The 45th POTUS - Donald J. Trump

[digster]

There are always leaks from unnamed sources in every single administration. Every single one, and often there is jockeying for power in the West Wing that sometimes plays out partially in the press. These leaks just sound more outlandish, worrisome and dangerous because, well...

[McParadigm]

It is absolutely true that this admin is the leakiest of the leakiest, but yeah...anonymous sources helped break some of the biggest stories of the Iraq War and the Clinton/Gingrich collision.

[McParadigm]

More on that tweet, from WaPo:

The acting attorney general informed the Trump White House late last month that she believed Michael Flynn had misled senior administration officials about the nature of his communications with the Russian ambassador to the United States, and warned that the national security adviser was potentially vulnerable to Russian blackmail, current and former U.S. officials said.

The message, delivered by Sally Q. Yates and a senior career national security official to the White House counsel, was prompted by concerns that ­Flynn, when asked about his calls and texts with the Russian diplomat, had told Vice ­President-elect Mike Pence and others that he had not discussed the Obama administration sanctions on Russia for its interference in the 2016 election, the officials said. It is unclear what the White House counsel, Donald McGahn, did with the information.

In the waning days of the Obama administration, James R. Clapper Jr., who was the director of national intelligence, and John Brennan, the CIA director at the time, shared Yates’s concerns and concurred with her recommendation to inform the Trump White House. They feared that “Flynn had put himself in a compromising position” and thought that Pence had a right to know that he had been misled, according to one of the officials, who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters.

A senior Trump administration official said that the White House was aware of the matter, adding that “we’ve been working on this for weeks.”

[96583UP]

From Politico's article on the Appellate Court's decision:

The decision says it is "well established" that when considering the legality of government actions courts can consider public comments such as Trump's public call for a ban on immigration by Muslims.

I don't know if Spenno is still around, but I'm curious what his take (or anyone else) is on this since he has been pretty adamant that the comments surrounding the ban don't matter at all and shouldn't be cause for people becoming hysterical about it since the ban doesn't say "Muslim", but this indicates that there is a judicial precedent in the U.S. that allows the courts to do just that when considering the constitutionality of an action.

I'm not sure that's an entirely accurate summary of my feelings on the matter but, with the admission that I've had other things going on and so haven't kept up with this as much in the last few days, I don't see why my feelings on the matter should change on the basis of whatever the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals thinks.

Other considerations aside, eg. the constitutionality of the law, I still think it seems to be a reasonable policy in broad terms - and very popular electorally, I suspect.

I think people on this board have been a little unfair trying to stereotype Spenno as some generic vanguard for the Trump administration. Let's just try to step back and calm down and let free and unbiased exchange of ideas run its course and we'll be all the better for it.

First of all, if my question offended Spenno then I'm sorry for that. I definitely wasn't trying to sterotype him or exaggerate what he's said over the past few weeks. He has repeatedly stated that comments made by Trump and people associated with Trump aren't relevant to judging the Executive Order itself. He has used the word 'hysterical' to describe the protests and condemnations of Trump's actions both in his own posts and articles that he's linked.

I used his name in my post because the quote I was posting seemed to be a pretty direct response to what he's said on the issue so I was curious to hear his thoughts on the fact that apparently U.S. judicial precedent includes the principle that comments by policymakers are considered relevant when considering legal issues regarding the policies they have enacted. Obviously I wasn't asking if that changes his personal opinion, but to see if in his view perhaps it legitimizes the private citizens who are using his, and others close to him, comments to suggest that this ban is in fact religiously motivated. Or at least that isn't unreasonable to do so, even if he personally believes they are irrelevant. There was nothing about my post that was not calm, or intended to be unfair, or discouraging a free exchange of ideas. If it appeared otherwise, then that was not my intention.

Personally, I want Spenno to post more in this thread. I miss LittleWing, Glorified_Version, Buffalohed, PunkDavid, and all the other people who had strong opinions that sometimes went strongly against the board consensus. I think this place becoming an echo chamber is very undesirable, so I welcome any dissenting opinions, from Spenno or anybody else.

Dude,

Here was my post (the stuff in bold):

From Politico's article on the Appellate Court's decision:

The decision says it is "well established" that when considering the legality of government actions courts can consider public comments such as Trump's public call for a ban on immigration by Muslims.

I don't know if Spenno is still around, but I'm curious what his take (or anyone else) is on this since he has been pretty adamant that the comments surrounding the ban don't matter at all and shouldn't be cause for people becoming hysterical about it since the ban doesn't say "Muslim", but this indicates that there is a judicial precedent in the U.S. that allows the courts to do just that when considering the constitutionality of an action.

I despise freedom and believe that autocracy is the only viable solution to prevent complete human self-extinction. True, there will need to be a significant reduction in human biodiversity in order for us to be able to evolve to the next plateau of existence; but Lord Trump has been ordained by Xenu to bless the earth with the purifying essence of fire.

The constitution must be destroyed. All must bow to Trump. PS new SG album 2017 fuck yeah dogg

I think people on this board have been a little unfair trying to stereotype Spenno as some generic vanguard for the Trump administration. Let's just try to step back and calm down and let free and unbiased exchange of ideas run its course and we'll be all the better for it.

If you read them together you will get...as we say in america in the year 2038, "the шутка"

[BurtReynolds]

Heh.

that was wonderful

[96583UP]

So why doenst N Korea just bomb S Korea?

legit question. They are obviously heading towards the capacity to Launch missile. Is it beacuse they legit dont have the capacity to launch a long range missile? Do they actually fear repercussions from the international community? I dont get the sense that either of the above excuses are true for them. So what gives? Someone explain international diplomacy for me when it comes to dictatorships.

Because the response would be total annihilation of N Korea by the United States

this is the deal with nukes: no one actually uses them, because it is the same thing as putting a gun to your own head and pulling the trigger

despots may be crazy but they are not irrational

[96583UP]

So why doenst N Korea just bomb S Korea?
.

Because any serious attack on south Korea would be the end of Kim's existence. The primary reason for his threats is to keep his own population in line. The rest of the world is content to let him do it.

I should have read ahead!!!!

[96583UP]

I am going to classic B the shit out of the rest of these unread pages I am catching up on

[96583UP]

A high ranking unnamed source, who spoke with the Dispatch on the condition of anonymity, has confirmed that President Trump has denied the request on grounds that California, and the city of Sacramento in particular, have failed to enforce federal immigration laws and have threatened to succeed from the Union. The source is quoted as saying:

“The President has no incentive in helping the state of California. The state harbors more illegal immigrants than any other state and has multiple sanctuary cities that violate federal laws. The state very publicly supported Hillary Clinton throughout the election and the President views the state as being responsible for his loss in the popular vote, something he has had trouble with accepting."

Jesus Christ. How pathetic.

http://www.snopes.com/trump-federal-aid-california/

fake news

[96583UP]

A high ranking unnamed source, who spoke with the Dispatch on the condition of anonymity, has confirmed that President Trump has denied the request on grounds that California, and the city of Sacramento in particular, have failed to enforce federal immigration laws and have threatened to succeed from the Union. The source is quoted as saying:

“The President has no incentive in helping the state of California. The state harbors more illegal immigrants than any other state and has multiple sanctuary cities that violate federal laws. The state very publicly supported Hillary Clinton throughout the election and the President views the state as being responsible for his loss in the popular vote, something he has had trouble with accepting."

Jesus Christ. How pathetic.

Snopes says this is fake news in no uncertain terms. But if we share it around enough, it becomes real!

classic b!

[Bi_3]

Interesting article on the political conundrum Russia is now in with Trump in the White House

http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/02/13/the ... out-trump/

[96583UP]

ooooOOOOOOOOoooooooo

seeing him next to her made me realize how much more of an elite-level hunk he is compared to her

[BurtReynolds]

ooooOOOOOOOOoooooooo

seeing him next to her made me realize how much more of an elite-level hunk he is compared to her

It's the Fidel Castro genes.

[McParadigm]

NY Times adds details:

The F.B.I. has been examining Mr. Flynn’s phone calls as he has come under growing questions about his interactions with Russian officials and his management of the National Security Council. In addition, the Army has been investigating whether Mr. Flynn received money from the Russian government during a trip he took to Moscow in 2015, according to two defense officials.

[Norah]

Flynn resigned

[McParadigm]

well goddamn.

[wease]

No way.

[Orpheus]

Now if we could just get a handle on the national security conversations...with club sauce.

[Mecca]

if the "best guy for the job" was compromised by russia, who's to say the next guy won't be compromised by north korea?

[McParadigm]

How many days did he have that job? I wouldn't put it on my resume.