Tag: Trump

  • Borderlandia

    Trump has gone to Texas, even though he didn’t want to, so that he can…look studly on the border? Or something?

    He does look hawt, you gotta admit.

    CreditCreditDoug Mills/The New York Times

    President Trump arrived in this border town Thursday on a trip that he did not want to take to discuss a crisis that Democrats say does not exist.

    He’s helpless. If they tell him to go to this border town in Texas, he has to go.

    But as the government shutdown neared the end of its third week, the president left Washington with no additional negotiations scheduled with congressional leaders. In remarks to reporters on Thursday, Mr. Trump left open the possibility of declaring a state of emergency, which could allow him to bypass Congress to fund the wall.

    Asked if he would make such a declaration, an action that would likely face legal challenges, Mr. Trump said: “If this doesn’t work out, probably I will do it. I would almost say definitely.”

    If what doesn’t work out? His trip to the border in Texas? He expects that to “work out”? Meaning, to convince the Democrats to agree to spending 5 billion dollars building his racist wall? Why would it do that? How could it?

    In a meeting with network anchors on Tuesday ahead of his address to the nation, the president dismissed his trip to McAllen, a border community where crime is near a 30-year low, as a “photo op” that he was doing because his top communications advisers counseled him to.

    I bet they didn’t advise him to tell network anchors that though.

    In Texas, a crowd of supporters with flags and “build the wall” signs gathered near the Rio Grande before Air Force One landed on Thursday. While in Texas, Mr. Trump is expected to meet with Border Patrol officials who are being forced to work without pay because of the funding impasse.

    Meet with them to do what? Tell them to hold garage sales? To make adjustments? To take up dog-walking?

    To bolster his campaign for the wall, the president has also scheduled an interview with the Fox host Sean Hannity, who will broadcast his show Thursday night from McAllen. Mr. Hannity is one of the president’s highest-profile supporters and is highly influential among his political base.

    Ah, great, that’s definitely the person we want running the country: Sean Hannity.

  • When he said “pay for it” he obviously didn’t mean “pay for it”

    This one will lose him some MAGA fans, because he’s playing them for suckers.

    President Donald Trump claimed Thursday that his oft-made 2016 campaign promise that he would build a wall and Mexico would pay for it didn’t mean it would be a direct payment, despite outlining just that scenario during his campaign.

    Yeah, they’re not going to like that, because he said it to them and they know that and nobody likes being played for a sucker.

    “When during the campaign, I would say ‘Mexico is going to pay for it,’ obviously, I never said this, and I never meant they’re gonna write out a check, I said they’re going to pay for it. They are,” he said as he prepared to depart the White House for the southern border.

    We’re not that stupid, Don. We’re not your kids.

    But in April 2016, Trump’s campaign outlined the steps he would take to compel Mexico to pay the US “$5-10 billion” to fund a border wall — a plan that relies largely on threatening to bar undocumented Mexican immigrants in the United States from wiring money to relatives in Mexico.
    “It’s an easy decision for Mexico: make a one-time payment of $5-10 billion to ensure that $24 billion continues to flow into their country year after year,” the memo said.

    Don’t insult us, Don. Nobody likes being insulted that way.

  • Impulsive, reckless, and uninformed

    The Fire fighters’ union responds:

    As Californians struggle to recover from a series of devastating wildfires, the president of the United States has launched another impulsive, reckless and uninformed tweet threatening to halt federal funding dedicated to helping fire fighters keep their communities safe.

    “This is yet another unimaginable attack on the dedicated professionals who put everything on the line, including their own homes, to protect their neighborhoods,” says Harold Schaitberger, General President of the International Association of Fire Fighters. “While our president is tweeting on the sidelines in DC, our fellow Americans 3,000 miles to the west are mourning loved ones, entire communities have been wiped off the map and thousands of people are still trying to figure out where they are going to call home.”

    “The president’s tweet is disgraceful at a time when the government is under a self-imposed shutdown and the citizens of Paradise haven’t even been at their home sites in 30 days,” says President of the California Professional Firefighters Brian Rice. “This important funding would go toward literally helping this city rise from the ashes. To withhold it in a game of politics is insulting to the people of Paradise.”

