• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

US Election: 2016

Reminds me of the hate Harper campaign that occurred up here. 

I don't think Trump would do worse than Clinton.  I am kinda looking forward to Trump publicly castigating Trudeau actually.  Maybe he will have the intestinal fortitude to compel all the G7s that don't meet 2% GDP on defence spending to ante up... Maybe not all, just that freeloading northern cousin would do nicely.
 
The Clinton unauthorized server was such an easy target, the Russians obviously decided to look for more lucrative hunting grounds:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russian-government-hackers-penetrated-dnc-stole-opposition-research-on-trump/2016/06/14/cf006cb4-316e-11e6-8ff7-7b6c1998b7a0_story.html

Russian government hackers penetrated DNC, stole opposition research on Trump
Russian goverment hackers penetrated the Democratic National Committee and had access to the DNC network for about a year, but all were expelled earlier in June. (Jhaan Elker/The Washington Post)
By Ellen Nakashima June 14 at 3:09 PM

Russian government hackers penetrated the computer network of the Democratic National Committee and gained access to the entire database of opposition research on GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump, according to committee officials and security experts who responded to the breach.

The intruders so thoroughly compromised the DNC’s system that they also were able to read all email and chat traffic, said DNC officials and the security experts.

The intrusion into the DNC was one of several targeting American political organizations. The networks of presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump were also targeted by Russian spies, as were the computers of some GOP political action committees, U.S. officials said. But details on those cases were not available.

A Russian Embassy spokesman said he had no knowledge of such intrusions.

Some of the hackers had access to the DNC network for about a year, but all were expelled over the past weekend in a major computer cleanup campaign, the committee officials and experts said.

The DNC said that no financial, donor or personal information appears to have been accessed or taken, suggesting that the breach was traditional espionage, not the work of criminal hackers.

The intrusions are an example of Russia’s interest in the U.S. political system and its desire to understand the policies, strengths and weaknesses of a potential future president — much as American spies gather similar information on foreign candidates and leaders.

The depth of the penetration reflects the skill and determination of the United States’ top cyber adversary as Russia goes after strategic targets, from the White House and State Department to political campaign organizations.

“It’s the job of every foreign intelligence service to collect intelligence against their adversaries,” said Shawn Henry, president of CrowdStrike, the cyber firm called in to handle the DNC breach and a former head of the FBI’s cyber division. He noted that it is extremely difficult for a civilian organization to protect itself from a skilled and determined state such as Russia.

“We’re perceived as an adversary of Russia,” he said. “Their job when they wake up every day is to gather intelligence against the policies, practices and strategies of the U.S. government. There are a variety of ways. [Hacking] is one of the more valuable because it gives you a treasure trove of information.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin has spoken favorably about Trump, who has called for better relations with Russia and expressed skepticism about NATO. But unlike Clinton, whom the Russians probably have long had in their spy sights, Trump has not been a politician for very long, so foreign agencies are playing catch-up, analysts say.

“The purpose of such intelligence gathering is to understand the target’s proclivities,” said Robert Deitz, former senior councillor to the CIA director and a former general counsel at the National Security Agency. “Trump’s foreign investments, for example, would be relevant to understanding how he would deal with countries where he has those investments” should he be elected, Deitz said. “They may provide tips for understanding his style of negotiating. In short, this sort of intelligence could be used by Russia, for example, to indicate where it can get away with foreign adventurism.”

Other analysts noted that any dirt dug up in opposition research is likely to be made public anyway. Nonetheless, DNC leadership acted quickly after the intrusion’s discovery to contain the damage.

“The security of our system is critical to our operation and to the confidence of the campaigns and state parties we work with,” said Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.), the DNC chairwoman. “When we discovered the intrusion, we treated this like the serious incident it is and reached out to CrowdStrike immediately. Our team moved as quickly as possible to kick out the intruders and secure our network.”

A Clinton campaign official said, “We have no evidence that our information systems have been compromised.” A spokeswoman for the Trump campaign referred questions to the Secret Service.

DNC leaders were tipped to the hack in late April. Chief executive officer Amy Dacey got a call from her operations chief saying that their information technology team had noticed some unusual network activity.

“It’s never a call any executive wants to get, but the IT team knew something was awry,” Dacey said. And they knew it was serious enough that they wanted experts to investigate.

That evening, she spoke with Michael Sussmann, a DNC lawyer who is a partner with Perkins Coie in Washington. Soon after, Sussmann, a former federal prosecutor who handled computer crime cases, called Henry, whom he has known for many years.

Within 24 hours, CrowdStrike had installed software on the DNC’s computers so that it could analyze data that could indicate who had gained access, when and how.

The firm identified two separate hacker groups, both working for the Russian government, that had infiltrated the network, said Dmitri Alperovitch, CrowdStrike co-founder and chief technology officer. The firm had analyzed other breaches by both groups over the last two years.

One group, which CrowdStrike had dubbed Cozy Bear, had gained access last summer and was monitoring the DNC’s email and chat communications, Alperovitch said.


The other, which the firm had named Fancy Bear, broke into the network in late April and targeted the opposition research files. It was this breach that set off the alarm. The hackers stole two files, Henry said. And they had access to the computers of the entire research staff — an average of about several dozen on any given day.

The computers contained research going back years on Trump. “It’s a huge job” to dig into the dealings of somebody who has never run for office before, Dacey said.

CrowdStrike is not sure how the hackers got in. The firm suspects they may have targeted DNC employees with “spearphishing” emails. These are communications that appear legitimate — often made to look like they came from a colleague or someone trusted — but that contain links or attachments that when clicked on deploy malicious software that enables a hacker to gain access to a computer. “But we don’t have hard evidence,” Alperovitch said.

The two groups did not appear to be working together, Alperovitch said. Fancy Bear is believed to work for the GRU, or Russia’s military intelligence service, he said. CrowdStrike is less sure of whom Cozy Bear works for but thinks it might be the Federal Security Service or FSB, the country’s powerful security agency, which was once headed by Putin.

