Ex-President Donald Trump

It began on Sunday morning when Mr. Trump, posting on Twitter, accused Mr. Corker of deciding not to run for re-election because he “didn’t have the guts.” Mr. Corker shot back in his own tweet: “It’s a shame the White House has become an adult day care center. Someone obviously missed their shift this morning.”



The senator, Mr. Trump said, had “begged” for his endorsement. “I said ‘NO’ and he dropped out (said he could not win without my endorsement),” the president wrote. He also said that Mr. Corker had asked to be secretary of state. “I said ‘NO THANKS,’” he wrote.
Mr. Corker flatly disputed that account, saying Mr. Trump had urged him to run again, and promised to endorse him if he did. But the exchange laid bare a deeper rift: The senator views Mr. Trump as given to irresponsible outbursts — a political novice who has failed to make the transition from show business.



Mr. Trump poses such an acute risk, the senator said, that a coterie of senior administration officials must protect him from his own instincts. “I know for a fact that every single day at the White House, it’s a situation of trying to contain him,” Mr. Corker said in a telephone interview.



The deeply personal back-and-forth will almost certainly rupture what had been a friendship with a fellow real estate developer turned elected official, one of the few genuine relationships Mr. Trump had developed on Capitol Hill. Still, even as he leveled his stinging accusations, Mr. Corker repeatedly said on Sunday that he liked Mr. Trump, until now an occasional golf partner, and wished him “no harm.”
The White House did not respond to a request for comment on Mr. Corker’s remarks.

Mr. Trump’s feud with Mr. Corker is particularly perilous given that the president has little margin for error as he tries to pass a landmark overhaul of the tax code — his best, and perhaps last, hope of producing a major legislative achievement this year.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/08/...tion=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage

 

Trump's popularity is slipping in rural America: poll

Trump's popularity is slipping in rural America: poll
John Wilson, 70, at the Morgan County Fair in McConnelsville, Ohio. REUTERS/Tim Reid
(Reuters) - Outside the Morgan County fair in McConnelsville, in a rural swath of Ohio that fervently backed U.S. President Donald Trump in last year’s election, ticket seller John Wilson quietly counts off a handful of disappointments with the man he helped elect.

The 70-year-old retired banker said he is unhappy with infighting and turnover in the White House. He does not like Trump’s penchant for traveling to his personal golf resorts. He wishes the president would do more to fix the healthcare system, and he worries that Trump might back down from his promise to force illegal immigrants out of the country.

“Every president makes mistakes,” Wilson said. “But if you add one on top of one, on top of another one, on top of another, there’s just a limit.”

Trump, who inspired millions of supporters last year in places like Morgan County, has been losing his grip on rural America.

According to the Reuters/Ipsos daily tracking poll, the Republican president’s popularity is eroding in small towns and rural communities where 15 percent of the country’s population lives. The poll of more than 15,000 adults in “non-metro” areas shows that they are now as likely to disapprove of Trump as they are to approve of him.

In September, 47 percent of people in non-metro areas approved of Trump while 47 percent disapproved. That is down from Trump’s first four weeks in office, when 55 percent said they approved of the president while 39 percent disapproved.

The poll found that Trump has lost support in rural areas among men, whites and people who never went to college. He lost support with rural Republicans and rural voters who supported him on Election Day.

And while Trump still gets relatively high marks in the poll for his handling of the economy and national security, rural Americans are increasingly unhappy with Trump’s record on immigration, a central part of his presidential campaign.

Forty-seven percent of rural Americans said in September they approved of the president’s handling of immigration, down from 56 percent during his first month in office.

Poll respondents who were interviewed by Reuters gave different reasons for their dissatisfaction with the president on immigration.

A few said they are tired of waiting for Trump to make good on his promise to build a wall along America’s southern border, while others said they were uncomfortable with his administration’s efforts to restrict travel into the United States.

“There should be some sort of compromise between a free flow of people over the border and something that’s more controlled,” said Drew Carlson, 19, of Warrensburg, Missouri, who took the poll.

But Trump’s “constant fixation on deportation is a little bit unsettling to me.”

The Trump administration would not comment about the Reuters/Ipsos poll.

To be sure, Trump is still much more popular in rural America than he is elsewhere.

Since he took office, “I like him less, but I support him more,” said Robert Cody, 87, a retired chemical engineer from Bartlesville, Oklahoma who took the poll.

Cody said that Trump may rankle some people with the way he talks and tweets, but it is a small price to pay for a president who will fight to strip away government regulations and strengthen the border.

DROPPING OFF THE SCREEN
When Trump called the election a ”last shot“ for the struggling coal industry and when he called for protecting the nation’s southern border with a “big, fat, beautiful wall”, he was speaking directly to rural America, said David Swenson, an economist at Iowa State University.

“Feelings of resentment and deprivation have pervaded a lot of these places,” Swenson said. “And here comes a candidate (Trump) who’s offering simplistic answers” to issues that concern them.

Rural Americans responded by supporting Trump over Democratic rival Hillary Clinton by 26 percentage points during the election, an advantage that helped tip the balance in battleground states, such as Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, where Trump won by less than 1 percentage point.

But after 10 months, many are still waiting to see concrete changes that could make life easier in rural America, said Karl Stauber, who runs a private economic development agency serving a patchwork of manufacturing communities in south central Virginia.

“Rural people are more cynical about the federal government than people in general are,” Stauber said. “They’ve heard so many promises, and they’ve not seen much done.”

Despite all the talk of bringing manufacturing jobs back, Stauber said he has not seen any companies which have relocated to his region, or anyone expand their workforce, due to new federal policies.

“It just seems like we’ve dropped off the screen,” he said.

According to the poll, Trump’s overall popularity has dropped gradually, and for different reasons, this year.

Rural Americans were increasingly unhappy with Trump’s handling of healthcare in March and April after he lobbied for a Republican plan to overhaul Obamacare and cut coverage for millions of Americans.

In May and June, they were more critical of Trump’s ability to carry out U.S. foreign policy, and they gave him lower marks for “the way he treats people like me.”

In August, they were increasingly unhappy with “the effort he’s making to unify the country” after he blamed “both sides” for the violence in Charlottesville, Virginia, in which a suspected white nationalist drove his car into a crowd of anti-racist demonstrators.

The Reuters/Ipsos poll was conducted online in English across the United States. It asked people to rate the president’s performance and the results were filtered for people who lived in zip codes that fell within counties designated as “non-metro” by the federal government.

The poll combined the results of “non-metro” respondents into nine, four-week periods. Each period included between 1,300 and 2,000 responses and had a credibility interval, a measure of accuracy, of 3 percentage points.

Reporting by Chris Kahn and Tim Reid; Editing by Jonathan Oatis

 

Mueller’s A-team of top investigators and attorneys has reportedly begun researching just how “complete” Trump’s pardon power really is, and whether he could pre-emptively pardon his family members and close associates. Specifically, the special prosecutor’s top legal counsel, Michael Dreeben, is looking into past presidential pardons to determine what restrictions exist, according to a Bloomberg report published Tuesday.

Dreeben is venturing into uncharted territory. As Mueller’s investigation was metastasizing at the end of July, The Washington Post reported that Trump had begun asking his advisers and legal team about his ability to pardon aides, associates, family members, and even himself—questions Dreeben is likely seeking the answers to himself. “While there has been a lot of speculation over the past months, the language about the pardon power in the Constitution is very broad and the unusual circumstances commentators (and now Dreeben) are considering [have] never happened before,”Renato Mariotti, a former federal prosecutor, wrote on Twitter. “Mueller and Dreeben are likely planning their legal argument in advance as well as plotting out next steps in case the President issues pardons that could otherwise hinder the investigation.”


https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/10/robert-mueller-donald-trump-pardon-power

​

 

Kelly and Mattis discussed literally tackling Trump in the event he ‘lunges for the nuclear football’: report
Elizabeth Preza
New York Magazine contributing editor Gabriel Sherman on Tuesday reported on a remarkable conversation he had with a senior Republican official, who described conversations Donald Trump’s chief of staff Gen. John Kelly and defense secretary James Mattis have had about “physically [restraining] the president” in the event he “[lunges] for the nuclear football.”

Sherman was discussing the growing concern in the West Wing over Trump’s temperament, particularly as the president continues to escalate feuds with prominent Republicans like Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) while simultaneously setting the United States “on the path to World War III.”

“A conversation I had with a very prominent Republican today, who literally was saying that they imagine Gen. Kelly and Secretary Mattis have had conversations that if Trump lunged for the nuclear football, what would they do?” Sherman told NBC’s Chris Hayes. “Would they tackle him? I mean literally, physically restrain him from putting the country at perilous risk.”

“That is the kind of situation we’re in,” Sherman added.

Pressed by Hayes to explain the sources’ relationship to—and direct knowledge of—the Trump administration, Sherman explained, “these are the conversation they have, on very good authority, are taking place inside the White House.”

 

​

 

[h=1]“I Hate Everyone in the White House!”: Trump Seethes as Advisers Fear the President Is “Unraveling”[/h]In recent days, I’ve spoken with a half dozen prominent Republicans and Trump advisers, and they all describe a White House in crisis as advisers struggle to contain a president that seems to be increasingly unfocused and consumed by dark moods.

At first it sounded like hyperbole, the escalation of a Twitter war. But now it’s clear that Bob Corker’s remarkable New York Timesinterview—in which the Republican senator described the White House as “adult day care” and warned Trump could start World War III—was an inflection point in the Trump presidency. It brought into the open what several people close to the president have recently told me in private: that Trump is “unstable,” “losing a step,” and “unraveling.”

The conversation among some of the president’s longtime confidantes, along with the character of some of the leaks emerging from the White House has shifted. There’s a new level of concern. NBC News published a report that Trump shocked his national security team when he called for a nearly tenfold increase in the country’s nuclear arsenal during a briefing this summer. One Trump adviser confirmed to me it was after this meeting disbanded that Secretary of State Rex Tillerson called Trump a “moron.”In recent days, I spoke with a half dozen prominent Republicans and Trump advisers, and they all describe a White House in crisis as advisers struggle to contain a president who seems to be increasingly unfocused and consumed by dark moods. Trump’s ire is being fueled by his stalled legislative agenda and, to a surprising degree, by his decision last month to back the losing candidate Luther Strange in the Alabama Republican primary. “Alabama was a huge blow to his psyche,” a person close to Trump said. “He saw the cult of personality was broken.”

Even before Corker’s remarks, some West Wing advisers were worried that Trump’s behavior could cause the Cabinet to take extraordinary Constitutional measures to remove him from office. Several months ago, according to two sources with knowledge of the conversation, former chief strategist Steve Bannontold Trump that the risk to his presidency wasn’t impeachment, but the 25th Amendment—the provision by which a majority of the Cabinet can vote to remove the president. When Bannon mentioned the 25th Amendment, Trump said, “What’s that?” According to a source, Bannon has told people he thinks Trump has only a 30 percent chance of making it the full term.



https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/10/donald-trump-is-unraveling-white-house-advisers

 

172​

 

400 lawyers and $100 million dollars spent???LOL Not even close.
And there have been no grand jury indictment leaks. There was simply an announcement last week the first indictment would happen Monday.

What's really going to roast Trump's ass is the fact that former Trump campaign staffer George Papadopoulos has admitted he lied to the FBI about Russia contacts and is supposedly about to make a deal behind closed doors about the Trump team's knowledge of Russian interference and efforts to help Trump win the election.

The Russia scandal is very easy to understand and breaks down like this; Russia tried on several different occasions to contact the Trump campaign team offering to help aid in his defeat of HRC. This included offering the Trump team HRC's ILLEGALLY hacked emails and to launch a cyber-disinformation campaign against HRC.
In exchange, Russia wanted Trump to lift sanctions placed on them under Obama for their activities in Georgia and Ukraine.

WHen you're running for POTUS, you can't knowingly condone a foreign government stealing information from your political opponents, or use social media to spread REAL 'fake news' as a form of propaganda.

But no, stupid ass Trump allowed an adversarial nation to basically run his presidential campaign, which is by definition treason.

Stay tuned, but I'm almost 100% sure Trump is going to end up resigning before he ever risks being impeached.

As for this BS uranium conspiracy theory, I'll let Joy Reid break it down for you.
2:20 minute vid.

 

He definitely has them trained well as they totally stick to the script.

 

Nearly everything in that dossier has proven to be true. In fact political pundits have speculated Mueller is using it as his template for investigation into Trump's dealings with Russia.
BTW there's nothing illegal about the Uranium deal. Also, none of that uranium has left the country, nor will it EVER. It's basically just a stock. We never sold or transferred uranium to Russia.

As for Tony Podesta, the brother of top Clinton aide John Podesta, resigning his lobbying firm, I'll paraphrase what I read on twitter today;

Let's see here: - Tony Podesta resigns - 1 point for Team Trump - Gates Indicted - 10 points Team Anti-Trump - Paul Manafort Indicted - 100 points Team Anti-Trump - George Papadopoulos Flipped - 1000 points for Team Anti-Trump Team Anti-Trump = 1110 points Team Trump = 1 point

 

Well said, John Oliver dug into this Uranium 1 non-conspiracy, pay for play, nonsense earlier...

start at 10:17

 

Contacting Russians is not illegal. Obama and Clinton did it..lying to the FBI is what's illegal. Still nothing to do with our President. You will be sorely dissapointed. The last Administration that you woefully and ignorantly defended as being wonderful, will be exposed through all this. It's going to backfire.

 

Crow is best served cold. I hope you're got an empty stomach.
NO offense, but you're really clueless on this entire issue, and that's based on conversations I've had with former Trump supporters IRL.

Too bad you didn't know a thing about Trump until he ran for POTUS.

On one hand you recognize the criminality of someone hacking a celeb's cloud account and posting their nude photos online, yet for some reason you don't understand how it's criminal for the Trump campaign to solicit and accept hacked HRC emails from the Russians.

Makes no sense.

 

​

 

Please tell me this is a meme and not for real???!!!lol

The Trumps are just so pathetic. They hate the Obamas so much because they wanna BE the Obamas.

 

At this point, all your blowhard accusations amount to a big fat zero.

You're the one('s) perpetually dry-heaving...my stomach is fine. Your extreme hate and disgusting vitriol for our President before ever giving him one millisecond of a chance is palpable for reasons other than because he's Donald Trump. Like l have said, with you lot, the Presidency began and ended with Obama. You can't stand the fact that Hillary lost on her own and that an old White man is the President (spare me your no job-having Bernie Sandals excuse.)

Trump did not "solicit and accept Hillary's emails", Wikileaks posted Podesta's emails on their website showing among other things, collusion with Corporate donors for Goverment access as well as concern over Obama lying to the country about knowledge of Hillary's illegal Server.
You cannot compare that to hacking naked pictures of women and plastering them for nothing more than voyeuristic sexual 'pleasure'.

 

And this is why you libs are a national joke. You believe and swallow this shit like a hooker giving blow.
Do you honestly think for one millisecond your lot would not have gone on a hysterical 21 day outrage meltdown if she had said that? How can you even believe it, let alone post the garbage as fact.



Excerpts: "By our own example we must teach children to be good stewards of the world they will inherit...We must remember that they are watching and listening. .?.?. As adults we are not merely responsible. We are accountable...No child should ever feel hungry, stalked, frightened, terrorized, bullied, isolated or afraid, with nowhere to turn,...We must teach each child the values of empathy .?.?. kindness, mindfulness, integrity and leadership which can only be taught by example."

 

Joy who? Please. She broke nothing down. That's surface bullshit we already knew. Let's wait for the FBI Informant now cleared to speak, shall we?

“The Justice Department on Wednesday night released a former FBI informant from a confidentiality agreement, allowing him to testify before Congress about what he witnessed while undercover about the Russian nuclear industry’s efforts to win favorable decisions during the Obama administration,”

*******
George Pap is/was a low-rung junior consultant who went nowhere with his personal attempt to find dirt on Hillary, and was hired only as an energy consultant.

Papadopoulos LinkedIn page says: that he has participated in business, policy and oil and gas conferences in the United States, Europe and the Middle East. He says the State Department nominated him as "a top five finalist" to represent the United States in 2011 at the emerging leaders UNESCO forum in Paris.

Btw AB..what of the fake Dossier is true, since you declared it was? I'll wait..

 

I unignored Bliss long enough to see she's becoming unhinged. The dominoes are beginning to fall for Trump. It took 23 months for the Watergate break-in to reach Nixon so settle in, it's gonna be a long one. Meanwhile keep deflecting to "libs." LMAO!

 

DOJ lifts gag order on FBI source in Russian uranium deal
By Mark Moore

October 26, 2017 | 9:25am


UPI
The Justice Department lifted a gag order that will allow a former FBI informant speak to congressional panels investigating an Obama-era deal in which a Russian-backed company was able to get control of a significant amount of the United States uranium supply.

A DOJ spokesman late Wednesday cleared the way for the informant to disclose to the committees “any information or documents he has concerning alleged corruption or bribery involving transactions in the uranium market, including but not limited to anything related to Vadim Mikerin, Rosatom, Tenex, Uranium One, or the Clinton Foundation.”

SEE ALSO

Obama administration knew about Russian bribery plot before uranium deal

GOP lawmakers launched probes this week into the 2010 deal, which was struck when Hillary Clinton served as former President Barack Obama’s secretary of state, but said a key informant couldn’t testify because of a confidentiality agreement with the DOJ.


The man, who hasn’t been identified by name, went undercover for the FBI for five years to get information on Russia’s efforts to gain a share of the US atomic energy market.

Congressional investigators want to know more about how Russian energy giant Rosatom acquired Canadian mining company Uranium One, which has a mine in Wyoming, and then was able to get control of 20 percent of America’s uranium stockpile.

The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, which is composed of officials from several government agencies including the State Department that was headed at the time by Clinton, signed off on the deal.

News reports in 2015 revealed that former President Bill Clinton was paid $500,000 from a Kremlin-linked bank for a 2010 speech and the Clinton Foundation received millions in charitable donations around the time of the Uranium One deal...

More:
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/...ian-nuclear-bribery-cleared-to-testify-before