HomeFactopediaBrainoffsRankingsCommunityLog In
You know 0 facts





Thu 26 Jan 17 #1 
jmaxg
Contributor


As we know, since being inaugurated, President Trump has signed a great many "excecutive orders" and the press is all in a tizzy about them.

But what does it mean, will the actions in the order be inacted, does it have any power and other annoying but valid legal questions.

A presidential "executive order" is just that. A demand by the executive office that something will be done. As we know from previous presidents, some of them end up in court because it's believed they extend over the boundaries already set by courts and the law of the land.

So let's be clear here. The US Constitution explicitly states that within the boundaries of the United States, anything "legally binding" has to be because of an act of Congress already exists to underline it and the US Supreme Court will take leave to assess if it needs to. That is the literal function of what is known as the "three branches of government", those being the "executive", the "legislative" and the "judicial".

Of the many orders signed by President Trump in this, his inaugural week, and shown to the press at great expense and showing off his little hands, most will probably never be enacted because they contravene already existing legal precendent.

So what you just witnessed, if you were unfortunate enough to witness it, is a publicity stunt and nothing further.

It's like comparing "Trump University" to actual universities.

 




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message
1 person likes this post


Fri 27 Jan 17 #2 
JMK
Editor

Daily Show on the Executive Orders




Knows 47147 facts
like | send message


Fri 27 Jan 17 #3 
sally906
Contributor

I was interested to read today (ok I laughed and laughed) that the major US supplier of cement to be used to build a Not as great Great Wall is a Mexican company CEMEX - the value of its shares has gone up 12% since the announcement. My hubby dabbles in shares and a strong recommendation to buy came through by email today. There is an American based company, CalPortland, that could come into the equation - but does not have the resources for such a huge task. There is also an Israeli company that does prefabricated concrete walls in large scale - but would cost heaps and heaps to arrive in USA. They have done a 420 mile wall - but the USA one is going to be around 1000 miles.  Just FYI - it will be a big wall but not a Great Wall. The Great Wall of China is still the longest at around 13,000 miles.  It also took over 2,000 years to build! If you take a very tongue in cheek estimation - divide 2000 by 13 and it will take 153 years to build the not so Great Wall of America.  Yes I know it's silly to compare the time frame like that, and China did it all manually. But I like playing with figures like that :)




Knows 26511 facts
like | send message
5 people like this post


Tue 31 Jan 17 #4 
jmaxg
Contributor

Well, as we have seen , various US Government departments actually tried to enact, and got slapped with lawsuits and court injunctions.  Some government departments did not even try to comply with a court order and chose to align themselves with their commander-in-chief above the law which is the Constitution of the United States. That itself is yet another cause for another law suite.

(yes, the Executive Branch of the Government of the United States can be sued. Provided the Supreme Court allows leave. It hasn't happened often. But United States law does allow for that)

So what we got here is a situation and not a good one. The Executive Branch of the United States Government is being sued on all sides and this is just Week Two.

The Mexican Government has cancelled all further interactions.

The British Prime Minister is under assault relative to a state visit invitation due to the thought of a "pussy grabber" being in the same room as the Queen let alone having to deal with him.

And the rest of the world is coming to grips with the rippling implications of his dopey and racist "executive order" regarding Muslims.

If week two is this gnarly, I can hardly wait for week three.

All hail F&%ckface Von Clownstick!




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message
1 person likes this post


Tue 31 Jan 17 #5 
Ruby Franks
Contributor

I hope Sally Yates sues for wrongful dismissal.




Knows 132844 facts
like | send message
2 people like this post


Thu 2 Feb 17 #6 
jmaxg
Contributor

I don't think she can. She "serves (or served) at the pleasure of the President of the United States".

(a term made known due to a TV series called The West Wing)

Lawfully, the head of the executive branch can appoint her, or accept her role from a previous presidency or eject her at will. Given Ms. Yates' ultimate stance, it obvious that SCROTUS, sorry, POTUS chose the latter.

For those that don't know......

Sally Yates was the deputy attorney general within the United States Department of Justice (DOJ). Upon the releasing of the former Attorney General of the United States (Loretta Lynch) due to the changing of administrations (presidencies), Sally Yates was requested to be the Acting Attorney General of the United States until the new attorney general could make it through the US congressional nominating process.

Upon the issuing of the executive order regarding the qualified halting of immigrants from certain countries and the absolute barring of anybody at all from Syria, Ms. Yates took time to consider her role and then issued an order to all DOJ lawyers across the United States NOT to administrate, support or in any way prosecute any case related to that executive order. She felt it was in contradiction to the 1st Amendment to the United States Constitution.

She was then dismissed by President Trump in a hurried and crude fashion with security literally escorting her to the door.

Senator Jeff Sessions is just about to be confirmed as the next Attorney General of the United States.  But this is that same guy that questioned Sally Yates during the US Senate hearing for deputy attorney general.

Jeff Sessions is a mealy mouthed and hopeless government administrator, has a racist record, is a known brown noser and is a poor excuse for a human being, let alone a senator.

That's the irony. Along with his own specific questioning of her relating to matters involving standing up to the president, that clown is just about to replace her as the new Attorney General of the United States of America and resume his great professional path of brown nosing and getting aides to tell him how high to jump (because he's too stoopid to figure it out for himself) and NOT standing up to the president.

Positive note though......Sally Yates has been nominated for the "JFK Profiles In Courage" award.

That's a big deal.

