Trump-haters making democracy impossible

[Billo_Really]

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: RE: Israeli Official--Close Hold
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2015 11:42:52 -0500
From: Eizenstat, Stuart <[email protected]>
To: 'Jake Sullivan' <[email protected]>
CC: Dan Schwerin <[email protected]>, Laura Rosenberger <[email protected]>, Huma M. Abedin ([email protected]) <[email protected]>, John D. Podesta ([email protected]) <[email protected]>


Jake,
What he meant was that they are concerned that the focus of an HRC Administration would be on the Palestinian peace process and two state solution, rather than on the external threats to Israel (Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas), and that the Administration would be populated with officials of this bent. He was less worried about HRC's own views.
Stu

-----Original Message-----
From: Jake Sullivan [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 5:45 PM
To: Eizenstat, Stuart
Cc: Dan Schwerin; Laura Rosenberger; Huma M. Abedin ([email protected]); John D. Podesta ([email protected])
Subject: Re: Israeli Official--Close Hold

Stu - what does this mean?

He attended part of the Saban Forum and felt that most of the emphasis
was on the Palestinian issue, and wonders if a Clinton Administration
“will be a Saban Forum for four years”, due to “the people around her,
but not her”.



> On Dec 8, 2015, at 5:21 PM, Eizenstat, Stuart <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> He attended part of the Saban Forum and felt that most of the emphasis was on the Palestinian issue, and wonders if a Clinton Administration “will be a Saban Forum for four years”, due to “the people around her, but not her”.



-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: Hillary Clinton to Jewish donors: I’ll be better for Israel than Obama - POLITICO
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2015 12:12:45 -0400
From: Dan Schwerin <[email protected]>
To: Robby Mook <[email protected]>
CC: Oren Shur <[email protected]>, John Podesta <[email protected]>, Jake Sullivan <[email protected]>, Christina Reynolds <[email protected]>


That's basically the goal of the BDS letter.

On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Robby Mook <[email protected]> wrote:
I was just thinking: has she made a clear statement on Israel yet? I get this question from donors all the time. Does she need to state her principles on Israel before Iran? Or do both at the same time?






-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: FW: Univision
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 00:35:16 +0000
From: Haim Saban <[email protected]>
To: John Podesta <[email protected]>, Huma Abedin <[email protected]>, Jake (HRC) Sullivan <[email protected]>, Laura Hartigan <[email protected]>, Alex De Ocampo <[email protected]>


Ok.I like this one




From: Rob Friedman
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 4:33 PM
To: Haim Saban
Subject: Univision


Haim , I just wanted to tell you that I thought the moderators for last nights Debate were excellent. They were thoughtful , tough and incisive. I thought it made Hilary appear direct and strong in her resolve. I felt it advanced our candidate. Thanks for Univision. Rob
Rob Friedman

Co-Chairman, Motion Picture Group

LIONSGATE

Office: 310.309.8484

EMail: [email protected]

Do you have a point? Why all the random emails on Israel? So there can be no confusion on my position with Israel, I will sum it up with the following...

If I was President:

• I would stop protecting Israel with our veto in the UNSC
• I would halt all military shipments to Israel
• I would freeze all Israeli assets in US banks
• I would submit a resolution to the UNSC stating that Israel has 90 days to get their ass out of the OPT, or that decision will no longer be theirs to make

And I would bring humanitarian aid to Gaza. This was a problem because they keep sending the wrong ships to bring aid. Well, I would fix that by sending this ship...



Fuck Israel!

 

[Billo_Really]

I didn't vote for Trump and I am not a Republican so you are barking up the wrong tree there Sport..

However, speaking of true Americans if you were a real American you would have been pissed at how Obama fucked up this country with increased poverty, decreased family income, tremendous debt, increased income disparity and dismal economic growth. You would be pissed at his deals with the Muslims and the Communisst like Castro. You would be embarrassed at his weak and destructive foreign policy that created ISIS and enabled the Iranians. You would really be pissed at the racial division that Obama created in this country and would be dismayed at the enormous welfare state that the sonofabitch grew so much.

You also would have been pissed at that corrupt, dishonest and incompetent asshole Crooked Hillary that got filthy rich selling government influence and laundering the money through a sham charity foundation. You would be appalled at the corruption of the Democrats and Crooked Hillary that was revealed with the Wikileaks.

Actually, I'm pissed that for 8 years, republicans refused to work with Obama and democrats on any legislation that would help average Americans. The republicans did everything they could to gridlock government to the point Congress couldn't do the job it was elected to do.

