Trump II

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Negotiations/mediation/diplomacy worked well so far:

[Alan Klein]

or accept the Swiss offer to mediate. Doris Leuthard  looks much better than Dennis Rodman.


http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/switzerland-mediate-north-korea-crisis-1.4274409

Les, I wish it would be that easy.  Frankly, negotiations are over.  Either we'll live with a nuclear NK.  Or there will be war. 

Right now, Trump is blustering a lot.  But American servicemen's dependents have not been pulled out of South Korea, something I suspect would happen before an American attack.  There would be a troop buildup and re-positioning of our navies.  (Maybe it's happening secretly.)  I don't think war will happen with Congress declaring it unless NK attacks.  I don't think they're stupid. 

What I'm afraid of that the bluster and warlike speech against America from the NK side reminds me of Saddam's trying to convince his enemies that he still has WMD's, which he didn't.  But he convinced the world, or at least Bush,  and we attacked.  Something like that might happen in Korea if we think he will be a danger to us.  On the other hand, I really don't think he's crazy.  He wants the nukes as he see them as insurance to preserve against an attack.  But he's not going to attack So Korea or America as that would be suicide.  He's seen the picture of Saddam's hanging and Kaddafi's shooting. 

[LesPalenik]

Les, I wish it would be that easy.  Frankly, negotiations are over.  Either we'll live with a nuclear NK.  Or there will be war. 

Right now, Trump is blustering a lot.  But American servicemen's dependents have not been pulled out of South Korea, something I suspect would happen before an American attack.  There would be a troop buildup and re-positioning of our navies.  (Maybe it's happening secretly.)  I don't think war will happen with Congress declaring it unless NK attacks.  I don't think they're stupid. 

What I'm afraid of that the bluster and warlike speech against America from the NK side reminds me of Saddam's trying to convince his enemies that he still has WMD's, which he didn't.  But he convinced the world, or at least Bush,  and we attacked.  Something like that might happen in Korea if we think he will be a danger to us.  On the other hand, I really don't think he's crazy.  He wants the nukes as he see them as insurance to preserve against an attack.  But he's not going to attack So Korea or America as that would be suicide.  He's seen the picture of Saddam's hanging and Kaddafi's shooting.

I agree that negotiations won't work, especially not by the pretty Swiss president.  I quoted it only because it was the breaking news.
Similarly, I don't think that he is deterred by the examples of Saddam or Gaddafi. And definitely not by those Tomahawk missiles sent to Syria if they were meant to scare him.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Back to illegal immigration... this is actually brilliant:

They don’t pay taxes. They circumvent our laws. They get free stuff from the government... They come here, take thousands of our jobs... They are part of a shadow economy that sucks billions of dollars out of the United States every year... Many of these people should be in prison, and the government is looking the other way...

https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/sentiment-building-to-deport-nations-billionaires

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Negotiations/mediation/diplomacy worked well so far:

Not sure why you used an image with Bill Clinton in his second year of office, but he did announce an agreement that prevented North Korea from withdrawing from the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT). North Korea committed to freezing its illicit plutonium weapons program in exchange for aid. The NTP lasted from 1985 till 2002 when, under President George W. Bush, North Korea effectively withdrew from it.

Here is a more complete overview of all the talks that took place over time:
Chronology of U.S.-North Korean Nuclear and Missile Diplomacy
https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/dprkchron

Cheers,
Bart

[Alan Klein]

I agree that negotiations won't work, especially not by the pretty Swiss president.  I quoted it only because it was the breaking news.
Similarly, I don't think that he is deterred by the examples of Saddam or Gaddafi. And definitely not by those Tomahawk missiles sent to Syria if they were meant to scare him.

The Tomahawks were just Trump making his bones to the world, not NK in particular.  Frankly, NK feels their nukes will prevent an attack and protect their regime.  They may be right.  But it could backfire if we feel threatened enough that we attack because of their nukes.  Even f we do nothing, Japan might develop nukes.  Wouldn't that be something?  Anti-nuke Japan, the only country ever to have A-bombs used against them, could easily build them.  Then what?

No one wants war.  I don't think NK does, we don't, So Korea, even China.  War would interrupt their plans to be the richest country as trade could stop.  It'll be a disaster for the world.

