, the anthropomorphized frog that the alt-right has adopted/stolen to represent their hate, comes in. While Pepe is often drawn as Donald Trump and is male, I would imagine he could take any form that he desires [3]. Given the fact that Pepe is actually the Egyptian god Kek (if I'm understanding this conspiracy correctly).
As for how Trump figures into this, my speculation is that, one day in ancient Egypt a man far removed from his own time appeared, catching the attention of the god Kek. That man was a time traveling Donald Trump. Being a God, and therefore immortal, Kek remembered Trump in the present and decided to grant Trump's followers the power to do "meme magic" (internet magic put into action via memes). In return for their worship of Pepe (the present day incarnation of Kek).
As for how Donald Trump came to be a time traveler, he did so via a machine designed by Nicola Tesla. Tesla, similar to Leonardo Da Vinci (who drew designs for a flying machine), never actually built a functioning time machine (although he did design one and conduct experiments). After Tesla's death his documents (including the time machine blueprints) were seized by the government.
Thinking there could be something of great value to be discovered in these documents, the government brought in scientist John G. Trump to look at them. John Trump discovered the plans for the time machine, but, instead of revealing his discovery to the government, stole them. Later he gave the documents to his nephew, Donald J. Trump.
Apparently technological advancements of the day, combined with the wealth of Donald Trump, allowed for construction of a working time machine. The future president, being a real estate mogul and not a scientist, used his wealth to pay others to construct the machine in secret. I'm guessing. There is a YouTube video that lays out the basic story, but it doesn't get into the specifics.
(Video: Donald Trump Time Travel Theory - Tesla, Barron Trump, Mike Pence and Meme Magic. Published by The Truth Factory 7/25/2017. RT 8:30).
Upon completion of the time machine, Donald Trump used it to travel to the future. What he found there convinced him that he MUST run for and be elected president of the United States. In order to alter the timeline by preventing Hillary Clinton from becoming the 45th POTUS and starting WWII. Presumably he then traveled to the past. Possibly looking for knowledge that would help him win the presidency and prevent nuclear destruction. Or a dystopian future caused by the election of the warmongering hawk Hillary Clinton (AKA "Hitlery Rotten Klintoon" or "Hildebeest").
For the record, real world proof of Trump's travels into the past exist in the form of the Baron Trump novels, which were a series of 2 fictional works published in 1889 and 1893 (tales similar to Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, but which never attained anywhere near the same popularity).
According to the Youtube, narrated by a talking feline (cats being "sacred in ancient Egyptian society"), Trump's son Barron also time traveled (hence the title of the books). However, (as we all know) Trump himself used the alias "John Barron". Additionally, in Baron Trump's Marvelous Underground Journey, Trump apparently "flees from his entanglements with local women".
Trump used the "Barron Trump" alias to call the press (representing himself as his own spokesman) to brag about what a ladies man Trump was (something he also did using the name "John Miller"). I therefore say it was Trump the father and not Barron Trump the son who time traveled to the past and became the inspiration for the "Barron Trump" novels.
If the video by "The Truth Factory" is to be believed, that is. Which, of course, it is not. First of all, between the two, I am far more worried that Trump (as opposed to HRC) could start WWII. By provoking North Korea. According to Trump Secretary Tillerson is "wasting his time" trying to find a diplomatic solution to the North Korean problem. And, as per Defense Secretary James Mattis, we need "military options that our president can employ if needed".
Just recently Trump tweeted that he's in favor of regime change in North Korea. This after he criticized gwb for invading and occupying Iraq to depose Saddam Hussein (although the fool might believe getting rid of Kim Jong Un can be done easily by dropping a few nukes).
...hasn't worked, agreements violated before the ink was dry, makings fools of U.S. negotiators. Sorry, but only one thing will work!
Additionally, as you've probably heard, Trump is mulling decertifying the Iran deal worked out by the previous administration. An arrangement that is preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Apparently Trump wants Iran to have nukes. Remember Trump said "it's not like, gee whiz, nobody has them". So, looks like nukes for NK is a no, but nukes for Iran is a tentative yes.
