Christie isn't the only one sayin' it...

 

A judge in Washington, D.C., dropped part of a lawsuit against former President Trump's 2017 Inaugural Committee by ruling the nonprofit had not misused funds by spending $1 million on ballrooms and meeting spaces at Trump's D.C. hotel.

Friday seemed a successful day in court for former President Donald Trump – with one lawsuit against him withdrawn by the complainant and another dismissed by a judge, according to reports.

In the first case, Summer Zervos, a former contestant on "The Apprentice," ended her 2017 lawsuit against Trump in which she accused the show’s former host of sexually assaulting her.

In the second case, a New York state judge dismissed a 2019 lawsuit brought by former Trump attorney Michael Cohen, in which Cohen sought $1.9 million from Trump to cover legal expenses.

 

These are actually concentration camps where Uighurs are beaten tortured killed and young girts are raped to death as kind of a sport.

'Uighurs like being in those camps': Nancy Pelosi reveals what Trump told her on China's human rights

David Edwards
December 02, 2021



Nancy Pelosi (Fox News/screen grab)

President Donald Trump suggested that Uighurs "like" being in Chinese concentration camps, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) revealed on Thursday.

The Speaker made the allegation after a reporter asked if the House of Representatives would vote on a Senate bill designed to prevent forced labor in China's Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region.

"I take second place to no one in Congress in my criticism of China's human rights record," Pelosi said. "I've even spoken to President Trump when he was at G20 in Japan a few years ago. I said, 'Will you go up to the president of China and tell him that on the House and in the Senate, Democrats and Republicans have very serious concerns about what President Xi is doing to the Uighurs?'"

"The next day [Trump] called me and said, 'I talked to the president and he says the Uighurs like being in those camps,'" she recalled. "That's what autocrats say."

Pelosi pointed out that House Democrats are pushing for a "stronger bill" than the Senate has passed to protect the Uighurs.

Watch the video below from C-SPAN.



https://www.rawstory.com/nancy-pelosy-donald-trump-uighurs/

 

So, lets see; a wrong story propaganda piece posted here by stumbler alleging what President Trump told his mortal opponent, Nancy Antoinette (who is probably the most corrupt member of Congress) in a private conversation a few years ago.

Nope. Shooters fact check says bullshit layered upon bullshit.

rent free
tax free

 

This is another thing that is just hilarious. For all his four years Trump declared "infrastructure week" so many times it became a running joke. To the point President Biden even used it declaring "finally its infrastructure week" and the whole room cracked up when his infrastructure bill passed. And Trump will never be able to get over that and is willing to destroy Republicans for voting for Biden's infrastructure bill.

Trump wanted Biden's infrastructure bill to fail so much he was working the phones to stop any Republican votes







A Washington Post profile on Alaska Rep. Don Young (R) revealed that former President Donald Trump was so desperate to kill the infrastructure bill under President Joe Biden that he was working to phones to stop the funding.

Trump spent the majority of his presidency attempting to pass his own version of the bill, with enthusiastic support from Democrats. The idea of "infrastructure week" became a punchline during the presidency, wrote the New York Times in 2019. Trump then torpedoed his years-long effort for an infrastructure package in 2019 because the Democrats were investigating him for his call with Ukraine where he demanded a "favor" for aide.

It was previously reported that Trump was working to kill any Democratic negotiations with Republicans. Trump then began publicly criticizing Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) for even entertaining the idea of the vote.

A Politico report in July said that Republicans were privately encouraging Trump to tone down his opposition and even consider supporting the effort, which would have allowed him an opportunity to take partial credit in getting the conversation rolling.


But as the vote came close, Trump begged with his allies to kill the effort, allowing Democrats to argue that Trump wants the country to fail. Trump has teased that he may run for president in 2024 and if elected he could have attempted an "infrastructure week" again, so it's unclear if that was his thinking.

"Rep. Don Young knew the call would not end well, as the Alaska Republican forcefully rejected Donald Trump’s plea to oppose the more than $1 trillion infrastructure legislation," the Post report said. "How did the former president take the news?"

“Not well,” Young told the Post, noting that the good news is that there wasn't any shouting. “I think his policy is just so good. Just shut up — that’s all he has to do. He’s not going to. I know that.”