Did you save any vitriol for corporate welfare?

 

[usmbguest5318]

Just how much good or neutral press does Trump deserve? Given his deplorable character, nonexistent relationship with the truth -- on matters great and small -- and utter failure to complete his own stated goals, my answer is "little to none."

You are ignoring, and want everyone else to do so too, the fact that much of what Trump says or does is reprobate. I mean really. Trump and Trumpkins have to recognize that only Trump is responsible for his actions and, given his upbringing, he should know better than to do/say any and all of the deucedly imbecilic and melodramatic thing he does. He should know better than to talk about things for which he isn't expertly conversant. Saying and doing such things, at 70+ years of age, shouldn't even cross his mind to do, much less be done by him. Why? Because he's the POTUS!!!

There has never been a full-throttle, out-of-the-gate, naked attempt by the press to bring down a president like we are witnessing here. It puts the nation in an impossible position.

Assuming that's so -- I don't know whether it is, and you've not substantiated that assertion with anything credible -- so what? He prides himself on amassing superlatives. Trump's got his share of firsts, that may (or may not) be just another one of them. And Trump has another first he can claim. He's the first POTUS to show himself as a preposterous acidly acrimonious cheap Internet loiterer. For Christ's sake! The man is a veritable Twitter-troll!

Assuming that's so -- I don't know whether it is, and you've not substantiated that assertion with anything credible -- so what? Has any other POTUS " out-of-the-gate" [sic] preceded and commenced their presidency with the nature and extent of utter BS Trump has? NO! Not even close.

As an aside, I suggest you watch Episode 2 of CNN's series The Nineties.

There has never been a full-throttle, out-of-the-gate, naked attempt by the press to bring down a president like we are witnessing here. It puts the nation in an impossible position.

I don't know that there is an express attempt to "bring down" Trump. What there is is the scrutiny any POTUS must face. There is also well deserved ridicule for the all the utterly inane, incoherent, ill conceived, vulgar and just f*cking ridiculous, often childish, things the man has said and done over the course of his whole damned life!

The press would be remiss, frigging derelict in their duty, not to at least remark upon those things. If they didn't who would? Who other than the press has the resources to look rigorously into the details of Trump's life and inform the American people about them? Nobody held Trump at gunpoint or under other duress and made him do and and say the things he has, yet you and he would now have us all ignore the fact that he has! Well, being POTUS doesn't work like that.

There has never been a full-throttle, out-of-the-gate, naked attempt by the press to bring down a president like we are witnessing here. It puts the nation in an impossible position.

Has it not occurred to you that the press and everyone else responds to what the POTUS does. The POTUS, PEOTUS, presidential candidates, etc. act/speak or fails to act/speak, and the press, lo the world, reacts, responds, comments, analyzes, etc. in response to his doing so. The process flow does not go in any other direction. Now the quality -- intellectual, factual, efficacy, gravitas, etc. -- of what the POTUS says is on him. He can say things that are insightful or not, true or not, well considered or not, trivial or not, coherent or not, and so on.

Because the process starts with the POTUS' actions/remarks, whatever position the nation finds itself is attributable to the POTUS, not the press. Moreover, when it comes to the state of the union, the POTUS must bear the burden of it, be it good or bad. That the head of state carries such a burden is not a novel concept.

Then, happy low, lie down.
Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown.
-- William Shakespeare, Henry IV, Part II​

 

[Valerie]

they (Democrats) obstruct the work of government

don't believe everything you read in the russian times, junior.





"Trump is a blunt instrument for us, I don’t know whether he really gets it or not.” - Steve Bannon


Republican Anti-tax activist Grover Norquist famously declared, "I don't want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub."

The GOP plot to drown Medicaid in the bathtub

 

[Valerie]

The war I am fighting in now is a war to stop the greedy dumbass hateful Liberals from destroying this country. It is the good fight.

"destroying this country" would be rethuglicans actively undermining our democratic processes and institutions.

so why do you continue to defend them??


Clapper says Trump weakening U.S. government

How Trump’s attacks on the intelligence community will come back to haunt him

Analysis | Thanks to Trump, Germany says it can’t rely on the United States. What does that mean?

 

[Flash]

[QUOE]Actually, I'm pissed that for 8 years, republicans refused to work with Obama and democrats on any legislation that would help average Americans. The republicans did everything they could to gridlock government to the point Congress couldn't do the job it was elected to do.

Did you save any vitriol for corporate welfare?

