Saturday, January 21, 2017

Trump-Putin World Quadrant: For Trump (NW & SW) and Putin (NE & SE)

This Sign Was Spotted in Danilovgrad, Serbia

Pretty Simple Really: New American-Russian Alliance 

My initial assessment (some will call it corny or stupid) that I see now that Donald J. Trump is officially in the office:

America is now totally ripe for one or more dictators to soon take over. Why do I say that? Just look and listen to this – my educated evaluation based on close scrutiny and observation. It goes something like this (in exactly 200 words, too).

“We seem to not trust or believe anyone or anything except from a bullshitting con-artist billionaire who surrounds himself with other bullshitting con-artist billionaires, who collectively blame the “entire establishment” who BTW: helped them get so damn rich by riding on our backs (they tell us) and then taking away from us all our stuff, then tell us we should only trust them to fight and get our stuff back, which will be on their terms, and that method is forthcoming, but yet they are reluctant to lay out in full the details all the while profess that we should only trust and believe in them – and not any of the media except that of their choosing for us to believe and trust. And, there will not time for any of our Q&A and certainly none from the media they we can’t trust or believe.”

Does that sound like that circle is now squared?

Related to my assessment is this from the Boston Globe as reflected in their summary. And, no, I simply found this article while after I was searching for a Trump-Putin photo for the blog posting (*the one I used above ironically):

“[…] if Trump and Putin do forge a 21st-century detente, it would bind the United States to an authoritarian nation notorious for political repression, military opportunism, naked interference in the affairs of other states, and a dismal record on human rights — all of it grounded in a cult of Putin-personality.”

That description seems to fit them both, doesn’t it? We could call it the P.T. Barnum effect (Putin-Trump in this case); not for their money per se, but for their vote and support and worldly goods in the long run.

Thanks for stopping ... hope you were not bored too much (smile).

Friday, January 20, 2017

New Middle Names for Donald and Melania Trump: Hot Off The Press

First Up: “Donald P. Trump” extract from his Inauguration Speech  
[click image to enlarge]

Then: “Melania P. Trump” for her RNC Convention Speech

Surely the middle name initial “P” runs the family, um?

This simple post and comparison proves my point – and boy, I hope it’s not “fake” news…!! (smile)

Oh, BTW: The “P” stands for plagiarists (kind of a wild guess) since both of them are speech non-originalists ...

Hey, humor is humor no matter the source, right?


Wednesday, January 18, 2017

Like Father Like Son or Vice Versa (With strong emphasis on vice)

Congrats, Donald. Thank you Vlad. I'm humbled.
(За здоровье!)

A recent tweet - the father's line:

“Russia has never tried to use leverage over me. I HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH RUSSIA - NO DEALS, NO LOANS, NO NOTHING!”

4:31 AM - 11 Jan 2017
31,776 replies / 23,707 retweets / 86,196 likes

Now from the son, Donald, Jr., an older quote — oops...!!!


Now try to tie it all together, even if that's humanly possible in this PR era with this: BREAKING NEWS FROM WASHINGTON, DC from McClatchy DC News with this startling headlines, which alone is disturbing to say the least:

FBI and five other agencies probe possible covert
Kremlin aid to Trump

The FBI and five other law enforcement and intelligence agencies have collaborated for months in an investigation into Russian attempts to influence the November election, including whether money from the Kremlin covertly aided President-elect Donald Trump, two people familiar with the matter said.
The agencies involved in the inquiry are: the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, the DOJ, the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, and representatives of the DNI sources have said.
Investigators are examining how money may have moved from the Kremlin to covertly help Trump win, the two sources said. 
One of the allegations involves whether a system for routinely paying thousands of Russian-American pensioners may have been used to pay some email hackers in the United States or to supply money to intermediaries who would then pay the hackers, the two sources said.
[…] Mr. Trump, the president-elect, will be inaugurated January 20, 2017 (Friday at high noon), said in a press conference that he believes Russia was involved with the hacking (but possibly others instead), and he has at times called allegations that he or his associates were involved in such as a “political witch hunt” and a “complete and total fabrication.”
Related: Mr. Trump has yet to say whether FBI Director James Comey will be retained. However, the rest of Trump’s newly appointed intelligence and law enforcement chiefs will inherit the investigation, whose outcome could create national and international fallout.
Noteworthy: Mr. Trump's presidential transition team did not respond to a request for comment about this latest inquiry. 
As always, stay tuned. This for sure is a very critically-important story. 