Obviously this makes no sense, but I think we are possibly dealing with a madman. And, NO, I do not believe Trump is utilizing the "madman strategy" (maybe he thinks he is). What I'm saying is that Trump is crazy (a mentally deranged dotard).
Another reason to fear that our future might be a irradiated hellscape initiated by a Donald Trump button press on the nuclear football, IMO. A future I would have no fear of if the popular-vote-winning Hillary Clinton had assumed the presidency. Maybe we'd have more war (because yes, she is a hawk, but she isn't stupid-crazy (a dangerous combination of stupid and crazy).
But, for those of you who thought DJT wouldn't be a hawk, he did JUST declare that the Afghanistan conflict will continue. Despite criticizing Obama and tweeting (on 1/11/2013) "let's get out of Afghanistan". So, NO, I don't think he's any better on that front than HRC would have been. CNBC says Trump "won the White House in part on a policy of reducing engagement in foreign conflicts", but SURPRISE, he lied.
BTW, I have yet to mention that "Kek is the deification of the concept of primordial darkness". Sounds about right to me. That his racist followers would bow down to an evil god, that is. It might be that they THINK "the cult of Kek" is a "parody" religion, but it is, in fact, real. And the time traveling Trump did not go first to the future, but to the past. Where he caught the attention of Kek, who then sent Trump to an alternate future. A future in which the world had been destroyed by a nuclear conflict... started by Trump.
Although Kek told Trump that the world had been destroyed by Hillary Clinton, and that Trump had to run for president to "stop" her. Making DJT the ultimate #trumpdupe. A dupe in Kek/Pepe's plan to wipe humanity from the globe and return us to "primordial darkness". Or (much more likely, IMO) Kek/Pepe promised Trump godhood if he helped Kek/Pepe destroy the world (sounds to me like something the egomaniacal Trump would desire). And the most ardent followers of the Kek/Trump duo will (à la the Christian rapture) be spirited away. Perhaps to "Kekistan" and thus be saved... while all the "normies" and rest of the world burns [4].
(Footnotes below are excerpted from the SPLCarticle "What the Kek: Explaining the Alt-Right Deity Behind Their Meme Magic" by David Neiwert, 5/8/2017).
Footnotes [1] In "the World of Warcraft online computer games... participants can chat only with members of their own faction in the war either Alliance or Horde fighters), while opposing players' chats are rendered in a cryptic form based on Korean; thus, the common chat phrase LOL (laugh out loud) was read by opposing players as KEK... at some point, someone at 4chan happened to seize on a coincidence: There was, in fact, an Egyptian god named Kek [who] was portrayed as a bringer of chaos and darkness, which happened to fit perfectly with the alt-right's self-image as being primarily devoted to destroying the existing world order". [2] "during the Greco-Roman period, the male form [of Kek] was depicted as a frog-headed man". [3] Kek "is a god of chaos and darkness" and that is "according to their own explanations". [4] ..."ordinary people [are called] normies... in their lingo..."
Video: Absurdity linked to by a Pepe-worshipping fool on the #trumpdupe WYD blog. Trump faces off against the hated George Soros. #trumpdupes, FYI, embraced the term "deplorable" because they had already embraced the evil god Kek. Because they are evil (2:06).
Postscript: Regarding the Mike Pence clones (one of which is Tim Kaine's wife), they are from the far future, as I understand it. Apparently at least 3 Pence copies were sent back to the past - by "Mike Pence Prime" - to lend assistance to DJT.
I know words. I have the best words ~ DJT claim during a campaign stop in SC on 12/30/2015.
If I only told you the name, "American Liberty Report", I think you'd be able to guess that the're a Right-wing "news" source. Conservative news sources often use the words "liberty" and "patriot". The implication being that the Left is opposed to liberty and Lefties aren't patriotic.