You are confused.

That asshole Obama got most of what he wanted. He got more debt, more welfare, more government, more regulations, higher taxes, Obamacare, two shithead extreme left wing asshole supreme court justices and just about everything his little black heart wanted. The only thing the sonofabitch didn't get was confiscation of firearms and that third Libtard asshole on the court, which we all think is a good thing.

The RINOs kissed his black ass pretty much so,

 

[Flash]

The war I am fighting in now is a war to stop the greedy dumbass hateful Liberals from destroying this country. It is the good fight.

"destroying this country" would be rethuglicans actively undermining our democratic processes and institutions.

so why do you continue to defend them??


Clapper says Trump weakening U.S. government

How Trump’s attacks on the intelligence community will come back to haunt him

Analysis | Thanks to Trump, Germany says it can’t rely on the United States. What does that mean?

You are confused Moon Bat. I don't defend the Republicans because I am not one of them. They are Progressives and big government weenies just like the filthy ass Democrats.

The Democrats promise bad government and always deliver bad government.

The Republicans promise good government but usually produces the same big government as the Democrats.

The best thing you can say about the Republicans is that they are always better than the Democrats. However, that doesn't mean much because the Democrats set such a low bar.

Obama did a tremendous amount of damage to this country. We will suffer from that for a long time to come. Hopefully Trump will be able to undo some of that damage. We shall see. It looks like he is trying very hard to do that despite the massive Democrat obstructionism and the weak minded RINOs.

 

[Valerie]

REVISIONIST HISTORY IS REPUBLICAN BULLSHIT


The Republican political strategy has been to obstruct efforts to help the economy for everyone but the wealthiest few, and then campaign on complaints that the economy isn’t helping anyone but the wealthiest few. It’s working.

In President Obama’s July 12 weekly address he said, “So far this year, Republicans in Congress have blocked every serious idea to strengthen the middle class.” He could have said, “Since 2009.” Since the 2009 “stimulus,” Republicans have obstructed pretty much every effort to help the economy. In the Senate they have filibustered hundreds of bills, and since the “stimulus” they have managed to keep anything from passing that might help the economy.

In the House, Republicans have refused to allow votes on anything that seriously would help the economy, instead passing only tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, spending cuts on essential things like maintaining our infrastructure and scientific research, and cutting regulations that protect people and the environment from being harmed by corporations seeking profit.

Republicans have blocked every effort since the stimulus to maintain infrastructure, hire teachers, raise the minimum wage, give equal pay for women, stop special tax breaks for millionaires corporations (especially oil companies), stop tax breaks for sending jobs out of the country, provide student loan relief, help the long-term unemployed, and more. Instead they insist on even more tax breaks for oil companies and billionaires, on cutting environmental protections, deregulating oil companies, and so on.

Obstruction Using Senate Filibusters

How many bills have been filibustered by Senate Republicans since President Obama took office? Bloomberg’s Jonathan Bernstein, in “All Filibusters, All the Time,” writes, “The correct count of how many bills have been filibustered during Obama’s presidency is: approximately all of them.”

That’s what it means to have a 60-vote Senate, which is what Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and the Republicans declared as soon as Obama was elected. Almost every measure and, until Majority Leader Harry Reid and the Democrats invoked the nuclear option last fall, almost every nomination, had to have 60 or more votes to pass. That’s a filibuster.

Here are just a few of the hundreds of bills Senate Republicans have filibustered since President Obama took office — just a few:

• Infrastructure bills
  The following headlines are from last week’s “Full Employment Is More Than Possible. It Is Essential.“
  

• 2011: “Republicans filibuster Obama infrastructure bill”
• 2012: “‘Phantom filibuster’ blocking path forward for highway bill, says Reid“
• 2013: “Bipartisan Transportation and Housing Bill Filibustered“

• Equal Pay for Women

• Minimum wage increase

• Creating American Jobs and Ending Offshoring Act

• Bring Jobs Home Act – stop tax breaks for moving jobs and production facilities out of the country

• Teachers and First Responders Back to Work Act of 2011 – rehire 400,000 teachers, firefighters, paramedics and police officers.

• Student loan reform – ease the crushing burden of student loan debt by at least allowing refinancing to lower interest rates

• Extended unemployment benefits – for the long-term unemployed

• Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) — let working people join unions – filibustered in 2007, killed by threat of filibuster 2009

• Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act – let public safety officers join unions

• The Buffett rule – ensure millionaires pay a comparable tax rate to middle-class Americans

• Repeal Big Oil Tax Subsidies Act

What would it have meant for the economy and jobs to launch a post-stimulus effort to maintain and modernize our infrastructure? How about reversing the tax structure that pays companies to move jobs out of the country? How about equal pay for women? How about a minimum wage increase? How about hundreds of thousands of teachers and first responders going back to work? How about being able to organize into unions to fight for wages, benefits and safer working conditions? How about relief from crushing student loan debt?

All of those things blocked, and people wonder what the economy is just slogging along…

Obstruction And Economic Sabotage In The House

In the House Republican leadership has been following what is called the “Hastert Rule” to obstruct bills that would win with a majority vote. This is not a real “rule”; it is a partisan method of limiting what Democrats and moderate Republicans can accomplish. Republican leadership will not bring a bill up for a vote unless a majority of Republicans are for it. In other words, even if a bill would pass with most Democrats and some Republicans voting in favor, it can’t even get a vote unless it fits with Republican doctrine. (Actually that would be Republican funder doctrine, which is basically oil companies, Wall Street and a few ultra-billionaires.)

The Cost To Our Economy From Republican Obstruction And Sabotage

 

[AntonToo]

Trump won and he is doing an excellent job. We have obstructionist democrats and a lying media unwilling to report what a good job he is doing.

Thankfully, the media is starting to die.

Wall Street Journal Editorial Writer Is Found Dead

NBC Washington anchor Jim Vance dies at 75

They just need to do it faster.

But whatever happens, you aren't deplorable.

 

[Rustic]

The war I am fighting in now is a war to stop the greedy dumbass hateful Liberals from destroying this country. It is the good fight.

"destroying this country" would be rethuglicans actively undermining our democratic processes and institutions.

so why do you continue to defend them??


Clapper says Trump weakening U.S. government

How Trump’s attacks on the intelligence community will come back to haunt him

Analysis | Thanks to Trump, Germany says it can’t rely on the United States. What does that mean?

The deep state is the enemy of the country… Dumbass

 

[Lumpy 1]

Donald Trump was elected by the people of the United States to a four year term. He is the person we chose to execute the laws of our Republic. We chose him according to the method as provided in our Constitution--the supreme law of the land. You Trump-haters have opposed him from his first day in office--not his policies, but him. You have attacked him like a pack of vicious dogs every minute of every day of his administration--not his policies, but him. In other words, you have spent every day since he took office attacking our democracy itself.

You seek to bring him down. That means you seek to overturn the election. That means you seek to bring down our system of government. That means you and your thug allies think you should replace the democratic will of the people as the supreme power in this land. That means you seek to overturn the Constitution; you seek to subvert the rule of law. That means you are dangerous traitors.

Consider this from today's Washington Post: Sessions discussed Trump campaign with Russian ambassador, per intel intercepts. Do you know what that is? That is a big fat nothing. So what if Sessions discussed the campaign with the Russian ambassador. So fucking what? Jeff Sessions could have made it his mission to discuss the campaign with every leader on earth plus Satan every single day from Iowa through November 8 and no laws would have been broken.

Trump should have federal agents raid the Washington Post on Monday morning and have every person there arrested on charges of treason. He should keep them in jail until the end of his term.

Trump lost the election by nearly 3 million votes so he's not my president.

Although I'm grudgingly having to own up to the reality that trump has done a couple of things I like.

. He finally admitted that the Iran deal is working as advertised; and signed off on it.

Second; imposing travel restrictions on North Korea so the religious right in this country can no longer send their children into that hellhole as warriors for god.

Thank you Trump.

View attachment 140017
.

.. Trump counties in red, nut cases likely in blue..

There's a lot of empty space in the red part of that map, mostly it's inside the heads of the people who enthusiastically voted for Trump.

"Trump lost the election by nearly 3 million votes so he's not my president."

True story...HRC won Loon York, North Mexico (California), the vote from illegitimate classless un-American's including but not limited to; Feminazi's, low-life's and bottom feeders, weirdos, illegals, men in dresses, pole puffers....etc, etc
Trump won the vote from legitimate American's who matter.
MAKE AMERICA AMERICAN AGAIN!

Hilarious that the people who claim they want America AMERICAN again are the least American of anyone. They think being more like Russia is how to be an American. They are a danger to the country and the free world.

View attachment 140264

At least they "find" them. Republicans are flat out "given" theirs.

.. Right, up a monkey's butt, thanks for the confirmation....

 

[cnelsen]

wtf is a tribewitch ?

 

[cnelsen]

Republicans are angry Democrats refuse to ruin the lives of millions of American families.

Typical liberal. The state as daddy.

 

[cnelsen]

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: RE: Israeli Official--Close Hold
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2015 11:42:52 -0500
From: Eizenstat, Stuart <[email protected]>
To: 'Jake Sullivan' <[email protected]>
CC: Dan Schwerin <[email protected]>, Laura Rosenberger <[email protected]>, Huma M. Abedin ([email protected]) <[email protected]>, John D. Podesta ([email protected]) <[email protected]>


Jake,
What he meant was that they are concerned that the focus of an HRC Administration would be on the Palestinian peace process and two state solution, rather than on the external threats to Israel (Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas), and that the Administration would be populated with officials of this bent. He was less worried about HRC's own views.
Stu

-----Original Message-----
From: Jake Sullivan [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 5:45 PM
To: Eizenstat, Stuart
Cc: Dan Schwerin; Laura Rosenberger; Huma M. Abedin ([email protected]); John D. Podesta ([email protected])
Subject: Re: Israeli Official--Close Hold

Stu - what does this mean?

He attended part of the Saban Forum and felt that most of the emphasis
was on the Palestinian issue, and wonders if a Clinton Administration
“will be a Saban Forum for four years”, due to “the people around her,
but not her”.



> On Dec 8, 2015, at 5:21 PM, Eizenstat, Stuart <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> He attended part of the Saban Forum and felt that most of the emphasis was on the Palestinian issue, and wonders if a Clinton Administration “will be a Saban Forum for four years”, due to “the people around her, but not her”.



-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: Hillary Clinton to Jewish donors: I’ll be better for Israel than Obama - POLITICO
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2015 12:12:45 -0400
From: Dan Schwerin <[email protected]>
To: Robby Mook <[email protected]>
CC: Oren Shur <[email protected]>, John Podesta <[email protected]>, Jake Sullivan <[email protected]>, Christina Reynolds <[email protected]>


That's basically the goal of the BDS letter.

On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Robby Mook <[email protected]> wrote:
I was just thinking: has she made a clear statement on Israel yet? I get this question from donors all the time. Does she need to state her principles on Israel before Iran? Or do both at the same time?






-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: FW: Univision
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 00:35:16 +0000
From: Haim Saban <[email protected]>
To: John Podesta <[email protected]>, Huma Abedin <[email protected]>, Jake (HRC) Sullivan <[email protected]>, Laura Hartigan <[email protected]>, Alex De Ocampo <[email protected]>


Ok.I like this one




From: Rob Friedman
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 4:33 PM
To: Haim Saban
Subject: Univision


Haim , I just wanted to tell you that I thought the moderators for last nights Debate were excellent. They were thoughtful , tough and incisive. I thought it made Hilary appear direct and strong in her resolve. I felt it advanced our candidate. Thanks for Univision. Rob
Rob Friedman

Co-Chairman, Motion Picture Group

LIONSGATE

Office: 310.309.8484

EMail: [email protected]

Do you have a point? Why all the random emails on Israel? So there can be no confusion on my position with Israel, I will sum it up with the following...

If I was President:

• I would stop protecting Israel with our veto in the UNSC
• I would halt all military shipments to Israel
• I would freeze all Israeli assets in US banks
• I would submit a resolution to the UNSC stating that Israel has 90 days to get their ass out of the OPT, or that decision will no longer be theirs to make

And I would bring humanitarian aid to Gaza. This was a problem because they keep sending the wrong ships to bring aid. Well, I would fix that by sending this ship...



Fuck Israel!

The point, since I need to spell it out, is here is hard evidence, not the monkey piss they are throwing at Trump, but hard evidence of Israeli interests not only funding a US pres candidate but manipulating the election (Univision). This is ignored while the skunks pursue chimera. And it's not just the press failing to make this a story, they were in the fucking room themselves. If you can't see the treason in this then you are hopeless.

 

[cnelsen]

POTUS " out-of-the-gate" [sic]

Really?

"Two or more words that collectively act as an adjective should be hyphenated when they appear immediately before the noun they modify. This helps prevent misreading."

 

[oreo]

Donald Trump was elected by the people of the United States to a four year term. He is the person we chose to execute the laws of our Republic. We chose him according to the method as provided in our Constitution--the supreme law of the land. You Trump-haters have opposed him from his first day in office--not his policies, but him. You have attacked him like a pack of vicious dogs every minute of every day of his administration--not his policies, but him. In other words, you have spent every day since he took office attacking our democracy itself.

You seek to bring him down. That means you seek to overturn the election. That means you seek to bring down our system of government. That means you and your thug allies think you should replace the democratic will of the people as the supreme power in this land. That means you seek to overturn the Constitution; you seek to subvert the rule of law. That means you are dangerous traitors.

Consider this from today's Washington Post: Sessions discussed Trump campaign with Russian ambassador, per intel intercepts. Do you know what that is? That is a big fat nothing. So what if Sessions discussed the campaign with the Russian ambassador. So fucking what? Jeff Sessions could have made it his mission to discuss the campaign with every leader on earth plus Satan every single day from Iowa through November 8 and no laws would have been broken.

Trump should have federal agents raid the Washington Post on Monday morning and have every person there arrested on charges of treason. He should keep them in jail until the end of his term.

Sessions lied about his contacts with Russians, and he lied again when he stated that there was no discussions about the Trump campaign.

The 1st LIE:

When he was asked in his confirmation hearing what he would do if there was evidence anyone associated with Donald Trump’s presidential campaign had communicated with the Russians, Sessions replied that he wasn’t aware of any such “activities,” and added, “I did not have communications with the Russians.” A questionnaire he filled out for the committee also asked whether he had had contact with the Russians, to which Sessions, according to the Post, wrote, “No.”

Jeff Sessions spoke twice with Russian envoy during presidential campaign: Department of Justice

The 2nd LIE:

Russia’s ambassador to Washington told his superiors in Moscow that he discussed campaign-related matters, including policy issues important to Moscow, with Jeff Sessions during the 2016 presidential race, contrary to public assertions by the embattled attorney general, according to current and former U.S. officials. Ambassador Sergey Kislyak’s accounts of two conversations with Sessions — then a top foreign policy adviser to Republican candidate Donald Trump — were intercepted by U.S. spy agencies, which monitor the communications of senior Russian officials in the United States and in Russia. Sessions initially failed to disclose his contacts with Kislyak and then said that the meetings were not about the Trump campaign.

Sessions discussed Trump campaign-related matters with Russian ambassador, U.S. intelligence intercepts show

Both of these lies happened while SESSIONS was UNDER OATH during a congressional hearing.

This is the status quo for the Trump inner circle. They lie then get caught, then lie again to cover up and then get caught again.

They still haven't realised that they were being watched since 2015.

GCHQ first became aware in late 2015 of suspicious “interactions” between figures connected to Trump and known or suspected Russian agents, a source close to UK intelligence said. This intelligence was passed to the US as part of a routine exchange of information, they added. Over the next six months, until summer 2016, a number of western agencies shared further information on contacts between Trump’s inner circle and Russians, sources said.The European countries that passed on electronic intelligence – known as sigint – included Germany, Estonia and Poland. Australia, a member of the “Five Eyes” spying alliance that also includes the US, UK, Canada and New Zealand, also relayed material, one source said.

British spies were first to spot Trump team's links with Russia

So we get this:



In this 8 minute video Shep Smith explains that Trump surrogates were not only on the phone with the Russian ambassador but with Russian intelligence agents, including the very day that DNC databases were hacked into.



So there are two on-going criminal investigations. One into collusion with a foreign adversary to interfere into an American election, and the other Obstruction of Justice.
http://nypost.com/2017/05/18/lindsey-graham-russia-probe-now-a-criminal-investigation/
Wash. Post: Mueller investigating Trump for obstruction - CNNPolitics.com

Now while I am certain you Trump supporters wouldn't mind if Vladimir Putin moved his desk into the Oval office, the rest of us have a problem with that.
Kushner contradicts Trump team's denials of Russia contacts - CNNPolitics.com
James Clapper says Watergate scandal "pales" in comparison with Russian claims - CBS News

 

[cnelsen]

Donald Trump was elected by the people of the United States to a four year term. He is the person we chose to execute the laws of our Republic. We chose him according to the method as provided in our Constitution--the supreme law of the land. You Trump-haters have opposed him from his first day in office--not his policies, but him. You have attacked him like a pack of vicious dogs every minute of every day of his administration--not his policies, but him. In other words, you have spent every day since he took office attacking our democracy itself.

You seek to bring him down. That means you seek to overturn the election. That means you seek to bring down our system of government. That means you and your thug allies think you should replace the democratic will of the people as the supreme power in this land. That means you seek to overturn the Constitution; you seek to subvert the rule of law. That means you are dangerous traitors.