As long as Ms Yates will be fine and have a career.....that's all we have to worry about. And I am sure she will.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Thu 2 Feb 17 #7 
rmcmanus
Editor

The thing that concerns me, from over here, is that, a) Mike Pence is no better (except he's not  a lunatic) & b) how hard will it be to undo all the shit ​ mess that these "executive orders" are creating?  Islamic State/Daesh/Isis/Whatever base a lot of their message on the fact that the US hates Muslims, and now they've got the perfect tool to drive that message home.




Knows 40274 facts
like | send message
3 people like this post


Sat 4 Feb 17 #8 
sally906
Contributor

Of course they're a threat - Muslim refugees are terrorists and a threat to all Americans - look at the horrifying massacre at Bowling Green!  Incidentally you can donate to a fund for the victims here: https://www.bowlinggreenmassacrefund.com/  LOL!  If you do try to donate to the victims of this alternative massacre the funds are going to the ACLU and they are quite upfront about it.  Goodness me what a stupid woman!  

Next she'll be saying refugees were behind the Narnia Bombings, Atlantis shootings and the Midsomer Murders. 




Knows 26511 facts
like | send message
3 people like this post


Sat 4 Feb 17 #9 
jmaxg
Contributor

Good one Sally. But you have to take the time to explain the joke. And pop in a "kucklehead" or two.

To those that don't know, Kellyanne Conway is a Trump administration representative who, during an interview on Sunday, 29 January 2017, came up with a term during an interview explaining why the Trump Adminstration disagreed with facts presented by reporters during a White House press briefing regarding numbers attending the Trump inaguration. Her term in the interview was "alternative facts" explaining the White House position.

(as if it has to be explained, there is no alternative to a fact)

On Thursday, 2 February 2017 during an interview with Chris Matthews of MSNBC, Kellyanne Conway referred to the "Bowling Green Massacre" as the reason why the previous President Obama had banned Muslims. The only problem being:

1.  President Obama didn't ban Muslims and never has, and

2.  There was no "Bowling Green Massacre".

A couple of terrorist suspects were arrested in Bowling Green, Kentucky. But apart from that? Sorry, no massacre.

Maybe she was referring to the Bowling Green vermin road kill cleanup of 1979.

 




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Sat 4 Feb 17 #10 
jmaxg
Contributor

Now, about the phone-call between POTUS and the Prime Minister of Australia?

All I know is that Trump has put the Prime Minister of Australia in a very delicate position.

But the message to Trump is......g'head, screw that up.

A good Prime Minister will renege on your rights due to treaties in a heart beat if it's shown that the other part is not up to the deal. And that is a very powerful option in this case. Not in the United States interests however. A poor NSA call and one he may have to live with.

I found Trump's conversation with our Australian Prime Minister was rude, amazingly ill-informed, disrespectful and crass.

But then again, listen to the traffic. Is this not what Vladimir Putin would prefer?




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Sat 4 Feb 17 #11 
Helen McKenzie
Contributor

Trump couldnt be anything else other than rude, disrespectful and crass




Knows 24527 facts
like | send message
1 person likes this post


Tue 7 Feb 17 #12 
jmaxg
Contributor

Article 1, Section 9, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution reads as follows:

"No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State."

An "emolument" is defined as:

"A salary, fee, or profit from employment or office."

Last weekend (4 & 5 February 2017), Trump spent the weekend at his Florida "Mar a Lago" golf club. In accordance with the above clause, he better had paid for it himself. But even if he did, as he has not given up shares or ownership, technically he has abridged the "emoluments" condition as it can be argued that government salary went via him to his own company and by inference, his company profited and therefore Trump profited.

Trump's Washington D.C. Hotel

As at his inauguration, Trump had not given up his financial stake in the company that owns and operates the Trump Washington D.C. Hotel. His sons control it, true enough. But Donald Trump still stands to profit from any success.

One of the biggest customers of the Trump Washington D.C. Hotel is the American Government.

In a strange twist, the current American president may find himself in deep legal and constitutional trouble due to a "round robin" of funding that will possibly and ultimately end in his personal profiteering.

To know for sure, his tax returns will have to be presented for public, or at the very least, Department of Justice (DOJ) scrutiny.

Taa-Daa!!!!




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Tue 7 Feb 17 #13 
sally906
Contributor

Just a question - he stated he would not accept a wage for being president.  Dont' know if this happened - but if he is not receiving a wage from the government for being president is he not entitled to get his income from elsewhere - like a business?




Knows 26511 facts
like | send message


Tue 7 Feb 17 #14 
jmaxg
Contributor

Trump supporters will point out the "from any King, Prince, or foreign State." part and argue that no such relationship has taken place!

But therein lies the devil in the details.

The "Emoluments Clause" was always meant to hold the United States Head of State personally responsible for any conduct that could be perceived as not being in the interests of the people.

We currently have a Head of State that might be profiting due to business arrangements and at the expense of the people. To know for sure, it may be ordered that we or the DOJ see certain personal documents and.....well, you see the picture.

The only problem being is that Trump's nomination, Jeff Sessions is about to be named Attorney General of the United States and he is gonna cover that stuff up because that is the slimey scumbag he is.

Still, a phalanx of smart lawyers may just out maneuver him.

From what I have heard, that shouldn't be hard.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Tue 7 Feb 17 #15 
jmaxg
Contributor

Like I said above Sally, a "sum zero" situation maybe on paper (Trump paying his own way), but the outcome will result in publicity and prestige for that facility. Especially when he owns it or has a major shareholding in it.