Anyway, as per an email I received today, "Trump is curing some of America's deepest problems". Without clicking on the link and reading the story, my guess is that the "deep problem" Trump has cured is that a Black man was president.
After clicking the link I see that the problem Trump has solved is "extreme sensitivity". Sensitivity to what, you ask? The fact that Trump is an inarticulate buffoon who refers to countries that don't exist (Nambia) and uses words that don't exist ("unpresidented" and "covfefe").
Trump isn't America's first idiot president (gwb), but he is, due to his use of Twitter (the article says) accomplishing the amazing feat of curing the "extreme sensitivity" of people who realize that Trump is completely unqualified for the job of president.
This feat is accomplished by Trump keeping up a constant barrage of moronic tweets. According to the "American Liberty Report", "he has deliberately used Twitter to onslaught leftist ideology so relentlessly that they can't help but become desensitized to his words". So, people are getting used to Trump's idiotic tweeting, and for that he deserves praise?
America is suffering from oversensitivity. It is crippling our once unparalleled institutions of higher learning. Trump saw the issue, and he has already flipped the script on several classic battles. (How Trump Is Curing Extreme Sensitivity in the US).
Trump is exhibiting "real leadership on a level we haven't seen in ages" by using Twitter to "push buttons", forcing the Left to "get over their sensitivities". Remember when Obama was criticized for being "professorial". Yeah, that was awful, right? What we really needed, according to the Right, was a moron.
Now we have a moron, and he's shaking things up with his stupidity. Way to go dotard Trump! Can you f*cking believe it?! I know I sure as hell can't.
Image: The dotard Trump claims he has the "best words". "Dotard", btw, means "an old person, especially one who has become weak or senile". The dictator Kim Jong Un recently said (re Trump's threat to destroy North Korea), "I will surely and definitely tame the mentally deranged U.S. dotard with fire". Yeah I doubt it. The "tame with fire" part, and not the part about Trump being a mentally deranged dotard (he is). BTW, I am not saying that Kim isn't mentally deranged... this might be a case of "it takes one to know one".
Angry people have become the middle of the political spectrum ~Geert Wilders (dob 9/6/1963) a Dutch nationalist politician and fan of DJT who has been criminally accused of inciting hatred and discrimination.
Progressive Radio host Thom Hartmann has stated his belief many times that "whichever party first reinvents itself successfully will begin winning elections the way the Democrats did in the 1932-1968 era" [1]. The "reinvention" he refers to is to be pro-worker by opposing sending our jobs overseas.
Unfortunately this past potus election has proven that Thom Hartmann was right. I did not disagree, but I did hope that it would be the Democrats who reinvented themselves. The Democratic potus candidate should have been Bernie Sanders. Bernie Sanders has proven that he is pro-worker by opposing job killing free trade agreements. Bernie Sanders votes against them.
Barack Obama, on the other hand, championed the job killing free trade agreement known as the TPP. This was after suggesting that he might renegotiate NAFTA during his first campaign. Hillary Clinton (viewed by many as a 3rd Obama term) was initially in favor of the TPP. I say that if Bernie had not run that she wouldn't have flipped. She would have run as the pro-TPP candidate.
Trump, an outsider, was the right candidate at the right time. He ran against the TPP, which White Rust Belt Blue-collar voters knew would cost them their jobs. Trump also promised he'd stop brown people (here) and yellow people (overseas) from stealing their jobs (he played the race card). I'm not saying everyone who voted Trump did so because they're racist, but a LOT of them did.
The Trump presidency was, btw, predicted by former president Bill Clinton. He predicted the ascendency of a Trump-like leader with his New Covenant speeches (a series of speeches WJC delivered "at his alma mater, Georgetown University, in late 1991 to outline his political philosophy at the start of his campaign for the presidency").
WJC: ...we're offering a new radical approach to economics. Economics as if people were really important. If we offer these hard-working families no hope for the future, no solutions to their problems, no relief for their pain, then fear and insecurity will grow, and the politics of hate and division will spread. If we do not act to bring this country together in common cause to build a better future, David Duke and his kind will be able to divide and destroy our nation. (Excerpt from then-Governor Clinton's 11/20/1991 New Covenant speech).
Donald Trump offered "hope for the future, solutions to their problems, and relief for their pain" in the form of his rejection of the TPP. Bill Clinton signed NAFTA into law, which is why we got gwb [2]. And Obama and Hillary both spoke favorably of more job-killing free trade. Hillary reversed herself on the TPP, although she was pushed/forced to do so by Bernie Sanders.
Now, most of us know that Donald Trump is a con-man who just said what he needed to in order to get elected. But enough people were fooled. Previously middle class workers (White people in the flyover states, by and large) saw their jobs go overseas due to the Bill Clinton-signed NAFTA. And they feared that it was going to happen again. Obama (for some bizarre reason that baffles my mind) tried to sell the same snake oil [3].
He thought he could ram it though before his administration ended, I guess. Hillary Clinton reversed course because of Bernie Sanders. "I've got to be more like Bernie" she decided (because the voters were responding to Bernie's anti-TPP stance). But the damage was done. Nobody believed her. The White middle class who lost (or could lose) their good paying jobs because of job killing free trade didn't believe her (btw, I thought the bill would pass before the Obama administration came to an end, Obama would sign it into law, HRC would be elected, then she'd put the blame on Obama).
She wanted it, but wouldn't touch it (if she were elected and it had not passed) because it would damage her politically. This is why I blame Obama and I blame both Clintons for the Trump presidency. Trump hijacked the Republican Party and "reinvented" it. Thom Hartmann knew whichever party was first to come out against job killing free trade would win. Bill Clinton PREDICTED what would happen if he failed to offer these workers "relief for their pain". But he went ahead and signed NAFTA anyway.
According to Thom Hartmann, "Donald Trump lead a full-scale war against the Republican establishment and elites, particularly through his attack on both their military and their trade policies". Trump, as president, chucked the TPP. An easy campaign promise to fulfill. The military situation we're in is another story.
He strongly opposed continuing the futile fight in Afghanistan as a candidate. Now he sends more troops? Did that disillusion some of the #trumpdupes? I suspect some were disillusioned. Others will continue to believe that anything Trump does is great. Because he's White. According to the racist blogger Rusty Shackelford.
Rusty Shackelford: Now, now WD... even you would have to admit DJT is so much stronger then the moolie. We are fine with the Pres changing his mind after having all the information presented to him... that's the sign of a strong leader... not a limp wristed dufuss. (8/21/2017 at 9:44pm).
"David Duke and his kind will be able to divide and destroy our nation", Bill Clinton warned. Now it has happened. At the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville David Duke said "the event represented fulfilling the promises of President Trump". He was talking about White racists "taking our country back" after a Black guy got elected president twice.
Regarding Trump's hardcore base, Jamelle Bouie writes (in a 9/1/2017 Slate article) "it's become harder to deny that people support the president not just for being president, but for his core message of White resentment and grievance" (visit the WYD blog and you'll see what I mean).
Bill Clinton both predicted and helped bring this disaster about. His signing of NAFTA and Obama's championing of the TPP lead directly to Trump. Trump was the "white resentment and grievance" candidate. Of course the majority of us realized that Trump was a huge liar and saying whatever he needed to to get elected (except for the racism stuff. Trump IS a racist). This is why he lost the popular vote (the smart people voted for Hillary).
Trump did get rid of the TPP, however. But Bernie Sanders would have done that. Then go on to champion programs to help people harmed by decades of job-killing free trade agreements. Unlike Trump, who wants to kill such programs (the ACA, for example). Additionally Trump wants to hurt poor people by cutting Social Safety net programs drastically and push through enormous tax cuts for the benefit of the wealthy (he's a typical Republican in this regard).