[How Russian special forces are shaping the fight in Syria]

The lack of coordination is not unusual, he said. “There’s an amazing adversarial relationship” among the Russian intelligence agencies, Alperovitch said. “We have seen them steal assets from one another, refuse to collaborate. They’re all vying for power, to sell Putin on how good they are.”

The two crews have “superb operational tradecraft,” he said. They often use previously unknown software bugs — known as “zero-day” vulnerabilities — to compromise applications. In the DNC’s case, the hackers constantly switched tactics to maintain a stealthy presence inside the network and used built-in Windows tools so that they didn’t have to resort to malicious code that might trigger alerts. “They flew under the radar,” Alperovitch said.

The two groups have hacked government agencies, tech companies, defense contractors, energy and manufacturing firms, and universities in the United States, Canada and Europe as well as in Asia, he said.

Cozy Bear, for instance, compromised the unclassified email systems of the White House, State Department and Joint Chiefs of Staff in 2014, Alperovitch said.

“This is a sophisticated foreign intelligence service with a lot of time, a lot of resources, and is interested in targeting the U.S. political system,” Henry said. He said the DNC was not engaged in a fair fight. “You’ve got ordinary citizens who are doing hand-to-hand combat with trained military officers,” he said. “And that’s an untenable situation.”

Russia has always been a formidable foe in cyberspace, but in the last two years “there’s been a thousand-fold increase in its espionage campaign against the West,” said Alperovitch, who is also a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council. “They feel under siege.”

Western sanctions, imposed after Russia’s annexation of Crimea in Ukraine, have hurt the economy and led the government to increase its theft of intellectual property to limit the impact of import restrictions, he said. And Russia’s growing isolation has increased the need for intelligence to understand and influence political decisions in other countries, he added.

CrowdStrike is continuing the forensic investigation, DNC lawyer Sussmann said. “But at this time, it appears that no financial information or sensitive employee, donor or voter information was accessed by the Russian attackers,” he said.

The firm has installed special software on every computer and server in the network to detect any efforts by the Russian cyber spies to break in again. “When they get kicked out of the system,” Henry predicted, “they’re going to try to come back in.”

Tom Hamburger contributed to this report.
 
:rofl: This is funny on sooooo many levels.

Even some incredible irony given Trumps relationship with Hispanics.

GOP consultant calls Trump 'Cheeto Jesus' in epic tweetstorm
Technically Incorrect: Rick Wilson seems to think Twitter is the only place to get the Republican Party to speak out about its true feelings for its presumptive candidate.


http://www.cnet.com/news/gop-consultant-rick-wilson-calls-trump-cheeto-jesus-in-epic-tweetstorm/

Twitter is now the epicenter of the business of politics.

Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump believes Twitter is one of his great advantages. He fancies himself a sharp tweeter.

Lately, though, there have been mutterings of concern, some of them on Twitter, from his own party about his candidacy.

It seems claiming a judge's heritage makes him biased and then congratulating himself after the Orlando massacre haven't gone down well with senior GOP figures.

They are unable, or merely reluctant, to express their true feelings.

This has riled longtime Republican consultant Rick Wilson. So much so that he unleashed a tweetstorm.

In a 10-tweet barrage on Wednesday, Wilson assailed both Trump and the GOP chieftains.

It began by chastising Republicans for tolerating Trump's antics. He asks how anyone at the Republican National Committee has the "standing to act shocked that Trump is not doing the basics of campaigning?"

Then it got a touch stinky.

"No matter how much you try to act surprised, you own this," Wilson tweeted. "You're covered in his stench."

He had other thoughts, too.

"Your off the record sniping and grumbling is no substitute for moral courage," Wilson tweeted in far fewer than 140 characters. "That's so DC."

There's more, much of it delightfully obscene.

But it's the epithets that really matter, as Trump himself -- creator of "Crooked Hillary" and "Lyin' Ted" and so many more -- will tell you.

Wilson decided to create his own for Trump.

"This weekend, people were lined up hundreds deep to give blood to the victims of Orlando. Your Cheeto Jesus was praising himself."

It will be interesting to see if "Cheeto Jesus" catches on. Can Wilson have enough Twitter-power through his 41,500 followers to get it into the mainstream?

The Trump campaign didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

I feel sure, however, that the candidate will soon take to Twitter to decry this new epithet.
 
Eventually someone is going to have to say enough is enough and get the train wreck back on the rails. Otherwise the GOP can kiss a hell of a lot more than just the White House goodbye.

Trump’s relationship with RNC sours
Tensions flare as the party hires a fired Trump aide and uses vendors linked to #NeverTrump, while fundraising flags.


http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/donald-trump-republican-national-committee-224403

Donald Trump is relying heavily on the Republican Party to bolster his skeletal operation, but his campaign’s relationship with the Republican National Committee is increasingly plagued by distrust, power struggles and strategic differences, according to sources in both camps.

In recent days, RNC Chairman Reince Priebus has privately grumbled that his advice doesn’t seem welcome with Trump, according to one RNC insider. Other party officials have expressed frustration that Trump’s campaign is trying to take too much control over a pair of fundraising committees with the party while adding little to the effort, according to campaign and party officials familiar with the relationship.

While Trump had promised Priebus that he would call two dozen top GOP donors, when RNC chief of staff Katie Walsh recently presented Trump with a list of more than 20 donors, he called only three before stopping, according to two sources familiar with the situation. It’s unclear whether he resumed the donor calls later.

Meanwhile, there’s deep skepticism on Trump’s campaign about the RNC’s commitment to the presumptive GOP nominee, with some campaign officials questioning how hard the RNC is working to help Trump and to raise money for his campaign’s joint committees with the party.