[Alan Klein]

Not sure why you used an image with Bill Clinton in his second year of office, but he did announce an agreement that prevented North Korea from withdrawing from the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT). North Korea committed to freezing its illicit plutonium weapons program in exchange for aid. The NTP lasted from 1985 till 2002 when, under President George W. Bush, North Korea effectively withdrew from it.

Here is a more complete overview of all the talks that took place over time:
Chronology of U.S.-North Korean Nuclear and Missile Diplomacy
https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/dprkchron

Cheers,
Bart

But Clinton's diplomacy didn't work, nor did Bush's or Obama's.  While we were giving the North Korean aid, they were secretly working on developing nuclear technology. 

Meanwhile, some of that technology was probably transferred back and forth to Iran who we have a treaty with that won't stop them from developing nukes either.  We'll be facing a nuclear Iran in a few years with the same situation as we have now with NK.   

[Robert Roaldi]

There is a lot of talk about North Korea attacking. Who are they going to attack and for what purpose? I haven't read anything that clearly describes NK's end-game or at least what they're trying to accomplish. Can someone point me to a credible analysis of NK's goal in all this.

Is South Korea ramping up their military preparedness? Is China? Is Japan? Is Australia? Shouldn't they be if this threat is credible?

If hostilities do break out, there will probably be a race to get in there and capture the NK scientists and engineers who worked on the missiles and nuclear arsenal (if there is one). If they have developed sophisticated weaponry with their limited resources, it probably means that they have really good personnel. I am not being facetious in any way. They might have the next Wernher von Braun in their employ.

[OmerV]

Back to illegal immigration... this is actually brilliant:

https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/sentiment-building-to-deport-nations-billionaires

HA! Thanks for that. It's good to leave this thread with a smile.

[Alan Klein]

US has regained foothold as leader in East Asia.
Countries like Taiwan, So Korea, Philippines, Japan, and others who had been pulling away from America towards China because of Obama's disengagement in the Pacific have gone back to America for support.  This even includes Vietnam who despite their war with the US, fear the Chinese even more historically.  They see America helping them against the Chinese. 

Trump and NK's nukes are turning the Pacific topsy-turvy. 

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/foreign-policy/349113-us-has-regained-foothold-as-leader-in-east-asia

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... a credible analysis of NK's goal in all this...

A credible analysis of a lunatic's mind!?

Even non-crazy leadership makes fatal mistakes by attacking first, without considering several steps ahead. I am sure Japan regrets Pearl Harbor to this day.

[texshooter]

I just learned something:

Taxing whites because they are rich is not equitable enough.  Social justice demands that we tax the rich because they are white.

 What we need is a white privilege tax according to Seattle's progressive City Council, which proposed a race tax on diet soda because white people drink diet more than black people do. The mayor felt it was the best way to fight "white privileged institutionalized racism." 

http://redalertpolitics.com/2017/05/07/seattles-mayor-tried-fight-white-privilege-soda-tax-backfired/



Do you see where we're headed? An affirmative action tax code.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Donald Trump 'lashed out' at new chief of staff John Kelly amid rising tension in White House
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/president-donald-trump-lashes-out-chief-of-staff-john-kelly-marine-corps-general-white-house-a7927181.html

QUOTE   "Donald Trump has reportedly lashed out against his new chief of staff John Kelly following reports the pair were on a "collision course" due to tensions in the White House.

The US president gave the retired Marine Corps general a dressing down in an incident seen by a number of administration staff, it is claimed.

Mr Trump's temper is said to have flared after advisers suggested he should stop politicising normal issues of government following another blistering attack on the media at a rally in Phoenix, Arizona.

Sources told the New York Times that Mr Kelly, 67, reacted to the outburst calmly, but said he later told colleagues he had never been spoken to in such a way during 35 years of military service and would not put up with similar treatment again."


Oh my. Trouble in Paradise ...

Cheers,
Bart

[Schewe]

The fact is over 100 intercepts of people connected to Trump were transcribed and given to Obama through his Adviser Susan Rice.

And the fact is, it was Congressman Devin Nunes that created the controversy regarding National Security Adviser Susan Rice unmasking Americans. You know why? Because White House aids "discovered" the records that Susan Rice reported as part of her job of National Security Adviser and the White House wanted a way to disclose this information.

