President Donald J. Trump

[Gd5150]

http://www.newsweek.com/rex-tillerson-could-quit-over-unprofessional-trump-bashing-jeff-sessions-641038

Remember friends, Sec. Tillerson is as much of an outsider and non-government type as Trump is, and even he allegedly is fed up with Trump's piss poor management and seemingly erratic behavior.

More "sourcesl" and "insiders" making "reports of" by another joke Democrat Media source Newsweek. 🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔 another nothing burger comin up.

If we took speculation away from the Democrat Media Complex there'd literally be no news as they report no facts anymore. Just fake sources and opinions. Yawn

[albrecht]

'I did not have sexual relations with that woman, MISS LEWINSKY"

Bill Clinton...

As a Brit and a Yorkshire one at that I can understand that you missed his nuance. But your flagrant parsing of the whole statement makes we wonder if you do understand what Bill was saying and purposes edited the most important words of his statement.

I did not have sexual relations with that woman, MISS LEWINSKY

When he made that statement he was likely not denying sexual relations with Lewinsky to the people (and Billary) but denying he had sexual relations with Hillary to Miss Lewinsky. He was afraid she would really spill more beans and create a bigger scandal, sexual or otherwise, and wanted to calm the waters with her and/or keep her under his influence ("I really love you, honey, I don't have sex with Hillary, babe. That woman drives me up the wall but I got to stick with her for a few more years, baby. Now come here...") Hillary was well aware of Bill's philandering, for decades, at this point. She was mad that it hurts their, and then her, careers and they wanted to ensure Lewinsky didn't make things worse. So an attempt to calm her/things down.

[Gd5150]

As a Brit and a Yorkshire one at that I can understand that you missed his nuance. But your flagrant parsing of the whole statement makes we wonder if you do understand what Bill was saying and purposes edited the most important words of his statement.

When he made that statement he was likely not denying sexual relations with Lewinsky to the people (and Billary) but denying he had sexual relations with Hillary to Miss Lewinsky. He was afraid she would really spill more beans and create a bigger scandal, sexual or otherwise, and wanted to calm the waters with her and/or keep her under his influence ("I really love you, honey, I don't have sex with Hillary, babe. That woman drives me up the wall but I got to stick with her for a few more years, baby. No come here...") Hillary was well aware of Bill's philandering, for decades, at this point. She was mad that it hurts their, and then her, careers and they wanted to ensure Lewinsky didn't make things worse. So an attempt to calm her/things down.

It was the "vast right wing conspiracy" don't you remember. After all Hillary and Democrat Media "sources" had "consensus" and told us.

Never forget Democrat Chris Mathews saying on CNBC, I know he didn't do it, but if he did he would deserve to be impeached. Then the dress came along, and the Democrat Media Complex circled the wagons. They're all liars. And only the stupidest would ever fall for the lefts used car salesman crap. They have no evidence to support their claims and speculations. They never do.

[Dr. MD MD]

Oh do keep up Barbie...He recused himself because he 'forgot' to mention when asked if he'd had any dealings with foreign citizens during the campaign. He remembered later and when Mueller was appointed (By the DAG) Sessions recused himself because he could hardly oversee an investigation in which he was to be investigated.

Tillerson was appointed to help drain the swamp...Well, the 'other' swamp. Trump wanted his own swamp.

Oh sure! Everyone should just keep recusing themselves until there are only Democrats left. It's pretty transparent and really lame.  :

Seriously though, I do wonder why the Republicans are so afraid of the Dems who recently lost the majority of their power? It speaks to deep state collusion. The only real question is will our country continue to be run by spies or will the people prevail? We know how it will turn out if the spies prevail. Think Russia and Eastern Europe 1945-1990. 

[21st Century Man]

Oh do keep up Barbie...He recused himself because he 'forgot' to mention when asked if he'd had any dealings with foreign citizens during the campaign. He remembered later and when Mueller was appointed (By the DAG) Sessions recused himself because he could hardly oversee an investigation in which he was to be investigated.

Tillerson was appointed to help drain the swamp...Well, the 'other' swamp. Trump wanted his own swamp.

By gum, I actually agree with you.   If the shoe was on the other foot, I'd be wanting a Democratic Attorney General to recuse himself.

[Yorkshire pud]

More "sourcesl" and "insiders" making "reports of" by another joke Democrat Media source Newsweek. 🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔🍔 another nothing burger comin up.

