Tuesday, April 25, 2017

Analysis of the “Hypocrites and Crooks Я Us Trump Family Empire”

Empire by Trump: A masculine fragrance scent launched in 2015

Trump Assigned Those Duties
(Thus: Trump does not have get involved himself - neat, um)

Other Part of the Troika

Today's post is this super video from John Oliver, just in case you didn't see it. 

It is perhaps the funniest and most accurate and factual to date ... it is a real keeper as they say — enjoy:

Open full screen for best viewing

In closing: I want to say that I found this part of the video, which was extracted from Ivanka Trump’s book (pictured above) to be the most-educational of the all.


That quote seems to show their business model, thinking, and approach to dealing with people in general. But, more importantly I think, it also kind of  shows the technique used by Donald J. Trump to win the election... read it carefully and see if you agree or not. What an amazing “family philosophy” – explains a lot doesn’t it?

Thanks for stopping by.

Sunday, April 23, 2017

Failure After Failure: Again GOP Back at Work to Repeal and Replace ACA

We are back and stronger than ever with this modified baby
(/s/ Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) Speaker of the House)

Four basics here — Much worse to follow
(Bet on it)

Updated (April 23, 2017) from CNBC here >> New GOP Health Care Plan and then more below:
Trump-care (actually the Ryan AHCA ready to make a second attempt at passage since the yanked the previous bill due to lack of GOP votes to pass it) may now in fact include a new “innovative” provision called the “pro bono healthcare provision” by participating doctors to the needy (i.e., those uninsured). The concept appears easy to understand:
1.  Local doctors could voluntarily agree to accept up to 20 pro bono patients/year.
2.  In return the local doctor would receive a tax deduction.
3.  That tax deduction would be equal to a normal office visit and fees for each.
4.  At the end of the tax year, the doctor would fill out a one-page form listing how many “pro bono” patients they served and the value of those visits.
5.  Like all tax deductions, “pro bono care” would be subject to audit (for fraud).

The medical community is on board. The Association of Mature American Citizens (AMAC) polled hundreds of doctors and found over 80 percent would participate.
Since there are some 400,000 primary care doctors and nurse practitioner around the country, and if each were to accept 20 patients, then over 6 million insured people would be helped.
Uncle Sam would in essence be picking up the tab (no taxes from the doctors and services paid for) but from tax reduction and tax break for the MD’s thus reducing the Treasury’s total tax revenues for that year (less money in the Federal kitty as it were).
Doesn’t that somehow equate to and sound like a “one-payer system?”  Sure sounds like that to me.
Just don’t try and get or find a Republican in Congress to admit that is exactly what the “pro bono” care provision would be in reality. Good luck in your search.

GOPers would thus able to claim that the “pro bono healthcare” provision:
1.  Not only provides coverage for millions of the uninsured, but that it is also saving money by reducing or eliminating costs from Medicaid (which presently helps some of our neediest citizens) and thus reducing the Federal treasury, too.
2.  As for Trump, he could take credit (which he will) for providing health care for millions of uninsured and saying he is saving taxpayers hundreds of millions in Medicaid costs for those 6 million thus also saving his promise to “not cut Medicaid” and give us “tax reform” too – that is smaller government. His win-win.  

Nice “art of the deal” trick, um? Yes, it is. Plus, if Federal revenues are cut or reduced then the GOP can claim “tax reform” – another sleight of hand trick. Call that too the “art of the con.” (I mean good deal or raw deal? Take you choice).

Related and posted earlier – call it background info – two key articles:
If this all-GOP run government can’t serve people they way they have sworn to do, or the way claim in every floor speech, then may I suggest they seek another line of work on a cattle or horse ranch someplace out of sight shoveling the crap they shovel on this critical issue, or tell us they want to return home to “spend more time with their families.” 
Realize all these GOP stunts have been playing out since 2010 when the ACA was signed into law (BTW: without a single Republican vote) and with over 75 GOP attempts to repeal it have failed. Not hard to wonder why?
Cuts will come – make no doubt about it. Paul Krugman, 2008 won Nobel Prize for economics and a darn good writer says Trump voters will feel and be betrayed, but guess what, Trump won’t care. That Krugman article is here from for the New York Times.
Also, this fine story, vis-à-vis the GOP’s sustained nasty political con game they are play with healthcare and their feeble attempts to “repeal and replace Obama-care also from the New York Times.

Now with a second all-GOP vote in doubt again with bigger fish to fry (avoid government shutdown and pass FY bill) even “tax reform” as promised will be delayed, too.