Consider this from today's Washington Post: Sessions discussed Trump campaign with Russian ambassador, per intel intercepts. Do you know what that is? That is a big fat nothing. So what if Sessions discussed the campaign with the Russian ambassador. So fucking what? Jeff Sessions could have made it his mission to discuss the campaign with every leader on earth plus Satan every single day from Iowa through November 8 and no laws would have been broken.

Trump should have federal agents raid the Washington Post on Monday morning and have every person there arrested on charges of treason. He should keep them in jail until the end of his term.

Sessions lied about his contacts with Russians, and he lied again when he stated that there was no discussions about the Trump campaign.

The 1st LIE:

When he was asked in his confirmation hearing what he would do if there was evidence anyone associated with Donald Trump’s presidential campaign had communicated with the Russians, Sessions replied that he wasn’t aware of any such “activities,” and added, “I did not have communications with the Russians.” A questionnaire he filled out for the committee also asked whether he had had contact with the Russians, to which Sessions, according to the Post, wrote, “No.”

Jeff Sessions spoke twice with Russian envoy during presidential campaign: Department of Justice

The 2nd LIE:

Russia’s ambassador to Washington told his superiors in Moscow that he discussed campaign-related matters, including policy issues important to Moscow, with Jeff Sessions during the 2016 presidential race, contrary to public assertions by the embattled attorney general, according to current and former U.S. officials. Ambassador Sergey Kislyak’s accounts of two conversations with Sessions — then a top foreign policy adviser to Republican candidate Donald Trump — were intercepted by U.S. spy agencies, which monitor the communications of senior Russian officials in the United States and in Russia. Sessions initially failed to disclose his contacts with Kislyak and then said that the meetings were not about the Trump campaign.

Sessions discussed Trump campaign-related matters with Russian ambassador, U.S. intelligence intercepts show

Both of these lies happened while SESSIONS was UNDER OATH during a congressional hearing.

This is the status quo for the Trump inner circle. They lie then get caught, then lie again to cover up and then get caught again.

They still haven't realised that they were being watched since 2015.

GCHQ first became aware in late 2015 of suspicious “interactions” between figures connected to Trump and known or suspected Russian agents, a source close to UK intelligence said. This intelligence was passed to the US as part of a routine exchange of information, they added. Over the next six months, until summer 2016, a number of western agencies shared further information on contacts between Trump’s inner circle and Russians, sources said.The European countries that passed on electronic intelligence – known as sigint – included Germany, Estonia and Poland. Australia, a member of the “Five Eyes” spying alliance that also includes the US, UK, Canada and New Zealand, also relayed material, one source said.

British spies were first to spot Trump team's links with Russia

So we get this:



In this 8 minute video Shep Smith explains that Trump surrogates were not only on the phone with the Russian ambassador but with Russian intelligence agents, including the very day that DNC databases were hacked into.



So there are two on-going criminal investigations. One into collusion with a foreign adversary to interfere into an American election, and the other Obstruction of Justice.
http://nypost.com/2017/05/18/lindsey-graham-russia-probe-now-a-criminal-investigation/
Wash. Post: Mueller investigating Trump for obstruction - CNNPolitics.com

Now while I am certain you Trump supporters wouldn't mind if Vladimir Putin moved his desk into the Oval office, the rest of us have a problem with that.
Kushner contradicts Trump team's denials of Russia contacts - CNNPolitics.com
James Clapper says Watergate scandal "pales" in comparison with Russian claims - CBS News

This is the same US intelligence unit that passed along the false evidence that Mossad provided that was used to dupe us into attacking a sovereign nation that posed no threat to us. Is THAT who provided the "intelligence intercept" the lying zero-credibility Washington Post chose to trumpet across the land? I want to see the actual intercepts first of all, because I don't trust the traitors, second of all , it doesn't fucking matter if Jeff Sessions did discuss the campaign with the Russian ambassador. It wasn't illegal. As for the lying nothing burger, I saw the testimony when Sen Al Franken (thanks! Minnesota, you dumb Norskies) slithered around the question, asking it a little this way a little of that, it was not the way someone actually concerned about the country would ask it. It was agenda driven. In the context, it was clear that Franken asked Sessions about meeting with Russians as a surrogate (what a stupid word, there) for the campaign, and Sessions said no. Truthfully. Now I imagine when they met the ambassador and he exchanged pleasantries, how's the campaign coming, you must be exhausted, it's coming along well, Mr Ambassador, yes, they keep me running. Now let's get down to business. That would be enough for the treacherous snakes ruining our country to splash headlines "SESSIONS DISCUSSED CAMPAIGN!!!!" and for traitorous imbeciles like yourself to run with it. This is not the good of the country driving the (((vermin))) at the Washington Post. You people should be ashamed of yourselves.