If we took speculation away from the Democrat Media Complex there'd literally be no news as they report no facts anymore. Just fake sources and opinions. Yawn

Will you video your reaction when the circus tent collapses? Please...

[Dr. MD MD]

By gum, I actually agree with you.   If the shoe was on the other foot, I'd be wanting a Democratic Attorney General to recuse himself.

Big surprise!  :

Well, at least you'll have something to complain about when nothing gets done. Maybe people really do get just what they deserve.   

[albrecht]

Will you video your reaction when the circus tent collapses? Please...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/investing/gold/7511589/Explain-why-you-sold-Britains-gold-Gordon-Brown-told.html
I'm still trying to figure this one out. Was it some kind of secret 'banker bailout,' like our idiots did (to yours, ours, and German, and I think some others) or just a way to funnel money to 'developing countries' so their migrants and investments from despots can take over yours? Or some weird insider-trading deal (but how can that be inside unless he, or his cronys bought positions before a "Pre-announce?" Of GOLD, one of THE most fungible and popular assets?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/investing/gold/7511589/Explain-why-you-sold-Britains-gold-Gordon-Brown-told.html

Has this ever been answered sufficiently? Our 'banker bailout' has many supposed answers and economic papers and opinion pieces but I haven't seen as much coverage anymore of the odd gold sale "pre-annouced," at that. (Maybe because less money? Maybe because "connected"- foreign power, blackmail, ransom demand, or just simple incompetence by Labour?) Recall that one batty Lord claiming some "illuminati"-type group offered him some weird deal for bailouts or settlement? My memory fails me but he mentioned it on the floor or to the press, as I recall.

[Yorkshire pud]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/investing/gold/7511589/Explain-why-you-sold-Britains-gold-Gordon-Brown-told.html
I'm still trying to figure this one out. Was it some kind of secret 'banker bailout,' like our idiots did (to yours, ours, and German, and I think some others) or just a way to funnel money to 'developing countries' so their migrants and investments from despots can take over yours? Or some weird insider-trading deal (but how can that be inside unless he, or his cronys bought positions before a "Pre-announce?" Of GOLD, one of THE most fungible and popular assets?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/investing/gold/7511589/Explain-why-you-sold-Britains-gold-Gordon-Brown-told.html

Has this ever been answered sufficiently? Our 'banker bailout' has many supposed answers and economic papers and opinion pieces but I haven't seen as much coverage anymore of the odd gold sale "pre-annouced," at that. (Maybe because less money? Maybe because "connected"- foreign power, blackmail, ransom demand, or just simple incompetence by Labour?) Recall that one batty Lord claiming some "illuminati"-type group offered him some weird deal for bailouts or settlement? My memory fails me but he mentioned it on the floor or to the press, as I recall.

Anything pertaining to Tony Blair and Gordon Brown gets little more than contempt from me. I could think of several quite elaborate and inspired punishments for those two and several of their cabinet members. Only Mo Mowlem had any earned respect. She died way before her time. Blair was frightened she might usurp him and happenstance ensured that never happened.

[albrecht]

Anything pertaining to Tony Blair and Gordon Brown gets little more than contempt from me. I could think of several quite elaborate and inspired punishments for those two and several of their cabinet members. Only Mo Mowlem had any earned respect. She died way before her time. Blair was frightened she might usurp him and happenstance ensured that never happened.

I get it, personally or whatever, but has there ever been any forensic analysis or political analysis or economic analysis for the reasons for some of those weird moves? Any economists or 'think tanks,' or that precious "Chatham House," (ignore the 'rules' this time. Ha) ever came up with a good, rational explanation? It seemed, and still does, weird. To broadcast intention to sell at, or about, a price- in advance? And so MUCH?

[Yorkshire pud]

I get it, personally or whatever, but has there ever been any forensic analysis or political analysis or economic analysis for the reasons for some of those weird moves? Any economists or 'think tanks,' or that precious "Chatham House," (ignore the 'rules' this time. Ha) ever came up with a good, rational explanation? It seemed, and still does, weird. To broadcast intention to sell at, or about, a price- in advance? And so MUCH?

Reason? Brown was an idiot. I have no idea what possessed him to sell the gold. No doubt he had/has a reason, but I won't be convinced.

[21st Century Man]

Big surprise!  :

Well, at least you'll have something to complain about when nothing gets done. Maybe people really do get just what they deserve.   

Is there something wrong about preserving integrity? That is exactly what Sessions is doing.  Sorry you don't agree.

[albrecht]

Reason? Brown was an idiot. I have no idea what possessed him to sell the gold. No doubt he had/has a reason, but I won't be convinced.

I just find it hard to believe that the UK would operate like some backwater African Commonwealth with regard to a deal of that magnitude. But, I guess, I'm wrong?

[Yorkshire pud]

I just find it hard to believe that the UK would operate like some backwater African Commonwealth with regard to a deal of that magnitude. But, I guess, I'm wrong?

Brown was the Chancellor of the exchequer. His first decision was to make the Bank of England completely autonomous from the government (Currency control), which was universally well received. And like Trump has absolved himself from answering for the US military, Brown absolved himself from any B of E screw ups, so they had to present good reasons for interest changes, policy etc.

But I've still no idea why he sold the gold. Blair pulled a blinder and gifted the Labour leadership (and by default at the time PM) to Brown just as the slump of 2007 and 2008 took hold. Brown carried the flack (Because it was his fiscal policies previously that contributed) and realised he'd been given a poisoned chalice as Blair lapped up very lucrative after dinner speech gigs and being an advisor to less than pleasant totalitarian regimes.

[albrecht]

Brown was the Chancellor of the exchequer. His first decision was to make the Bank of England completely autonomous from the government (Currency control), which was universally well received. And like Trump has absolved himself from answering for the US military, Brown absolved himself from any B of E screw ups, so they had to present good reasons for interest changes, policy etc.

But I've still no idea why he sold the gold. Blair pulled a blinder and gifted the Labour leadership (and by default at the time PM) to Brown just as the slump of 2007 and 2008 took hold. Brown carried the flack (Because it was his fiscal policies previously that contributed) and realised he'd been given a poisoned chalice as Blair lapped up very lucrative after dinner speech gigs and being an advisor to less than pleasant totalitarian regimes.

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/banknotes/Pages/about/scottish_northernireland.aspx
Is this why I've been told that the Scots pounds would not be as acceptable down in London, (this was years ago before this 2009 reform? I never had a problem. Except by friends/colleagues who would make fun, I guess?)

[Yorkshire pud]

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/banknotes/Pages/about/scottish_northernireland.aspx
Is this why I've been told that the Scots pounds would not be as acceptable down in London, (this was years ago before this 2009 reform? I never had a problem. Except by friends/colleagues who would make fun, I guess?)

Some places won't accept Scottish notes; Contrary to popular belief there is no legal obligation to do so. Any merchant can refuse to sell anything for any reason. I don't agree with refusing the currency but some do. Less of a problem in the very north of England.

[albrecht]

Some places won't accept Scottish notes; Contrary to popular belief there is no legal obligation to do so. Any merchant can refuse to sell anything for any reason. I don't agree with refusing the currency but some do. Less of a problem in the very north of England.

Wow. That's what I was told but didn't believe it. Nice. I agree that every merchant should reserve the right to refuse service to anyone, but we have laws/court-opinions against it. 
So, is this only for currency (non-English) or for any reason (I've seen stuff about 'football colors' etc.) Could one refuse service to a Muzzie, Pole, Russian oligarch, Middle-Eastern 'royal' for example? "Sorry Sir, you cannot buy my football team." "Sorry, Sheik but we refuse service to you at this establishment." "Sorry, but my pipes can only be fixed by Irish workers, Mr.Polanski, etc." "Disregard that order Dr. Paki- this operation at the NHS can only be done by Dr. Smith." Would be a great way to take the country back! (kidding?)

[Dr. MD MD]

Is there something wrong about preserving integrity? That is exactly what Sessions is doing.  Sorry you don't agree.

You think this "investigation" has integrity?! 

You should've just voted for Hillary. 

[Dr. MD MD]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcrprphGzXg

[21st Century Man]

You think this "investigation" has integrity?! 

You should've just voted for Hillary. 

I think the investigation is stupid but with that said Sessions was involved in the campaign and because of that he is compromised.  It is like the situation where Kagan should have recused herself in the Obamacare case.  She was involved in the creation of Obamacare so she should not have been involved in the judgement of the case. I expect every side to live up to high standards and it disappoints me when they don't.

[Dr. MD MD]

I think the investigation is stupid but with that said Sessions was involved in the campaign and because of that he is compromised.  It is like the situation where Kagan should have recused herself in the Obamacare case.  She was involved in the creation of Obamacare so she should not have been involved in the judgement of the case. I expect every side to live up to high standards and it disappoints me when they don't.

Doesn't it strike you as more than a little odd that despite winning back all levels of government the Republicans are kowtowing to the Democrats like there's nothing they can do about it? 

SHUT THIS FUCKING WASTE OF MONEY DOWN! YOU LOST DEMS! START DEALING WITH IT IN A MORE CONSTRUCTIVE MANNER! 

[Dr. MD MD]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6SI0QVTgZs

[albrecht]

I think the investigation is stupid but with that said Sessions was involved in the campaign and because of that he is compromised.  It is like the situation where Kagan should have recused herself in the Obamacare case.  She was involved in the creation of Obamacare so she should not have been involved in the judgement of the case. I expect every side to live up to high standards and it disappoints me when they don't.

I agree, for the most part, but, unfortunately, it is not a civics or Phil101 or Sunday School, though I wish more who have them. In dealing with actors that take a "whatever it takes," "slow, 'one step-forward, two-step back,' and fundamentalist thinking you cannot "debate," at least much but need to take action. And I mean civil, legal action (for now, at least here, etc.) The Republicans have all branches and won't move. Due to fundamentalist or 'deep state' ideas. "Unless perfect, not good." Or "protect my job and way-it-is." "You disagree with on A so I will be disgree with you on C even though we both agree on B, and the vote is on B." Not Acceptable. Same old stuff because the Left (now primarily Democrat) will compromise, and accept small-changes and compromise to an ultimate goal. "Not Good," to use a catch-phrase of somebody. What 'they' (whether Rep Party or Trump or whatever) needs to do is like Reagan and others do some stuff. Not just "wish for the past" but do it and advance as not a "past" agenda but a even better future using the past freedoms as impetuous.  In this case some what "looks like positive law" but really is just restoring real law, order, and government (and culture.) Get rid of everything they can do by fiat (various agencies, former orders/memorandums, illegals, political hires,) cut budgets, cut taxes, cut international agreements and foreign aid/funding (when in OUR Nation's interest.) And IGNORE the press or treat it as a dead deal- but don't focus on this aspect (as Trump seems to do.) Go after new media. Get some more, hopefully, Justice(s,) appointed and do everything to get those. I'm, generally, for gridlock Federally. But, maybe, in this case, they need to get their act together.

[21st Century Man]

Doesn't it strike you as more than a little odd that despite winning back all levels of government the Republicans are kowtowing to the Democrats like there's nothing they can do about it?  

SHUT THIS FUCKING WASTE OF MONEY DOWN! YOU LOST DEMS! START DEALING WITH IT IN A MORE CONSTRUCTIVE MANNER! 

It pisses me off to no end though I don't view Sessions as a wimp.  McConnell, Ryan and many other Republican politicians are just that. Wimps. Sessions has done more to enact Trump's agenda than anyone else in the cabinet.  He's tough on sanctuary cities and enforces the law.  I think his fight against pot is a waste of time and money but no one's perfect.

[PB the Deplorable]

Doesn't it strike you as more than a little odd that despite winning back all levels of government the Republicans are kowtowing to the Democrats like there's nothing they can do about it? 

SHUT THIS FUCKING WASTE OF MONEY DOWN! YOU LOST DEMS! START DEALING WITH IT IN A MORE CONSTRUCTIVE MANNER! 

The only way to deal with this is to begin investigating every single accusation made against every Democrat from the Clinton Administration on.  Where either the statute of limitations has not expired, or where it has but the issue is of importance to the nation. 

I would get all the ducks in a row - background, subpoenas, interview targets - then begin without announcing them to the media, very low key, one a day - one after another - and let the Party leadership understand it won't stop until the nonsense going on against Trump stops.  Completely stops.  There are enough scandals and questions of impropriety to roll out a new investigation a day every single day for two full presidential terms.  Start with the most damaging, lowest hanging fruit.  Then sit back, let the FBI do their jobs, and focus on the agenda he ran on.

Nothing illegal, dishonest, or unethical in investigating questionable and possibly illegal activity.  Much, if not all of it is what honest journalists doing their jobs would have been looking into and reporting anyway, instead of helping to conceal.

Or I guess he can just sit there bewildered and ineffective for the rest of his term, tweeting out lame-ass half-baked foolishness

[chefist]

LOL...who will be the first on the Left to call these boys "Hitler Youth"?



https://youtu.be/Lch4Bql6Baw

[Dr. MD MD]

The only way to deal with this is to begin investigating every single accusation made against every Democrat from the Clinton Administration on.  Where either the statute of limitations has not expired, or where it has but the issue is of importance to the nation. 

I would get all the ducks in a row - background, subpoenas, interview targets - then begin without announcing them to the media, very low key, one a day - one after another - and let the Party leadership understand it won't stop until the nonsense going on against Trump stops.  Completely stops.  There are enough scandals and questions of impropriety to roll out a new investigation a day every single day for two full presidential terms.  Start with the most damaging, lowest hanging fruit.  Then sit back, let the FBI do their jobs, and focus on the agenda he ran on.

Nothing illegal, dishonest, or unethical in investigating questionable and possibly illegal activity.  Much, if not all of it is what honest journalists doing their jobs would have been looking into and reporting anyway, instead of helping to conceal.

Or I guess he can just sit there bewildered and ineffective for the rest of his term, tweeting out lame-ass half-baked foolishness

I'm starting to think this is why Chaffetz really quit. He realized that there really are untouchables and that the investigation that really needed to happen (into the Clintons and the Obama admin.) never will. It's too bad. He seemed like a decent and honorable man. :

[PB the Deplorable]

It pisses me off to no end though I don't view Sessions as a wimp.  McConnell, Ryan and many other Republican politicians are just that. Wimps. Sessions has done more to enact Trump's agenda than anyone else in the cabinet.  He's tough on sanctuary cities and enforces the law.  I think his fight against pot is a waste of time and money but no one's perfect.

Sessions should have never recused himself.  What good did appeasing the Ds do?  How many times do we need to learn appeasement does not work and is always counterproductive?  Always.  There is nothing here, so obviously he isn't involved.  So, no reason to recuse.  Fuck the Democrats and what they want - they are out of power, rightfully so, and have produced nothing on this to date. 

Recusing himself started the process where the next person in line - Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein - became the Attorney General office's point man on this issue, and either caved to pressure from the Ds or just plain intentionally backstabbed Trump, in taking the step of appointing a special prosecutor.

That should have never happened, and it's Session's fault for recusing himself.  Special Prosecutor Mueller is an old friend of Comey's, and has hired a bunch of high powered Democrat prosecutors.  He should not have been picked.  He should have ''recused himself'' as a friend of Comeys.  He should be fired, the Special Prosecutor's office shut down, and Sessions should ''un-recuse'' himself, and reclaim his position.

I thought Sessions had more sense than this.  What a clown show.

[albrecht]

LOL...who will be the first on the Left to call these boys "Hitler Youth"?



https://youtu.be/Lch4Bql6Baw

Oh they have been for years. But, I agree, even though they have accepted female packleaders, homosexual and LBGTUQUI as official stance, and non-god, or pledges to country even, stances in recent years by various changes or "packs" or policy or lack thereof....(not that all changes are bad but it proves you can never appease the left....)

[albrecht]

Sessions should have never recused himself.  What good did appeasing the Ds do?  How many times do we need to learn appeasement does not work and is always counterproductive?  Always.  There is nothing here, so obviously he isn't involved.  So, no reason to recuse.  Fuck the Democrats and what they want - they are out of power, rightfully so, and have produced nothing on this to date. 

Recusing himself started the process where the next person in line - Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein - became the Attorney General office's point man on this issue, and either caved to pressure from the Ds or just plain intentionally backstabbed Trump, in taking the step of appointing a special prosecutor.

That should have never happened, and it's Session's fault for recusing himself.  Special Prosecutor Mueller is an old friend of Comey's, and has hired a bunch of high powered Democrat prosecutors.  He should not have been picked.  He should have ''recused himself'' as a friend of Comeys.  He should be fired, the Special Prosecutor's office shut down, and Sessions should ''un-recuse'' himself, and reclaim his position.

I thought Sessions had more sense than this.  What a clown show.

Sessions should be a Thurmond. But he aint. (For good or ill, on either, at least some will take a stand and follow through for himself what his constituents stand for, or on principle.) Not that I'm comparing the "views" by either but the follow-up.