    President-elect of CAL FIRE Local 2881 Tim Edwards says, “A more responsible president, Theodore Roosevelt, realized the uniqueness of the West and the complex geography of our wildlands. The fire fighters who protect these precious forests, at the risk to their lives, safety and their own homes, understand that drought and climate change have made our task more difficult. Now is the time for us to work collaboratively for solutions, not to make unfair, dangerous assessments.”

    Last year, unprecedented wildfire destruction in California burned an area larger than the state of Rhode Island — the Camp Fire, with 48 dead, is the deadliest wildfire in California history.

    Wildfire season has now become a year-round event, with short-staffed departments and exhausted fire fighters spending weeks at a time on the frontline doing their best to keep communities safe. Further reduction of resources will only make things more dangerous for fire fighters and the citizens they have sworn to protect.

  • Can he undeclare a state of disaster?

    Yes, Trump really did say he has “ordered FEMA to send no more money” – not will order but has ordered.

    Whether the president even has the authority to rescind FEMA funding that has already been approved remains unclear. Guidelines for the way federal dollars flow after the president declares a national disaster, [as] he did after devastating wildfires in California this year, are outlined in the Stafford Act, said Rafael Lemaitre, the former director of public affairs for FEMA under the Obama administration.

    “I’m not aware of any mechanism where you can say, ‘I’m undeclaring a state of disaster,” Lemaitre said.

    Or, probably, of any president who would want to, until now.

    Individual assistance dollars help victims find temporary housing, pay for repairs to their homes or help them buy groceries, clothes or new furniture. The window to apply for this aid closes Jan. 31.

    It is unknown if Trump’s threat to stop FEMA funding could threaten those still seeking undistributed money.

    “FEMA individual assistance is a real lifeline for people in their greatest time of need,” Lemaitre said, “and to use the plight of survivors to push your political agenda is draconian.”

    It’s evil, sadistic, cruel, unconscionable, psychopathic.

    “It’s absolutely shocking for President Trump to suggest he would deny disaster assistance to communities destroyed by wildfire,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said in a statement. “Attacking victims is yet another low for this president.”

    And to do it apropos of nothing, in a fit of petulant narcissistic rage – it’s just stunning. He’d bite all our heads off if he could.

    Last night he was on tv pretending to be all broken up about victims of violent crimes, and this morning he takes time out of watching tv to tell us he’s taking disaster relief funding away from victims of violent wildfires.

  • Sadist in chief

    Oh my god.

    CBS Los Angeles reports:

    President Donald Trump Wednesday announced that he has ordered the Federal Emergency Management Agency to stop sending wildfire relief money to California.

    In an early morning tweet, Mr. Trump blamed the state’s forest management for its recent slew of historically-large wildfires which have leveled entire communities up and down the state.

    “Billions of dollars are sent to the State of California for Forrest (sic) fires that, with proper Forrest (sic) Management, would never happen,” Mr. Trump wrote. “Unless they get their act together, which is unlikely, I have ordered FEMA to send no more money. It is a disgraceful situation in lives & money!”

    capture 14 President Trump Says He Is Halting FEMA Wildfire Aid To Calif.

    I’m knocked breathless.

    He has GOT to go.

    Late Tuesday, FEMA announced that the deadline to apply for aid had been extended from Friday, Jan. 11, to Jan. 31. It’s unclear how Mr. Trump’s supposed new order could affect those applications. FEMA did not immediately respond to a request for comment from CBS2.

    Going back to last summer, Mr. Trump has repeatedly criticized California officials, alleging they are at fault for not doing enough to prevent the wildfires and threatening to withhold federal funding.

    So now he’s punishing the people harmed by the fires. It’s astounding.

  • Two a minute

    More lies pointed out.

  • Fake emergency

    Hahahaha national emergency hahahahahahaha this is all so hilarious.

