“Jared Kushner” – Google News: ‘Vice’ director laughed at Ivanka Trump’s abrupt exit during film screening – Who

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

‘Vice’ director laughed at Ivanka Trump’s abrupt exit during film screening  Who

when he discovered that two prominent members of Donald Trump’s administration, the president’s daughter Ivanka Trump and son-in-law, Jared Kushner, …

“Jared Kushner” – Google News


  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    3
    Shares
  •  
  • 3
  •  

“Conspiracy Against US” – Google News: Leonard Pitts Jr.: Some find it all too easy to denigrate women – Lima Ohio

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Leonard Pitts Jr.: Some find it all too easy to denigrate women  Lima Ohio

This is a column about some black people.Not all, thank goodness. Not even most.But if you watched the stunning recent Lifetime documentary, “Survivi.

“Conspiracy Against US” – Google News


  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    3
    Shares
  •  
  • 3
  •  

Cambridge Analytica from Michael_Novakhov (4 sites): “cambridge analytica” – Google News: Facebook’s Game Purchases Were Designed to Make Money off Unsuspecting Kids – News18

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Facebook’s Game Purchases Were Designed to Make Money off Unsuspecting Kids  News18

The United States District Court has given Facebook time to file unredacted documents, after the now public court documents indicate this was a planned …

“cambridge analytica” – Google News

Cambridge Analytica from Michael_Novakhov (4 sites)


  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    3
    Shares
  •  
  • 3
  •  

“deutsche bank and trump” – Google News: Probe into Wall Street banks over rigging US Treasury auctions stalls – New York Post

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Probe into Wall Street banks over rigging US Treasury auctions stalls  New York Post

A politically dicey investigation into Wall Street banks allegedly rigging US Treasury auctions has stalled due to a lack of evidence, and it’s unclear if the…

“deutsche bank and trump” – Google News


  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    3
    Shares
  •  
  • 3
  •  

1. Trump from Michael_Novakhov (198 sites): Palmer Report: Adam Schiff hints at why Robert Mueller issued his statement about Donald Trump and Michael Cohen

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  


On Friday, Special Counsel Robert Mueller caught just about everyone off guard when he issued a statement asserting that unspecified portions of the BuzzFeed bombshell were incorrect. At the time, Palmer Report pointed out the most likely reason for why Mueller did what he did. Now House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff is hinting at the same thing.




The BuzzFeed article spurred a national conversation about the impeachment process against Donald Trump beginning immediately. Based on the way House Democrats were talking in public, it sounded like they were perhaps preparing to introduce articles of impeachment as soon as Monday. When Robert Mueller stated that some details of the article were inaccurate, the net result is that House Democrats decided to pull back for a hot minute until Mueller explains what really happened.






Mueller would have known that this would be the result of his statement, so Palmer Report suggested on Friday that this was in fact his goal. If the House Democrats were to file articles of impeachment that were based on a news article that was even slightly less than 100% correct, that would have handed Donald Trump an easy way to fight back against such charges. Mueller seemingly spoke up in order to prevent that scenario from happening.



Sure enough, Adam Schiff appeared on Face The Nation on CBS on Sunday morning and suggested that this is precisely why Robert Mueller did what he did. It’s not clear if Schiff was getting this from Mueller himself, or if it was merely his own presumption. That said, there is ample evidence that committee chairs like Schiff have been working in tandem with Mueller on at least a basic level.

Click here to help fund Palmer Report’s editorial takedown of Donald Trump!

•••••

Sign up for the free Palmer Report mailing list and never miss an article!



The post Adam Schiff hints at why Robert Mueller issued his statement about Donald Trump and Michael Cohen appeared first on Palmer Report.