And guess what happened? That whole thing landed Nunes in hot water for violations of law and House Rules...

And, I can point you to articles that backup the facts and make your claim that Susan Rice did anything wrong is bullshit.

First, there's this...

Top Republican: Controversy surrounding Susan Rice unmasking was 'created' by Devin Nunes

The chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee said Friday that the controversy surrounding whether former National Security Adviser Susan Rice politicized intelligence about President Donald Trump and his associates "was all created" by House Intelligence Committee chairman Devin Nunes.

Remember the breathless press release Nunes gave after meeting with Trump at the White House? The "info" he gave Trump was the same information White Aids told Nunes about...so why was a congressman telling Trump something the White House already knew? Nunes was being used as a stooge to launder the sensitive information. And that got him in trouble...

Ethics panel opens investigation into Nunes

“The disclosure of this information by Chairman Nunes was evidently intended to try to lend some credence to President Trump’ claims that former President Obama had Trump Tower wiretapped — claims that have been repeatedly been shown to be absolutely baseless, as confirmed by FBI Director Comey in his testimony before Chairman Nunes’ own committee,” MoveOn.org’s ethics complaint read.

“In his quest to assist President Trump politically, however, it appears that Chairman Nunes has committed serious violations of law and House Rules.

So, that whole story about Rice legally unmasking Americans and supposedly leaking the information and making it available to Obama for political use is, well, it's bullshit Alan.

So, scratch that off the list...what other surveillance do you allege Obama had done? Carter Page? The FBI had a FISA warrant...who else? Come on, clearly you think Trump was right when he claimed Obama was eavesdropping on him. Nobody else does–not even the people in his administration like the FBI and DOJ. But somehow, both you and Trump are convinced it's real and not a rightwing conspiracy theory...

[Alan Klein]

...So, that whole story about Rice legally unmasking Americans and supposedly leaking the information and making it available to Obama for political use is, well, it's bullshit Alan.

So, scratch that off the list...what other surveillance do you allege Obama had done? Carter Page? The FBI had a FISA warrant...who else? Come on, clearly you think Trump was right when he claimed Obama was eavesdropping on him. Nobody else does–not even the people in his administration like the FBI and DOJ. But somehow, both you and Trump are convinced it's real and not a rightwing conspiracy theory...

No one said the original surveillance wasn't instituted by the NSA as part of their surveilling Russians calls.  It's what happened with that information afterwards that was political.  The fact is over 100 intercepts of people connected to Trump were transcribed and given to Obama through his Adviser Susan Rice.  Their looking smacks of politics.  I'm sure they were waiting and hoping for Trump to "collude". 

But in the end, all that monitoring of Trump organization phone calls with the Russians and the transcripts of them given to Obama, there was no collusion.  Had Obama found something, it would have been released before the election to damage Trump.   

[Schewe]

It's what happened with that information afterwards that was political.  The fact is over 100 intercepts of people connected to Trump were transcribed and given to Obama through his Adviser Susan Rice.  Their looking smacks of politics.

Their looking "smacks of politics"? Bullshit. You have no idea what the transcripts showed and you have no proof that anything done with them was anything other that national security related–which is why Rice requested the unmasking and logged each request making sure there was a record of the request–which is how the White House aids "discovered" what Rice did and brought in Congressman Devin Nunes in a feeble attempt at laundering the intel.

And, you have no clue whether or not anything that was in the transcripts proved or disproved Trump or his campaign colluding with the Russians...as far as I know, nothing about those transcripts have been released publicly other than their existence which was leaked by Nunes who is not being investigated by the House for ethics violations...

[Alan Klein]

Their looking "smacks of politics"? Bullshit. You have no idea what the transcripts showed and you have no proof that anything done with them was anything other that national security related–which is why Rice requested the unmasking and logged each request making sure there was a record of the request–which is how the White House aids "discovered" what Rice did and brought in Congressman Devin Nunes in a feeble attempt at laundering the intel.

And, you have no clue whether or not anything that was in the transcripts proved or disproved Trump or his campaign colluding with the Russians...as far as I know, nothing about those transcripts have been released publicly other than their existence which was leaked by Nunes who is not being investigated by the House for ethics violations...