  • Oh well if they’re uncomfortable

    The damn fools at the major US tv networks have agreed to air Trump’s stupid EMERGENCY DANGER DANGER LOOK OUT speech.

    Mr. Trump’s request that the major networks broadcast his speech live set off a day of tense deliberations at ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox. By Monday evening, they had all agreed to broadcast the president’s address live at 9 p.m. Eastern. Cable news channels, including CNN and Fox News, will also carry the speech.

    Some journalists worry that handing Mr. Trump a chunk of network prime time could allow the president to assert falsehoods to tens of millions of viewers. But several network producers said privately on Monday that they were uncomfortable turning down the president amid a national event affecting millions like the government shutdown. Declining Mr. Trump’s request could also open the networks to accusations of partisan bias.

    Oh fuck off. Trump is a dangerous authoritarian maniac, so the fact that network producers are “uncomfortable” telling him no is hopelessly beside the point.

    Ted Koppel, the veteran ABC anchor, said in an interview that given that Mr. Trump had not previously requested time for an Oval Office speech, the networks ought to give him “the benefit of the doubt.”

    “When the president of the United States asks for airtime, you’ve got to do it,” Mr. Koppel said. “If what he has to say is clearly just in his self-interest and does not address the greater national interest, then the next time the White House comes around, I might not be inclined to offer it.”

     Christ he sounds like fucking Chamberlain. “Mr Hitler gave me his word, all he wants is the Sudetenland, he will never ask for another thing if we just give him that.”
  • Looking strongly

    Can Trump give himself emergency powers if there’s no emergency?

    “We are looking at it very strongly,” Trump told reporters on Sunday. “We’re looking at a national emergency, because we have a national emergency.”

    How do you look at something “very strongly”? He can’t even word, and he wants emergency powers.

    Also, we don’t have a national emergency of the kind he means. We have a national emergency that Trump is president.

    Congress could reject the president’s emergency declaration with a vote in both the House and Senate. But the Republican-controlled Senate seems unlikely to take that step. Instead, critics would very likely pursue a legal challenge.

    “I think the president would be wide open to a court challenge saying, ‘Where’s the emergency?’ ” Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, told ABC.

    “Emergency” doesn’t mean “more people seeking asylum than Donald Trump would like.”

    [Elizabeth Goitein, co-director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice] also cautioned that a resort to emergency powers in the current situation — in the midst of a standoff with lawmakers that has produced a partial government shutdown — could be considered an abuse of the president’s power.

    “Emergency powers are intended to be used for emergencies, not to settle political disputes or to shortcut the political process,” Goitein said.

    Would a wall be just a great thing?

    Trump has insisted since the 2016 campaign that a physical barrier along the U.S. border with Mexico is the solution to what he sees as a crisis.

    “Walls work,” the president wrote in a letter to lawmakers last week. “That’s why rich, powerful, and successful people build them around their homes. All Americans deserve the same protection.”

    He means himself when he says “rich, powerful, and successful people.” He thinks that’s the only kind of people to be, and he thinks he’s the most rich, powerful, and successful person of all.

    But not all rich, powerful, and successful people do build walls around their houses, and of the ones who do, not all of them think that therefore there should be a wall keeping Mexico and points south out of our nice shiny expensive stuff.

  • The list requested by the Secret Service as a security precaution

    The LA Times has some questions:

    Trump railed as a candidate and as president about people living in the country without permission, calling them rapists and violent gang members.

    Last year, in a White House meeting discussing so-called sanctuary cities and states with sheriffs and other local California officials, the president said:

    “We have people coming into the country or trying to come in, we’re stopping a lot of them, but we’re taking people out of the country. You wouldn’t believe how bad these people are. These aren’t people. These are animals.

    If immigrants in the U.S. illegally are so violent and such a danger to society, why did managers of Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, N.J., surreptitiously remove the names of undocumented workers from a list of employees sought by the Secret Service?

    I think I know this one. Trump likes to hire undocumented workers because 1. he can pay them less and 2. they’re not in a position to complain if he cheats or otherwise mistreats them. So, what’s he going to do? Hire them and conceal the fact even from the Secret Service.