Indeed, faced with suggestions that party leaders are unhappy with Trump’s incendiary rhetoric about the Orlando shooting and the judge presiding over a lawsuit against the candidate and his Trump University, campaign insiders scoffed.

“I don’t think we are going to take a lot of political advice from Priebus,” a campaign official said. “From my perspective, we should not be relying on the RNC for much because I’m not sure they are fully supportive yet,” the campaign official said, adding, “but we hope and expect to soon be on the exact same page.”

The fraught dynamic is a potentially serious liability for an insurgent campaign that has proudly eschewed political infrastructure and is dwarfed by Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s operation, which is expected to raise $1.5 billion or more. The situation is equally problematic for the Republican Party, which typically relies on its presidential candidate to help boost down-ballot candidates, enhance voter data and raise money.

Several Trump allies said their distrust spiked this week when they learned that Rick Wiley, who was fired from the campaign last month, had been spotted in the RNC’s Capitol Hill offices and had participated in a Tuesday RNC conference call.

RNC spokesman Sean Spicer, who over the past few days did not respond to multiple inquiries about Wiley’s new position, declined on Wednesday to answer ninequestions about the party committee’s relationship with the Trump campaign.

On Wednesday, the RNC told The Washington Post that it had retained Wiley as a consultant to help run its national field program — a move it said was done with the blessing of the Trump campaign.

However, three operatives in and around the campaign suggested Wiley’s hiring at the RNC may have been blessed by one faction of the campaign, but that it’s not going over well with many staffers.

One said that it’s being viewed as “a direct f--- you to the campaign.”

Wiley had served as Trump’s national political director. And his fall from grace was partly due to the widespread perception among
Trump’s staff that he was working closely with the RNC and representing himself as the campaign’s official liaison, without the candidate’s blessing.

The Trump campaign would not comment on the record about its relationship with the RNC. One Trump Tower official called it “a great relationship. I work well with everybody over there, and I haven’t heard of anyone who doesn’t have a great relationship with them.”
Major party presidential nominees typically merge their operations with those of their respective parties after securing a nomination, and
it’s not unusual for rifts to emerge during the mergers. But in interviews with more than a dozen Republicans familiar with the relationship between Trump and the RNC, it became apparent that the phenomenon is more pronounced than in past presidential years, despite Trump’s greater reliance on the RNC for basic campaign functions.

In 2012, for instance, Priebus checked in numerous times a day with his party’s nominee, Mitt Romney. And, an RNC insider said that while the chairman does connect with the Trump campaign on a daily basis, it’s less frequent than it was with Romney’s team, and the discussions are more superficial.

A former RNC official who helped the party work with past presidential campaigns said: “Usually, the RNC sees itself as part and parcel of the presidential campaign, and they work hand in glove on budgets and spending. This doesn’t seem to be gelling that way. There’s some resistance there.”

The dissension appears to stem at least partly from the Republican establishment’s distaste for Trump.

Since the billionaire real estate showman dispatched the last of his challengers for the party’s nomination, a handful of RNC staffers have either left the committee or looked for other jobs. That notably includes the official tasked with communicating the party’s message to Hispanics — a demographic group that Trump has repeatedly antagonized with his criticism of undocumented immigrants and his calls for building a wall between Mexico and the United States.

And Trump’s campaign has sought to exert influence over the RNC by signaling its preference that party contracts be withheld from some firms that worked for Trump opponents or on the so-called #NeverTrump movement to block him from the nomination.

One of Wiley’s sins, from the perspective of some on the campaign, was to work on behalf of the campaign on an RNC micro-targeting project in swing states with a firm called TargetPoint Consulting that had been paid at least $156,000 this year by a leading #NeverTrump super PAC. A TargetPoint partner did not respond to a question about whether the firm is still working for the RNC.

But one campaign source said, “People who overtly opposed the Republican nominee should not be making money from the Republican Party.” The source added, “Their duties were seamlessly taken over by other vendors who support the candidate.”

Trump’s efforts to build a relationship with the RNC also have been hindered by the disorganization and infighting that plague his campaign.

When campaign official Michael Caputo late last month reached out to an RNC researcher, asking for material on the Clintons’ Whitewater real estate controversy, he was rebuked by campaign spokeswoman Hope Hicks for contacting the RNC researcher.

“He is still an employee of the RNC, and we need to be sensitive to that until he comes over to our team full-time,” Hicks wrote in an email to Caputo that was obtained by POLITICO.

Trump’s organizational challenges have led to confusion about who was serving as the campaign’s point person to the RNC, a vacuum that Wiley had filled, apparently without official sign-off from the campaign.

Three operatives who have worked with the campaign suggested that Wiley’s recent hiring by the RNC may have been partly a power play by Trump’s campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, in his power struggle with campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, who had pushed for Wiley to be fired from the campaign.

Neither Lewandoswki nor Manafort responded to requests for comment. But their infighting was seen as stymieing other efforts to tap a liaison with the RNC. Names previously floated included deputy campaign manager Michael Glassner and Bill Palatucci, an RNC member who is a confidant of close Trump ally Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey. Neither emerged in the role, nor did they respond to questions about whether they had been considered for it. Two campaign sources suggested that Glassner’s ability to fill such a role might have been compromised because he is seen as loyal to Lewandowski.

In recent days, though, Ed Brookover, who in the 1980s and ’90s served in top positions at the RNC and the party’s congressional campaign arms, has emerged as the de facto liaison. Brookover, who declined to comment, maintains a good working relationship with Lewandowski and Manafort, according to multiple sources in and around the Trump campaign.

“Ed’s a Corey guy, but he plays well with everyone,” said a GOP strategist who has worked with the Trump campaign, adding that Brookover is not the only campaign official working with the RNC.

Others include Jim Murphy, who was hired this month by Manafort to replace Wiley as national political director, and Glassner, who is working with the RNC on fundraising-related matters.

It’s unclear whether communication has improved, but even when the lines of communication are open, it doesn’t mean that everyone is on the same page.