Palmer Report

1. Trump from Michael_Novakhov (198 sites)


  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    3
    Shares
  •  
  • 3
  •  

1. Trump from Michael_Novakhov (198 sites): Palmer Report: Rudy Giuliani screws up and admits Michael Cohen lied about Trump Tower Russia after all

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  


On Thursday, BuzzFeed reported that Michael Cohen had lied under oath about Trump Tower Moscow, that Donald Trump had instructed him to do so, and that Robert Mueller had specific evidence to prove it all. On Friday, Mueller stated that some unspecified details of the BuzzFeed report were incorrect. Trump and his team immediately seized the opportunity to falsely accuse the entirety of the BuzzFeed report of being false. But now Rudy Giuliani has promptly blown that.




Giuliani hit the Sunday morning talk show circuit and admitted that the Trump Tower Moscow negotiations between Team Trump and Russia did take place, and that they did continue all the way through the end of the election. Rudy has stipulated to some variation of this before, but this time he also admitted that Donald Trump himself participated in this process. So why does this matter?






Rudy did not admit that Donald Trump told Michael Cohen to lie under oath. But Rudy did just confess to a series of details which confirm that Michael Cohen lied under oath about Trump Tower Moscow. This confirms half of BuzzFeed’s report. Thus it significantly weakens Team Trump’s assertion this weekend that the entirety of the BuzzFeed report was incorrect.



If Team Trump was going to take the position that BuzzFeed had it all wrong, the best way to sell that would have been to stay away from interviews entirely, because any good interviewer was going to ask about the details. Because Rudy Giuliani went on television to try to take a victory lap on Donald Trump’s behalf, it merely resulted in Rudy having to admit that the Trump Tower Moscow plot was very real, and that Donald Trump was indeed at the center of it.

Click here to help fund Palmer Report’s editorial takedown of Donald Trump!

•••••

Sign up for the free Palmer Report mailing list and never miss an article!



The post Rudy Giuliani screws up and admits Michael Cohen lied about Trump Tower Russia after all appeared first on Palmer Report.

Palmer Report

1. Trump from Michael_Novakhov (198 sites)


  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    3
    Shares
  •  
  • 3
  •  

1. Trump from Michael_Novakhov (198 sites): Just Security: Why It May Not Matter If BuzzFeed Got It Wrong: “Encouraging” Perjury is Also a Crime

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Assume that the BuzzFeed report got it wrong and that President Donald Trump did not direct his then-personal attorney Michael Cohen to lie to Congress. As a matter of law, what would result if President Trump instead only encouraged Cohen to lie to Congress? There’s evidence in the public record that at least points toward a conclusion that’s what President Trump did–evidence that principally includes court documents filed by Cohen’s attorneys and the Special Counsel. I asked several leading legal experts to analyze this question. Their views are remarkably uniform: If President Trump encouraged, rather than directed, Cohen to lie to Congress, the President would still be guilty of a federal crime involving an obstruction of justice.

The experts provided a range of insights about the kinds of evidence that would be needed to prove that the President encouraged Cohen and the inferences that can be drawn from the relationship between the two men at the time, the President’s having a conversation with Cohen about his testimony in advance, and other matters.

Before providing the experts’ views, here is the prompt I sent to each of them:

What, if any, legal significance is there between the following two scenarios?

A. President Trump directed Michael Cohen to lie to Congress.
B. President Trump knew in advance that Michael Cohen was going to lie to Congress, and Trump gave Cohen his approval or encouragement.

At the time, Cohen was Trump’s personal lawyer.

Another way of putting the question: if Scenario B were true, would President Trump be potentially guilty of a crime? The same crime as Scenario A?

Please feel free to address these questions however you wish. The following parts of the publicly available record may be useful to your analysis:

1. Sentencing memo on behalf of Michael Cohen:

“Furthermore, in the weeks during which his then-counsel prepared his written response to the Congressional Committees, Michael remained in close and regular contact with White House-based staff and legal counsel to Client-1.”

2. The Special Counsel’s sentencing memorandum says:

“Third, Cohen provided relevant and useful information concerning his contacts with persons connected to the White House during the 2017–2018 time period.

