Trump 10: Orange Voldemort Rises

[Audrey2]

I have to post the Luxembourg video as well.

They even give a shout out to Melania!

 

I even ran into one from Mars! 

 

[onekidanddone]

1 minute ago, samurai_sarah said:

Here's a link that shows the video for every country that has participated so far: http://everysecondcounts.eu/

Apparently, what started out as a Dutch idea, is now a collaborative effort.

We're number TWO ...we're number TWO....

[GreyhoundFan]

"Donald Trump’s latest attack on the media is very, very dangerous"

Spoiler

President Trump has said lots of negative things about the media since he began running for the White House in June 2015. He's called reporters “the most dishonest people.” He's called out individual reporters for alleged bias. He's insisted that the media as a whole is failing. Heck, he even once called me “one of the dumber and least respected of the political pundits.”

But, to my mind, all of that name-calling pales in comparison to Trump's insinuation Monday that the media is purposely covering up terrorist attacks. Here's the key bit of what Trump said at U.S. Central Command in Florida:

You’ve seen what happened in Paris, and Nice. All over Europe, it’s happening. It’s gotten to a point where it’s not even being reported. And in many cases the very, very dishonest press doesn’t want to report it. They have their reasons, and you understand that.

Trump said, “They have their reasons, and you understand that.”

He didn't offer any more explanation. Just that.

White House press secretary Sean Spicer, pressed on Trump's comment on the flight from Florida back to Washington, stood up for his boss.

Where to start? How about:

1. The media did cover every single one of the terrorist attacks Trump mentions. Extensively.

2. It's deeply irresponsible to suggest — with no evidence — that the news media is ignoring news events because they don't fit some sort of hidden journalistic agenda.

That second point is why what Trump is saying is so, so dangerous. He's implying that the media is allowing its own collective biases to get in the way of his efforts to keep the country safe from the threat of terrorism. That the media is, at best, downplaying these attacks because of their own ideological biases and, at, worst, siding with the terrorists. That's staggering stuff — even for Trump.

As Philip Bump notes, it's not the first time Trump has made an insinuation like this one. In June 2016, in the wake of the Orlando nightclub massacre, Trump said this: “People cannot believe that President Obama is acting the way he acts and can’t even mention the words radical Islamic terrorism. There’s something going on.

“They have their reasons … and you understand that.”

“There's something going on.”

Notice the similarities? A suggestion of nefariousness without any evidence to back it up.

The problem is this: For lots and lots of people listening to Trump, his suggestion that the media is complicit in a coverup of terrorist attacks will be taken as fact. They won't seek out context or evidence that, frankly, totally undermines his contention. Because they already believe the media to be bad/biased, they will simply take it as a fact that the media is willfully disrupting the president's efforts to keep the country safe.

The job of a leader isn't to give people what they want — especially if you know (or suspect) it's not entirely accurate. If Trump has evidence that the media has covered up a terrorist attack — or downplayed it in any way — he should come forward with it. Spicer suggested Trump will do just that.

I look forward to that list. Without it, what Trump is doing is leveling a baseless allegation. And baseless allegations from the president of the United States are very dangerous things.

There are some good Tweets and links in the article. The sentence I bolded is the one that is the most scary.

 

 

[Cartmann99]

1 hour ago, 47of74 said:

What am I, Larry Craig?

I think a generous allowance of Vaseline would help with that issue. 

Well, I've never seen you and Larry Craig in the same room at the same time...

[Cartmann99]

The First Lady is suing folks again:

Quote

 

In a lawsuit filed today, First Lady Melania Trump revealed her intention to leverage the presidency to ink new “licensing, branding, and endorsement” deals worth many millions of dollars. In the filing, Melania Trump’s lawyer described the position of First Lady as a “once-in-a-lifetime” money making opportunity. She told the court she intended to pursue deals in “apparel, accessories, shoes, jewelry, cosmetics, hair care, skin care, and fragrance.”

These kind of endorsement deals would be especially lucrative while Melania Trump is First Lady and thus “one of the most photographed women in the world.”

 

https://thinkprogress.org/melania-trump-reveals-plan-to-leverage-presidency-to-ink-multi-million-dollar-endorsement-deals-1999314fb8f1

Melania honey, I don't recommended you ever spend the night in the White House. I have a distinct feeling that the ghosts of all the former First Ladies would gang up, snatch you bald-headed, and then proceed to toss you out on the lawn for being such a tacky-ass grifter. 