Thus the "emoluments" bit.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Tue 7 Feb 17 #16 
Helen McKenzie
Contributor

So confusing!




Knows 24527 facts
like | send message


Tue 7 Feb 17 #17 
jmaxg
Contributor

Not really.

It's all about continually proving you are not in the office in order to make a buck outside of the office.

If memory serves me right, Trump is not the first president that may have intentionally or unintentionally have found himself in this situation.

But in this era, we have ways of working out what is happening due to recent regulations and methods of exposure.

One of those methods is a tax return where upon, if badly or purposefully erroneously completed, may constitute a felony.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message
1 person likes this post


Tue 7 Feb 17 #18 
Ruby Franks
Contributor

This presidency is going to keep lawyers and constitutionalists debating for many a year - even if by some miracle it should end tomorrow.

If women have to dress like women in the White House (what does that even mean?) I hope men will adorn themselves like men and stop using hair dye, make-up, hair spray etc.

A few days ago I heard a Trump representative saying that Trump and May had been swept to power on a wave of democratic enthusiasm. Alt-facts. Trump had a minority of the popular vote, May wasn't even elected leader by her own Parliamentary party, but fell in to place through an excess of cowardice. (Yay, alt-description from Ruby)




Knows 132844 facts
like | send message
2 people like this post


Thu 9 Feb 17 #19 
jmaxg
Contributor

For those of you hearing about the censuring of Senator Elizabeth Warren from further discussion regarding the nomination of Jeff Sessions as Attorney General of the United States, this is the letter she quoted from that made Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell so angry that he felt the need to silence her:

 

 

 

After censuring Elizabeth Warren for reading the above letter, Mitch McConnell quoted these following words:

"She was warned. She was given an explanation. Nevertheless, she persisted."

And then three MALE senators went ahead and read the same letter anyway..........and they were NOT censured.

Now Senate Leader McConnell has a trending Twitter hashtag on his hands.......#shepersisted.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message
2 people like this post


Sat 11 Feb 17 #20 
jmaxg
Contributor

Now let's be clear about the statement Mitch McConnell, leader of the US senate actually said.

He said "Sit the F%^k down, shut the F&#k up, and if we want your two bobs worth, we probably won't ask for it."

Twitter IMMEDIATELY got it.

So did my best friends. That's all I can ask for. Some of them actually persisted.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Thu 16 Feb 17 #21 
jmaxg
Contributor

And NOW we have a resigning National Security Advisor (the first one in 64 years of that position being in existence) and the nomination for the President's cabinet Labour Secretary withdrawing from the nomination process.

Despite what the press might say, I don't think the Trump White House is going boobs up just yet.

But it is coming uncomfortably close.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message
1 person likes this post


Fri 17 Feb 17 #22 
Helen McKenzie
Contributor

A news item over here is saying that Trump claims he "inherited a mess".......did he inherit it or did he intensify it or did he create it and blame the Obama administration????




Knows 24527 facts
like | send message


Fri 17 Feb 17 #23 
sally906
Contributor

Standard politics to blame the previous administration - I heard that his nomination for replacement National Security Advisor has turned him down citing family reasons.   Not wanting to get on a sinking ship maybe?

Do they have enough to impeach him yet?




Knows 26511 facts
like | send message
1 person likes this post


Fri 17 Feb 17 #24 
Helen McKenzie
Contributor

If they impeach does that mean he has lost the presidency?




Knows 24527 facts
like | send message


Fri 17 Feb 17 #25 
Doctor Factenstein
Evil Genius

No - just like being charged with a crime doesn't mean you're going to spend time in prison.

Impeachment is the start of the process. No president, though, has ever been removed via impeachment. Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton were both impeached but the senate didn't vote in favour of removing them from office following the impeachment. 

The impeachment process had started for President Nixon but he resigned before it played out.




Knows 34637 facts
like | send message
1 person likes this post


Fri 17 Feb 17 #26 
Helen McKenzie
Contributor

I find American politics interesting yet confusing at same time




Knows 24527 facts
like | send message


Sat 18 Feb 17 #27 
jmaxg
Contributor

The actual process is a two-step according to American Law.

Step One is the impeachment carried out by the United States House of Representatives. They must declare and vote for an impeachment based on "high crimes and misdemeanors". If it gets passed, the current President is actually declared "impeached".

As it happens, Step One is just a political censuring of sorts unless Step Two happens.

Step Two is an actual trial in front of the United States Senate presided over by the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court.

It's only gotten as far as the U.S. Senate on two occasions being Andrew Johnson (the guy that took over after Lincoln was assassinated) and William Jefferson Clinton.

In neither case did the U.S. Senate vote to uphold the House of Representatives impeachment.

In the ONE CASE where it might've gotten that bad, the U.S. President (Nixon) resigned before the process could begin.

But if (and that's a big if) the U.S. Senate voted to uphold the impeachment of a sitting president, then they would be required by constitutional law to vacate the position.

If they refuse to because they are psychologically unhinged, then they must be removed forcibly.

Edit: Revised to include non-specific gender references. I'm new at this so if I get it wrong, I apologise.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message
2 people like this post


Sat 18 Feb 17 #28 
Helen McKenzie
Contributor

Ok that has made things clear




Knows 24527 facts
like | send message


Sat 18 Feb 17 #29 
jmaxg
Contributor

Glad to be of service.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message
1 person likes this post


Sat 25 Feb 17 #30 
jmaxg
Contributor

The Sean Spicer thing and did the big networks get shut out?