    The New York Times, which last month broke the story that golf club managers knowingly hired  workers who had entered the country illegally (including the Guatemalan woman who makes Trump’s bed when he’s there and who received a White House certificate for her “outstanding” service), reported Thursday that the club’s human resources office failed to include the names of workers in the U.S. illegally on the list requested by the Secret Service as a security precaution.

    No doubt that’s because, as part of the vetting, the Secret Service was requesting Social Security numbers; workers in the country illegally do not have valid Social Security numbers.

    Normally presidents aren’t supposed to hide things from the Secret Service.

  • It would be illegal

    Bruce Ackerman, a professor of law at Yale, explains how illegal Trump’s plan to use emergency powers to build Wall would be. Trump’s plan is to take military funding to pay for Wall, and use the military to build it.

    While it is hard to know exactly what the president has in mind, or whether he has any conception about what it would entail, one thing is clear: Not only would such an action be illegal, but if members of the armed forces obeyed his command, they would be committing a federal crime.

    There are laws against it.

    In response to the Hurricane Katrina disaster in New Orleans, Congress created an express exception to the rules, and authorized the military to play a backup role in “major public emergencies.” But in 2008 Congress and President Bush repealed this sweeping exception. Is President Trump aware of this express repudiation of the power which he is threatening to invoke?

    But, Trump would say, they’re terrorists.

    It is, I suppose, possible to imagine a situation in which the president might take advantage of the most recent exception, enacted in 2011, which authorized the military detention of suspected terrorists associated with Al Qaeda or the Taliban. But despite President Trump’s unsupported claims about “terrorists” trying to cross the border, it is an unconscionable stretch to use this proviso to support using the military for operations against the desperate refugees from Central America seeking asylum in our country.

    There could be terrorists (or a terrorist) among them, just as there could be terrorists anywhere else. But we don’t imprison the whole population because who knows, there might be terrorists or school shooters among them, so why would be unleash the military on refugees because there might be terrorists among them?

    The law is clear; how it would play out is less so. But undoubtedly, we would see a period of passionate debate on Capitol Hill, with scores of representatives, from both parties, condemning the president’s move as an unconstitutional abuse of his powers as commander in chief.

    This would play out in public, with millions of service members watching closely. They would immediately be obliged to decide whether to obey President Trump — and risk criminal punishment. For the president to put these men and women in such a position, simply out of petulance over congressional opposition, would be especially unconscionable.

    What this all adds up to is a potential crisis much graver than whatever immigration emergencies the president has in mind: A legally ignorant president forcing our troops to choose between his commands and the rule of law in a petty political struggle over a domestic political question.

    Let’s hope he doesn’t step over the brink.

  • The muck at the bottom of stupidity’s deep barrel

    Terry Glavin on Trump’s Putin-based explanation of the Russian role in Afghanistan:

    We’re now at the half-way mark of Donald Trump’s term in the White House, and the relentless hum of his casual imbecilities, obscenities, banalities and outright fabrications has become so routine to the world’s daily dread that it is now just background noise in the ever-louder bedlam of America’s dystopian, freak-show political culture.

    And yet, now and again, just when you think the president has scraped his fingers raw in the muck at the bottom of stupidity’s deep barrel, the man somehow manages to out-beclown himself. Such was the case this week, in a ramble of fatuous illiteracy that should drive home the point, to all of us, that the Office of the President of the United States of America is currently occupied by a genuinely dangerous maniac.

    It does.

    But then Trump went right off the deep end with a disquisition on the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and his remarks betrayed a perilous, gawping ignorance of the very reason why Afghanistan became such a lawless hellhole in the first place—which is how it came to pass that al-Qaeda found sanctuary there with the deranged Pakistani subsidiary that came to be called the Taliban, which is how al-Qaeda managed to plan and organize the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001—which is the very reason the American troops that Trump keeps saying he wants to bring home are still there at all.