Only 13 Republicans in the House were willing to support the bill, and Trump has pledged to punish them with primary challenges and an effort to bring them down in 2022. The 13 Republicans, however, seem to be taking the bet that by the midterm election Trump will forget about his opposition and be onto another fight.



Meanwhile, however, the Republican Party is in crisis as Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) desperately clings to his only hope of becoming the Speaker of the House. While the GOP majority leader was able to control his caucus with donations from lobbyists, PACS and corporations, many of those members, like Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), can raise their own funds and don't need the help from the GOP leadership. If she can help raise more money for the caucus, she could ultimately end up being more powerful than McCarthy next year.

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-infrastructure-biden-republican-primary/

 

Thats right, biden was calling his pig bill an "infrastructure" bill.
Want to know what's actually in it?
What's in the $1.2T bipartisan infrastructure bill? | Fox Business
Transportation: $312 billion
A majority of the new spending in the bill goes directly toward repairing the country's aging transportation system. The White House has said that 173,000 total miles of America’s highways and major roads and 45,000 bridges are in poor condition.

The bill also includes a substantial investment in bridges – the Biden team said the $40 billion set aside in new funds for bridge repair, replacement and rehabilitation is the single largest dedicated investment since the construction of the interstate highway system.
Here's the real question; Americans pay gas tax, road tax, license tax, use tax on autos and all manner of taxes when we own a vehicle. These taxes are supposed to fund new roads and maintain existing roads and bridges. So, what did we pay for in the past, and what the hell are we paying for now? One thing we know is a new transit rail line into Hunters Point in San Francisco. You know, the former naval base Nancy and her family and friends are developing.

• Roads, bridges, major projects: $109 billion
• Safety: $11 billion
• Public transit: $49 billion
• Passenger and freight rail: $66 billion
• Electric vehicles: $7.5 billion
• Electric buses/transit: $7.5 billion
• Reconnecting communities: $1 billion
• Airports: $25 billion
• Ports and waterways: $16 billion
• Infrastructure financing: $20 billion

Other infrastructure: $266 billion
The bipartisan infrastructure bill also seeks to address a lack of broadband infrastructure with a $65 billion investment to ensure most Americans have access to reliable, high-speed internet. The bill will also bolster the power grid to prevent against outages that have become commonplace in recent years with a $65 billion investment.
just gotta ask; which of these programs will benefit despicable party hacks? Its a damn sure bet average Americans won't benefit from any of this pork.
Another substantial chunk of the funding – $55 billion – will go toward water and wastewater infrastructure, including $15 billion to replace lead pipes and $10 billion to address contamination from manufactured chemicals (polyfluoroalkyl substances).

• Water: $55 billion
• Broadband: $65 billion
• Environmental remediation: $21 billion
• Power, including grid authority: $73 billion
• Western water storage: $5 billion
• Resilience: $47 billion

"Democracy requires compromise," a White House fact sheet said. "The historic Bipartisan Infrastructure Framework will make life better for millions of Americans, create a generation of good-paying union jobs and economic growth, and position the United States to win the 21st century, including on many of the key technologies needed to combat the climate crisis."

How will the measure be paid for?
One of the biggest sticking points was how to pay for the measure. The White House said in a fact sheet that it would be funded with $250 billion in unused coronavirus relief funds, $53 billion in unused unemployment insurance and sales from the strategic petroleum reserve, among other measures.

Here are all of the revenue sources listed by the White House:
See there? they want to use unemployment insurance program integrity funds; you know, the "dedicated" funds that supposedly only fund unemployment benefits and unemployment programs. and lets not forget bidens huge tax cut for politicians and other millionaires, the increase in SALT deductions. The SALT deductions Trump limited that pissed off despicables so bad.

• Strengthen tax enforcement when it comes to cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin
• Unemployment insurance program integrity
• Redirect unused unemployment insurance relief funds
• Repurpose unused relief funds from 2020 COVID-19 emergency relief legislation
• State and local investment in broadband infrastructure
• Allow states to sell or purchase unused toll credits for infrastructure
• Extend expiring customs user fees
• Reinstate Superfund fees for chemicals
• 5G spectrum auction proceeds
• Extend mandatory sequester
• Strategic petroleum reserve sale
• Public-private partnerships, private activity bonds, direct pay bonds and asset recycling for infrastructure investment
• Macroeconomic impact of infrastructure investment

Bunch of smoke and mirrors is what all this really is.

 

A CIA Report Shows Trump Abandoned His Duty as Commander in Chief
The agency had to trick Trump into paying attention to intelligence.

• 
  David Corn
  Washington, DC, Bureau ChiefBio | Follow

Donald Trump listens as incoming Central Intelligence Agency director Gina Haspel speaks during her May 2018 swearing-in ceremony at CIA headquarters.Evan Vucci/AP

Fight disinformation. Get a daily recap of the facts that matter. Sign up for the free Mother Jones newsletter.
The CIA is too polite to say this directly, but it has issued a report that shows that Donald Trump, while obsessing over his efforts to overturn the 2020 election, abandoned one of his primary duties as president: to stay fully informed about potential threats to the nation.

This indictment comes from the agency’s Center for the Study of Intelligence, which produces scholarly papers and histories related to intelligence. Many (but not all) are publicly released, and they can be academic and a bit esoteric. There’s “How We Identified the Technical Problems of Early Soviet Nuclear Submarines,” “Scandinavians as Agents,” or “The Metals Traces Test.” But the CSI also generates work relevant to current intelligence issues—and that includes the question of what happens when a president doesn’t care about intelligence.


Days ago, the CSI released a revised edition of Getting to Know the President: Intelligence Briefings of Presidential Candidates and Presidents-Elect, 1952-2016. And what makes this edition new is that it includes a chapter on the 45th president that is titled, “Donald J. Trump—A Unique Challenge.”

The book is authored by John Helgerson, a veteran CIA intelligence officer who served as the agency’s inspector general in the George W. Bush administration. During those years, he investigated the CIA’s use of torture and wrote a classified report (released years later) criticizing the agency for these interrogation practices and noting the CIA might have violated international law. And now Helgerson, in a gentle way, is warning the public about a man who served in the White House and who might once again try to occupy the Oval Office.

Helgerson, one can tell, bends over backward to be fair to the former guy. He notes that during some intelligence briefings, Trump—as presidential candidate, president-elect, and president—listened attentively and was generally respectful toward the briefers dispatched by the intelligence community. But the bottom line is that Trump didn’t pay close attention to intelligence. This is no newsflash. After all, Trump once said that he was his own best foreign policy adviser “because I have a very good brain.”

In the first paragraph of the 37-page chapter, Helgerson notes that Trump, “by his own account, did not often read.” And that included the President’s Daily Brief, the report drawn up each day—with immense effort from the intelligence community—for the chief executive that summarizes need-to-know national security matters. For some presidents, the PDB is delivered each day with a briefing from an intelligence officer. Trump only wanted briefings about twice a week. It was less during the presidential transition.




Ted Gistaro, a career CIA analyst who was Trump’s primary briefer during the 2016 campaign, the transition, and the first years of the Trump presidency, told Helgerson that Trump did not pay much attention to the PDB: “He touched it. He doesn’t really read anything.” As Helgerson puts it, “Trump’s style was to listen to the key points, discuss them with some care, then lead the discussion to related issues and others further afield.” That sounds like a nice way of saying Trump couldn’t focus on the most important matters. James Clapper, who was director of national intelligence during the Trump transition, is quoted in the chapter recalling that Trump was prone to “fly off on tangents; there might be eight or nine minutes of real intelligence in an hour’s discussion.” He added, Trump “was ‘fact-free’—evidence doesn’t cut it with him.” The best way of reaching Trump was to show him maps, graphics, and satellite imagery—material that he found exciting.

During one briefing, Gistaro recalled, Trump asked him why there was information in the PDB that had not appeared in the media. Gistaro explained an obvious point to Trump: Sometimes obscure international developments that escape notice in the press can have significant implications for US security interests.

Without stating this explicitly, this new CIA publication indicates that Trump was highly uncurious about a highly sensitive matter: covert actions. These are the super-secret operations mounted by the CIA and other agencies that go far beyond intelligence collection. They could be paramilitary operations abroad, penetrations of terrorist groups, or sabotage of the cyber or nuclear facilities of an adversary. During the transition, “Trump received no briefings from CIA on covert action programs,” the chapter says. And he asked for none in the first weeks of his administration. (Vice President Mike Pence and soon-to-be-fired national security adviser Michael Flynn did receive such briefings.) This is rather odd. This activity tends to need presidential authorization, and it involves the most critical national security matters. Helgerson does not provide an explanation for Trump’s apparent lack of interest. And while the CIA prepared books with information on the several dozen world leaders that Trump would be talking to during the transition, it was “never clear exactly how much use Trump made of this information.”

Helgerson chronicles one of the most sensitive briefings presented to Trump. On January 6, 2017, two weeks before he took office, Trump was briefed by senior intelligence officers on the intelligence community’s assessment that Russia had attacked the 2016 election to help Trump. The intelligence, he writes, “was so solid that no one on the Trump team disputed the findings or conclusions of the report.” Much of the intelligence had come in via technical collection—covert eavesdropping and communications intercepts. Helgerson doesn’t point out that even though Trump seemed to accept the intelligence findings, he would for years afterward claim the Russia scandal was a hoax and even publicly state that he took Vladimir Putin at his word when the Russian leader told him Moscow had not intervened. (It was at the end of this particular briefing that then-FBI director James Comey informed Trump about the existence of the Steele dossier and its unconfirmed allegations that Trump had directly colluded with Russia and that the Kremlin possessed compromising material on him—which enraged Trump and caused him to believe the intelligence community was out to destroy him.)

Advertise with Mother Jones
The chapter says that in his first weeks in office, Trump took the PDB briefings—which he received two or three times a week—”seriously.” They lasted between 40 and 60 minutes. But according to Helgerson, Trump did not look at the PDB each day. He would just ask the briefer to fill him in on what he missed between the briefings. That means Trump would go for days without checking on the PDB material. Yet he monitored cable television news assiduously.

The PDBs were not long; at first, they usually contained three one-page items describing a new development overseas and brief updates on ongoing crises. Later in Trump’s presidency, items were allowed to extend to a second page. “The goal was to make the PDB shorter and tighter, with declarative sentences and no feature-length pieces,” Helgerson writes. In early 2017, Mother Jones reported that a memo was sent to intelligence analysts instructing them to keep material for the PDB short and free of nuance. By contrast, Obama voraciously read a longer PDB—typically including four articles each up to two pages and accompanying graphics, maps, video, and imagery—six days a week, using a computer tablet, and had a briefing most days. Once a week he was presented a longer article on a thematic or big-picture item. The chapter on Obama in Helgerson’s book is titled, “A Careful Reader.”

Beth Sanner, a top CIA analyst who replaced Gistaro as Trump’s briefer midway through Trump’s term, said that after about two years, the briefings settled into a pattern: two sessions a week, each about 45 minutes long. That’s not a lot of time for a president to be informed about the world and threats to the United States. The chapter states:

Gistaro had adopted the practice of providing the president with a one-page outline of the topics he would cover at the session along with a set of graphics. Sanner continued that practice and found that the twice-a-week schedule provided the time to script a briefing with graphics that anchored what Sanner called “story-telling” about the topics. Sanner noted that while Trump did not read the PDB, he read or had seen other things that he would bring into the conversation.

Story-telling? To keep Trump’s interest about the most pressing matters of the day, Sanner and her team had to come up with stories. They essentially had to trick the president into paying attention.


e
There’s nothing shocking in this report about Trump. But it does highlight his failings as president—and his brazen negligence of national security. According to this chapter, Sanner last briefed Trump before he headed to his private club in Palm Beach for the holidays on December 23, 2020. The briefings were to resume on January 6. But no more briefings occurred. Helgerson doesn’t dwell on this, but his book shows that for the last month of his presidency, Trump received no briefing from the intelligence community. That is—or should be—shocking. Presuming Trump stuck to his habit of not reading the PDB, he spent his final weeks in office, while falsely claiming the election had been stolen from him and plotting to thwart the Constitution, ignoring intelligence information and neglecting his obligation as commander in chief to remain up to speed on critical national security matters.

No doubt, Trump and his devotees will dismiss any derogatory information that emerges from the so-called Deep State. But Helgerson’s report is a harsh accusation based on first-hand accounts. It presents yet another example of Trump placing his own interests over those of the nation. And with Trump pondering a 2024 run for the White House, this chapter serves a fundamental purpose of intelligence: it provides a serious threat assessment.

https://www.motherjones.com/politic...ump-abandoned-his-duty-as-commander-in-chief/

 

Rent free
Tax free

 

We need a vaccine for TDS.

 

I just happened to catch a mistake were I accidentally posted this on the wrong thread.

 

tax free
rent free

 

Hmp... the hack fucks are giving credit to Trump without saying the mans name...as I dont remember hearing the Crime Boss Biden and the Ho (half cracker 3.0) Administration passing an annual budget yet.. or did they?

The U.S. budget deficit totaled $356.4 billion in the first two months of the budget year, down 17% from the same period a year ago thanks to a sharp jump in government revenues that offset a smaller increase in spending.

In its monthly budget report, the Treasury Department said Friday that the government’s deficit in October and November was $72.9 billion below the deficit in the same two months last year. The government’s budget year starts on Oct. 1.

The improvement was due to government revenues rising at a faster pace than spending over the past two months.

For the October-November period, tax revenues totaled $565.1 billion, 23.6% above revenues in the same period last year and a record for the first two months of the budget year.

 

and Biden is going to borrow to go on a spending spree and fuck up the budget and increase the debt, only a dumacrat could do that!
BRING BACK TRUMP! lol

 

Whether or not Trump runs, or gets elected is not the issue this country has.

The real issue is knowing who is in Congress.

Congress today has 95 or so hack fuck anti-U.S. representatives sitting up on Capital Hill....that is very significant...those anti U.S. hack fucks are the new voice of the Democrat party...make no mistake about that.

Congress creates law...Congress spends money...Congress controls every aspect of your life and lifestyle

Congress has only a small handful of true Constitutional Conservative style Representatives ..about 9...that's all there is.

Congress is the problem we have today...not Crime Boss Biden and the Ho (half cracker 3.0)...

 

The people who know Trump best. Some who have been with him even before he started his first 100 days.

Former Trump admin officials band together to block their former boss from holding office again: report

Sky Palma
January 06, 2022






There's a group of former Trump administration officials who are making moves to ensure Donald Trump never runs for office again, POLITICO reports.

According to former White House press secretary and chief of staff to the first lady, Stephanie Grisham, the group plans to meet next week where they will discuss how to “try and stop” former President Donald Trump and the “kind of violence and rhetoric that has been talked about and continues to divide our country.”



“I think that there were a few of us who, again, have been sitting back watching him continue to manipulate and spread this big lie and continue to harm our country,” Grisham told CNN. “And [we] started some informal chats and then started throwing around ideas of what we could do, how we could formalize it."

As to the members of the group, POLITICO confirmed it consists of former Department of Homeland Security chief of staff Miles Taylor, who was revealed to be the author of “Anonymous”, former national security official Olivia Troye, and Trump’s former communications director, Anthony Scaramucci.

Read more at POLITICO and watch below.



https://www.rawstory.com/former-tru...former-boss-from-holding-office-again-report/

 

When Trump opened his hotel in Washington there was an effort to prevent him from selling alcoholic beverages. According to the law of Washington, DC one cannot operate a bar in the District unless one is "of good moral character." Trump obviously fails that criterion, so he should have been restricted to selling soft drinks.

 

But you're mistaken. He obviously was found to be of good moral character. doggo, you need to get over your TDS. real bad.

 

Its fun to watch the hypocrites on the forum sometimes.
Remember when stumbler and his minions shouted and twirled about how Stephanie Grisham, when she was the press spokesman for the Arizona Republican caucus, revoked some press credentials cause she didn't like the stories some of them were reporting? And remember when they spewed shit about her being paid by the State of Arizona while working for Trump before he won the election? And remember when she violated the Hatch Act promoting Trump on her twitter account?
That was when the safe space started getting hard to maintain.

Anyway;
Now that she's written a "tell all" book about her time with the Trump administration and is promoting it she's the fair haired child of the despicables.

No honor among liars and thieves, eh?

 

I missed all that because I put him on ignore <after replacing the mouse scroll wheel three times>
Now I've had the same mouse for 3 years now. He's staying on ignore. LOL