Saturday, January 14, 2017

Ethical Oversight — Nope, Not Needed Part Deux: GOP Weasels Profess

Office of Government Ethics (OGE)
(Added to the GOP's chopping block)

Updated from earlier post 
(Now combined GOP-Trump motto)

FOLKS THIS IS NOW VERY VERY SERIOUS STUFF - to wit:
After-the-fact update (it came in shortly after the below was posted) and falls in line with the whole idea and prospect of the Trump's marketing the Trump name and products from the White House for their own financial gain (believe it or not; it is real).
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – One day after President-elect Donald Trump encouraged supporters to “Buy L.L. Bean,” an ethics watchdog warned federal employees they must not endorse products or companies.
The OGE (discussed below in greater detail) said on its official Twitter account: “All executive branch employees must refrain from misuse of position, including endorsements.”
No mention of Trump was made in the tweet, and many rules for federal employees do not apply to the president
(I Note: Which I am sure he knows about and will stretch the limits to the limits). 
The ethics office has tweeted other reminders to employees this week, including one that federal gift restrictions remain in place during the upcoming inauguration.
The office's endorsements message drew attention on Twitter, though, because it came after Trump posted support for the Maine catalog retailer known for its backpacks and rubber-bottomed boots. Activists had called for a boycott following reports that a member of the family that owns L.L. Bean contributed to Trump's campaign.

Trump tweeted: “Thank you to Linda Bean of L.L. Bean for your great support and courage. People will support you even more now. Buy L.L. Bean.” (Thus Trump was implying that since she supported him and he won that was her reward: Presidential endorsement for their products – no conflict, right Mr. and Mrs. GOP)?
Original post starts here:

I already blasted the new 115th all-GOP run House on the ethics oversight issue they wanted to toss. Then after an intense public backlash they backed down and reversed course which you recall was on the very first day of the new session – ironic to say the least. The GOP vote to back down from reining in the Office of Congressional Ethics was unanimous as Jake Sherman of Politico reported (can be reviewed here). 

Sadly, they are baccccck and after the big prize as seen in this UPDATED STORY FROM THE AP that has this HEADLINES:

GOP lawmakers go after ethics official who criticized Trump
The heart of that AP piece is seen, I believe, in these two statements which are germane and right to the point:

House Republicans have shown no inclination to challenge President-elect Donald Trump on ethics matters. Instead, they are going after the federal ethics official who questioned Trump's potential conflicts of interest.

(My Note: How ironic is that, yet so typical of the hypocrisy shown by this GOP probably over the past 10-15 years).

Two key Democratic views:

From Rep. Elijah Cummings of Maryland, top Democrat on the committee sharply criticized Chaffetz for summoning OGE Director Mr. Walter Shaub, saying: “The Oversight Committee has not held one hearing, conducted one interview, or obtained one document about President-elect Donald Trump's massive global entanglements, yet it is now apparently rushing to launch an investigation of the key government official for warning against the risks caused by President-elect Donald Trump's current plans.”

Other Democrats see a coordinated effort by Republicans to undermine the OGE ethics reviews of Trump cabinet nominees to ensure they will avoid conflicts of interests. The question is why are the Republicans holding that view?

This from House Democratic Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) who said: “Instead of honoring his committee's responsibility to hold the administration accountable, Chairman Chaffetz has appointed himself President-elect Trump's chief strongman and enforcer.”
Here is the background on the Office of Government Ethics (OGE):
It is an independent agency within the executive branch of the Federal Government which is responsible for directing executive branch policies relating to the prevention of conflicts of interest on the part of Federal executive branch officers and employees. OGE primary duties include the following:
·         Establishing the executive branch standards of conduct;
·         Issuing rules and regulations interpreting the criminal conflict of interest restrictions;
·         Establishing the framework for the public and confidential financial disclosure systems for executive branch employees;
·         Developing training and education programs for use by executive branch ethics officials and employees;
·         Ensuring that individual agency ethics programs are functioning properly by setting the requirements for them, supporting them, and reviewing them.
The Director of OGE is appointed by the President after confirmation by the Senate and serves a five-year term, thereby overlapping presidential terms, and is not subject to term limits. Other OGE employees are career civil servants. The office was created by the Ethics in Government Act of 1978. The OGE was separated from OPM in 1989 pursuant to reform legislation. 
So, this brings me back to Rep. Jason “A-hole” Chaffetz (R-UT) – I say A-hole and because that is based on my opinion and close scrutiny of his past performance and remarks and focus while sitting as the Chairman of the all GOP-run House Oversight Committee… see it you agree. Where we are now with Chaffetz and obvious partisan pursuit for oversight of the non-partisan, independent ethics oversight office – now pathetic and ironic is that? But, as I said, SOP for the GOP. 
As for me, I see the ethics office as key and necessary and yes, Mr. Shaub has a duty to enforce the rules and law and also I say yes, he should tell the public about “What our government employees, appointed or elected are up to that is unethical since they all work for us: “We the People” isn’t that what GOPer profess in every speech and Talk Show sound bite?