    “Russia used to be the Soviet Union. Afghanistan made it Russia, because they went bankrupt fighting in Afghanistan,” Trump began. “The reason Russia was in Afghanistan was because terrorists were going into Russia. They were right to be there. The problem is, it was a tough fight. And literally they went bankrupt; they went into being called Russia again, as opposed to the Soviet Union. You know, a lot of these places you’re reading about now are no longer part of Russia, because of Afghanistan.”

    They were right to be there.

    You can almost see Putin’s hand making his lips move.

    You’ll want to let that sink in for a moment: on Wednesday, Jan. 2, 2019, Donald Trump endorsed a revisionist lunacy that is currently being championed by a bunch of cranks at the outermost neo-Stalinist fringe of Vladimir Putin’s ruling circle of oligarchs. They’ve already managed to cobble together a resolution in Russia’s Potemkin parliament that is to be voted on next month. It’s jointly sponsored by lawmakers from Putin’s United Russia and the still-existing Communist Party.

    The resolution would overturn a declaration adopted by the Congress of People’s Deputies at the time of Soviet communism’s unravelling in 1989, 10 years after the Soviets’ catastrophic dismembering of Afghanistan. The 1989 resolution frankly declared that the Soviet invasion and the nine-year war the Soviets prosecuted in Afghanistan deserved “moral and political condemnation.” The 1989 resolution was signed by Mikhail Gorbachev himself, who at the time was chairman of the Supreme Soviet.

    Well now who are you gonna believe, Gorbachev or Donnie Twoscoops?

    The resolution slammed the former Soviet leaders Leonid Brezhnev, Yuri Andropov, Andrei Gromyko and Dimitri Ustinov for turning Afghanistan into an apocalyptic wasteland of more than a million corpses and forcing a third of the Afghan population to flee the country as refugees, costing as well the lives of 15,000 Soviet soldiers, for good measure.

    Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

    And now, Donald Trump, the president of the United States, is saying Gorbachev was wrong, and Brezhnev, Andropov, Gromyko and Ustinov were right, and so are Vladimir Putin’s creepy neo-Stalinist revisionists.

    He belongs to Putin.

  • Tilt tilt tilt

    You can see him say it.

    (Why does he jerk his head back and forth every time he says something? It looks weird.)

  • Didn’t happen

    Another pratfall lie:

    President Donald Trump claimed without evidence on Friday that past presidents have privately confided to him that they regret not building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

    But at least three of the four living U.S. presidents — Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama — did no such thing.

    I’m going to go way out on a limb here and say that Jimmy Carter didn’t do it either.

    Asked if Clinton told Trump that he should have built a border wall, Clinton spokesman Angel Ureña said, “He did not. In fact, they’ve not talked since the inauguration.”

    Bush spokesman Freddy Ford also said the two men had not discussed the matter. And Obama, for his part, has not spoken with Trump since his inauguration, except for a brief exchange at George H.W. Bush’s funeral in Washington, D.C.

    Obama has consistently blasted Trump’s pledge to build a border wall. “Suggesting that we can build an endless wall along our borders, and blame our challenges on immigrants — that doesn’t just run counter to our history as the world’s melting pot, it contradicts the evidence that our growth and our innovation and our dynamism has always been spurred by our ability to attract strivers from every corner of the globe,” he said in 2016.

    They said it to him in a dream. Really. They were all there, at a Pizza Hut where Jared Kushner was the pepperoni chef, and they all said it.

    The White House did not respond to a request for an explanation of Trump’s remarks, which came during a lengthy appearance in the Rose Garden in which he insisted he won’t reopen the government until Democrats relent and approve more than $5 billion for the wall.

    “This should have been done by all of the presidents that preceded me and they all know it,” Trump said. “Some of them have told me that we should have done it.”

    Some of them – so that means at least two. That makes half of them. It could mean as many as three. Two of them, or three of them, told him that, according to him. “Some” is a nice relaxed number to use when you’re lying, but it can trip you up if you’re dealing with a very small number. “Some” of four is a little awkward.

    “I think it’s well-known that the incumbent president is very careless with the truth,” former president Carter said last year in an interview with CBS News.