RNC staffers have privately expressed disappointment that the research and messaging suggestions they have sent to Trump’s campaign are often discarded or reinterpreted by the candidate himself.

On the fundraising side of the operation, at least one Trump campaign staffer had privately suggested that the campaign would find a way to tap into cash collected by the joint fundraising committee for a relatively new RNC fund that can accept maximum donations of $100,200, according to a GOP operative briefed on the staffer’s conversations. That fund is legally required to be spent maintaining or improving party headquarters.

Lindsay Walters, an RNC spokeswoman, appeared to reject any suggestion that the money could be spent on Trump’s campaign, telling The Associated Press that the cash would be spent only on “the operation of the RNC headquarters.”

A member of the party’s fundraising leadership conceded that “there’s always friction staff to staff about who has control when you try to put two different organizations together.” But the fundraiser said the friction hasn’t been as much of an impediment as the calendar has been.

“Given the fact that we started from scratch, it’s going very well,” said the fundraiser. “Remember, we didn’t have any fundraising infrastructure like we did with Romney and with Bush.”
 
You gotta have faith. Otherwise...

Would checks and balances stop Trump? Don’t bet on it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/do-you-really-think-the-gop-will-stand-up-to-trump-if-he-is-president/2016/06/15/70aaa53e-30ed-11e6-8758-d58e76e11b12_story.html

By Robert Kagan June 16 at 8:01 AM

Robert Kagan is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a contributing columnist for The Post.

Will the Republican Party that made Donald Trump its nominee protect us from Trump when he is president? Even as they call him a “textbook” racist and acknowledge his scant regard for the rule of law, Republican leaders assure voters that the U.S. system of checks and balances will contain their candidate’s authoritarian impulses. Congress and the judicial system will keep Trump under control.

History and recent events suggest that is a risky proposition. Inflamed popular passions and overreaching presidents have at times not been checked. Presidents have ignored Supreme Court rulings, and the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 and 1918, Jim Crow, the mistreatment of German Americans during World War I and of U.S. citizens and noncitizens of Japanese descent during World War II, and the investigations of Sen. Joseph McCarthy all showed how a frightened, angry or simply bigoted majority could deprive individuals of their rights despite the Constitution’s checks and balances. That those rights were eventually restored is no cause for satisfaction: The damage done was permanent.

Nor is it reason for complacency, especially now. Never before has a presidential candidate given more reason to fear that he will run roughshod over democratic institutions and abuse the vast powers of the presidency for personal ends. Not a week goes by without Trump providing fresh evidence that he neither understands nor values our political and legal systems but rather sees them as tools to be manipulated or obstacles to be overcome. He threatens to change libel laws to go after media outlets. He attacks federal judges as unfit on grounds of ethnic background. He promises, if elected, to have his attorney general launch investigations of his political opponents. In the past, Americans did not know as they voted that their presidents would seek to abuse their executive powers. This time, and indeed for the first time ever, they do.

As for the Republicans, after being unwilling to stop Trump from clinching the nomination, and being unwilling to abandon him after deciding that he is a racist, they want us to trust that they will be willing to fight him once he becomes president. More likely the opposite will be true.

Consider the reasons Republicans support Trump today. The first is party interest. Trump was chosen by the voters in a legitimate race and according to the rules of the Republican primary process. To abandon him, they fear, would destroy the party. Moreover, it would hand a victory to the “Obama-Clinton-Sanders” Democrats, who some Republicans insist would be an even bigger disaster. Finally, Republicans up for election fear that if they oppose Trump and anger his supporters, they will face dangerous primary challenges or lose in the general election.

Which of these motives will disappear once Trump becomes president? He will still be the Republican Party’s legitimately chosen leader, as well as the legitimately elected president. The election cycle doesn’t end in November. To oppose Trump as president will be even more contrary to the party’s interests than it is now. Will Republicans line up with Democrats to vote against Trump-inspired legislation — to ban Muslims from entering the country, for instance, or to deport 11 million illegal immigrants? To do so would only hand the opposition major political victories, setting the stage for Democratic congressional gains in 2018. Party interests will require that the party support its president.

Even in the unlikely event that some brave Republicans did act in ways contrary to the interests of their party, what would their constituents say? Two years ago, Republican voters threw out the House majority leader because he was, in their view, too willing to compromise. Would they feel differently if Republicans voted with Democrats against the Republican in the White House? And imagine how a President Trump would respond to rebellion in the ranks. Trump already has a record of vindictiveness against those who resist him, including within his own party — would he forget the person who said he engaged in “textbook” racism? — and Republicans already have a record of caving.

In short, anyone looking to Congress to curb the excesses of a President Trump will have to count on the Democrats. Is that the Republican message: Don’t worry about Trump, Democrats will protect you?

To hope that the judicial system will check Trump may be equally fanciful. The courts have historically been reluctant to challenge the president on actions they deem related to national security. Trump himself has noted that he will have the authority to close the borders to certain groups. And as Brookings Institution legal scholar Benjamin Wittes points out, the Justice Department is always vulnerable if a president wants to manipulate it for his own purposes. Trump has already said that if elected he will have his attorney general look into the matter of Hillary Clinton’s emails. Republicans and conservatives may delight to hear it, but what Trump can do to Democratic opponents he can also do to Republicans who defy him.

Wittes makes the point that what keeps the attorney general and the Justice Department from abusing power is not the law so much as a respect for “norms and human and institutional decency.” In fact, this is true of our entire constitutional system. The checks and balances do not automatically snap into action whenever a president overreaches. The people and their representatives have to make the system work. It is a never-ending battle. As the political scientist Edward Corwin once put it, the Constitution is an “invitation to struggle,” but our system relies on all three branches waging that struggle in a democratic spirit. No one knew better than the founders that the system they designed was neither foolproof nor tyrant-proof. The people had to make good decisions, including choosing political leaders who respected the system and the rights it safeguards.