BTW: Mr. Trump can replace Mr. Shaub and appoint a new head of the OGE, which I suspect he will and probably, based on the current attitude in DC, probably consider and pick a Jack Abramoff or Tom DeLay sort of person. What do you think? They fit that mold, don’t they? After all, the GOP motto seems to be as the graphic above says: “We don’t need no stinkin Ethics or Ethical oversight, either.”

Continue the story at the AP link above or here.

Thanks for stopping by and sharing this pathetic story with me. Stay tuned.

Thursday, January 12, 2017

Strike While the Iron is Hot Before the Public Wakes Up then Call Hazmat

First Hide Old Mitch's Revenge Iron, then Call Hazmat 

Biggest Show of All: Step Right Up Folks, One Thin Dime, One-tenth of a Dollar
(No, not Little Egypt this time)

The wrecking crew is coming to town – get ready.

“GOP House and Senate move to repeal ACA but with no idea how to replace it … and the AMA weighs in…”

From The AP: The American Medical Association wants Republicans to show how they would replace President Barack Obama's health care law before Congress votes to repeal it.  In a letter Tuesday to congressional leaders, AMA Chief Executive Officer James L. Madara writes that before lawmakers dismantle the law, “they should show in reasonable detail what will replace current policies.”

GOP leaders hope to approve legislation in the next few weeks or months dismantling much of the law. It is expected to take them months or years to approve replacement legislation. The AMA represents many of the nation's doctors. It supported passage of Obama's law when it was enacted in 2010. The AMA letter was first reported by Politico.

Meanwhile in the all-GOP Senate – GOP Majority “Leader” Mitch “Our Priority is Make Barack Obama a One-term President” McConnell (R-KY) come all this:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Congress is poised to complete its initial step toward dismantling President Barack Obama's health care law, as Republicans divided over how to replace it face pressure from Donald Trump for quick action.
By a near party-line 51-48 vote early Thursday, the all GOP-run Senate approved a budget that eases the way for action on subsequent repeal legislation as soon as next month.
In the all GOP-run House planned to complete the budget on Friday, even amid misgivings by some GOP lawmakers. Aiming to build momentum, the office of House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) distributed an email underscoring support for the measure from by the ultra-conservative think tank, Heritage Action.
McConnell meanwhile says: “We must act quickly to bring relief to the American people.”
(I Note: GOP defines “relief” as kicking 20 million Americans off of decent health care back into the poor houses and ER for primary care, or far worse: straight under the closest bus or into a GOP outhouse).
Donald Trump said in his press conference: “We're going to do repeal and replace, very complicated stuff.” That promise, however, will be almost impossible to fulfill in the complicated web of Congress, where GOP leaders must navigate complex Senate rules, united Democratic opposition and substantive policy disagreements among Republicans.

Passage of Thursday's measure would permit follow-up legislation to escape the threat of a filibuster by Senate Democrats via the so-called budget reconciliation process. Only simple majority vote. No DEM filibuster. For those keeping score:
GOP: 1 / Democracy: Ø

However, Republicans are not close to agreement among themselves on what any Obamacare replacement would look like at the end of the day. Republicans plan to get legislation voiding Obama's law and replacing parts of it to Trump by the end of February, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) announced on “The Hugh Hewitt” conservative radio talk program. Other Republicans have said they expect the process to take longer.

(I Note: He makes major policy statement on rightwing Talk Radio – how frickin’ low or lower should I say, can the GOP go than this? Seems a whole lot lower).