On the 24th of February 2017, there was a press gathering in the White House that excluded CNN and others.

But it was actually a "gaggle" as opposed to a normal press gathering.

Some of us know a "gaggle" from the series "The West Wing" when C.J. Craig often held impromptu meetings in her office with select journalists.

I know everyone was charged up and ready to go but actually, it was not that big a deal.

Huffington Post? If you are gonna do this for all four years then you need to pick your battles.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Sat 25 Feb 17 #31 
JMK
Editor

So this is innaccurate? https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/24/media-blocked-white-house-briefing-sean-spicer

And this:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/24/donald-trump-bars-new-york-times-cnn-politico-white-house-press/ 

Call it a gaggle if you want but it is very clear that only those that Trump considered support his views were allowed to attend. The statement "had the pool there so everyone would be represented and get an update from us today" is pure nonsense, the only news coming out of that room would have been supporting Trump. "Everyone" was not represented at all.




Knows 47147 facts
like | send message


Tue 28 Feb 17 #32 
jmaxg
Contributor

Well again, it's not as if these news outlets were barred from the White House Press Corps. They STILL have their seats in the arena and Sean Spicer still gives his address every day and they can still ask questions during those conferences.

I am NOT backing up Sean Spicer or, by default, the Trump administration.

But it IS a fact that this has happened before......press secretaries having closed conferences with select journalists. So many times that the fictional world (The West Wing) made a note of pointing it out.

Happening so early may be different. But the mechanics relative to it are quite old and a fact of press and White House life.

Whether or not Sean Spicer can maintain credibility IS the question here.

Not "gaggles" and/or "bruised egos".




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Tue 28 Feb 17 #33 
sally906
Contributor

They say they are excluding the fake news distributors.

Well excluding the press won't stop that - fake news has always been around - and there will always be people who won't bother checking the facts and believe it anyway.  In fact if you present them with the truth they think that THAT is fake.  

What Trump is doing is getting angry at the real news that he doesn't want people to know about - and calling it fake news.  He is the strangest man!!




Knows 26511 facts
like | send message


Tue 28 Feb 17 #34 
jmaxg
Contributor

He's not strange Sally. He's behaving exactly as his thin-skinned ego demands of him.

BUT he is in an infinitely higher office that he has ever been in before. I think that fatigue is happening. Some of his recent procedural speeches are becoming demure (as opposed to the dumb CIA speech) and controlled.

Whether or not it stays that way is the question.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Tue 28 Feb 17 #35 
jmaxg
Contributor

Just a note.....at the level of "Then Academy Awards for Motion Picture Arts and Sciences"....

Sub Level - Awards for Arts and Sciences......

Sub, sub-level - Best Picture for 2017.

Not saying nuffing. Just that Price Waterhouse Coopers is having a heart attack right now and hoping that The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, after 70 years, is not going to screw them.

I agree with Java that they should get one more chance.

But I am also pretty sure that "Accountant A" and "Accountant B" have been fired.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Tue 28 Feb 17 #36 
jmaxg
Contributor

Also.....Jordan Horowitz (producer of La La Land) must now and forever be known as "Snatchy McGrabby".

That was Warren fu&%*&g Beatty! You do NOT get to snatch shit from him!

I understand you were trying to solve the problem but so was he.

That was rude, poorly thought out and insulting.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Sat 4 Mar 17 #37 
jmaxg
Contributor

I am apparently front page news.

All I did was post this on Reddit....

I just wanted to make a point........not be shown on TV.

Ah well, such is life.

 




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Sat 4 Mar 17 #38 
jmaxg
Contributor

Just in case you are wondering, yes, the left and right arrows were a fluke. I didn't expect the second one to size up with the first one as exactly as it did.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Tue 7 Mar 17 #39 
jmaxg
Contributor

Ok folks, now it's official. The current President of the United States is "losing it".

His Twitter tweets as at Saturday morning (4 March 2017, EST) didn't just suggest, but STATED OUTRIGHT that the previous President of the United States, Barack Obama, ordered illegal bugging of his then New York City residence, Trump Tower.

His "surrogates" (the current buzz word for the previous term, "spokesman") state that the President is perfectly within his rights to say that. When asked if they agree, they immediately back-track and change the subject. Meaning, they refuse to be on record backing up the raves and rantings of their own and current Commander-In-Chief.

For the record, the President of the United States is allowed, without ANY additional permission from ANY other agency, to ORDER any evidence of any warrants and resulting transcripts relative to any surveillance activity from now until as far back as he wants. So if President "Looney Tunes" wants to verify this, he can do it himself.

ALSO for the record, the Head of the FBI James Comey, the ONLY law enforcement agency that can adminstrate such requests on behalf of the Executive Branch, refutes such allegations and has called upon the Department of Justice, the ONLY agency that could have ordered them to do it, to themselves, refute such allegations.

The only problem with that, of course, is that Attorney General Jeff Sessions has recused himself and is currently a "lame duck".

MEANWHILE, the stocks of the United States being the creditable "big boy on the block" are going downhill fast. The world press has already reassigned the mantle of "Leader of the Free World" from President Trump to Angela Merkel of Germany. The Australian Prime Minister is still working out why the sitting US President went all bat-shit on his ass.