    “I think I went through my campaign and my presidency without ever lying to the people or making a deliberately false statement, and I think that would be a very worthwhile thing to reinsert into politics these days,” he added.

    Sir, sir, any thoughts on the wall while you’re at it?

  • Clang clang

    Yeah.

    Genius reporter reminds Trump he can declare emergency powers for himself. “Have you considered?” asks bright spark. Trump answers before he finishes the question.

    Yes I have. And I can do it if I want.

    That is true, unfortunately.

    Reichstag fire.

    A few hours [after the fire], on February 28, Hindenburg invoked Article 48 and the cabinet drew up the “Decree of the Reich President for the Protection of the People and State.” The act abolished freedom of speech, assembly, privacy and the press; legalized phone tapping and interception of correspondence; and suspended the autonomy of federated states, like Bavaria. That night around 4,000 people were arrested, imprisoned and tortured by the SA. Although the Communist party had won 17 percent of the Reichstag elections in November 1932, and the German people elected 81 Communist deputies in the March 5 elections, many were detained indefinitely after the fire. Their empty seats left the Nazis largely free to do as they wished.

     

    Don’t think he wouldn’t do it. Bush and Reagan look like reasonable, professional administrators compared to Trump. Trump would do it.

  • Trump says he’s prepared

    Trump threw a press conference after meeting with legislators.

    Trump “said he’d keep the government closed for a very long period of time — months or even years,” according to Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, who spoke to reporters in the White House driveway.
    “Absolutely I said that,” Trump affirmed from the Rose Garden shortly afterward. “I don’t think it will, but I’m prepared.”

    Sure, he’s prepared, because he won’t lose his house or car or credit record or anything else; the fact that hundreds of thousands of government workers will doesn’t matter to him, because he is Trump and they are not.

    Trump said he designated a group of aides, including Vice President Mike Pence, Homeland Security secretary Kirstjen Nielsen and White House senior adviser Jared Kushner, to participate in the discussions, which he described as meant to “determine what we’re going to do about the border.”

    It’s so insulting to make grown up legislators share their discussions with Jared Kushner. “Talk to my son-in-law, he’ll fix it.”

    CNN reports Trump has said he might declare a national emergency to get the wall. That would be baaaad, because a national emergency gives him all kinds of powers we do not want him to have – it makes him basically a dictator.

  • He doesn’t care

    Trump wants the government shutdown to go on for years. That should be grounds for impeachment all by itself.

    Emerging from what they called a “sometimes contentious” meeting at the White House, Democratic leaders said Mr. Trump remained adamant that he would not sign spending bills to reopen the shuttered offices unless Congress approved money for his wall on the southern border.

    “We told the president we needed the government open,” Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader, told reporters outside the White House. “He resisted. In fact, he said he’d keep the government closed for a very long period of time, months or even years.”

    In other words he’s doing a dictator.

    On Friday, the president sent a letter to Congress that was an unsubtle rebuff to Democratic leaders with whom he had met on Wednesday. According to a person in the meeting, Ms. Pelosi cut off the Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen as she was reeling off statistics about the border. In his letter, Mr. Trump said that “some of those present did not want to hear the presentation at the time, and so I have instead decided to make the presentation available to all Members of Congress.”

    Says the guy who shouted down Pelosi every single time she started to speak in that on-camera meeting a few weeks ago.

    The shutdown, which enters its third week on Saturday, has left about 800,000 workers without pay, limited the functions of federal agencies and slowed the court system. There are also concerns that if the shutdown continues for several more weeks, it will harm the overall economy.

    All that will please Trump. He likes chaos and destruction, as long as they don’t cause him any discomfort.

  • 90 minutes of random

    The White House has the whole transcript of Trump blathering for an hour and a half yesterday. I’m afraid I will have to say more about it, because I just have to.

    But the southern border is a very, very high — highly used placed by people that do human trafficking.  How can it get worse than that?

    There’s a reason why politicians and wealthy people build walls around their houses and their compounds.  President Obama recently built a wall around his compound.  There’s a reason for it.  And I don’t blame him.