Fourth, Cohen described the circumstances of preparing and circulating his response to the congressional inquiries, while continuing to accept responsibility for the false statements contained within it.”

3. Lanny Davis told Bloomberg Radio:

“I don’t know whether they were aware that it was not accurate, but I know that Mr. Mueller wrote in his sentencing memo that Mr. Cohen published the testimony before he gave it and that he consulted with White House officials before he gave it so that they knew that the testimony was going to be what Michael Cohen knew to be false testimony about the Moscow tower.”

“The inevitable conclusion is that Mr. Trump and the White House knew that Michael Cohen would be testifying falsely to Congress and did not tell him not to.”

4. Sentencing memo on behalf of Michael Cohen:

“Michael’s false statements to Congress likewise sprung regrettably from Michael’s effort, as a loyal ally and then-champion of Client-1, to support and advance Client-1’s political messaging. At the time that he was requested to appear before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Michael was serving as personal attorney to the President, and followed daily the political messages that both Client-1 and his staff and supporters repeatedly and forcefully broadcast. Furthermore, in the weeks during which his then-counsel prepared his written response to the Congressional Committees, Michael remained in close and regular contact with White House-based staff and legal counsel to Client-1.

As such, he was (a) fully aware of Client-1’s repeated disavowals of commercial and political ties between himself and Russia, as well as the strongly voiced mantra of Client-1 that investigations of such ties were politically motivated and without evidentiary support, and (b) specifically knew, consistent with Client-1’s aim to dismiss and minimize the merit of the SCO investigation, that Client-1 and his public spokespersons were seeking to portray contact with Russian representatives in any form by Client-1, the Campaign or the Trump Organization as having effectively terminated before the Iowa caucuses of February 1, 2016.”

5. Sentencing memo on behalf of Michael Cohen:

“We address the campaign finance and false statements allegations together because both arose from Michael’s fierce loyalty to Client-1. In each case, the conduct was intended to benefit Client-1, in accordance with Client-1’s directives.”

6. In Cohen’s prepared remarks during his sentencing hearing, he said:

“Recently, the President Tweeted a statement calling me weak, and he was correct, but for a much different reason than he was implying.  It was because time and time again I felt it was my duty to cover up his dirty deeds rather than to listen to my own inner voice and my moral compass.  My weakness can be characterized as a blind loyalty to Donald Trump, and I was weak for not having the strength to question and to refuse his demands.”

Here are the experts’ views (emphases added in bold by me):

Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti), partner at Thompson Coburn LLP, CNN legal analyst, and member of the board of editors of Just Security. He served as a federal prosecutor in the Securities and Commodities Fraud Section of the United States Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Illinois:

There is no question that Trump committed a crime if he directed or corruptly persuaded Cohen to lie to Congress. Mere “encouragement” is enough if Trump knew it was a lie and intended for Cohen to mislead Congress. But that can be difficult to prove unless Trump explicitly instructed Cohen, and there is no public evidence that indicates Trump did so. It is often the case that criminals subtly suggest in indirect ways that their associates lie, or that there is a preexisting understanding that the associate should lie. Those cases can be very challenging to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

Barbara McQuade (@BarbMcQuade), Professor at the University of Michigan Law School. She served as United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan and Co-Chair of the Terrorism and National Security Subcommittee of the Attorney General’s Advisory Committee from 2010-2017:

While the second scenario might make it more difficult to prove a direct crime, such as suborning perjury, President Trump could be guilty of aiding and abetting or conspiracy to obstruct justice in violation of 18 USC 1512(b) or (c) under either scenario. (And, of course, if we are considering impeachment rather than indictment, we need not worry about the technical elements of crimes.) The difference would be a matter of proof.