(a HUGE diplomatic insult and now a subsequent political mess for the Australian PM)

In the mean-time, the United States public are confused and more than disappointed in their current president.

If the above accusations against the former president by the current president are to be formulated so as to not be carried out by an official US agency, then the current US President is accusing the former US President of commiting not only a felony, but one of the heineous of felonies that being illegal surveillance of an American citizen.

The current US President is accusing the former US President of pulling a Richard Nixon.

Ok SCROTUS, sorry, Donald.......good luck with that.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Tue 7 Mar 17 #40 
jmaxg
Contributor

"There is no question that something is there" say the elongated randerdings of Trump supporting "surrogates".

But when you ask them will they stand-by and support their president? Oh CRAP NO! I may be supportive, but I am not completely crazy!

Welcome to the Twilight Zone that is the current American Presidency.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Tue 14 Mar 17 #41 
jmaxg
Contributor

Current summary on President Donald J. Drumpf Trump:

  1. The President Obama wire tapping allegations - The White House is now walking back the allegations claiming that "wire tapping" meant "surveillance" in a general sense. Source: Huffington Post Article
  2. The Affordable Care Act Replacement Attempt - The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released this PDF summarising the effect of the American Health Care Act (AHCA). Obviously, the report was not to anyone's liking. Republican senators appear to not like the bill and our outwardly stating it will not make it past the United States Senate.

It's a republican held congress, that is a fact.

But at least ONE senator (Tom Cotton - Republican - Arkansas) is reminding other congressional voters what might happen if they vote for flawed legislation and expect to survive relative to their next term.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Tue 14 Mar 17 #42 
jmaxg
Contributor

Bottom paraphrasing line:

POTUS: "Yeah. I know I said that. But what are ya gonna do about it?"

US White House Chief Spokesman Sean Spicer: "Yeah, I know he said that, but that's not what he meant. He meant other stuff that is less definable."

US White House surrogate, Kerry-Anne Conway: "Microwaves! They form cameras!"

(the rubber trucks meant for her are parked outside)

This is it folks. You asked for it.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Wed 15 Mar 17 #43 
sally906
Contributor

He has been very quiet lately - when my children were little and they went quiet it usually meant they were up to no good.

Quiet worries me.




Knows 26511 facts
like | send message
4 people like this post


Thu 16 Mar 17 #44 
jmaxg
Contributor

Major elements of President Donald Trump's second attempt at an Executive Order intended to ban or restrict Muslim based entry into the United States have been struck down by a Federal Court hours before it was to take effect based on a deliberation by US District Court Judge Derrick Watson of Hawaii.

Source: United States District Court of Hawai'i CV. NO. 17-00050 DK W-KSC dated 15 March 2017

Keep your eye on Twitter folks. It may be about to get ugly again.

(unless, of course, his staff manage to hide his phone)

The thing about this particular court decision is that legal beagles are jumping up and down and in awe of the legal prose handed down in the Judge Watson deliberation and that it basically ignores historically technical and political based precedent and goes straight back to the First Amendment to the US Constitution.

The President vowed (in a Wednesday - 16 March 2017 - night rally) to take it all the way to the US Supreme Court.

Which is fine, IF the Supreme Court grants leave for it to be heard which they don't necessarily have to. And there is nothing the current President of the United States can do about that

The prevailing, admittedly early legal opinion, out there is that Judge Watson's deliberation is legally rock solid and that the Supreme Court may simply ignore any requests to appeal it.

Which means Trump will get all whiney and spit his dummy out in anger........yet again.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Sat 18 Mar 17 #45 
jmaxg
Contributor

And now things have changed yet again.

Today (17 March 2017), Angela Merkel, the person now regarded as "Leader Of The Free World" was forced to hold court next to the guy that lost the title of "Leader Of The Free World" in a historical heart-beat.

This is the photo-op.

Now, with this "illegal surveillance crap", he involves the German Head of State in his personal fantasy.

As part of the press too and fro, mention is made of the Fox News article that inspired the Executive Office that surveillance was not only ongoing, but supported by the British GCHQ.

The inspiration for all this was because of a statement on Fox News made by Andrew Napoletano, a former judge that likes and aligns himself with Alex Jones of "Info Wars". BOTH think that the "9-11" event was an inside, government caused and perpetrated stunt intended to bring about a hawkish stance that would reult in the invasion of Iraq and the hounding down of Saddam Hussien.

That idea is so STOOPID as to be beyond belief. Conspiracy theorists don't seem to know the difference between malleable and softened metal and what that might mean relative to one of the best terrorist planned attacks in history.

The point being, we can't allow that to happen again.

And so, in summary, we have a current president that not only believes that the former president ordered illegal and felonious activity, but that also he subscribes to people that accuse former president George W. Bush of committing the most henious act possible - causing the death of over 3,000 Americans just to have a reason to attack Iraq.

The thing is, in what universe does this president think this will go away?

 




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Sat 18 Mar 17 #46 
jmaxg
Contributor

Relative to the photo-op above, I think that the previous conference between the two had Angela Merkel calling him out on his crap and diplomatic disrespect.

In the photo-op, what did Donald Trump do?

He sat there like a pissed off and spanked baby.