And, right on the heels of all that is this great piece from at the Daily Beast written Michael Tomasky – a must read – highly factual for those of us paying close attention to this GOP wrecking crew that goes with that super graphic above, don’t you think.

I leave you with this question: “How much longer will the general public accept this latest GOP plan, or perhaps better to say: “this GOP out-of-control scheme” to run and then ruin everything that the country has ever worked hard for and indeed stands for?” This is not a rhetorical question, either.

So, my fellow Americans, hang on tight – it’s going to get mighty ugly mighty fast. Stay tuned.

Tuesday, January 10, 2017

Ignore Speaker; Boo Channel; Pooh-pooh Presentation: Not the Hard Facts

  
The truth must always prevail. Facts matter, as a matter of fact...

A very good introduction the following really excellent video presentation:

CONSIDER how far Donald J. Trump is estranged from fact.

•  He inhabits a fantastical realm where Barack Obama’s birth certificate was faked.

•  He asserts Mr. Obama and Hillary Clinton were involved in found Islamic State (ISIS).

•  He says the Clintons are killers.

•  He said Ted Cruz’s father was with Lee Harvey Oswald before he shot JFK.

Trump is the leading exponent of “post-truth” politics — that is a reliance on assertions that “feel true” but have no basis in fact.

His brazenness is not punished, but taken as evidence of his willingness to stand up to elite power.

Enjoy this 12-minute presentation and measure the truth. That is the facts vs. what Trump has said, still says and usually denies. Worse, he tell us we didn’t hear or see what he said that we heard and saw – confusing isn’t it. By his careful design and via his natural character.



Hope you enjoyed this ... I sure did.

Sunday, January 8, 2017

Weasel Gang Duo: Bernie Madoff and Donald Trump — “Art of the Con”

Trump List: Wall, check. Memo to Mexico: Demand payment or else


Don't think we have been conned? Think again... to wit (my notes are in RED):

WASHINGTON (Boston Herald) — Republicans in Congress are beginning the search to find money to help President-elect Donald Trump fulfill one of his biggest campaign promises: To build a wall along the Mexican border to slow illegal immigration. Trump is expected to ask Congress to provide the initial funding for the project, estimated to cost between $12 billion and $38 billion.

Once construction begins, Trump has said, he will demand reimbursement from the Mexican government, even though Mexican officials have said they won’t pay. Republicans say they are trying to figure out how to provide initial support for the wall, despite opposition from Democrats and resistance from budget conservatives in their own party.

ART OF THE DEALTRUMP’S SIGNATURE BOOK… well with this development, how about “ART OF THE CON.”

... Trump will demand Mexico reimbursement for the wall, or what? Okay, say Mexico says “no” which in Spanish is the same damn word “no.” What is Trump prepared to do… invade Mexico City and take over their Treasury Department or whatever they call it or something far worse?

Now my spin, sort of. Call it the “Art of Con” – i.e., in return for the reimbursement, all of the Trump Hotels worldwide will gain and have the sole rights to all Mexican food on a global basis for life.

Oh, the profits from such a deal? They stay in the Trump-owned hotels and I guess, trust fund? Sounds wild, right? Ha… not nearly as wild as this stunt Trumps is about to pull, and with the help from this all-GOP run congress, which now it seems is willing to hunt for money to help him build that damn wall!!!  Folks: hide you wallets and purses. 

I seriously wonder how the Trump loyalists feel now? Let down comes to mind, but will it? Also, I'm sorry folks, a Rick Perry oops moment won't fit. 

Stay tuned.

Thursday, January 5, 2017

Two Weasels Lip Locking and Cut From the Same Cloth @Liars Я Us

Note: This is not mine 
This is mural spotted outside a bar in Vilnius, Lithuania
(May 2016)

By way of introducing this post, here is a very short clip about that mural and Trump statement about Putin, both clip and mural story come from USA Today.
                                                                         