As Benjamin Franklin said, “a Republic, if you can keep it.” Today, Americans can’t simply rely on the system to save them from the possibility of a fascist president. And they certainly can’t count on the Republicans who produced this threat in the first place. They will have to shoulder that responsibility themselves, in the voting booth.
 
While the anti-Trumpers are busy bashing the guy, its amazing that they havent stopped to realize that the current occupant of the WH seems to be pushing the boundaries of Presidential power.I dont worry about Trump.
 
tomahawk6 said:
While the anti-Trumpers are busy bashing the guy, its amazing that they havent stopped to realize that the current occupant of the WH seems to be pushing the boundaries of Presidential power.I dont worry about Trump.

No more so than President Cheney did.  ;D
 
Americans deserve to know the truth. Demand that Trump release the measurements.

https://youtu.be/5LhNjWoBZck
 
And yes the Japanese are still weird. Just weird for Trump.

https://youtu.be/ZbM6WbUw7Bs
 
Someone's still mad about Trump wanting a larger wall on their common border:

CBC

Canada should watch out for 'S T U P I D' Trump, former Mexican president warns
[CBC]
June 17, 2016

A former Mexican president is warning Canada that Donald Trump could turn his attention to the north next after spending the better part of his presidential campaign directing his ire at Mexico and its people.

"Canada please watch out, because today this guy goes crazy against Mexico and later he will do it with Canada," Vicente Fox said in an interview with Chris Hall on CBC Radio's The House. "If today is Mexico, next will be Canada, he will declare a trade war with Canada. That's a lose-lose proposition, everyone will lose with things like that. He's threatening NAFTA. That's absolutely brilliant."

Trump has pilloried the free trade agreement between Canada, the United States and Mexico calling it "a disaster."

NAFTA, established in 1994, created a North American free trade bloc that eliminated most tariffs on trade between Canada, the U.S. and Mexico. Trump has said the deal has hollowed out the American heartland, shipping manufacturing jobs south to Mexico

(...SNIPPED)
 
Interesting read about the man how gave Trump his approach to business and politics.

The man who showed Donald Trump how to exploit power and instill fear

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/former-mccarthy-aide-showed-trump-how-to-exploit-power-and-draw-attention/2016/06/16/e9f44f20-2bf3-11e6-9b37-42985f6a265c_story.html

Donald Trump was a brash scion of a real estate empire, a young developer anxious to leave his mark on New York. Roy Cohn was a legendary New York fixer, a ruthless lawyer in the hunt for new clients.

They came together by chance one night at Le Club, a hangout for Manhattan’s rich and famous. Trump introduced himself to Cohn, who was sitting at a nearby table, and sought advice: How should he and his father respond to Justice Department allegations that their company had systematically discriminated against black people seeking housing?

“My view is tell them to go to hell,” Cohn said, “and fight the thing in court.”

It was October 1973 and the start of one of the most influential relationships of Trump’s career. Cohn soon represented Trump in legal battles, counseled him about his marriage and introduced Trump to New York power brokers, money men and socialites.

Cohn also showed Trump how to exploit power and instill fear through a simple formula: attack, counterattack and never apologize.

Since he announced his run for the White House a year ago, Trump has used such tactics more aggressively than any other candidate in recent memory, demeaning opponents, insulting minorities and women, and whipping up anger among his supporters.

Cohn gained notoriety in the 1950s as Sen. Joseph McCarthy’s chief counsel and the brains behind his hunt for communist infiltrators. By the 1970s, Cohn maintained a powerful network in New York City, using his connections in the courts and City Hall to reward friends and punish those who crossed him.

He routinely pulled strings in government for clients, funneled cash to politicians and cultivated relationships with influential figures, including FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, mafia boss Anthony “Fat Tony” Salerno and a succession of city leaders.

*****
Roy Cohn was born in New York City in 1927, into an affluent Jewish family. His father, Albert C. Cohn, was a longtime member of New York’s Democratic machine and a State Supreme Court and appellate division judge. Roy Cohn attended elite prep schools and graduated from Columbia Law School at age 20.

Through his father’s connections, Cohn landed a job with the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Manhattan. In the spring of 1949, Cohn was asked to write a memo about a man named Alger Hiss, a State Department official suspected of spying for the Soviet Union. Cohn soon came to believe that the Soviets had many spies inside the U.S. government.

In 1950, Cohn at age 23 was the lead prosecutor in what became known as the Atom Spy Case. A Jewish couple named Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were accused of conspiracy to commit espionage for the Soviet Union. After the two were convicted of passing atomic secrets to the Soviets, the judge left the courtroom and called Cohn from a phone booth on Park Avenue. As Cohn later wrote, the judge wanted “to ask my advice on whether he ought to give the death penalty to Ethel Rosenberg.”

“The way I see it is that she’s worse than Julius,” Cohn told the judge, according to his autobiography. Both Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were executed in an electric chair.

In 1953, Cohn joined Sen. Joseph McCarthy (R-Wis.) as chief counsel to the Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. McCarthy had exploded into public view three years earlier when he claimed that he had a list of 205 State Department employees who were members of the Communist Party.

McCarthy launched a series of sensational hearings about the communist threat in the United States, calling on scores of professors, Hollywood writers, government employees and others to answer questions about their alleged ties to the party. Blacklists were created and careers ruined.

Cohn and McCarthy soon faced a backlash.

In early 1954, the permanent subcommittee held the Army-McCarthy hearings, in part to determine whether Cohn sought special treatment for an enlisted friend. McCarthy objected to tough questioning of Cohn and attacked the reputation of a young associate in the firm of the Army’s lawyer. That spurred the lawyer to ask the now-famous question that underscored growing doubts about McCarthy’s ethics: “Have you no sense of decency, sir?”