    The reasons politicians do it can be different from the reasons rich people do it. One reason Obama needs a lot of security is Donald Trump himself. The birther shit. That crooked puffed-up moron put a bigger target on Obama with the birther shit. So there’s that.

    Of course, Obama didn’t build a wall around his house (and he doesn’t have a “compound”).

    We’re in a shutdown because Democrats refuse to fund the border security.  They try and make it like it’s just about the wall, and it is about the wall.  I said, over the weekend, to a number of people that, you know, the wheel, the wall — there are some things that never get old.

    No comment necessary.

    You know, frankly, if this administration didn’t take place, if another administration came in instead of this administration — namely Mike and myself, and the group around this table — you’d be at war right now.  You’d be having a nice, big, fat war in Asia.  And it wouldn’t be pleasant.  And instead of that, we’re getting along fine.  I’m not in any rush.  I don’t have to rush.  All I know is there’s no rockets; there’s no testing.

    If Clinton had won we would now be at war with North Korea? I’m not seeing it.

    So, you know, I think my relationship, I will tell you, with the leaders of Europe is very good.  A lot of them don’t even understand how they got away with it for so many years.  I’ll say to Angela, and I’ll say to many of the other leaders — I’m friends with all of them — I’ll say, “How did this ever happen?”  And they sort of go like, “I can’t believe it either.”  They can’t believe it.  You know why?  Because they had presidents and other people within administrations in the past that allowed them to get away.  Like some of them would say, “Well, no one ever asked us to pay.”

    Yes, that happened, I’m so sure.

    But at least he knows what to do about health care.

    So, I’m a great flexible guy.  We were part of that lawsuit, as you know.  And a great judge, highly respected from Texas, said the individual mandate is out.  That means that we should win at the Supreme Court, where this case will go.

    Now, when we do, we will sit down with the Democrats and we will come up with great healthcare.  Far better.  Far better.  We’ll have everything included.  We’ll have everything included.  Far better.  Because Obamacare is too expensive, the premiums are way too high, and the deductibles don’t exist.  I mean, the deductibles, you can’t even use it.  The deductible is so high.  Unless you get hit by a tractor, you can’t even use it.  Nobody has ever seen anything like it.  The deductibles are so high.

    Obamacare is a tremendous failure.  But now that we won the individual mandate, and that’s — which, by the way, was by far the most unpopular.  It was by far the most unpopular thing in Obamacare.

    So there will be much better health insurance, with everything included. He said that twice. Everything included. The premiums will be much lower, and the deductibles will be much lower too. It will be fantastic.

    The only question is how it’s going to be funded. He forgot to explain that part. No individual mandate, and of course no Medicare for all or single payer or any socialist thing like that there, so the question is…what? What, then? But he forgot to say. I think he always does forget to say. He thinks he can bring the premiums down and bring the deductibles down and cover everything and ditch the individual mandate and not do anything about the funding. That’s why he always has to forget to explain how that will work.

    And then he tells a spectacular lie.

    I have great popularity in Utah.  I love the people of Utah.  I did something for them that nobody else would’ve done that has to do with their parks, as you know.  That was a big day — a big thing.  And we did that for a very special person, who is now going to be retiring after 42 years.  You know who I’m talking about.  Our great friend, our great senator, who is really a spectacular man.  And also for Mike Lee, who really pressed it very hard.  So Orrin Hatch and Mike Lee.

    And the people of Utah really appreciate what I did for hundreds and hundreds of miles of park that they’ll be able to now use, as opposed to not.

    No. Developers will be able to “use” the hundreds and hundreds of miles of park, while everyone else will not.

    I’ll save his explanation of recent Russian history for later.

  • Why are we there?

    This particular two minute segment is quite startlingly idiotic and hence frightening.

    There seems to be a frozen silence in the room while he blurts out all this uncomprehending shit.

  • What independent Justice Department?

    Want to watch Matthew Whitaker kissing Trump’s bum at that Cabinet meeting?

    Here you go.