That's what it looked like to me anyway.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Sat 18 Mar 17 #47 
jmaxg
Contributor

So the whole 9-11 conspiracy thing, does it hold water? Lets do it point by point:

1.  Why did the World Trade Centre buildings hold up based on such an onslaught?

2. Why is melting metal so significant?

3. Could the plan have worked?

4.  If the conspiracy is to be belived, why would George W. Bush perpetrate it?




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Sat 18 Mar 17 #48 
JMK
Editor

Saw an interview where he described the proof that he was wiretapped by the Obama administration. He basically said it was because he read an article in the New York Times ( a paper he has previously denounced for fake news) which mentioned wiretapping, then he read some more things (not specified) and then the evening before he tweeted that he had just found out he'd been wiretapped, he watched a Fox news item which mentioned wire taps so he thought wire tapping "must be a thing" Really? This is how the President gets his inteligence reports? This is the sort of evidence he bases serious allegations of illegal activity on? Shaking my head.

Trump explaining where he got the idea from

Trump blaming Fox News

 




Knows 47147 facts
like | send message


Sat 18 Mar 17 #49 
Ruby Franks
Contributor

Here, the news is concentrating on the fact that the White House has not apologised to GCHQ or the British government (GCHQ being one of the government secret service agencies, not the secret service agency as Sean Spicer said). The White House has said that the matter will not be referred to again; as it won't be referred to again. I assume that means there will not  be any apology or reference to 'fake news'.

Trumpsplaining.




Knows 132844 facts
like | send message


Tue 21 Mar 17 #50 
jmaxg
Contributor

Ok, so today was different in that the Head of the FBI outright stated that neither the Department of Justice, the overseer of the FBI, nor the FBI, has authorised any surveillance of Trump Towers.

Admiral Mike Rogers, the Head of the NSA, stated outright that involving the British GCHQ was a breaking of the decades old, "Five Giants" agreement.

To put that in legal terms, it is illegal for an intelligence partner to surveil the people involved in an agreement.

Ok, to put it another way, the CIA and NSA cannot legally monitor the American public. But what if they got someone else to do it so they themselves don't do it like surveiling a partner? That's breaking the "Five Giants" agreement and breaking the law.

That's the reason the agreement was drawn up in the first place.

President Trump's lack of knowledge is only countered by his spectacular ignorance.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Tue 21 Mar 17 #51 
jmaxg
Contributor

President Trump places a phone call:

Trump: "Hay Malcolm! How's it handling?"

Malcolm Turnball: "Do I know you?"

Trump: "I'm the president of the united states!"

Turnball: "Sorry, you are fading in and out. Wait! I have a call from the Prime Minister of New Zealand I have to take."

Trump: "I am the President of the United States, you junkyard dog!"

Turnball: "And I am the Prime Minister of Australia."

Trump: "We need your "ASIO" input.

Turnball: "Really? Then f**k off."

 




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Thu 23 Mar 17 #52 
jmaxg
Contributor

A small point perhaps, but a fact. The republican head of the House Intelligence Committee, Michael Nunes, upon receiving information that may have been germain to the committee and their investigations, did not share it. Instead, he galloped over to the White House and shared it with the President. The committee were left dumbfounded.

In one step, the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee showed little forsight and intelligence (how ironic) and may have confirmed the need for an independent inquiry.

Edit: DEVIN Nunes, not "Michael".




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Thu 23 Mar 17 #53 
jmaxg
Contributor

So.......if you are being investigated by a police officer, is it normal for that police officer to come to you and compare notes?

And what does Michael Nunes' act mean relative to the three branches of government?

And why does this administration feel like it's the Titanic looking for an iceberg?

Edit: Again Devin Nunes, not "Michael".




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Thu 23 Mar 17 #54 
JMK
Editor

I'm taking bets on how long before Trump resigns. I give it 3 months max. He'll give some trumped up (pun intended) excuse but he'll go before he's impeached.



Unfortunately will mean we are stuck with Pence but at least he is sane (relatively speaking).


Knows 47147 facts
like | send message


Sat 25 Mar 17 #55 
jmaxg
Contributor

As a guy that claimed to know the art of the deal via his book, "Donald Trump - The Art Of The Deal", the President is now looking like a guy with less and less credibility.

I KNOW everyone is making a big deal about how the AHCA vote today was put off indefinitely. But it has to be stated as much as people thinking that vote, if it got through, was going to make a difference? Please! Gimme a break! Everyone is talking as if it was a fairies fart away from Trump signing it into law!

Sorry folks. Even if it did succeed, it has to go through the US Senate and THAT is a much tougher task. The Senate is relieved that they don't even have to consider it. The Senate was already prepared to boot it's sorry ass out.

Just to remind everybody, an act of legislation (get it? the legislative branch?) must go through BOTH houses of congress, House of Representatives AND the Senate......AND BE PASSED......before it can arrive at the president's desk to be signed into law.

The AHCA could not even get past the House of Representatives and THEY are supposed to be the easy ones.

Is this embarrassing for President Trump? NOTHING is embarrassing for President Trump!

He is sitting in the Oval Office thinking "Well, you guys put me here. Even if I don't know what I am doing, so what.
'I am the president and you're not.'"

(yes, President Boob actually said that)




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Tue 28 Mar 17 #56 
jmaxg
Contributor

The Little Girl and the Bull

On a certain night in New York City, unknown to the rest of us, the bronze statue of a small defiant child was installed directly facing the bronze bull of Wall Street.

Here is the picture....

The public reacted with immediate adoration and "got the point" of this artistic stunt.

Here is a picture of one such reaction....

As a result, the Mayor of New York City, Mayor de Blasio has decreed that the defiant young lady will remain in place until February of 2018.

The meaning of the young lady might mean anything from overt feministic defiance to a reminder of child labour and child abuse from the historic origins of New York City on upwards and that our corporations are not as "touchy-feely nice" as they would prefer you believe.

But the fact that the Mayor of New York City has allowed it to remain is incredibly generous. And yes, d'uhhh, tourist inducing.

(the statue was due to be removed April 2nd, 2017)

Still, the Mayor didn't have to do that. It's NYC! It's not as if it was gonna die from lack of tourism.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message
2 people like this post


Tue 28 Mar 17 #57 
jmaxg
Contributor

Trump sorry FOX News said the President was spending the weekend working at the White House.

A Virginia golf course owned by Donald Trump says different.

Not sure what the transportation and secret service bill is now. But it must be pretty big.

Maybe Angela Merkel can deliver the invoice personally to you and shove it where the sun doesn't shine.

You enormous jerk.

She is ONE HUNDRED TIMES bigger and better than you. She is a quantum chemistry major and has a Phd in quantum science.

Donald Trump makes buildings and stiffs subcontractors!

TRUMP is the very reason capitalism looks as bad as it does.

I don't know how long we expect this fool to remain at large in the world. But please understand that we get it.

We are saddened, embarrassed and not happy.

Please accept our most profound apologies.

(that's the World to Trump. Not Trump to the World)




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Tue 28 Mar 17 #58 
Helen McKenzie
Contributor

One would have thought that the statue of the little girl and the bull would remain permanently instead of being removed. Why would they remove it?




Knows 24527 facts
like | send message


Tue 28 Mar 17 #59 
sally906
Contributor

I thought that too Helen - do they know who sculpted it? Surely it would have been commissioned by someone?




Knows 26511 facts
like | send message
1 person likes this post


Tue 28 Mar 17 #60 
JMK
Editor

It was placed without permission, there is probably some loophole to escape red tape if they allow it temporarily. My guess is that it will end up staying permanently unless someone steals it.




Knows 47147 facts
like | send message
1 person likes this post


Tue 28 Mar 17 #61 
JMK
Editor




Knows 47147 facts
like | send message


Wed 29 Mar 17 #62 
Helen McKenzie
Contributor

The work in that statue is incredible, it would be a shame for it to go


Knows 24527 facts
like | send message


Wed 29 Mar 17 #63 
Ruby Franks
Contributor

Interestingly, the bull was the piece of guerilla art, being installed without permission in the late 1980s, but became such a popular piece it was allowed to remain; a symbol of the USA's ability and desire to roar back after bad economic times. The 'Fearless Girl' was commissioned from Kristin Visbal by State Street Global Advisors, an investment company, as a temporary intallation for a week (with the neccessary permissions from the city). It has become so popular, that it has been granted a longer period of installation.

Some commentators are saying that it is ironic that a financial company, with the average glass ceiling in finance being extremely low, should have commissioned this, I have no idea if SSGA have a better record on this, but their intent was to give publicity to the issue, the statue being installed for International Women's Day (March 8th).

Arturo di Modica who sculpted 'Charging Bull' isn't best pleased, as he feels the girl has changed the original meaning of his strong optimistic work.

It's interesting to ask whether knowing the background/maker of a piece alters our perception and appreciation of it, and how time and events can change our interpretation of art. I'm happy to look at this conjunction of sculptures as a representation of feelings about the current political climate in the US, but that wasn't the overt intent.

There was some news coverage of this in the UK, I think it refreshing when a news story can arouse debate which is quite fierce but doesn't become bitter.




Knows 132844 facts
like | send message
4 people like this post


Thu 30 Mar 17 #64 
jmaxg
Contributor

I think there are very good arguments for keeping it permanent.

1. It looks great relative to a statement about financial equality and the subsequent positions taken out of political frustration, defiance and gridlock. The bull represents success in financial markets. The little girl represents the opposite side of the coin.......poverty and despair brought about by the conduct of unfeeling corporations in their relentless pursuit of higher value for their shareholders.

2. The feminism aspect is also just as powerful. The bull represents male dominance in an all powerful corporate system. The little girl represents not female defiance, but PROPER defiance in the face of that. Her stance seems to say "I know what you are doing. We all know what you are doing.". There could be argued a great case for the statue remaining up until the salary/wage inequality situation is resolved or lots of glass ceilings have been shattered.

3. As mentioned above, the Mayor of New York City is interested in the ability to draw a tourist crowd. If it is left there, and it becomes known that it is there, people will come in the "Field of Dreams" sense. They will come to have their picture taken with it, they will come to look at it, they will come to ponder the meaning of it. As a result, it may take on a life of it's own.

But after February 2018, the corporate lobbyists will take over and have it removed.

But will they be successful? That may be a more interesting question as 2017 works itself out.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message
1 person likes this post


Thu 30 Mar 17 #65 
jmaxg
Contributor

As for Arturo di Modica, I couldn't give a rat's bum what he thinks! He allowed his sculpture to be positioned as such. Did he honestly think that the hundreds or thousands that pass it per day were not going to be reminded of the symbolism relative to burgeoning markets?

Along with that celebration comes certain facts such as the law of opposites.

I promise you that some of us will care for the hurt feelings of Arturo di Modica.

But I really am hoping that more of us, over time, will care more for those that are being beaten down by the bull's hooves.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message
1 person likes this post


Thu 30 Mar 17 #66 
jmaxg
Contributor

To JMK, the weekly Trump resort, golf playing, Mar-a-lago thing is being scrutinised and recorded.

Washington Post - Analysis of Trump Trips and Security Costs - Post Inauguration

The cost is building up. Not quite exponentionally yet, but it's getting there.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message
2 people like this post


Thu 30 Mar 17 #67 
JMK
Editor

It is not the golf playing per se that I disagree with. it is the hypocrisy.




Knows 47147 facts
like | send message
1 person likes this post


Thu 30 Mar 17 #68 
sally906
Contributor

I agree - look, even presidents need down time, no one is going to grumble about that  - but after going on and on and on about Obama playing golf and how Trump would be too busy saving America to  play golf. He goes out and spends more time golfing than presidenting - hypocrite 




Knows 26511 facts
like | send message
1 person likes this post


Thu 30 Mar 17 #69 
jmaxg
Contributor

It is also the money. Air Force One is not some camper van that Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump load up for an elephant hunting trip. It is a sophisticated piece of equipment that requires TONS of advance details, forward cargo shipments, secret service coordination meetings and service personnel not to mention the wear and tear relative to the equipment involved.

Every trip to and from Florida costs the American taxpayer MILLIONS of dollars. The count is 9 so far and it looks like it's not stopping. All of them to Trump owned resorts like Mar-A-Lago and that Virginia golf course.

So yes JMK and sally906, the hypocrisy is palpable. But so is the cost. And the ethics involved.

The following is "Hypocrisy" as a definition from Google:

"Hypocrisy is the contrivance of a false appearance of virtue or goodness, while concealing real character or inclinations, especially with respect to religious and moral beliefs; hence in general sense, dissimulation, pretense, sham."

Wow! They really nailed it down!




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Thu 30 Mar 17 #70 
Helen McKenzie
Contributor

Maybe if Trump wants to save America he buys himself a Hybrid car and drives himself to and from Florida which in turn would give his Secret Service a much needed break from his crap.  Just a thought lol




Knows 24527 facts
like | send message
1 person likes this post


Sat 1 Apr 17 #71 
sally906
Contributor

LOL - love the image Helen :)




Knows 26511 facts
like | send message
1 person likes this post


Sat 1 Apr 17 #72 
jmaxg
Contributor

Now I got this image in my head of Trump's version of being ecologically correct....

An entire moving section of the I95 (interstate connecting Washington DC and Florida) has been closed down.

The procession in the closed down section is fronted by the traditional five motor cycle police forward section (flashing lights, changed from state to state), then two black extended wheelbase Chevy Suburbans containing secret service personnel, the presidential limousine (known as the "beast"), then five more black, extended wheelbase Chevy Suburbans, then the Boeing 747 VC-25A that is the current Air Force One trundling awkwardly behind followed by a C-130 military cargo aircraft, two Gulf Jetstream private jets bearing the Presidential Seal, and three busloads of special forces troops finally followed by a single golf cart.

In the middle of this procession is a current model remote control Toyota Hybrid featuring a blow up effigy that looks like Donald Trump with a mannequin in the passenger seat bearing a blonde wig.

The whole thing is being overflown by a squadron of fully armed Blackhawk helicopters.

On the trip back from Mar-A-Lago to Washington DC, nothing changes except that the blonde wig on the mannequin is now brunette.

(there was a state reception at Mar-A-Lago with the mannequin in place but nobody noticed the difference)




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message
1 person likes this post


Sat 1 Apr 17 #73 
jmaxg
Contributor

The current problems are:

1. Devon Nunes (head of the house of representatives intelligence oversight committee) got his intelligence from the White House.

2. Nunes has essentially rendered the House of Representatives committee inert in that he has postponed all further hearings (due to the perception that he received intelligence from the White House)

3. The US Senate has begun their own investigation.

4. Michael Flynn, the fired NSA director, is granting testimony under the umbrella of immunity from prosecution.

5. Congressman Yoho of Florida, who does not know the difference between working at the pleasure of the president (Executive Branch) and behaving relative to constituents that voted (Legislative Branch) offered an opinion that was IMMEDIATELY rejected. An offer of a Civics course was subsequently made available to the Congressman. He refused.....quite arrogantly it has to be noted. This example of idiocy is being paid for by the people of the United States. IF another branch of government is presented to him, it is feared that his head will explode.

6. Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, is trying valiantly. His nasal plastic surgeon is on call 24 hours a day.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Tue 4 Apr 17 #74 
jmaxg
Contributor

More updates:

1. Jared Kushner, Ivanka Trump's husband and the President's son-in-law, is being sent on a state mission to Iraq in lieu of the current Secretary of State. One might conjecture that it's all too much work for millionaire Rex Tillerson (current Secretary of State) after he was forced, grudgingly, to do another trip for NATO reasons after his Russia trip.

2. White House Spokesman Sean Spicer's blood pressure seems to be levelling out at an unhealthy 180/110. But the Pro-Publica website related questions today about how President Trump's trust agreements were amended on February 10, 2017 that allow the President to withdraw more money; they seemed to create a ruddier response in Mr. Spicer's normally calm demeanor. Maybe Melania Trump, ensconced in Trump Tower, is getting pissed off that her shopping allowance has been diminished due to bothersome governmental reasons.

3. Speaking of Melania Trump, she got her picture taken in the White House recently. It's just a pity she doesn't even live there.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


This topic is now closed.






   About - Terms - Privacy Log In