Seems this GOP is still looking for how shall I say it: Still looking for leadership and apparently still looking in all the wrong places.

The old GOP: Gone from the “Party of No” to the new GOP Party of Nowhere.”

Saturday, April 22, 2017

War in North Korea (Maybe) — GOP Privatization War Run Amok (Real)

Corporate America Retort: “Hey, works for us”

Only Two Sheets Needed: Will Help Keep Your Underwear Clean
(GOP sounds like those TV “Enjoy the go” Bears)

Today I focus on three continuing privatization schemes that the GOP always pitches and pursues: The VA, Healthcare including Medicare and Medicaid, and Public education.

First this background and review to set the stage as it were:

One of the President Trump’s first orders of business on January 23, a mere three days after taking office, was to sign an executive order establishing a federal hiring freeze, which the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) warns will impact workers and communities across the nation, as more than 85 percent of federal employees live and work outside the nation's capital.
During a press briefing, press secretary Sean Spicer framed the memorandum  which prevents vacant positions from being filled or new positions from being created, except within the military or national security apparatus — as an effort to create an “effective and efficient government.”
But, as AFGE national president J. David Cox Sr. pointed out, the freeze will “actually increase taxpayer costs by forcing agencies to hire more expensive contractors to do work that civilian government employees are already doing for far less.” In effect, it's a step towards privatizing the federal government, and Cox continued: “Numerous studies have shown that contractors are two to three times more costly than each federal employee they replace. President Trump's federal hiring freeze will result in more government waste as agencies are forced to hire high-priced contractors to do the work that federal employees can and should be doing.”

And, here we are today – more the same old, same GOP crap with the following areas:
THE VA AND HEALTHCARE: Trump said back in December 2016 that he considering a “public-private option” that would allow some Veterans to get all of their medical care from private-sector physicians and with the government paying the bill adding: “It’s one of the options on the table. Definitely an option on the table to have a system where potentially Vets can choose either or, or all private.”

FACTS:  

1.  About 9 million veterans — 40 percent of the total U.S. veterans population — use VA medical services or receive veterans benefits.

2.  VA officials said nearly one-third of all medical appointments conducted last fiscal year were with physicians outside the department.

3.  Congress in 2014 approved a new Choice Card program, which allows veterans facing lengthy wait times or significant travel to visit private-sector clinics instead of VA facilities.

(I Note: That program has faced mixed reviews, with VA officials saying it has limited use and critics saying department officials have undermined the program with unneeded bureaucracy).

4.  Trump promised to “ensure every Veteran in America has the choice to seek care at the VA, or to seek private medical care paid for by our government.”

However, critics of such a dramatic change, a critic of which I am a strong one, are questioning how such a plan would work and what the potential costs would be.

There are far too many unknowns… we need to make the VA stronger just as Abe Lincoln said: “… to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow, and his orphan.” Nowadays, that also means: “… to care for her …”

I say, stop tinkering with the VA – solve problems and sustain it, fund it, and make it better… don’t believe me – ask the Vets.

(ACA) OBAMA-CARE REPEAL EFFORT TO GET AHCA) TRUMP-CARE:

Keep in mind Trump has been woefully ineffective despite the fact of his daily EO signing TV spots. He and his party control both the House and Senate and all they needed to repeal Obama-care and pass Trump-care was a simple majority vote and they couldn’t even muster that. Now part II is about to raise its ugly head by keeping a lot of Obama-care provisions, but giving states a road to waivers to drop provisions and cut people while and you guessed it: passing the savings up the line to millionaires and billionaires who need it least or needs it like another Trump reality show.

PUBLIC EDUCATION:

Now another “voucher crazy idea on top of Paul Ryan’s previous pledges to privatize Medicare, too – while tossing Medicaid to the states for full funding and tinkering with Social Security – always been a long time GOP goal since FDR days is this attack on public education – yep; vouchers for schools – stated this way:

Despite the national marketing campaign by President Trump and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, vouchers take scarce funding away from public schools, where 90 percent of students attend, and create two different education systems — one private and one public — funded by taxpayers. The risks inherent in vouchers are especially pronounced in rural areas, where there are no or few private school options, and schools often serve as the social center of the community and the sole provider of critical services such as summer lunch and programs, food pantries and sports.

Private and religious school vouchers have received increasing attention in the past few months as Trump and DeVos have traveled the country extolling their virtues. Unmentioned in their sales pitch is that vouchers would be particularly harmful in rural communities and small towns, where removing funding would destabilize already financially challenged public school systems, and transportation to the nearest private voucher school — which can be an hour away or more — must be paid for and arranged by the student’s family. 

Who is Betsy DeVos anyway — short bio:


The Trump-DeVos voucher proposal’s has drawn opposition from key federal elected officials, including Senator Patty of Murray (D-WA), who is the ranking member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions committee who recently wrote a memo to committee members and said:

“In many rural areas, there are no, or very few, private school options. Students in rural areas often have to travel very far to attend the nearest school. Without taxpayer funded transportation, arranging private transportation would be prohibitively expensive and time-consuming for many families in rural areas. For these students and families, their public school is the only real option and claims to the contrary only amount to a false choice.”
According to the Center for American Progress, vouchers are highly unlikely to work and could decimate the public system in nearly 9,000 sparse school districts that have four or fewer schools. After excluding charter schools and regional agencies that are legally considered school districts, 85 percent of the 11,200 regular school districts fall into these two categories of sparse and average districts (a unified school district with five to eight schools, an elementary-school-only district with four to five schools, or a secondary-school-only district with three to five schools) where vouchers are entirely or more than likely to be unworkable, concluded CAP.
Nearly 9 million of the 50 million public school students across the country attend rural schools, finds a forthcoming report from the Rural School and Community Trust. “For rural schools, the emphasis on school choice means little because the closest schools are impossibly far away. Rural educators worry that their schools will gain very little from the school-choice model. If anything, it could siphon away critical funding,” states the organization.
In a Washington Post article using Maine and Alaska as examples of states where rural districts are common, reporters Jose A. Del Real and Emma Brown wrote about these shortcomings of the Trump-DeVos proposal this way:
“Washington has long designed education policy to deal with urban and suburban challenges, often overlooking the unique problems that face rural schools. . . With a new administration in the White House that prefers “school-choice” approaches — favoring charter schools and private-school vouchers so parents can opt out of public schools and bring taxpayer dollars with them — the nation’s rural schools are left to wonder about their fate.”
So, what can you do – well, plenty actually. You can call, write, or email your Senator or Rep. in Congress and tell them in no uncertain terms:
“Do not to divert billions of dollars of my tax dollars to vouchers or similar privatization schemes – strengthen and improve and help public education – that is the backbone of the country.”
Thanks for stopping by - come again.



Thursday, April 20, 2017

“Illogical Nuclear War Alternative” Vis-à-Vis NK Vice All-Out Invasion

Kim, Jung-un's famous inspection tour — note taker entourage in tow
(North Korea is great at staging phony photo ops like these)



Non-Nuclear Bomb Alternative

If the United States seriously intends to punish North Korea for continuing to develop nuclear warheads and the rockets to deliver them, the punitive blow will likely come via a *MOP, not MOAB… WTF is a MOP, and no not the kind used to wipe a floor with.
* MOP (Massive Ordnance Penetrator): Produced by Boeing, the MOP (official nomenclature is: GBU-57).
In 2004, the Pentagon began development of the Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP). The MOP was ready for combat in 2011.
It can deliver a 37,000 LB payload (some 15-tons) of high explosives deep into the ground – hence its nickname: “Bunker Buster.” 
MOP video here:

MOP is the biggest non-nuclear bomb ever – even more so than the 11-ton MOAB dropped to seal the caves in Afghanistan. The ones we still don’t know much actual damage was inflicted.
How We Got to this Point: In the early 1990s, North Korea was not a nuclear power in any sense of the word, but they certainly possessed the potential to become one. The Clinton administration aimed to head off Pyongyang’s atomic ambitions and by some accounts an attack was imminent, at the risk of an enormous casualty count that is until former President Jimmy Carter stepped in and offered another remedy by diplomatic means and trips to Pyongyang and it worked.
By early 1994, the State Department signed the “Agreed Framework” with North Korea, and it was a rather simple deal:
(1) Pyongyang would suspend development of weapons-grade nuclear reactors.

(2) The U.S. would help them get out of their impoverished turmoil (food and such) and would help them build nuclear reactors that could not produce weapons-grade by-products.

Then DC changed hands. George W. Bush and Dick Cheney took over and then also labeled the Clinton-Carter deal “appeasement.” By 2004, the Bush team abandoned the deal totally. Two years later, North Korea set off its first nuke.

(I must note here: The GOP always fails to mention or chooses to forget all the while they blame Bill Clinton, then Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton forgetting to look in the nearest mirror and see the real culprit. The Pentagon (* Under Bush-Cheney) adopted the policy of preemption).
In 2001, just after 9/11, Cheney said that even if there was even a 1 percent chance that a North Korean nuclear threat was real, “We have to treat it as a certainty in terms of our response.” That was called “Cheney’s 1% Doctrine” or possibly “Cheney’s Final Solution” (my hunch).
That Cheney doctrine shaped America’s approach to North Korea just like it was planned for Iraq, but not used to stop Saddam’s WMD program (which didn’t exist).
Then in mid-2002, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld directed the Pentagon to rewrite its plan for war with North Korea — and called it: OPLAN 5027 — which allowed the U.S. to preemptively conduct air raids on Pyongyang and their nuclear facilities. That posed a problem, however.
North Korean had been busily burying its most important military sites, including airfields and massive artillery positions.
Starting in the 1960s, North Korea constructed as many as 8,000 underground facilities – figures supposedly from U.S. sources. Still, under Bush, the U.S. lacked the means to destroy any of deepest facilities.
During the 1991 Gulf War, the military had rushed production of 5,000-pound bunker-busting bombs capable of punching through 100 feet of earth or 20 feet or concrete. A few years later, the Pentagon developed 2,000-pound bombs that it concluded were 25 percent more effective against underground sites. More than a decade later, these two munitions remained America’s best weapons for destroying North Korea’s underground military infrastructure. Even they weren’t enough.
“Neutralization of an underground facility... is a formidable task,” Air Force Col. Russell Hart wrote in a 2012 paper. To collapse the most “hardened” subterranean facilities, the Defense Department determined that it would need to skip a 10- to 15-ton bomb into a tunnel entrance in order to blow through the door and send a shock wave into the site.
The Bush administration considered fielding a “Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator RNEP” — in essence, a tactical nuclear weapon with a harder-than-usual shell that could burrow deeper into the ground than other atomic bombs.
The Union of Concerned Scientists concluded that the RNEP could “produce tremendous radioactive fallout.”
Congress balked at preemptively nuking North Korea’s nukes. Lawmakers wanted a non-nuclear alternative.
Each of the Air Force’s 20 B-2 (“Stealth Bombers”) based at Whiteman AFB in Missouri can carry two of the 21-foot-long bombs. So, we can forget aircraft carriers, stealth fighters, or ground troops.
The B-2’s, or B-52’s carrying the MOP’s are our only non-nuclear option for destroying Pyongyang’s best-protected deeply buried sites.
Q: If we use any of them, would NK react (I suspect they would) immediately by hitting Seoul (30 miles away) with all they had as a last ditch effort. It would be a huge disaster to say the least – millions would die in days.
Are we prepared for an early form of Armageddon? I don’t think so – I certainly hope not.

Sunday, April 16, 2017

Another Mental Health Evaluation: Donald J. Trump Not Left Wing Doctor

Krauthammer is Right Wing Conservative Who Appears on FOX 
(More on his professional bio below)

Trump needs to go to war somewhere, anywhere and on his terms to prove the size of this manhood or other body part size. War is a perfect way to show that manliness.

Then at some point he will tell us on his terms probably via another political rally or some crazy-ass tweet that he, and he alone, can end the war basically as he said once before that “I alone am the only one who can solve our problems, no one else just me (sic)(seen here).”  

Everything he has done in his nearly 100 days in office does one thing he worships most of all: It keeps him where he needs to be, where he thrives to be, and where he strives to be all the time: At the center of attention and controlling events and media around him.

How about this professional evaluation and BTW by someone trained in assessing mental issues, Charles Krauthammer: He is a medically-trained psychiatrist who is a skilled doctor that specializes in psychiatry which is the branch of medicine that is devoted to the diagnosis, prevention, study, and treatment of mental disorders.

He nails Trump perfectly, don’t you think?

Saturday, April 15, 2017

Here a Nuke There a Nuke Everywhere a Nuke, Nuke: Nonproliferation Ø

Nonproliferation? Ha!! We Don't Need No Stinkin' Nonproliferation

INTRODUCTION QUESTION: CAN THE UNITED STATES DEFEND AGAINST A NUCLEAR STRIKE BY NORTH KOREA (or anyone else)?
That question is from an article here in the Daily Mail in the UK.
Assuming that North Korea can fire a nuclear missile that can reach the US, although most experts say it may take 5-10 years from now to do that – it would be able to reach CONUS in around 30 minutes. The mostly likely missile would be their Taepo-dong 2 (Korean: 대 포 동 2) which is thought to have a range of between 6,200 and 8,000 miles, enough to hit CONUS East coast.
Despite having the most powerful military in the world, the U.S. probably could not defend against a missile attack from North Korea. To date, DOD has spent some $40 billion on the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system (GMD) which is designed to stop a nuclear warhead in flight. Each GMD interceptor is 60 feet tall and has a 150-pound “kill vehicle” on its tip.
During a nuclear or missile attack, the interceptors would be fired out of underground silos in either or both Alaska and California and would travel through the air at four miles per second and would destroy the missile by crashing into it mid-flight though there are no explosives on board the interceptors – simply a “head-on” crash as it were.

It is still not clear if that system would work since tests have yet to be successful despite decades of similar programs and at least $84 billion being spent on missile defense over the past decade alone.
The GAO reported in 2015 that the GMD system “has not demonstrated flight testing enough that it can defend the homeland against the current missile defense threat, which includes North Korea.” Rebuttal to GMD reports and articles here.
Ballistic missile defense is a very difficult problem, probably one of the most difficult problems that we have right now. Our defense community is saying that we have some capability and it's being designed and optimized to deal with the kind of threat you would get from a North Korean style attack, but it's still a hard problem even with the successes and failures. Facts on two very effective U.S. anti-missile systems: THAAD and PATRIOT (PAC-3).
Now as the late great Paul Harvey used to say: “Now the rest of the story.”

These nine countries had nukes as of April 2004. Each figure includes the approximate number of both tactical and strategic bombs (nuclear and thermonuclear, or the big and really humongous ones) some may not be up to date – but the message is clear nevertheless: There are enough to end mankind and life on Earth:

Country
Warheads
United States
10,455
Russia
  8,400
China
     400
France
     350
Israel
     250
United Kingdom
     200
India
       65
Pakistan
       40
North Korea
         8
TOTAL
20,168

There are at least eight “wannabe” countries that badly want nukes:
(1) Egypt, (2) Libya, (3) Syria, (4) South Korea, (5) Taiwan, (6) Iran, (7) Serbia, and (7) Montenegro. Imagine that? How did we reach this point today in history? Simple: Nuclear proliferation, i.e., nonproliferation basically has failed – now nukes are in vogue or so it seems and nobody gives a damn or so that seems also. Refer to the NPT (Nonproliferation Treaty).

Examples:

•  China wanted a bomb because it stopped trusting the Soviet Union.
•  India wanted a bomb because it had bad blood with China.
•  Pakistan wanted a bomb because it had bad blood with India.
•  Israel built nuclear weapons for protection against the Muslim states.
•  Egypt, Syria, Libya, Iran, and Iraq decided they needed the security of mutually assured destruction vis-à-vis Israel.
•  North Korea wanted one and now has a few vs. everybody else.

So, what about Taiwan versus China, or the Philippines versus Mindanao insurgents? We can keep going like this for a long time. The harder one looks, the more pairs of and even-smaller opposing parties pop into view throughout the world, each a potential Petri dish for this kind of mad thinking: We wants nukes to protect ourselves – in short: It’s truly is a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World and this movie has only one ending: Bye, bye mankind and planet Earth (melodramatic you say — nope, not one bit).

Still want more? Consider this: The United States may soon begin building a new generation of nuclear bombs called bunker busters. Designed to destroy concrete bunkers buried deep inside the earth, they may also be “small enough” for actual use in battle. In preparation for that, Congress has lifted America's self-imposed moratorium on testing and Nevada nuclear testing sites have been revamped so they will be ready for use in 18 rather than 36 months.

Meanwhile, shadowy sub-state groups we call terrorist organizations are interested in small nuclear weapons too. This makes the collapse of the Soviet Union a problem after all, for in addition to the bombs already deployed, Russia has enough highly enriched uranium and plutonium for at least 60,000 more bombs – just like real estate slogan says from time-to-time: It’s a seller’s market.

The thousands of scientists in charge of these lethal stockpiles work for low salaries and sometimes get no paycheck at all. And organized crime syndicates exert tremendous power in the Russian economy. Shadowy arms dealers surely see opportunities here. It's always about the money...!!!

We used to hear: “Get rid of nukes.” Nowadays we hear: “Where’s ours? Nuclear world war is more real today than ever – it has increased, not decreased – and the only question is: How did we the entire world allow this to happen?

One or two here, one or two there, and soon, well, it surely would be Armageddon with one huge final big bang in reverse…!!!

Friday, April 14, 2017

Trump-Putin Collude and Conspire: Who, What, When, Where, and Why

Let’s Play “Collusion”

Five “W” – One “H”
(Easy Yet Complex by Careful Design™)

Major Update (April 14, 2017) – various sources and linked in this update: 

The official investigation into relations between Trump and Russia now has “specific, concrete, and corroborative evidence of collusion” that has been reported. The evidence proves discussions took place “between people in the Trump campaign and agents of Russian influence relating to the use of hacked material (DNC and John Podesta),” a source told The Guardian.
The developments come as it has emerged that Britain’s spy agencies were among the first to alert their American counterparts to contact between members of Mr. Trump’s campaign team and Russian intelligence operatives.
British and other European intelligence agencies first intercepted suspicious “interactions” between people associated with the US President and Russian officials in 2015 as part of routine surveillance of Russia, intelligence sources have confirmed to a number of different publications. Spy agencies, including GCHQ, were not deliberately targeting members of the Trump team but rather recorded communications through “incidental collection,” CNN reports.
This intelligence was passed to the US as part of a routine exchange of information under the “Five Eyes” (US, UK, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada), which calls for sharing certain types of Intel information among those five members.
Over several months, different agencies targeting the same people began to see a pattern in communications between the Trump campaign inner circle and Russian operatives. For six months, until summer of 2016, interactions were repeatedly flagged to intelligence officials in the US who sources said were slow to act, with a source telling the Guardian: “It looks like the U.S. agencies were asleep” [just as European agencies said there were contacts going on between people close to Trump and people believed to be Russian intelligence agents. You should be wary of this]. “The message was in essence: Watch out. There’s something not right here.”
GCHQ's involvement in the investigation is controversial. Trump's press secretary, Sean Spicer previously accused: “The British spying agency of bugging Trump Tower on behalf of Barack Obama.” Spicer cited an unsubstantiated report on FOX News – from which FOX later distanced itself. At that same time, GCHQ diverged from its usual policy of refraining from commenting by describing the Spicer allegation as “nonsense.”
Yes, utter nonsense the Brits say, but I wager that Sean Spicer will totally disagree, um? BTW: A new SNL slot awaits him don't be late.


Spicer (R) McCarty (L) — I think ... damn
Stay tuned — a shit pot full of shoes yet to drop.

Thursday, April 13, 2017

Trump Drops a Bomb — The Biggest Bomb Other Than a Nuke Now in Use

First Time Ever Used in Combat – Yay, “We're #1” 


Washington (CNN) — The US military dropped America's most powerful non-nuclear bomb on ISIS targets in Afghanistan Thursday, the first time this type of weapon has been used in battle, according to US officials.

The bomb is the “Massive Ordnance Air Blast Bomb (MOAB)” nicknamed by the troops: “Mother of All Bombs” was dropped at 7:32 p.m. local time. The MOAB, officially the GBU-43-B (GBU: Guided Bomb Unit) bomb, is a 30-foot-long, 21,600-pound, GPS-guided munition so large it has to be dropped by parachute from the C-130 aircraft and then released to dive as most bombs do – nose first on the target.

Officials said the target was an ISIS cave and tunnel complex and personnel in the Achin district of the Nangarhar province, a remote area in the country's east which borders Pakistan.
Press Secretary Sean Spicer said: “The United States takes the fight against ISIS very seriously and in order to defeat the group we must deny them operational space, which we did. The strike targeted a system of tunnels and cave that ISIS fighters use to move around freely.” (I Note: The BDA (Bomb Damage Assessment) is pending, as well as enemy casualties (remains unknown).
Noteworthy is the fact that Mr. Trump declined to say whether he personally signed off on the strike, but did say: “Everybody knows exactly what happens. So, what I do is I authorize our military. We have given them total authorization and that's what they're doing.” Asked about what “total authorization” meant, a senior administration official declined to specify whether the President indeed ordered the strike in Afghanistan, saying simply: “We don't approve every strike. This administration has moved further away from dictating military strategy from the White House.”

It's a change Trump and Sec. Def. Mattis wanted, implying that the President granted military commanders broader latitude to act independently which Trump now touts as making a “tremendous difference” in the fight against ISIS.
Recall that during his campaign, Trump vowed to eradicate ISIS, saying he would Bomb the shit out of the terror group also known as ISIL. Right on cue, Republican hawks were quick to voice their support for this first in history of warfare strike such as: “I hope America's adversaries are watching & now understand there's a new sheriff in town," tweeted Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) reserve JAG officer – who apparently knows combat in the courtroom at least?
Graham’s tweet: “Pleased the Air Force dropped the MOAB against ISIL in Afghanistan. Must be more aggressive against ISIL everywhere- including Afghanistan.”
(I Note: Boy I hope ISIS does not set up some cell somewhere in the U.S. and start some planning and hiding and stuff, otherwise Trump and Graham will drop bombs here as Graham said: “… aggressive against ISIL everywhere…” Oops might be too late at that point you think)?
Q: Why does Trump think or perceive that he has to keep pushing the limits on warfare … this bomb now the first one used in combat. You have wonder why our adversaries, real or imagined plan to hit us, too. Seems Trump is ratcheting up the Geo. W. Bush doctrine of preemptive warfare: That is a deliberate decision to begin a war like Bush did telling us about invading Iraq: “It is better to destroy Saddam Hussein's regime now than to deal later with a regime armed with nuclear weapons or other WMD later.”

(I Note: How'd that turn out? Well, for one thing, the world knows that WMD scare tactic turned out to be one a huge lie – one of the biggest in history of warfare).

Stay tuned – Donald John Rambo Trump ain’t done yet – he’s just getting started.




Tuesday, April 11, 2017

Wea$el$ Я U$; Hypocrite$ Я U$ — $ame $ong, $ame Goal$, $ame De$ire$

Scam Artist Family Я Us 
(Only one focus of Trump, Inc: More Fame and Fortune)

The proof as they say is in the pudding … and plenty of that is dished out here. And yes, the public does have a compelling need to know.
Re: Secret Service Growing Cost to Protect the Entire Trump Family and a Few Others
Update (April 11, 2017) on the following from CNN – 
Washington – Donald J. Trump's travel to his private club in Florida has cost over an estimated $20 million in his first 80 days as president, putting the president on pace in his first year of office to surpass former President Barack Obama's spending on travel for his entire eight years.
The outsized spending on travel stands in stark relief to Trump's calls for belt tightening across the federal government and the fact that he regularly criticized Obama for costing the American taxpayer money every time he took a trip.
Given variations in each trip, estimating the security costs around a presidential trip is difficult. But a 2016 Government Accountability Office report about a four-day trip Obama took to Florida in 2013 – one similar to Trump's trips – found the total cost to the Secret Service and Coast Guard was $3.6 million.
To date, Trump has spent six weekends – and a total of 21 days – at Mar-A-Lago, his private Palm Beach club. The total estimated costs for those trips are around $21.6 million. Obama, by contrast, spent just under $97 million on travel in his eight years as president, according to documents reviewed by Judicial Watch, a conservative government watchdog. Trump's frequent weekend travel makes it all but certain he will surpass Obama's spending in his first term, likely within months.

The spending comes as Trump asks the federal government to slash non-defense spending by $54 billion, including deep cuts to the State Department, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Environmental Protection Agency and the wholesale elimination of other federal programs. The proposed cuts, which are unlikely to be adopted in total, will correspond with $54 billion in increases to defense spending.
ORIGINAL BACKGROUND ON THIS SUBJECT: The Secret Service is down some 250 special agents and 350 administrative and technical staff members compared to its peak at the beginning of the Obama administration. Morale among employees has sunk to the lowest of any federal agency, according to government surveys. And efforts to rebuild the work force — which Rep. Chaffetz (R-UT) said was short by 1,000 positions — have improved but the agency continues to struggle to keep up with attrition. Now protection includes a rare first lady’s residence outside of DC, 4 adult children and active former president and his family.
For example: Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, two adult sons who run the family business, have already traveled to Uruguay, Vancouver, the Dominican Republic, and Dubai this year, with their Secret Service details providing full protection and those were not government business trips, either – why???
Related – dollars that make no sense from Business Insider here:
1. Three trips to Mar-a-Lago since Trump's inauguration may have cost about $10 million, based on a government report from October that analyzed White House travel, the Washington Post said. The expenses include the cost of US Coast Guard patrol boats on the shoreline.

2. Palm Beach County officials say they will request reimbursement of tens of thousands of dollars per day from the White House for their deputies who provided security and logistical support around the city.

3. Police officials estimate that it would cost New York City $500,000 a day, or $183 million a year, to guard Trump Tower, where first lady Melania Trump and son Barron Trump live.

4.  Secret Service and U.S. embassy employees paid about $100,000 in hotel room bills during Eric Trump's trip to Uruguay, where he promoted a Trump-branded building.

5.  The Pentagon may have to secure rental space in Trump Tower — needed for when the president returns to NYC — it could cost $1.5 million per year, according to the building's website.