[laPapessaGiovanna]

Italy present! 

 

[sawasdee]

This article scared the pants off me.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/03/how-to-build-an-autocracy/513872/

 

[fraurosena]

Oooohh, I like this idea! 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/07/womens-march-organisers-plan-day-without-women-strike/

(to be fair though, I have wonderfully supportive and - dare I say it - feminist husband and sons, so there is no need to strike at home)

[apple1]

3 hours ago, fraurosena said:

Oooohh, I like this idea! 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/07/womens-march-organisers-plan-day-without-women-strike/

(to be fair though, I have wonderfully supportive and - dare I say it - feminist husband and sons, so there is no need to strike at home)

I won't be participating. I - and hundreds of thousands of my colleagues - are women working in healthcare. My area is pediatrics.

We can't leave sick kids without care to make a point.

YMMV.

[fraurosena]

16 minutes ago, apple1 said:

I won't be participating. I - and hundreds of thousands of my colleagues - are women working in healthcare. My area is pediatrics.

We can't leave sick kids without care to make a point.

YMMV.

Oh, I completely agree. Of course there are area's, of which healthcare is only one, in which one simply cannot and should not strike.

That said I can't help but rub my hands together in gleeful anticipation of how things will fall to pieces when hundreds and thousands of secretaries, waitresses, cleaning-ladies, shop assistants, flight attendants, dental assistants, teachers, human resource managers, social workers, counselors, community service managers, education administrators, cashiers, customer service reps, to name just a few,  all lay down their work.

[Flossie]

48 minutes ago, apple1 said:

I won't be participating. I - and hundreds of thousands of my colleagues - are women working in healthcare. My area is pediatrics.

We can't leave sick kids without care to make a point.

YMMV.

Your hospital may not allow it, but can you instead wear a button saying something like "What would happen if we women hadn't shown up to work today?"

[GreyhoundFan]

I like this opinion piece and agree with it: "Trump is a boy’s idea of a man"

Quote

My friend has a teenage son. He’s a good kid, well-behaved, impeccably mannered and exasperatingly unpredictable, as many teenagers are — a man one minute, a boy the next. My friend has schooled his son in the verities of life — be truthful, be reliable, be civil, be patient and, above all, be humble. Now, though, my friend does not know what to say. Donald Trump has left him silent.

There are many reasons to loathe Trump. His policies are mostly wrong, and even those that are right have been chaotically announced or implemented. He prescribes barroom oaths for an economy that needs thought and creativity. He would let the Earth bake rather than take the most rudimentary of steps to moderate global warming. He alienates allies and friends, embraces enemies and indulges in a noxious moral relativism in which, somehow, Russia and America are on the same level.

But it is my friend’s dilemma that best evokes what is so repellent about Trump. He is the winner who was supposed to lose. He is the bully in the fourth grade who never meets his match. He is the liar whose lies somehow don’t matter. He is the braggart who is never humbled. He refutes what Johnny Tremain was told and every child once instructed: “Pride goeth before a fall.” No, with Trump pride goeth before everything .

Donald Trump is the most un-American of presidents. Think of Abraham Lincoln — “Honest Abe.” Will anyone ever call Trump “Honest Don”? Will he be known for his humility or for his lust for knowledge? Will tales be told about his industrious work habits or, as with Lyndon Johnson, his furious desire to end racial discrimination? What will Trump overcome?

Or George Washington. Could there ever be an equivalent of the Parson Weems tale about Trump’s honesty: “Father, I cannot tell a lie”? No, it would have to be “Father, some Mexican cut down the cherry tree.” Or Dwight Eisenhower and his chain-smoking determination on the eve of D-Day, or Ronald Reagan and his affable demeanor with a bullet in him, or George H.W. Bush, who left his cushy country club life and volunteered for war at the age of 18, or Franklin D. Roosevelt, standing on atrophied legs, the braces digging into his flesh, or Barack Obama, whose dignity in the face of Trump’s revolting “birther” taunts is now so sorely missed. Trump repudiates them all. He will leave no myth, just an odor.