******

Settling back in New York, Cohn tapped his connections as he began building a private legal practice, documents show. Cohn often operated in the gray areas of the law. In the 1960s and early 1970s, he fought off four federal or state indictments for alleged extortion, bribery, conspiracy, perjury and banking violations. At the same time, he avoided paying state and federal income taxes and engaged in a variety of schemes to take advantage of wealthy clients, court records show.

Cohn’s brazenness seemed limitless. In 1969, while facing his third federal indictment, he wrote a confidential letter to Hoover, the FBI director. Cohn included affidavits, legal motions, news articles and other material outlining his defense.

“When I started fighting Communism as a young voice in the wilderness of the Justice Department, I suppose I realized that those who did not like what I was doing would be after me for a long time,” Cohn wrote on Sept. 8, 1969, according to documents obtained by The Post. “You are such a great institution up and down this nation, that I hate to see you diverted or annoyed for even a minute — thus my sense of deep regret.”

Hoover wrote back eight days later: “Your generous comments regarding me are indeed gratifying.”

*****

Cohn maintained a public veneer that he was heterosexual. His friends knew better. Sidney Zion, a journalist who helped Cohn write his autobiography, described him as “the Babe Ruth of the Gay World.” But when gay rights activists once asked him to represent a teacher fired for being homosexual, Cohn refused. He told the activists: “I believe homosexual teachers are a grave threat to our children, they have no business polluting the schools of America,” Cohn and Zion wrote in “The Autobiography of Roy Cohn.”

Cohn also lobbied against gay rights legislation in New York City. He once called a law’s sponsor on the City Council and offered a profane warning: “You’ve got to get off this fag stuff, it’s very harmful to the city and it’s going to hurt you,” Cohn said in a phone call that Zion overheard. “These f----ing fags are no good, forget about them.”

*****

Cohn kept company with a remarkable array of people. Stone, the political adviser for Trump and others, tells vivid stories, sometimes with varying details, about the first time he met Cohn. It was 1979, and Stone was calling on Cohn for political support and contributions on behalf of Ronald Reagan, then ramping up a presidential campaign.

Stone stood for some time in the townhouse’s waiting room. When Stone was finally admitted, Cohn was sitting at a dining-room table, in a silk bathrobe, Stone told The Post. On the table were three strips of bacon and a square of cream cheese. Cohn ate the food with his fingers.

Sitting at the table was a heavyset man.

“Mr. Stone, I want you to meet Tony Salerno,” Cohn said.

There Stone was, standing before the future boss of the Genovese crime family.

“So Roy says we’re going with Reagan this time,” Salerno said.

Cohn and Salerno listened to Stone’s pitch. Then Cohn recommended that Stone reach out to Trump.

“You need to meet Donald and his father,” Cohn said, as Stone recalls it now. “They’d be perfect for this. Let me set you up a meeting.”

After his election, Reagan wrote Cohn, a registered Democrat, a warm note of thanks for his support. The two men became close, Trump said.

Cohn tapped into the Reagan administration network on Trump’s behalf a short time later, according to a New York Times account. At Trump’s request, Cohn lobbied Edwin Meese III, a senior White House aide, to secure an appointment for Trump’s sister Maryanne Barry, an experienced federal prosecutor in New Jersey, to the U.S. District Court.

*****

In the early 1980s, the FBI and New York authorities carried out a sweeping investigation of the five New York crime families. Investigators relied on informants, court-authorized wiretaps and eavesdropping gear. They gathered hundreds of hours of conversations proving the mob’s reach into the construction industry. Cohn’s office fell under surveillance. Trump was not implicated.

In early 1985, Cohn wrote to FBI Director William H. Webster, irate at a newspaper report suggesting that investigators in the case had been surveilling his office.

“Since 1950 — the year I prosecuted the Rosenberg atom-spy trial at age 23 with the magnificent investigative help of the Bureau, up to the present, 34 years later, I have had a first-rate relationship with and respect for the Bureau,” Cohn wrote on March 11, 1985, according to documents obtained by The Post.

A confidential internal FBI memo the next month offered more detail: Field agents had conducted surveillance of Cohn’s office, with the aim of “installing a monitoring device to intercept the conversations of Genovese Boss Anthony Salerno,” who apparently was using Cohn’s office for his own business.

The next year, Salerno and 14 others were indicted on an array of criminal charges, including conspiracy, extortion and “infiltration of ostensibly legitimate businesses involved in selling ready-mix concrete in New York City,” the federal indictment said. One of Trump’s projects was mentioned in the indictment. Salerno and others eventually went to prison on federal charges including racketeering and bid-rigging.
 
Lindsay Graham just outed Donald Trump as being transgender.  ;D

Graham: Next president likely to be a 'she'

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/lindsey-graham-next-president-she-224551

Whether it's Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton, the next president will need to deal with setting aside defense cuts as part of sequestration, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said Monday, though he gave an indication as to which gender he expects the 45th commander in chief to be.

The next president, whoever he or she — most likely she — is going to be, needs to get these defense cuts set aside," Graham remarked during a discussion at the Center for a New American Security's conference.

Graham also took a shot at Trump, his former presidential primary rival, in discussing the spectrum of Republican viewpoints on defense.

"The bottom line: I think there’s a fight within the Republican Party for who we are on foreign policy, from the Rand Paul view to the Lindsey Graham, John McCain view," Graham said. "And Trump’s somewhere out there, somewhere saying something, I don’t know where he’s at. So, so, I think there’s a more traditional view of foreign policy emerging on the Republican side. It’s one of the reasons I wanted to run for president."

Graham has been one of the most vocal critics of Trump's candidacy, most recently urging his fellow Republicans to un-endorse their party's presumptive nominee after his comments attacking a federal judge.

"There will be a desire by all of us to help the next president, whoever he or she may be," Graham said. "And I would advise the next president, if it’s Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton, to start — give [Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.)] and me and other people a call about rebuilding the Defense Department, setting aside sequestration. I may be wrong, but I think there’d be a pretty large audience for that.”
 