 

[usmbguest5318]

POTUS " out-of-the-gate" [sic]

Really?

"Two or more words that collectively act as an adjective should be hyphenated when they appear immediately before the noun they modify. This helps prevent misreading."

Yes, sic. You're not wrong about the hyphen rule. That particular phrase as you used it, however, doesn't need hyphens because contextually there's no different meaning of the phrase with or without them.

• Right Out of the Gate - Phrase Meaning and the Idiom's Origins
• The Mastery Of The Hyphen
  The general rule for compounding is simple enough. Do not use the hyphen unless a difference in meaning is required. A poor-farm is not necessarily a poor farm. A glass house is different from a glass-house, a green house from a green-house. And out in the country, says a humorist, people distinguish between a near neighbor and a near-neighbor.

The reader is well aware that Trump did not literally come out of the gate itself. Also, the reader knows you do not mean that Trump literally came through (out of) a gate. Thus the idiomatic interpretation is the only rational one to apply to the phrase as you used it.

 

[usmbguest5318]

You have attacked him like a pack of vicious dogs every minute of every day of his administration--not his policies, but him.

Since the OP-er has asserted that people don't attack Trump's policies, here're some examples that show that to untrue.

• President Trump’s policies are bad for your health

• Economy, immigration and taxes
  • The Promise and Peril of the Trump Economy
  • Trump is proposing spending programs that seem to imply the economy is weak and in desperate need of help, yet economic indicators don't support that notion.
  • Meet Marco Dorado, Exhibit A in What's Wrong With Trump's Immigration Policies
  • Over 200 economists say Trump is wrong on immigration
  • The fundamental concern the plan poses is that, barring extraordinarily large cuts in government spending or future tax increases, it would yield persistently large, and likely unsustainable, budget deficits.
  • On a static basis, the plan would lead to at least 0.8 percent higher after-tax income for all taxpayer quintiles. The plan would lead to at least 10.2 percent higher incomes for the top 1 percent of taxpayers or as much as 16.0 percent higher, depending on the nature of a key business policy provision.
  • The Macroeconomic Consequences of Mr. Trump’s Economic Policies

• Energy
  • Trump’s “America First” Energy Plan Leaves America Behind
  • Why Trump’s energy plan makes no sense
  • 'America First' Energy Plan Challenges Free Market Realities

• Foreign Relations
  • Trump’s Foreign Policy: 100 Days of Global Bafflement
  • The Brilliant Incoherence of Trump’s Foreign Policy The United States periodically debates whether to do more or less abroad. Trump won by promising both. But he can’t possibly deliver.
  • An assessment of Trump’s first 100 days of foreign policy

 

[cnelsen]

POTUS " out-of-the-gate" [sic]

Really?

"Two or more words that collectively act as an adjective should be hyphenated when they appear immediately before the noun they modify. This helps prevent misreading."

Yes, sic. You're not wrong about the hyphen rule. That particular phrase as you used it, however, doesn't need hyphens because contextually there's no different meaning of the phrase with or without them.

• Right Out of the Gate - Phrase Meaning and the Idiom's Origins
• The Mastery Of The Hyphen
  The general rule for compounding is simple enough. Do not use the hyphen unless a difference in meaning is required. A poor-farm is not necessarily a poor farm. A glass house is different from a glass-house, a green house from a green-house. And out in the country, says a humorist, people distinguish between a near neighbor and a near-neighbor.

The reader is well aware that Trump did not literally come out of the gate itself. Also, the reader knows you do not mean that Trump literally came through (out of) a gate. Thus the idiomatic interpretation is the only rational one to apply to the phrase as you used it.

I think it's bad form to correct someone on grammar, spelling, punctuation, capitalization, or typos on something as informal as a message board with emoticons of dancing guys and smiley faces flipping each other off. It makes it worse if it is something so petty as whether I should have hyphenated "out-of-the-gate". Plus, you are wrong on top of that. "Out of the gate" with no hyphens is a prepositional phrase. I used it as an adjective: "a full-throttle, out-of-the-gate, naked attempt by the press to bring down a president". Both "full throttle" and "out of the gate" take hyphens there and for the same reasons.