Bernie Sanders should have been the Democratic potus candidate. I'm not saying I think he would have won, only that I KNOW he would have had a better shot. Hillary Clinton was the wrong candidate (even though I'd have liked to see a woman elected president, and YES, I did vote for her). But Bernie Sanders (with his record of opposition against job-killing free trade agreements) was the better candidate. He'd still of had to contend with the Russia meddling. And, instead of misogyny and Clinton-hate, he'd have faced antisemitism and bullshit about him being a Commie who was trying to buy votes with "free stuff".
Bernie Sanders would have won the votes of previously Democratic-voting Rust Belt Blue-collar workers (people who were with him in the primary, but switched to Trump when Bernie didn't secure the nomination). And that, I think, would have made the difference. There would have been no sabotage from James Comey either.
Footnotes [1] "From 1932 to 1968, the Democratic Party was obviously the majority party. During that time period, the Democrats had won seven out of nine presidential elections, and their agenda gravely affected that undertaken by the Republican Eisenhower administration" (source: Wikipedia/Timeline of modern American conservatism). This period of time is know as the New Deal coalition. As per Wikipedia, "FDR forged a coalition that included the Democratic state party organizations, city machines, labor unions, blue collar workers, minorities (racial, ethnic, sexual and religious), farmers, white Southerners, people on relief, and intellectuals". [2] "...it was the 1993 fight over the North American Free Trade Agreement that saw the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party stick the knife deep into the back of its longtime ally, organized labor". (Source: How the Democrats Lost Touch on Trade by Thomas Frank. Politico, September/October 2016). [3] As per a 4/23/2015 CBS News article, "in 2008, then-Sen. Obama ran as a skeptic of free trade agreements and even vowed during the primary to renegotiate NAFTA"... according to the former president "I think that we had a stretch of a couple of decades where, in part because of globalization, you had manufacturing moving to other places in search of low wages, no environmental standards, no labor standards. So trade deals haven't always worked for us".
Perjury about a blowjob is not nearly as serious as perjury about a Russian attack on our democracy ~ Laurence Tribe (dob 10/10/1941) a professor of constitutional law at Harvard who has argued before the Supreme Court 36 times (6/11/2017, CNN).
I am predicting that the Russia nonsense will go nowhere. Mueller (if Trump doesn't fire his partisan ass) will find nothing. Because Trump did not collude with Russia (according to Trump and his deluded trumpanzees). Which isn't to say that I think trump won't be impeached. He will. But it will be for receiving oral sex in the Oval Office. Mark my words!
BTW his wife Melania isn't the one who has (or will) blow him in the Oval. According to what I've read, "Melania is fully aware... not bothered [and] was planning on leaving the marriage until Trump's unexpected victory". What she was not bothered by is that Trump has a mistress.
The mistress's name? Hope Hicks. A 29 year old bimbo who currently serves as the White House Director of Strategic Communications. Hicks, a 28 year old former model, has no previous experience or interest in politics. Now she travels everywhere with him. BTW, rumor has it that Melania is also cheating. Her beau is "Henry Siemers, head of security at Tiffany's in Trump Tower".
Despite these rumors not being confirmed, I think we can be fairly certain that they are completely true. A cheater cheats, and Trump is a proven cheater. When he bragged to Billy Bush that he can kiss women without their consent and even sexually assault them (grab them by the privates) just because he is a celebrity, he was married to Melania.
Donald and trophy wife #3 were married the same year (1/22/2005) that he told the Bush cousin that he considers women to be mere sex objects, and he can do whatever he wants to a woman he finds attractive (this was sometime in September of 2005). What woman wouldn't want him, given the fact that he's an alpah male?
Obviously the Trumpster never considered staying loyal to his new (3rd) wife. Cheating, like grabbing pussy, is something he is entitled to. And, if (as a wealthy real estate magnate and reality TV star) he thought he was irresistible to women, why the hell would that change now that he's the most powerful man in the world? In addition to cheating with Hopie AKA "The Hopester" another rumor says "Trump has a regular girlfriend in Florida that he sees at Mar-a-Lago".
