The Trump Card...

[Turtle]

18 Executive Orders, 3 TV interviews, 3 speeches, a joint news conferences with a world leader, 7 phone calls with other world leaders, 1 trip to Philly, 0 waves from the plane door, met with union leaders and with CEOs, 1 war with Mexico, 87 twitstorms, and 1 butthurt mainstream media. That's one helluva week.

To the press, of course, his first week as just a chaotic hot mess, a disaster, out of control and a danger to life as we know it.

 

[muttly]

So much winning. I'm exhausted.

 

[Turtle]

The pace is pretty insane, comparatively speaking. In the past, presidents do something, and then everyone inside the beltway has a week or 10 days to figure it out, and get on the same page with their plans of attack. With this guy, while they're trying to wrap their heads around what he just did, he just did 4 more things. Wait. What?

He's like Aroldis Chapman... "Well, I don't know. It sounded like a strike."

 

[Turtle]

If you missed the Sunday shows, these two video are well worth watching. In the first one, Martha Raddatz is determined to frame the narrative the way she wants it, and Sean Spicer gives her a WWE-worthy smackdown. When she asked the same question a third time, each time phrased differently in order to get Spicer to give the answer she wants, when he snaps back with "I just said it, twice!" I thought she was gonna cry again. I nearly peed my pants.

In the second video, Kellyanne Conway is pretty routine (and informative) for the first 12 minutes or so, but after that, when Chris Wallace asks her if she understands how offended the press is when Steve Bannon tells them to shut up and listen, she lets loose and just bitch slaps the mainstream media.

 

[Grizzly]

Personally I think the restructuring of the White House National Security Council is more eye opening than the immigration ban.

 

[muttly]

Martha Raddatz denied that she cried,(on election night) but I dunno it looked like she did.

 

[Moot]

Kellyanne had a great comment near the end: "Biased (media) coverage is easy to detect. Incomplete coverage is impossible to detect." Maybe not impossible, but certainly difficult. Especially if your source for news is very limited.

 

[Worn Out Manager]

Finally, something for Expediters

Sent from my hand-held Etch-A- Sketch

 

[Yowpuggy]

President Trump, we know what you're up to - CNN
President Trump, we know what you're up to - CNN.com


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums

 

[OntarioVanMan]

President Trump, we know what you're up to - CNN
President Trump, we know what you're up to - CNN.com


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums

Now that was "fair and balanced" article.....LOL

 

[Grizzly]

President Trump, we know what you're up to - CNN
President Trump, we know what you're up to - CNN.com


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums

Now that was "fair and balanced" article.....LOL

Let me throw something out here ....

I grew up in NYC. I've been reading about Trump & his antics since I was literally a kid. I think Donald Trump is a major buffoon at times. My family & relatives in NYC think he's a complete boob. I mocked him & Hillary throughout the campaign, mostly because I think politics is purely entertainment. Most politicians are followers, not leaders.

Now I've spent the majority of his first week in office defending him. He's trying to get some things accomplished. The uproar over the immigration ban is absurd! The CNN article posted ends by asking Trump to govern all 325M American citizens. But the video starts with a statement saying Trump has now barred 134M people, from 7 different countries from possibly entering the US. So what!? Are we as a country responsible to govern every citizen of the US or every citizen of the world? Should every person on this planet be given the same rights in America as US citizens? Should every person on this planet be granted access to immigrate to our country?

 

[OntarioVanMan]

funny thing..NO ONE is barred....there is a 90 to 120 stay of any movement of people from them countries....heck a regular Christian could be inconvienced if born in one of them countries...

 

[Pilgrim]

In the second video, Kellyanne Conway is pretty routine (and informative) for the first 12 minutes or so, but after that, when Chris Wallace asks her if she understands how offended the press is when Steve Bannon tells them to shut up and listen, she lets loose and just bitch slaps the mainstream media.

Missed the first one but did watch FNS and nearly jumped up and cheered when Conway took Wallace to the woodshed over his faux outrage caused by Trump's "disrespect" of the MSM. This animosity between the Trump White House and the media will likely not go away any time soon considering the humiliation his victory imposed on them, along with the exposure of their bias towards Washington establishment politicians. It's refreshing to see a POTUS that does not put up with the fake news and biased reporting - especially the non-reporting - of news that the MSM has been getting away with for a long time. This no-nonsense attitude had a lot to do with his popularity among the people in flyover country and the unconventional appeal that got him elected.

 

[Turtle]

This animosity between the Trump White House and the media will likely not go away any time soon

Trump wants favorable coverage (who wouldn't?) but I'd be happy with news honestly brokered. Painting the 7 countries as being on the list because Trump doesn't do business there is not just dishonest, it is reckless and irresponsible journalism. The press won't change their tactics unless and until it starts hurting their bottom line.

It's beginning to, though. We all knew that cable news ratings in particular would drop off after the election, as they always do. It's bad for CNN across the board, but among the key news demographics of adults age 25-54, CNN’s post-election content has lost 2 percent of viewers since the same period last year, while MSNBC is up 19 percent and Fox News is up 37 percent. Because CNN is international they can better weather down ratings domestically, for a little while (depending on how stubborn they are) but eventually it will come back to haunt them, especially since AT&T is looking for regulatory approval to acquire CNN's parent Time-Warner.

Remember on the Saturday after the inauguration when Trump Tweeted about Fox News trouncing CNN's ratings? "They were many times higher than FAKE NEWS @CNN" was part of the Tweet. CNN was, like, "Oh yeah? I'll show YOU!" and then Tweeted literally fake news to show they and Fox had the same ratings. They used cumulative numbers from Nielsen Media Research, which measure audience reach (basically, those with cable and satellite subscriptions), while ratings (what Trump, and every media outlet in the country, referred to) measure the average number of people watching a given program. The cumulative are accurate numbers, but they mean exactly zero in terms of ratings. CNN's Chris "It's illegal for you to read the Wikileaks emails" Cuomo doubled down and even included the link to the CNN's press release. After getting called on it by a number of media outlets, and knowing this was a battle that couldn't fool anyone, a few hours later changed their press release to reflect the accurate ratings. Right after that Cuomo deleted his Tweet, since the link in his Tweet showed him to be lying.

 

[davekc]

Typical democrat playbook options. Go for race or religion. They want you to hear "Muslim ban" When it is not that at all. Millions of Muslims in Indonesia and they can come in. Why, because they are not a terrorist state.

 

[Turtle]

Senate Democrats, led by Chuck "Crying My Heart Out Over You" Schumer, today tried twice to rescind Trump's executive order on restricting travel to the United States by (according to CNN) "Muslims and refugees." (except that if you travel from one of the 7 countries, it really doesn't matter if you're Muslim or not).

In his second attempt (I'll get to the first attempt momentarily), Schumer asked that until the travel restriction is lifted and until secretary of state nominee Rex Tillerson explains if he supports the executive order and if he helped in its development, the Senate put off a procedural vote to advance Tillerson's nomination. So he's trying to hold Tillerson's advancement to the full Senate hostage until Trump lifts the ban. This, despite the fact that Tillerson has already testified in plain, comprehensible English that even a New York Liberal can understand, that he did not support a "blanket-type rejection of any group of people."

Democrats, in a breathtaking display of the firm grasp of the obvious, said that statement seemed to contradict Trump's order. But I digress.

All it takes is one objection to Schumer's ridiculous proposal, which came before Schumer even finished with his sentence. The vote to send Tillerson to the full Senate confirmation vote was 56-43, with all but four members of the Democratic caucus voted against it.

As to his first attempt, because again all it takes is one objection, Schumer sought unanimous consent to begin debate on a bill authored by the loverly and honorable Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, which would void the executive order.

In a stunning swag of repeal and replace, Schumer said (no, seriously, he actually said this), "So let's repeal the order and then sit down and discuss a smart, thoughtful, effective way to counter terrorism."

He said, as he dismounted Rainbow, his unicorn, and stepped onto a bed of daisy petals.

 

[xiggi]

Business as usual, they will fight change to the bitter end.

 

[Pilgrim]

In the wake of this "Muslim ban" crisis, wonder how many of the 43 non-banned Muslim dominated countries are stepping up and offering sanctuary to the huddled masses of their brethren being turned away by the US? Not sure what the current data reflects, but as of late 2015 the wealthiest Islamic countries weren't taking any due to various stated reasons, but instead offering financial aid to countries like Lebanon and Jordan. Most simply don't take refugees, period.

The Gulf countries, the wealthiest states among the Arab world, are among the largest donors to Syrian refugees. But they do not take in refugees to their own countries: None of them officially recognize the legal concept of refugeehood.

This is not a specific issue of hostility to Syrian refugees: The six Gulf monarchies have never signed the international conventions on refugee rights and statelessness, which began to be established after World War II.

Why Aren’t Gulf Countries Taking in Syrian Refugees?

Then there's Egypt, whose new military controlled government simply won't put up with them:

...the new military-backed regime is less sympathetic to Syrian migrants many more have been deported. Coinciding with a tide of Egyptian nationalism, Syrians reported being fired from their jobs, detained by police, and harassed by landlords.

Why Some Arabs States Refuse to Accept Syrian Refugees

Maybe the Trump policy isn't so bad after all.

 

[Turtle]

With the Tillerson vote coming Tuesday morning, we might not get much of a show, but I'd really like a few days to see how Trump deals with DOJ AG Sally Yates after she basically flipped him off. And to maybe get an office pool going as to how many days she has.

Her primary objection to the EO ban (wait, that looks bad, EO stands for Executive Order). isn't even a legal one, but an undefined moral one. The DOJ's Office of Legal Council (OLC) is the office that assists the AG's position as legal adviser to all Executive Branch offices, including the President. The Office of Legal Council approved the EO for legality before Trump signed it. The DOJ Civil Division are the lawyers who make the arguments in support of any and all EO's in court. So, the OLC approves the legality of all EOs, and if litigated, the Civil Division argues the support of the EOs.

In ther letter sent to the top lawyers at the Justice Department and to the Civil Division in particular, directing them not to defend the White House's executive order on immigration during her remaining time at the department, she notes all of the above paragraph, and then goes on to say, in effect, I'm going above and beyond all that to do what I want. "In addition, I am responsible for ensuring that the positions we take in court remain consistent with this institution’s solemn obligation to always seek justice and stand for what is right."

The phrase "stand for what is right" is a moral argument, not a legal one.

 

[xiggi]

I think she meant, Stand for what is left.