There is proof.  Both Director of the FBI Comey and Director of National Intelligence Clapper said there were no evidence of collusion.  Both of these men had seen the transcripts of all the surveillance "tapping" of phone calls.  Have you forgotten that Comey told this to Trump privately that he wasn't being investigated for colluding with the Russians.  But, Comey would not release his statement publicly as requested by President Trump who then fired him for not doing that? 

[Schewe]

There is proof.  Both Director of the FBI Comey and Director of National Intelligence Clapper said there were no evidence of collusion.

No they didn't...Clapper said he wasn't aware of any collusion when he left office but when he left office he didn't even know that the FBI was investigating the Russians collusion so ya gotta pretty much rule out Clapper because his job

Did Obama's director of national intelligence say there is no evidence of Trump-Russian collusion?

ANALYSIS: On May 8, Clapper testified under oath before the Senate Judiciary Committee in Congress. He reaffirmed statements he made in a March interview on NBC's "Meet the Press."

In the "Meet the Press" interview, he was asked if there were "improper contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian officials.” Clapper responded that there was no evidence of that "included in our report," referring to the Intelligence Community Assessment written about the 2016 presidential election and filed jointly by the NSA, FBI and CIA before Clapper left his post.

Host Chuck Todd asked him to clarify, "I understand that, but does it exist?"

Clapper responded, "Not to my knowledge."

During his May 8 appearance before Congress, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, asked Clapper if this was still accurate.

Clapper said it was. However, Clapper also said he wasn't always kept in the loop with the FBI. “It was my practice to defer to the FBI director ... on whether, when and to what extent they would inform me about such investigations,” he said.

--snip--

He addressed a question Graham posed about why Clapper wasn't aware of activities inside the FBI investigation.

“It’s not surprising or abnormal that I would not have known about the investigation, or more even importantly, the content of that investigation,” Clapper said. “So I don’t know if there was collusion or not. I don’t know if there was evidence of collusion or not, nor should I have.”

So, you just gotta let that one go Alan...Clapper didn't say what you claim he said...pants on fire dude...

Now, as to Comey, the former FBI Director, care to show a quote where Comes said there was no collusion? I certainly don't remember Comey saying anything like that...from his testimony:

No, Republicans, James Comey Did Not Say President Trump Is in the Clear on Russia

The most telling exchange came when Republican Senator Tom Cotton asked Comey whether Trump personally colluded with Russia. This is a different question than whether the FBI was investigating Trump personally at the time the two spoke, and it produced a very different answer:

Cotton: Do you think Donald Trump colluded with Russia?

Comey: That’s a question I don’t think I should answer in an opening setting. As I said, when I left, we did not have an investigation focused on President Trump. But that’s a question that will be answered by the investigation, I think.

I take that to mean he wouldn't say whether or not he (Comes) thought there was collusion, only that the investigation–which is still ongoing–will answer that question and that Trump personally was not a target of the investigation–YET.

So, again, I call pants of fire dude...Comey never said what you claim he said.

[texshooter]

no evidence of collusion.

No evidence of collusion only proves we should keep investigating.

[Schewe]

Last Week Was Trump's Worst Legislative Week Ever, And Congress Wasn't Even In Session

Donald Trump last week suffered enormous setbacks on his three highest legislative priorities and Congress wasn't even in session.

Each of these losses took away most or all of the leverage Trump is going to need to get Congress to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, fund his wall and do something on taxes. As a result, Trump's legislative agenda, which was already in deep trouble before last week, is now in a complete shambles.

Trump's biggest problem occurred when the parliamentarian ruled on Friday that the Senate only had until September 30 to use the reconciliation instructions from the fiscal 2017 budget resolution to consider ACA repeal and replace legislation. While this appears to be the kind of ruling only a budget process geek like me could love, it actually has enormous political implications for Trump: As of October 1, the Senate will need 60 votes rather than a simple majority to pass the health care change the White House has been promising and demanding.

And there aren't 60 votes in the Senate to do anything on health care.

Heck, the Trumpster loses ground with congress even when they aren't in session...so much for his promise of repeal and replace on day one, huh?