Myths have a certain staying power because, really, they are aspirational — not always who we are, but always who we want to be. We see ourselves as good and generous. We believe we are a virtuous nation. There is no monarchy or dictatorship in our past. We have always been a democracy, and even our presidential palace is sometimes called “the people’s house.” I am aware, of course, of slavery and Jim Crow and enduring racism. I am aware, too, of the near-extirpation of the American Indians and the raw anti-Semitism that doomed many Jews fleeing Hitler. All of this is unforgivable, unforgettable too.

As a kid, I was a paperboy, and the walls of the place where we picked up our papers were plastered with pictures of former paperboys — some sports figures, some presidents, some military officers. Ike was one. Roy Campanella, the Brooklyn Dodgers catcher, was another and so was the “G.I.’s General,” Omar Bradley, the last of the five-stars. I used to study that wall, wonder about those men and whether I could ever be like them. I envision it now. There is no room for Trump there. He does not qualify. Never mind that he was never a paperboy. More important, he is no role model.

A father instructs. He raises a child to be good, to be honest, to tell the truth, to be humble, to be fair, not to be petty, to respect women, to accept fair criticism, to protect the weak and not to injure the injured, such as the bereaved parents of a son who died heroically in Iraq and a reporter with a physical disability. Trump teaches otherwise. He shows a boy that the manly virtues are for suckers, that the narcissism of youth should be cherished and that angry impulses have to be honored. Lots of men have failed as presidents, as Trump surely will, but few fail so dismally as role models. He’s a boy’s idea of a man. He’s a man’s idea of a boy.

 

[47of74]

And I see the fornicating crybaby is back on the Twitters today...

Jesus Fornicating Christ, I wish that Orange Feces Gibbon would grow the perdition up, and get off the fornicating twitter already!

 

[fraurosena]

22 minutes ago, 47of74 said:

And I see the fornicating crybaby is back on the Twitters today...

Jesus Fornicating Christ, I wish that Orange Feces Gibbon would grow the perdition up, and get off the fornicating twitter already!

 

Although, when he does that, where'd our entertainment be? 

[AuntK]

On Rachel last night, the potential head of the FDA was discussed. Do not remember his name but these are his qualifications:

1. Not a medical doctor, in fact no medical background at all;

2. Millionaire Silicon Valley tech investor

3. Believes in immortality through biotechnology

4. Believes in "seasteading" - life on the planet is doomed unless we form islands and live at sea. These "islands" are made of metal shipping containers.

5.  Does not believe in pharmaceutical testing; just release new drugs let the market sort out whether they are effective or harmful. I guess if they don't kill anybody, they will stay on the market.

I am not making this up, and this was not some weird FB post or fake news site, I repeat, this was Rachel Maddow! 

A comment on Melania's marketing claim in her lawsuit - I have to wonder if this is just b.s. for purposes of her lawsuit or if they truly plan to use her position as FLOTUS to market products. Honestly, I'm not sure it would be very successful, it would likely be overpriced for her Wal-Mart Trumpster crowd and too tacky for their millionaire buddies, if they have any.  I'm wondering if it violates the Emoluments clause even though she is not an official, because she is married to him, he would benefit, so. . .

[Cartmann99]

17 minutes ago, AuntK said:

Does not believe in pharmaceutical testing; just release new drugs let the market sort out whether they are effective or harmful. I guess if they don't kill anybody, they will stay on the market.

Wait! Trump wants a Libertarian heading the FDA?!? I love how they never realize that they, or someone they love, may be hurt or killed while the Holy Free Market sorts these things out. SMDH

[47of74]

15 minutes ago, Cartmann99 said:

Wait! Trump wants a Libertarian heading the FDA?!? I love how they never realize that they, or someone they love, may be hurt or killed while the Holy Free Market sorts these things out. SMDH

Yeah, they want the drug companies to be free to dump any crap they want on to the market and let patients - especially poor ones who can't afford good health care - be guinea pigs.

They don't care how many more Vioxx fiascos happen

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rofecoxib

[Audrey2]

10 hours ago, Cartmann99 said:

The First Lady is suing folks again:

https://thinkprogress.org/melania-trump-reveals-plan-to-leverage-presidency-to-ink-multi-million-dollar-endorsement-deals-1999314fb8f1

Melania honey, I don't recommended you ever spend the night in the White House. I have a distinct feeling that the ghosts of all the former First Ladies would gang up, snatch you bald-headed, and then proceed to toss you out on the lawn for being such a tacky-ass grifter. 