Heads up: This post is long.
How much more will Trump embrace and support Putin and Russia with his outrageous statements and tweets, all the while denying any connection?
Recently: Trump has publicly refused to accept the conclusion that Russia is responsible for the hacking attacks. Trump this week escalated his criticism of our entire intelligence teams of professionals, such as DNI James Clapper and the CIA Dir John Brennan, by tweeting, without evidence, that an upcoming briefing on the suspected Russian hacking had been delayed until Friday, saying: “Perhaps more time needed to build a case. Very strange!”
I note: All intelligence officials have said there had been no delay – no whatsoever.
How much more of Trump blatant lies will or must the public take – how in the hell Donald J. Trump be trusted or believed on anything down the road?
More of his support for Putin about Russia and reputed “I have no ties to Russia” statements, this classic:
When asked about his affection for Russian president Vladimir Putin, Trump said any inference that a connection exists between the two is absurd and the stuff of conspiracy, and added “I have ZERO investments in Russia” in a tweet after the DNC hack and the Podesta emails released by Wiki Leaks on the eve of the DNC convention.
A few hard and proven facts from TIME in August 2016:
Most of the coverage of the links between Trump and Putin’s Russia takes the GOP presidential nominee at his word — that he has lusted after a Trump tower in Moscow, and come up spectacularly short. But Trump’s dodge — that he has no businesses in Russia, so there is no connection to Putin — is a classic magician’s trick. Show one idle hand, while the other is actually doing the work.
The truth, as several columnists and reporters have painstakingly shown since the first hack of a Clinton-affiliated group took place in late May or early June, is that several of Trump’s businesses outside of Russia are entangled with Russian financiers inside Putin’s circle.
So, yes, it’s true that Trump has failed to land a business venture inside Russia. But the real truth is that, as major banks in America stopped lending him money following his many bankruptcies, the Trump organization was forced to seek financing from non-traditional institutions.
Several had direct ties to Russian financial interests in ways that have raised eyebrows. What’s more, several of Trump’s senior advisers have business ties to Russia or its satellite politicians.
“The Trump-Russia links beneath the surface are even more extensive,” Max Boot wrote in the Los Angeles Times. “Trump has sought and received funding from Russian investors for his business ventures, especially after most American banks stopped lending to him following his multiple bankruptcies.”
What’s more, three of Trump’s top advisers all have extensive financial and business ties to Russian financiers, wrote Boot, the former editor of the Op Ed page of the Wall Street Journal and now a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.
Trump’s former campaign manager, Paul Manafort, was a longtime consultant to Viktor Yanukovich, the Russian-backed president of Ukraine who was overthrown in 2014. Manafort also has done multimillion-dollar business deals with Russian oligarchs. Trump’s foreign policy advisor Carter Page has his own business ties to the state-controlled Russian oil giant Gazprom.
Trump foreign policy advisor, and NSA nominee, Ret. Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, flew to Moscow last year to attend a gala banquet celebrating Russia Today, the Kremlin’s propaganda channel, and was seated at the head table near Putin.
Rex Tillerson, now Secretary of State nominee is up to his oil tankers with Russia and a potential $500 billion deal, on hold due to sanctions, that BTW Trump could lift after he is in office… plus, Tillerson will get a $170 million severance package from Exxon very soon.
Now more hard facts – from the VP debate last October Kaine v. Pence from Mother Jones:
Sen. Tim Kaine dropped Vladimir Putin's name more than 20 times in their VP debate, suggesting that Gov. Mike Pence and Donald Trump shared an unseemly admiration for the Russian president. Kaine said: “You guys love Russia… You both have said Vladimir Putin is a better leader than the president.” (Kaine referred to recent statements by Trump that contrasted Putin's supposed strength with President Barack Obama's weakness). Pence pushed back, calling Putin “small and bullying,” saying that a Trump administration would respond to Russian provocation “with strong, broad-shouldered American leadership.”

Now a list of some really hard stuff -  hang on tight – may overload your memory bank – but keep in mind the Trump voters who put him in the winner’s seat probably did not know this, or if they did, didn’t care and that too is a very serious concern:

Trump continues to say he has no ties to or love for Putin and Russia.
(I note post below tons to show his trail of lies that is a country mile long, cite this laundry list):
June 2012 (As President Obama meets with Putin, Trump tweets): “Putin has no respect for our President – really bad body language."
June 2013 (Shortly after Russia passes anti-gay laws banning gay “propaganda,” Trump tweets): “Do you think Putin will be going to The Miss Universe Pageant in November in Moscow—if so, will he become my new best friend?”
March 2014 (At the Conservative Political Action Conference, Trump boasts): “I was in Moscow a couple of months ago, I own the Miss Universe Pageant and they treated me so great. Putin even sent me a present, a beautiful present.”
(Recall that Trump has said a number of times: “I have never met Putin – don’t know him.) (Refer to more notes below that blatantly contradict this double talk).
(This just after Russia annexes Crimea from Ukraine, Trump tweets): “I believe Putin will continue to re-build the Russian Empire. He has zero respect for Obama or the U.S.!”
“Putin has become a big hero in Russia with an all-time high popularity. Obama, on the other hand, has fallen to his lowest ever numbers. SAD.”
April 2014 (Doubling down on his earlier tweet, Trump casts Obama as a weakling compared to Putin): “America is at a great disadvantage. Putin is ex-KGB, Obama is a community organizer. Unfair.”
(I note: NATO had just condemned Russia's “illegal intervention” of the Ukraine).

May 2014: Speaking at the National Press Club, Trump says he's kinda sorta spoken with Putin: “I was in Russia, I was in Moscow recently and I spoke, indirectly and directly, with President Putin, who could not have been nicer, and we had a tremendous success.”
July 2015: The Republican presidential front-runner, Trump says he'd “get along very well” with the Russian president during an interview with reporters in Scotland (when he opened his latest Golf Course): “I just think so. People say, 'What do you mean?' I think I would get along well with him. He hates Obama, Obama hates him. We have unbelievably bad relationships. Hillary Clinton was secretary of state. She was the worst secretary of state in the history of our country. The world blew apart during her reign. Now she wants to be president.”
October 2015: On CBS' Face the Nation, Trump talked about sharing air time with Putin on a 60 Minutes episode: “I think the biggest thing we have is that we were on 60 Minutes together and we had fantastic ratings. One of your best-rated shows in a long time. So that was good, right? So we were stablemates.”
(Note: Trump and Putin were on different continents, were interviewed separately, and according Time, the ratings weren't all that great.)
(I note: Less than two weeks earlier, Russia had launched its first air strikes in Syria in support of the Assad regime).
Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, Trump insists that there isn't enough proof to point to pro-Russian separatists for shooting down a Malaysian Airlines flight over eastern Ukraine in the summer of 2014. “They say it wasn't them.  It may have been their weapon, but they didn't use it, they didn't fire it, they even said the other side fired it to blame them. I mean to be honest with you, you'll probably never know for sure.”
November 2015: During a Republican debate, Trump gets back in the barn with Putin: “I got to know him very well because we were both on 60 Minutes, we were stablemates, and we did very well that night.”
December 17, 2015: In a rare moment of recognition, Putin praises Trump, saying that he is “a very lively man, talented without doubt, an absolute leader in the presidential race.” Before the day ends, Trump returns the favor. “It is always a great honor to be so nicely complimented by a man so highly respected within his own country and beyond.” (Trump said of Putin).
“I got to know [Putin] very well because we were both on 60 Minutes… and we did very well that night.”

December 18, 2015: On Morning Joe, Trump defends Putin from allegations that he's murdered journalists and political opponents.
“He's running his country, and at least he's a leader. Unlike what we have in this country. I think our country does plenty of killing, also, Joe.”
February 17, 2016: At a rally in South Carolina, Trump inserts a little distance between himself and Putin. “I have no relationship with him other than he called me a genius. He said Donald Trump is a genius and he is going to be the leader of the party and he's going to be the leader of the world or something.”
(I note: The word “genius” was Trump's, not Putin's).
April 28, 2016: After Bill O'Reilly asks whether he and Putin would get along well, Trump responds, “Maybe we will, maybe we won't. If we can make a great deal for our country and get along with Russia, that would be a tremendous thing. I would love to try it.”
June 17, 2016: Once again, Putin compliments Trump, calling him a “bright” person.
(I note: That was on the same day, Russia bombs American-backed rebels in Syria).
July 25, 2016: After Democratic National Committee emails are leaked by WikiLeaks, Trump takes to twitter to suggest the Russians were behind the hack because Putin “likes” him.
(Note: This from Trump should or could be declared a crime at the time):
July 27, 2016: Still gleeful over the DNC hack, Trump calls on Moscow to hack Hillary Clinton's email, saying into the cameras: “Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”
(I note: He invites foreign hacking).
He then declared:I never met Putin. I don't know who Putin is. He said one nice thing about me. He said I'm a genius. I said, 'Thank you very much' to the newspaper, and that was the end of it. I never met Putin.” Trump says he'd be firm with Putin, but also refuses to tell him to stay out of the presidential election: "I'm not going to tell Putin what to do. Why should I tell Putin what to do?"
(I note: Trump probably forget this from October 2015, um (that I also referenced above).
“I got to know [Putin] very well because we were both on 60 Minutes… and we did very well that night.”