More on the "Why" Trump and Sanders did so well. What the people who worked so hard to keep Sanders off the radar and undermine Trump don't seem to realize is that they are symptoms, not causes, and marginalizing them will simply result in something even worse coming around the next cycle (Trump would not exist as the presumptive candidate if the TEA Party movement's elected candidates had actually worked in the House and Senate to enact the small government program in 2012). If anyone wants to "Dump Trump", I suggest they start looking at Europe's Nativist parties to see what the future will look like in the United States if that happens.

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/06/17/populism-replacing-conservatism-winning/

Why Populism Is Replacing Conservatism, and Why It’s Winning

by SCOTT MOREFIELD17 Jun 20161,894

Depending where you are on the political spectrum, you’ll likely have different reasons for loving or hating Donald Trump.
To the establishment of both parties he represents an end to the status quo, the gravy train, and the old methods of not just getting things done in Washington, but winning votes to stay there. To activist liberals, Trump, despite his “live and let live” attitude on many social issues, is anathema to their Utopian, politically-correct world and indeed everything they stand for. They hate him, and he hates them back.

Conservatives, however, are undeniably as divided as they’ve ever been, or at least since the Goldwater days. To those who remain anti-Trump, the #NeverTrump crowd, the Republican nominee represents nothing less than a complete abandonment of their principles and the values they consider integral to the fabric of America. To them, a vote for Trump is a vote against civility, decency, and everything they hold dear.

The conservatives who are with Trump, however, see something entirely different. They see an unprecedented way to accomplish conservative goals, meaning to actually “conserve” what made America great in the first place, even without an ideologically pure standard bearer.

The key to this pragmatic position, and the reason it’s so effective, is the uncomfortable yet true realization that in order to actually get one’s agenda accomplished legislatively in America, one must actually win elections on a national scale.

In order to do that, conservatives must abandon the “conservatism” that in effect “majors on the minors” by focusing on peripheral issues that, while they may be important morally, don’t personally affect the average American voter, and instead embrace issues that do.

For their own survival, it’s time for conservatives to become populists.

By making immigration his central campaign issue early on, Donald Trump did just that, speaking to something that hits home for many if not most Americans. We wonder why our betters insist on bringing in two immigrants for every job created when American wages have been stagnant for decades. We ask why it’s so imperative that masses of unassimilable and unscreened Muslims be brought to our shores from regions which we’ve helped destabilize in the first place. Why must our border with Mexico be a sieve that allows anyone and everyone to enter, while Americans who marry foreigners and try to get them a legal permanent resident card face so much red tape?

The burden illegal immigration from the Third World imposes on American society is a steep one, yet one that only ordinary Americans unable to afford high fences and Gulfstream jets have to pay. We know that 25 percent of Federal prisons are filled with illegal aliens, and we know about high-profile cases like the tragic murder of Kate Steinle (often thanks to Donald Trump), but actual figures for illegal alien crime are hard to find because, as a 2015 FoxNews.com story laments, “the government agencies that crunch crime numbers are utterly unable — or unwilling — to pinpoint for the public how many illegal immigrants are arrested within U.S. borders each year.”

According to the FoxNews.com story, which examined data from several unaffiliated sources to come up with the numbers the government doesn’t want to give, the nation’s approximately 11.7 million illegal immigrants are responsible for 12 percent of all murder sentences, 20 percent of all kidnapping sentences, 16 percent of all drug trafficking sentences, and 13.6 percent of ALL sentenced offenders in the U.S.

Additionally, according to the Heritage Foundation, American taxpayers are on the hook to the tune of almost $20,000 for every low-skilled immigrant household, which pays roughly $10,000 in taxes while using $30,000 in government services. In fact, 57 percent of all immigrant household with children use at least one welfare program.

22 million Americans are currently looking for full-time work while at least 8 million full-time jobs are held by illegal immigrants. But but but… our elites tell us we must bring in more, and in ever increasing numbers, yet ordinary Americans wonder why … and side with Donald Trump.

Indeed, if immigration alone were Trump’s main issue it would be a winning one, but it doesn’t stop there.

Trump’s second major policy position, and again one that clearly pivots away from the establishment line of both parties, is trade, and again he nails it. Lecturing Carrier employees who’ve just lost their jobs to Mexico about the finer points of David Ricardo’s theory of comparative advantage is almost akin to telling a grieving mother who just lost her child that “God works in mysterious ways.” But that’s essentially what is happening. Come hell or high water, free traders are going to stick to their dogma until it sinks us all.

And what is this dogma we are asked by our leaders to believe? That, according to the CATO Institute, “free trade is its own reward,” and any efforts aimed at trying to level trade imbalances should be maligned as “mercantilist.” It all sounds good in theory, of course, if it weren’t for those stubborn facts. Sure, if the playing field between nations WERE level, countries specializing in what they do best and trading with other countries for the things they want but can’t produce as efficiently certainly benefits everyone more than they would otherwise benefit. Trade certainly CAN be a good thing.

Problem is, the playing field is far from level. Aside from the United States, many other countries, particularly China, actually attempt to protect their workers at America’s expense, keeping their protective tariffs while America lowers theirs. Additionally, some countries, like ours, overload their industries with expensive and burdensome regulations while others, like China, barely regulate anything at all. It is an open secret among outsourcing companies that, while cheap labor is often cited as the reason for a move overseas or below the border, the primary reason some industries move, particularly the ones more prone to pollution, is actually to escape our costly environmental regulations.

Free trade does help some, especially the top 1 percent to whom many of the Republican beltway elite are beholden. Of these, Pat Buchanan writes “[these] masters of the universe fly Gulfstream Vs to Davos and Dubai to dine with titled Europeans, Saudi princes and Chinese billionaires. These are America’s winners from free trade. The losers? Middle Americans. The average U.S. family has not seen a rise in real wages in 40 years. This is directly traceable to the loss of more than one-third of all U.S. manufacturing jobs. And that loss, that deindustrialization of America, is directly tied to the $10 trillion in trade deficits since Bush I.”