I was planning on taking the high road and leaving Melania alone. However, if she wants to use her position as First Lady to promote her endorsement line, the gloves will be off. 

I can understand staying out of the public spotlight, especially if your husband was in a different line of work when you married, then decided to have a job with more public access and opinion. Not all First Ladies have been as visible as Nancy Reagan, Barbara Bush, Hillary Clinton, or Michelle Obama. I respected Laura Bush's desire to stay more in the background. But, you can't have it both ways. You can't stay in New York, saying you want to be a mom and raise your son out of the public eye (at least for the rest of the school year), while using your platform as the First Lady to endorse products or promote your merchandise lines.

[47of74]

3 minutes ago, Audrey2 said:

I was planning on taking the high road and leaving Melania alone. However, if she wants to use her position as First Lady to promote her endorsement line, the gloves will be off. 

I can understand staying out of the public spotlight, especially if your husband was in a different line of work when you married, then decided to have a job with more public access and opinion. Not all First Ladies have been as visible as Nancy Reagan, Barbara Bush, Hillary Clinton, or Michelle Obama. I respected Laura Bush's desire to stay more in the background. But, you can't have it both ways. You can't stay in New York, saying you want to be a mom and raise your son out of the public eye (at least for the rest of the school year), while using your platform as the First Lady to endorse products or promote your merchandise lines.

Sigh.  Lincoln would've died of shame if he had seen what a bunch of tacky ass grifters the entire GOP has turned in to.  From the Palins (fornicate you very much John McCain for inflicting them on us) to Agent Orange and his family.

Orange Ferret Face and his family are probably going to make Popes like John XII or Alexander VI look like freaking saints by the time they're done.

[Cartmann99]

1 hour ago, AuntK said:

A comment on Melania's marketing claim in her lawsuit - I have to wonder if this is just b.s. for purposes of her lawsuit or if they truly plan to use her position as FLOTUS to market products. Honestly, I'm not sure it would be very successful, it would likely be overpriced for her Wal-Mart Trumpster crowd and too tacky for their millionaire buddies, if they have any.  I'm wondering if it violates the Emoluments clause even though she is not an official, because she is married to him, he would benefit, so.

 Since she seems determined to turn the White House into a cash cow, she should develop products for the part of the body that best represents the public's feelings about the word "Trump".

Suppositories, hemorrhoid relief, enemas, etc....

Tagline: We know all about being asses, so let us take care of yours!

[47of74]

6 minutes ago, Cartmann99 said:

 Since she seems determined to turn the White House into a cash cow, she should develop products for the part of the body that best represents the public's feelings about the word "Trump".

Suppositories, hemorrhoid relief, enemas, etc....

Tagline: We know all about being asses, so let us take care of yours!

I think for games like euchre there should be an alternative name for trump.  I just can't think of any off hand.  

[clueliss]

Per Twitter the DeVos vote is being called now.

[AuntK]

38 minutes ago, Audrey2 said:

I was planning on taking the high road and leaving Melania alone. However, if she wants to use her position as First Lady to promote her endorsement line, the gloves will be off. 

I can understand staying out of the public spotlight, especially if your husband was in a different line of work when you married, then decided to have a job with more public access and opinion. Not all First Ladies have been as visible as Nancy Reagan, Barbara Bush, Hillary Clinton, or Michelle Obama. I respected Laura Bush's desire to stay more in the background. But, you can't have it both ways. You can't stay in New York, saying you want to be a mom and raise your son out of the public eye (at least for the rest of the school year), while using your platform as the First Lady to endorse products or promote your merchandise lines.

Yeah, I'm with you on that. If she gonna start using her position as FLOTUS to shill products, she needs to get ready - the shit's gonna fly! I don't remember any First Lady EVER using her position to sell or market products, I think it's disgraceful and tacky. I don't care WHERE she's from, she needs someone to explain to her how to act.  Of course, so does her husband, but that's a lost cause.  I can't see her being successful either, the Trump brand is not exactly a success, especially recently, and it's likely to get worse.

[Ali]

If they file joint tax returns, could this lawsuit allow the tax returns to be subpoenaed as part of discovery?

[fraurosena]

Tangerine Toddler's White House on track to be most scandalous in history.. and that after just a few weeks in office.

http://www.ecowatch.com/trump-white-house-most-scandalous-2242869366.html