How about this trial of sick Trump ironies?
September 8, 2016: At a national security forum hosted by Matt Lauer, Trump says the Russian president has been a leader far more than our president has been.
September 14, 2016: Perhaps forgetting his August statement that Russia wouldn't go into Ukraine, Trump tweets about Russia's annexation of Crimea: "Russia took Crimea during the so-called Obama years. Who wouldn't know this and why does Obama get a free pass?"
September 19, 2016: Russia allegedly bombs a United Nations aid convoy outside besieged Syrian city of Aleppo, dashing hopes of reestablishing a US-Russia brokered ceasefire.
This the sickest of all:
October 4, 2016 (During the vice presidential debate, Trump tweets a link to a campaign press release titled): “Clinton's Close Ties to Putin Deserve Scrutiny.:
Yet this man cons his way into the White House as his supporters stare in awe, as most I suspect, wait for him to “hire them” for the millions of the jobs he promises.
Politics, they say, is a combination of luck and timing, ergo: Surely, Donald J. Trump has got to be the luckiest man who ever lived anywhere at any time in history.
You know what Trump reminds me of: The kind of person who can only talk in sound bites as they repeat what they heard on talk radio or read at some crazy-ass forum hosted by an Alex Jones or Michael Savage type. That is the “realDonaldTrump” in my mind.
He should start a new “Reality Show” and call it:The Trump Daily News Dump.” Then broadcast every segment in 140 characters or less with lots of Trump property and product Ads and 24/7.
Station Call Sign, Colors, and Acronym: TDND on your dial at 24.7
It is abundantly clear to me and I’m sure to many others as well that Donald Trump intends to run the government along with Foreign affairs like a new business venture - a new pet project as it were.
HE WILL USE HIS OWN PERSONAL BUSINESS MODEL – yes, the one that has failed miserably on so many fronts. He intends to do it in the shadows as his two sons and closest daughter, Ivanka, and most of those he is now nominating to run the entire Federal system – act as his front. But, he no matter what or despite what he says, he will be the only only one in control and calling the shot - it's in his DNA. 

That alone should scare the hell out of us and anyone else.
Thanks stopping by – hope I didn’t bore you with this very long post. However, I strongly believe it needed to be said and reinforced – not that it makes any difference or even matters at this point, right?

Tuesday, January 3, 2017

GOP Congress: “We don't need ethics oversight” – Two Words: Jack Abramoff

115th Congress Sworn into Office (Noon, January 3, 2017)

They told me we needed new Ethics oversight

Alfonso “Indio” Bedoya (1904-1957)
(Similar line in movie: The Treasure of the Sierra Madre)

Reminder: Why we need oversight of Congress


I was ready to blast this new 115th all-GOP run House on the ethics oversight issue. Then it was updated (see below). I will still make this post, which I think is still relevant on the topic just in case this all-GOP run Congress changes its mind later (I bet they will):

The update (from The AP): After an intense backlash, House Republicans on Tuesday reversed their move gutting Congress’ independent ethics watchdog group. The GOP vote to back down from reining in the Office of Congressional Ethics was unanimous, Jake Sherman of Politico reported.

Introduction: From the new 115th GOP-run House – agreement to weaken the ethics watchdog on the grounds it had grown too intrusive, prompting Democrats to charge they were scaling back independent oversight ahead of a new legislative session.  I have two words for them: JACK ABRAMOFF scandal.

Trump disagrees with this in one of his “infamous” tweets:  “With all that Congress has to work on, do they really have to make the weakening of the Independent Ethics Watchdog, as unfair as it ... may be, their number one act and priority. Focus on tax reform and healthcare and so many other things of far greater importance!” (#DTS stands for his campaign slogan “Drain the Swamp”).

(I note: Wow – agreeing with Mr. Trump on this issue. We both disagree about this Congress and their lousy move on this subject however they will try to justify it. Also, the voters must ask themselves “Is they what we want from you clowns?” You to serve us with no ethical oversight that allows you to run wild at midnight in a dark parking lot taking money in a brown paper bag with a wink/wink nod policy for us, um? I hardly think so).