And so, middle America continues to wake up. In fact, based on the percentage of voters who supported both Trump and Bernie Sanders, an increasingly significant percentage of American voters aren’t buying what their leaders are selling them when it comes to trade. For example, while Paul Ryan and indeed most Republican lawmakers, pundits, and Party donors champion the free trade mantra, primary exit polling showed a whopping 54 percent of Wisconsin voters believe trade deals take away U.S. jobs.

Instead, Donald Trump asks the same questions middle-class America asks, and on this issue especially, the guy who’s supposed to have changed his mind at least forty times on every issue has been remarkably consistent on this one – Why should we sacrifice our high paying jobs on the altar of globalism? Why can’t we have FAIR trade that benefits everyone instead of job killing, wage destroying “free” trade? And especially, why has America’s most prosperous eras been when she has been the most protective on trade?

On foreign policy, Trump again finds himself with ordinary Americans. What does protecting a Europe which refuses to pay for it, or policing the borders of Iraq, or toppling dictators only to replace them with ISIS have to do with making Americans secure? Why do we need to thumb our nose at Russia when they are fighting ISIS harder than anyone else? Our elites would have us entangled everywhere in the world, and yet Trump asks the same question we do – Why not consider putting America and Americans first?

That’s populism in a nutshell, taking the people’s side against the power elites who clearly do not have our best interests at heart.

Donald Trump wants to put America first. The establishment and the elites hate him for it, but Americans love him and are willing to overlook a whole host of other gaffes and even personality defects not because they don’t think those things aren’t important in and of themselves, but because they understand, unlike the conservative nit-pickers who still refuse to back him, that he is right and consistent on the issues that affect them personally.

The conservative movement in America has, for all intents and purposes, been a complete failure. Not only has it failed to produce electoral victories on a national scale, it has failed to “conserve” bathrooms that are safe for little girls, much less anything else of note. Could this be because conservatives have abandoned the issues that Americans, particularly middle-class Americans, care about and are truly affected by?

Conservatives have bowed at the altar of “free trade” while watching our manufacturing base disappear. They’ve surrendered to the oligarchs who want cheap labor and the ‘churchians’ who see it as their God-given duty to ‘rescue’ the world by letting the world come here by throwing our borders open to anyone who wants a free ride. They’ve let the warmongering neocons get us involved in more and more foreign places where we’re neither needed nor wanted. Where in all this is the concern for middle-class America?

Populism, on the other hand, is making a resurgence in America and indeed in increasingly significant pockets across Europe because it puts our people first, FIRST. That is why it is winning. That is why the elites hate it so much, and it’s ultimately the root of why they hate Donald Trump.

#NeverTrumpers want the perfect candidate, or at least one more perfect than Donald Trump. After the 1964 Goldwater debacle, William F. Buckley wrote, “Idealism is fine, but as it approaches reality, the costs become prohibitive.”

As conservatives, our reality is this – In the words of retiring Tennessee Lieutenant Governor Ron Ramsey, the architect of the Volunteer State’s massive shift from dominant Democratic to overwhelmingly conservative Republican government – “It matters who governs.”

Unless they can start winning national elections, our people, or the people who by and large think like us, won’t govern, and NOTHING we want to get done will get done. But in order to have a snowball’s chance of doing that, our leaders MUST start addressing the issues that hit home for the people they supposedly represent.

Of Buckley’s paradigm shift, Joe Scarborough wrote in Politio, “Goldwater’s disastrous defeat in 1964 taught WFB that lesson all too well, and Reagan’s pragmatic conservatism over the next two decades would also show Buckley just how effective a conservative politician could be if he was more interested in persuading voters than posing as an ideological puritan.”

There’s no denying that it may be too late. As Mitt Romney infamously pointed out during his failed 2012 campaign, the percentage of voters relying on government assistance may have already reached a tipping point that will eventually sink this Titanic. But the death of conservatism, well, not so much its death but its shift to caring about things that actually matter to ordinary working Americans – its shift to populism – could very well be what saves it, and indeed what saves America.

Scott Morefield is a news and opinion columnist for BizPac Review. Follow him on Twitter at @SKMorefield.
 
A young British man made a lame attempt to assassinate Trump at a rally today in Las Vegas.  The tool tried to grab a cop's gun and turn it on the Donald.  Needless to say he didn't succeed at either desire. 
 
jollyjacktar said:
A young British man made a lame attempt to assassinate Trump at a rally today in Las Vegas.  The tool tried to grab a cop's gun and turn it on the Donald.  Needless to say he didn't succeed at either desire.

19 year old Michael Sandford overstayed his visa.Grabbing a cops gun is certain to get him some time in a Vegas jail before being expelled.I would put him on a terror watch list for good measure.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/06/breaking-foreigner-arrested-trying-kill-donald-trump-vegas-rally/
 
Lightguns said:
The British are becoming an extreme disappointment to me.
Because of one idiot in Vegas?  Or other reasons?
 
milnews.ca said:
Because of one idiot in Vegas?  Or other reasons?
Nah, he's piece of sugar candy on the icing of my UK cake.  The whole nation seems being going so far left as to..... That and the British parliamentary system seems become a system of deadlock and division. But all off topic.

Sent from my XT1563 using Tapatalk

 
Lightguns said:
Nah, he's piece of sugar candy on the icing of my UK cake.  The whole nation seems being going so far left as to..... That and the British parliamentary system seems become a system of deadlock and division. But all off topic.

Sent from my XT1563 using Tapatalk
Just curious - thanks!

Just to bring it back into the U.S. election lanes, here's Wikipedia's tracking of the polling - enjoy!
1200px-US_polls_2016.svg.png
 
Back
Top