So maybe he isn't screwing Hope in the WH oval (or any room in the WH), given the fact that it's a dump, but, really, all that needs to happen is for him to lie about under oath about the extra-marital affair. When Trump was "elected" potus he was facing an unpresidented 3500 lawsuits. Some of them have been resolved in the 6 months of his illegitimate predisency, but new ones have been filed.
Get him under oath in regards to ONE of these lawsuits. Then, when the plaintiff's counsel asks him if he's cheated on Melania and he answers "no" (which any cheating man would do)? Then we've got him! The only problem would be that Trump would likely decline to answer and his lawyer would probably object. But a good lawyer could find a way to make the question relevant, I think. Maybe not, but it's worth a try.
Additionally, Trump might testify under oath in regards to the Robert Mueller investigation. Trump declared that he was "100 percent willing" to testify under oath about his conversations with former FBI directer Comey. Trump says Comey's characterization of their conversation was not accurate. "I didn't say that" Trump insisted when Comey testified that the predisent asked for loyalty. Also, "to let Flynn investigation go".
As we all know, Trump has not testified, but that does not mean that he won't be asked to. Trump could be asked to testify about his conversations with Comey, or for some other reason. Although Trump would likely refuse (and no law could compel him to appear before Congress under oath). And we all know he lied about being "100 percent willing". Because DJT is a pathological liar.
Trump will likely actively avoid testifying under oath. In regards to any kind of lawsuit or in regards to the Trump-Russia investigation. But, back before Trump was sworn in and Trump University lawsuit was still active, NBC news reported that "yes, Trump can be compelled to testify". Because "The US Supreme Court settled that question in 1997 when it ruled unanimously that a sexual misconduct lawsuit filed by Paula Jones against President Bill Clinton could proceed".
So, if Trump testifies under oath and lies about his affairs? Then the Republicans (once proof of the affair/affairs is presented), will be obligated to impeach. Because, as we all know, lying under oath about cheating on your spouse is an impeachable offense. Although he might not be removed from office, as the last guy who was impeached for a BJ wasn't. Which is why I think that the plaintiff's lawyer should ask as many questions as possible that Trump might answer with a lie.
Lying about threatening James Comey's job if he did not drop the investigation into Mike Flynn, or lying about his involvement in spinning a lie for Donald Junior (re his answer to an offer to collude with a Russian lawyer re the Russian government's support for candidate Trump) might not be as bad as lying about a BJ, but the argument still could be made that lying under oath is lying under oath. Couldn't it? Also, remember that Trump has a record of lying under oath, so it should be easy to catch him in a lie if he has no choice but to testify.
(Image: DJT smooches his alleged mistress, Hope Hicks).
Honestly, though, I think it's financial crimes that will be Trump's downfall. It's my understanding that Mueller has brought on a lot of people specializing in these kind of crimes. Mueller isn't just looking into collusion. Just as the investigation into Bill Clinton started with White Water, moved on to other things, then finally settled on lying about a BJ, Mueller doesn't have to make his case on collusion.
Not that I think there wasn't collusion (as there was nothing to White Water), only that Mueller can nail Trump on something else. Which I think he will. Looks like it's going to be money-laundering for Russian criminal elements. For which NY AG Eric Schneiderman might file charges. Against Paul Manafort - applying pressure to force him to flip on Trump (SWTD #386). If Manafort flips (because Trump can only pardon him for federally filed charges, not charges filed in NY) it could get really ugly for Trump. Bring on the popcorn.
Video:Ladies Man Leon Phelps (Tim Meadows) welcomes Monica Lewinsky to help take calls about dating at work and phone sex, followed by a call from Linda Tripp (5/8/1999). Note that this is the actual Monica Lewinsky, but not the actual Linda Tripp - who was portrayed by John Goodman (6:33).