FYI: In addition to Abramoff pleading guilty and going to jail, Rep. Bob Ney (R-OH) and GOP Maj. Leader Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX), were also prosecuted as well as the scandal included Rep. John Doolittle (R-CA) and Sen. Conrad Burns (R-MT)
Christian Coalition Leader Ralph Reed and Anti-Tax Lobbyist Grover Norquist Americans for Tax Reform were involved, too.
Even Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) was involved based on him requesting contributions of $30,000 from Abramoff's clients. Reid agreed to assist him in matters concerning Indian casino.
Then this new all-GOP congress who on their first day seemed to want to tell the public: “We don’t need no stinking ethics – just trust us.” Um, I say: Yeah, right, trust you – ha.
What is ethics anyway?  A quick definition:
The term or word “Ethics” is derived from the Ancient Greek word “Ethikos” which is derived from the word “Ethos” or more simply: a habit or a custom.

Ethics consists of two things:

First: Ethics refers to well-founded standards of right and wrong that prescribe what humans ought to do, usually in terms of rights, obligations, benefits to society, fairness, or specific virtues. Ethics, for example, refers to those standards that impose the reasonable obligations to refrain from rape, stealing, murder, assault, slander, and fraud. Ethical standards also include those that enjoin virtues of honesty, compassion, and loyalty. Ethical standards include standards relating to rights, such as the right to life, the right to freedom from injury, and the right to privacy. Such standards are adequate standards of ethics because they are supported by consistent and well-founded reasons.

Second: Ethics refers to the study and development of one's ethical standards. As mentioned above, feelings, laws, and social norms can deviate from what is ethical. So it is necessary to constantly examine one's standards to ensure that they are reasonable and well-founded. Ethics also means, then, the continuous effort of studying our own moral beliefs and our moral conduct, and striving to ensure that we, and the institutions we help to shape, live up to standards that are reasonable and solidly-based.

I pulled this from the original article here and I edited it to fit the blog format, however the entire whole article is here, and worthwhile as a bookmark – I found it interesting on this subject:

Some years ago, sociologist Raymond Baumhart asked business people, “What does ethics mean to you?” Among some of their replies were the following 5 responses:

1.  Ethics has to do with what my feelings tell me is right or wrong.”
2.  “Ethics has to do with my religious beliefs.”
3.  “Being ethical is doing what the law requires.”
4.  “Ethics consists of the standards of behavior our society accepts.”
5.  “I don't know what the word means.”

These replies might be typical of our own since the “meaning of ethics” is hard to pin down, plus the views many people have about ethics are shaky. 

Premise: If being ethical were doing “whatever society accepts,” then to find out what is ethical, one would have to find out what society accepts like to find about a view or views on abortion, for example, a survey of American society and then conform to your personal beliefs to whatever society accepts probably would or would not match.

However, no one ever tries to decide an ethical issue by doing a public survey, and rightly so. The lack of social consensus on many issues makes it impossible to equate ethics with whatever society accepts. Some people accept abortion but many others do not. So, if being ethical were doing whatever society accepts, one would have to find an agreement on issues which does not, in fact, exist.

Now what to expect from the new incoming 115th Congress is this very enlightening and a bit scary scenario of a proposed action. You be the judge of their true motivation… I read what some of they say and quite frankly, to coin an old phrase, “it’s a crock.”

The current law was an offshoot of that infamous Abramoff scandal (see above), and I leave with this simple, logical question: “Why does this new all-GOP House think they can govern without Ethical oversight?” (I bet we won’t like their weak-ass answers).

This story was also covered from several reputable sources:

1.  USA Today. 
4.  CNN here.

FYI:  Well, it’s our all-GOP House and Senate… millions of voters put them in charge and now they tried to pull this stunt on the very first order of business. I wonder what else do they have in store for us? Ought to be a humdinger of a 115th Congress, don’t cha’ think? We need to keep close track of this congress from top to bottom.

More later I am sure. Stay tuned.


Two GOP Dingbats Discuss the Backpedalling
(Left: Rep. Gohmert (R-TX) and Rep. Goodlatte (R-VA)

Newly-elected GOP Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) spotted leaving the Capital: