Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)

[71 dB]

Who believes an investigation into an innocent person would be 400 pages long? 

[Christo]

Who believes an investigation into an innocent person would be 400 pages long? 

Easily; that's about the combined length of all of Trump's tweets claiming NO COLLUSION!!!. 

[BasilValentine]

Congressman Richard Neal, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, has demanded the six most recent years of Donald Trump's personal and business tax returns, to which he has the unequivocal right by law. This includes data for approximately 250 dummy corporations. Is there anyone here naive enough to think the figures Trump used to value his assets when filing insurance claims and applying for loans from Deutsche Bank and others, made public by Michael Cohen, are going to agree with those he used to compute his tax liabilities? If Cohen's testimony on these matters is accurate, anyone with access to both data sets is likely to find hundreds of instances of tax fraud and bank fraud. It's a Trump family tradition.     

[Karl Henning]

Who believes an investigation into an innocent person would be 400 pages long? 

Trumpkins, including Todd

[BasilValentine]

Who believes an investigation into an innocent person would be 400 pages long? 

Page length is irrelevant. Trump is obviously innocent. He is doing exactly what innocent people do: Insisting that the proof of their total exoneration never sees the light of day.

The model for what should happen next is the Pentagon Papers.

[drogulus]

     I'm waiting. I'm waiting for Benjamin Wittes to say he no longer hopes that Barr will be an impartial arbiter on the release of the Mueller report.

     He said a few days ago:

Call me naive. Call me old school. Call me not in touch with the ethos of the moment. But I'll assume that Barr's oath of office meant something to him.

If that's wrong, the plate of crow with my name on it will still be warm in mid-April—or maybe sooner.

     I expect people to disagree, but I haven't yet decided that Wittes is wrong. If it's the case that Barr and Mueller are cooperating on the extent of necessary redactions that's a positive signal. The negative signal is that Barr didn't release the section summaries that were intended to be made public right away. They were pre-redacted for that purpose.

     

     

     

[BasilValentine]

     I'm waiting. I'm waiting for Benjamin Wittes to say he no longer hopes that Barr will be an impartial arbiter on the release of the Mueller report.

     He said a few days ago:

Call me naive. Call me old school. Call me not in touch with the ethos of the moment. But I'll assume that Barr's oath of office meant something to him.

If that's wrong, the plate of crow with my name on it will still be warm in mid-April—or maybe sooner.

     I expect people to disagree, but I haven't yet decided that Wittes is wrong. If it's the case that Barr and Mueller are cooperating on the extent of necessary redactions that's a positive signal. The negative signal is that Barr didn't release the section summaries that were intended to be made public right away. They were pre-redacted for that purpose.

Did you hear Barr and Mueller are cooperating from anyone other than Barr? What is his definition of cooperation, I redact, you protest, I do it anyway? Barr is just what he seems.

[Pat B]

Page length is irrelevant. Trump is obviously innocent. He is doing exactly what innocent people do: Insisting that the proof of their total exoneration never sees the light of day.

The model for what should happen next is the Pentagon Papers.

I wouldn't read too much into Trump's posturing. I am skeptical that his behavior has anything to do with the actual contents of the report. I doubt he's read it, and who knows whether any of the people he listens to have read it either. He plays the innocent victim because that is what he knows how to do and what his supporters want.

[drogulus]

Did you hear Barr and Mueller are cooperating from anyone other than Barr? What is his definition of cooperation, I redact, you protest, I do it anyway? Barr is just what he seems.

     It could be from Barr. Barr is delaying the inevitable IMO. The report was intended for the public and the full report will go to Congress. Prosecutors protect the results of their investigations. Watergate prosecutors stuck documents down their pants to reconstitute their WMD program. The whole Mueller probe thing is on a flash drive in a safe somewhere with a backup somewhere else.

[SimonNZ]

Vanity Fair:

Has Trump Been Grooming The I.R.S.'s Top Lawyer To Hide His Tax Returns?


Talking Points Memo:

Appeals Court Decision In Grand Jury Case Is Bad News For Mueller Report Seekers

"A panel of federal appellate judges in D.C. handed down a decision on Friday in an obscure case dealing with grand jury materials that could spell trouble for House Democrats and others seeking to see the full, unredacted report from special counsel Robert Muller.

By a 2-1 vote, the D.C. U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that judges do not have the authority to approve the release of confidential grand jury materials, outside of the five exemptions carved out in the federal law governing grand jury secrecy. The circuit court will likely have jurisdiction over any cases dealing with grand jury materials in Mueller's report.

Friday's opinion was written by Reagan appointee Judge Douglas Ginsburg and was joined by Judge Gregory Katsas, a Trump appointee who previously served in President Trump's office of White House legal counsel.

Obama-appointee Judge Sri Srinivasan wrote a dissent that pointed to the appellate court's 1974 decision in Haldeman v. Sirica. Then the court upheld the decision of  U.S. District Court Chief Judge John Sirica, during the Watergate investigation, to allow Congress to see the so-called "road map" put together by the grand jury investigating President Nixon.

Appellate courts in other circuits have ruled that the law's list of exemptions is not an exclusive one, and that judges have the authority to release the materials for reasons not explicitly outlined in the law."

[JBS]

Vanity Fair:

Has Trump Been Grooming The I.R.S.'s Top Lawyer To Hide His Tax Returns?


Talking Points Memo:

Appeals Court Decision In Grand Jury Case Is Bad News For Mueller Report Seekers

"A panel of federal appellate judges in D.C. handed down a decision on Friday in an obscure case dealing with grand jury materials that could spell trouble for House Democrats and others seeking to see the full, unredacted report from special counsel Robert Muller.

By a 2-1 vote, the D.C. U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that judges do not have the authority to approve the release of confidential grand jury materials, outside of the five exemptions carved out in the federal law governing grand jury secrecy. The circuit court will likely have jurisdiction over any cases dealing with grand jury materials in Mueller's report.

Friday's opinion was written by Reagan appointee Judge Douglas Ginsburg and was joined by Judge Gregory Katsas, a Trump appointee who previously served in President Trump's office of White House legal counsel.

Obama-appointee Judge Sri Srinivasan wrote a dissent that pointed to the appellate court's 1974 decision in Haldeman v. Sirica. Then the court upheld the decision of  U.S. District Court Chief Judge John Sirica, during the Watergate investigation, to allow Congress to see the so-called "road map" put together by the grand jury investigating President Nixon.

Appellate courts in other circuits have ruled that the law's list of exemptions is not an exclusive one, and that judges have the authority to release the materials for reasons not explicitly outlined in the law."

The last paragraph points to one of the most common reasons for Supreme Court review: when circuit courts disagree on the law, as here.
But there is one level of appeal before that. This decision was by a three judge panel. The losing side can ask the full Circuit Court to hear the case en banc, meaning all the judges of that circuit hear the arguments and make a sort-of-final decision.

[drogulus]

     Nuclear Power Can Save the World

Opinions are also driven by our cultural and political tribes. Since the late 1970s, when No Nukes became a signature cause of the Green movement, sympathy to nuclear power became, among many environmentalists, a sign of disloyalty if not treason.

Despite these challenges, psychology and politics can change quickly. As the enormity of the climate crisis sinks in and the hoped-for carbon savings from renewables don't add up, nuclear can become the new green. Protecting the environment and lifting the developing world out of poverty are progressive causes. And the millennials and Gen Z's might rethink the sacred values their boomer parents have left unexamined since the Doobie Brothers sang at the 1979 No Nukes concert.

     
     Let's make a deal with the eco-terrorists. We'll give them lots of Green New Deal goodies that help and they give us nukes to do the heavy lifting.

[SimonNZ]

FBI Chief Christopher Wray Warns Of 'Persistent, Pervasive' White Supremacy Threat
His warning in congressional testimony comes after reports that Homeland Security dismantled its domestic terrorism unit.

"FBI Director Christopher Wray testified before Congress on Thursday that white supremacy is a "persistent, pervasive threat" to U.S. security — despite President Donald Trump's indications to the contrary.

"How would you define the danger to public safety that is posed by white supremacist extremism?" House Appropriations Committee Chair Rep. Jose Serrano (D-N.Y.) asked.

Wray responded that the "danger ... of white supremacists, violent extremism or any other kind of extremism is, of course, significant."

He added: "We assess that it is a persistent, pervasive threat. We tackle it both through our joint terrorism task forces on the domestic terrorism side as well as through our civil rights program on the civil side through hate-crime enforcement."

The warning comes just weeks after Trump said he didn't "really" see a rise in global right-wing violence after an avowed white nationalist was charged in the fatal shooting of 50 people at two New Zealand mosques last month. Such violence is committed by a "small group of people that have very, very serious problems, I guess," Trump insisted.

Wray's pronouncement also follows reports that the Department of Homeland Security dismantled its domestic terrorism unit even as American right-wing violence has become the leading cause of terrorism in the U.S. Officials of the department conceded to CBS News this week that the unit has been "restructured" but said that Homeland Security remains committed to battling all domestic terrorism. Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen last month insisted that Islamist militants and those they inspire are the primary terrorist threat to the U.S.

In fact, more domestic terrorism suspects were arrested in the United States over the last two federal budget years than those inspired by foreign Islamic extremists. Most domestic terrorism suspects are right-wing extremists. But domestic terrorism is not a crime under federal law, so suspects are charged with weapon violations and other crimes.

Wray was also asked how the FBI is addressing a 17% spike in hate crimes in the U.S.

"We are determined not to tolerate hate-filled violence in our communities, so we're going to aggressively investigate those cases," he said."

[SimonNZ]

Wonkette:

Matt Gaetz: UHHHHHH ... WHAT IF TRUMP FAKED BEING A CHICK?

"Matt Gaetz, America's creepiest GOP Trump-humping congressman, and definitely one of the dumbest, had a thought on Tuesday. (And for once it wasn't about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.)

Gaetz, who is on the House Judiciary Committee because we guess that's the best the GOP has to offer, was in the first hearing for the Equality Act, which would codify LGBT civil rights protections into law -- finally -- and it's not that he doesn't want to support it. He does!

"I want to support this legislation and in the broadest sense I do," Gaetz said. "I believe that individuals in our country should not face discrimination for their sex or their gender or their sexual orientation."

But, you see, well ... did we mention Matt Gaetz is an incredibly stupid person? He's incredibly stupid. And he has zero understanding of the science around gender identity, and much like religious right fuckstains believe women get pleasure abortions in the ninth month just to stick it to Bible-beaters, he apparently also believes that people will use protections for transgender people to cheat the system, declaring new genders all willy nilly, whenever they find that it will suit their purposes or help them get ahead.

"I strongly support the rights of transgender individuals," he continued. "I will not denigrate or deny their struggles. But I am concerned about the potential bad actors who would exploit the provisions for their own gain."

And it's not just liberals he thinks are going to do this (though we imagine he guesses it's mostly liberals). It could even be noted Bad Actor Donald Trump! Who might fake transgender! (He would be the most tremendous transgender person ever! A lot of people would be talking about it! Historic!) What if Donald Trump just got up one morning and started making presidential proclamations on Twitter about how he enjoys being a girl? Wouldn't that kind of bogart breaking the glass ceiling for the first woman to be elected president? AND HOW WOULD THAT BE FAIR?

"If President Trump were to say, 'I'm am now the first female president,' who would celebrate that? Would those who support the legislation think that's a good thing or would they be dismayed?"

That's right, trans people, you can't have rights because Matt Gaetz is JUST WONDERING.

And TBH, if that did happen, Republicans like Matt Gaetz and his pals are so far up Trump's ass they'd probably become the world's biggest trans advocates all of a sudden, but they'd do it in some weird obstructionist way that mysteriously manages to glorify Vladimir Putin, so it would ultimately be a big step backward for trans equality.

As far as the rest of us who support the Equality Act -- you know, for actual LGBT citizens -- we think we'd have a couple few problems with Trump doing that. Would Trump go so far as to fake gender dysphoria in order to shove in Hillary Clinton's face that she wasn't the first woman president, but rather that Trump was?

Oh God we have more questions.

What would he name himself? (Yes, we're going to continue using "he," and it is NOT misgendering, because as Matt Gaetz has so helpfully pointed out, HE is FAKING.)

Would he be sexist toward himself, constantly?

Would he grab himself by the pussy all the time, because he just couldn't control himself, and he'd let himself, because he's a celebrity, and celebrities can get away with that kind of thing?

Would he get Michael Cohen to set up a porn slush fund to pay himself to stay silent about how he cheated on his wife (again) with himself?

Would he invite himself over to fuck himself, while his wife was home nursing their newborn, but instead of fucking himself he'd just bellyache the whole time about how sharks are scary, because Shark Week was on the TV?

If he rejected himself, would he get mad and call himself a "horseface" on Twitter?

We are just curious about these things, and about what happened to make Matt Gaetz such a gross idiot. What kinda drugs has he been mainlining (allegedly!), and did Louie Gohmert give them to him? So many questions.

[Wendell_E]

Wonkette:
"Matt Gaetz, America's creepiest GOP Trump-humping congressman, and definitely one of the dumbest, had a thought on Tuesday. (And for once it wasn't about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.)

Gaetz is supposedly contemplating running for Doug Jones' seat as Senator from Alabama. Though Gaetz is a congressman from Florida, his district is on the border of the two states, and Alabama has a very short residency requirement. 

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/4/5/1847851/-Morning-Digest-Trump-worshipping-Florida-congressman-Matt-Gaetz-mulls-Senate-bid-in-Alabama

[Todd]

Traffic on this thread sure seems to have dropped since the summary of the shoulda been bombshell Mueller report was released.  Curious. 

Anyway, Barry is back in the news: Barack Obama warns progressives to avoid 'circular firing squad'

One thing is for certain, current day progressives are far too stupid to heed the advice of a proven winner.

[drogulus]

    The summaries of the Mueller report are in the Mueller report. They have not been released.

     Now that Obama is in the rear view mirror it's safe to say he was not a leftist, obvious at the time but inconvenient for Repubs to admit when they were fighting Kenyan Socialism. I have made the point that progressive programs will succeed if they get as much support from nonprogressive pols as they have from the majority of voters. The voters don't like to get progressive cooties on them, they just want the programs.

[SimonNZ]

Can someone explain how he thinks a "witchhunt" would turn around and "exonerate" him?

[SimonNZ]

The memes were coming faster than the news, so i had to google this:

Donald Trump falsely claims windmills cause cancer

"Donald Trump has baffled medical professionals and energy experts alike, claiming windmills can cause cancer.

The US President was giving a speech at the National Republican Congressional Committee's spring dinner on Tuesday when he made the false claim.

"We've ended the war on American energy - the United States is now the number one producer of oil and natural gas anywhere in the world, and that all happened over the last two years," he told the crowd.

"Hillary wanted to put up wind. Wind. If you have a windmill anywhere near your house, congratulations - your house just went down 75 percent in value. And they say the noise causes cancer. You told me that one. Reaow, reaow, you know the thing makes the sonar."

There is no evidence windmills can cause cancer.

"The American Cancer Society is unaware of any credible evidence linking the noise from windmills to cancer," the organisation told the New York Times.

In contrast, the World Health Organization estimates fossil fuels - like the ones Trump says the US now leads world production in - killed 4.2 million people a year, with 91 percent of the world's population living in areas where its air pollution guidelines are not met.

A 2012 analysis found that for every trillion kWhrs of energy produced in the US, coal kills 15,000, wind kills 100 (usually from falls during maintenance) and nuclear power, zero.

A 2013 study found no evidence home values are impacted negatively by nearby wind projects, and the New York Times said a wind farm built near Trump's golf course in Scotland didn't affect its property value.

Trump went on say windmills are creating "graveyards" for birds.

"If you love birds, you'd never want to walk under a windmill because it's a very sad, sad sight. It's like a cemetery. We put a little, we put a little statue for the poor birds. It's true. You know, in California if you shoot a bald eagle they put you in jail for five years - but the windmills wipe them out."

It's unclear exactly how many birds are killed by windmills each year. One study found it could be up to 328,000 a year in the US - but this figure is dwarfed by how many die after crashing into buildings, which the US Fish and Wildlife service estimates could be as high as 988 million - 3000 times more.

Trump has a history of lying and making false statements. As of last month, the Washington Post had collected more than 9000 since he became President in 2017."


He seems to get a pass for confusing wind turbines with windmills, which, granted, is the lesser stupid.

[71 dB]

One thing is for certain, current day progressives are far too stupid to heed the advice of a proven winner.

Corporate democrats including Obama are the clueless ones. All they are doing is serving their billionaire donors, keeping the oligarchy alive. Do you really want to live in oligarchy? Call progresses stupid all you want, but America is going left and all Americans will one day have healthcare as a human right and not go bankcrupt over it. The only question is how many years it will take. How many Americans will die or go bankcrupt before the US joins all the other developped countries.