6.  Secret Service paid $12,000 for tents, portable toilets, light towers, and golf carts during Trump's Super Bowl weekend trip to Mar-a-Lago.

I insert: Why, indeed. Those two are on their own, both wealthy by most accounts travel for family business, and NOT official or any government business. Why can’t they fund their own private/personal protection services? Why should the taxpayers fit their bill? This is not an unreasonable nor illogical question.

In addition to the top officials and those immediate family that the Secret Service is required by statute to protect, they also provide round-the-clock protective details not only to the spouses and children of Trump’s adult children, but also to several top aides: Reince Priebus, H. R. McMaster, and Kellyanne Conway, at the president’s request.
With so many of the new people being protected living in New York, former Secret Service officials said the agency might eventually set up a fully staffed branch of the presidential protection division there, relocating agents from across the country.
For now, though, as it awaits a potential move to Washington by Mrs. Trump and their 10-year old son, Barron, the agency has elected instead to fly agents in from around the country, as it would during a campaign or for a large security event. Doing so for a routine non-election detail is less common and means the agency is paying for hotel rooms, transportation and living expenses — at Manhattan prices.
The agency is also renting space inside Trump Tower for offices and temporary sleeping quarters, two officials said, though the details of the transaction have not been made public.  Calculating the exact financial costs of the new measures is difficult. The Secret Service is famously tight-lipped about how it spends its money to avoid the politicization of presidential protection and travel. And untold other costs are shared by states and municipalities that provide law enforcement and other resources as needed.
In addition to the $27 million it has requested for protection of Trump Tower and members of the first family in New York, first reported by The Washington Post, the agency is assessing the need for millions more for other costs, from new technology to staffing, according to the Office of Management and Budget.
Example: New York City said it spent $300,000 a day protecting Trump Tower alone between Election Day and Inauguration Day.
Protecting the building when Mr. Trump is not there costs less, between $127,000 and $145,000 a day, according to James P. O’Neill, the city’s police commissioner, but that does not account for other costs to the city.
And in Palm Beach County, FL – Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort, the sheriff’s department says it is spending $60,000 a day in overtime when the president is in town. 

The burden for funding naturally rests on Congress to provide it increased resources for accelerated hiring, technological improvements and other security expenses and that means taxpayer-funded – since they are “we the people” and our duly-elected representatives, right – right, but so what.
We have an arrogant family of arrogant rulers in charge of the whole shebang as they say (W/H, Congress, and probably the courts, too). Is our form of Democracy at stake and on very thin ice – yes, it is and yes, we are. Those in power say they work for us – ha… seems they should adopt this office sign: 

Stay tuned… change can come in 2018. Hope you will be part of it.

Sunday, April 9, 2017

Election 2016 Investigative Nightmare: Lots of Questions Few Answers

Players: Secy. of State Rex Tillerson (former ExxonMobil CEO) and 
Russian President Vladimir Putin

Grand Prize – The Big Enchilada
(On hold: $500 Billion Oil Deal)


Maybe this post is more of my opinion than hard evidence, but I think that will be forthcoming, soon than later - however, here is some hard background facts:
From here (Think Progress) a darn good reminder and also from here (NY Times) especially now just as SOS Rex Tillerson prepares to visit Moscow and discuss Syria and other “hot button” issues. It has been said that he will not meet with Putin. I think that could change quickly and I predict they will meet – but we shall see (still my hunch).
What is at stake is a $1 trillion dollar ($500 billion to be precise) huge oil deal between Russian and ExxonMobil (signed by former ExxonMobil CEO and our current Secretary of State Rex Tillerson). That deal is still the issue of the century and still a very critically key question and possibly as they say, on the table and directly related to proven Russian shenanigans in the 2016 presidential election, which BTW is still open and under investigation on several fronts.
If that oil deal was just to enable Putin to line his pockets and or to prop up the Russian economy big time (also to benefit everyone in Putin’s circle) certainly it offers a much more tangible and probable motivation for team Putin to have worked so hard to ensure that Donald J. Trump was elected.
Recall however, it was SOS Rex Tillerson who had made that huge deal with Putin that was later blocked due to the sanctions and that deal could come back to life overnight without those nasty sanctions. Blocking the deal did not just “put Exxon at risk,” as the Wall Street Journal reported in 2014, and also explained here is still the biggest oil deal in history and perhaps still “expected to change the historical trajectory of Russia.”
I think this is the huge untold and not full factual story about the heart of the whole 2016 election cycle – the money – make no doubt about it.
Stay tuned. It ain't over yet as they say.