Under the law, a conspiracy is an agreement, which may be explicit or implicit. Evidence may be direct or circumstantial, and the law does not say that one is better than the other. If evidence shows that Trump explicitly directed Cohen to lie to Congress, then that is an easy case to prove. If, on the other hand, evidence shows that Trump implicitly encouraged Cohen to lie, that conduct can still legally amount to obstruction of justice. It is just more difficult to prove. Under either scenario, prosecutors would have to show that Trump had the requisite intent to act “corruptly” to impede the investigation by Congress. Instead of using direct evidence, prosecutors would need to use circumstantial evidence, such as evidence of circulating statements in advance without objection.

Mimi Rocah (@Mimirocah1), Distinguished Fellow in Criminal Justice at Pace Law School and a legal analyst for MSNBC and NBC News. She served as an Assistant United States Attorney in the Southern District of New York:

There is a significant difference, from a purely legal standpoint, between the conduct described in scenario A versus scenario B. In A, if Trump directed Cohen to lie to Congress about something material to the investigation (and assuming the proof on that direction was strong), he would be guilty most clearly of lying to Congress, under 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1001, because directing someone to commit a crime in that manner is the same as actually committing the crime yourself (under the aiding and abetting statute, 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2). In addition, if Cohen was under oath when he made these false statements, Trump could be potentially guilty of suborning perjury (under 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1622). Finally, with a directive this clear, I think Trump could potentially be guilty of witness tampering and conspiracy to commit obstruction under 18 U.S.C. 1512(b) & (c)). For these crimes “corrupt intent” would have to be demonstrated — i.e., that the lie was to prevent the investigation from uncovering something as opposed to some other motive like embarrassment. I think given the record as a whole that could be shown here. As to the facts in B, I think it’s less clear. The crimes a prosecutor would consider charging wouldn’t really change, but the question is whether those facts would be enough to show the necessary intent on Trump’s part to make the lies happen. The answer here is really going to be in the details that we don’t have yet. What does “approval” or “encouragement” mean? How explicit was it? What exactly did he say? Was it directly communicated from Trump to Cohen or through a third party? What did Trump say to the third party if one was involved? These are all questions a prosecutor would need to ask (and more). I think given the relationship between Cohen and Trump — i.e., Cohen couldn’t go ahead with the lies without Trump’s approval or assent, it increases the argument that it should be chargeable as a crime against Trump as well. In fact, I was involved in several cases as a prosecutor where we charged a Mafia boss for conduct under that theory.

David Alan Sklansky (@d_a_sklansky‏), Professor at Stanford Law School and a faculty co-director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center. He served as an Assistant United States Attorney in Los Angeles:

Legally there’s not much difference between directing someone to lie to Congress under oath and encouraging someone to lie to Congress under oath. As long as the lie concerns something material, the first is suborning perjury, and the second is aiding and abetting perjury. They’re both felonies. Acquiescing doesn’t necessarily constitute aiding and abetting; there has to be some actual encouragement. But the encouragement can be quite minimal. Approving someone’s plan to lie under oath about a material fact can be and usually will be aiding and abetting perjury, as long as the approval is communicated in advance to the witness.

Joyce White Vance (@JoyceWhiteVance), Distinguished Professor of the Practice of Law at The University of Alabama and MSNBC commentator. She served as the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Alabama:

Michael Cohen has been charged with and pleaded guilty to making a material, false statement to the Congress. The lie concerns how far into 2016 Trump continued to deal with Russians on a potential Trump Moscow project. Of course, conducting international business dealing isn’t a crime. Nor is it a crime for a Presidential candidate to lie, over and over, as it is now clear Trump did, to the public, while not under oath.

So the first question here is, why the lie? Is it merely that Trump was a detached business owner, focused on his presidential campaign, who after signing a non-binding letter of intent on the deal permitted his fixer-lawyer to move it forward and let it slip off his own radar? Sometimes people are forgetful, although that’s a tough sell for a man reputed to hold the reins of his business very tightly.

So, why lie about it? Maybe for the sake of appearances, but that alone doesn’t seem like enough to risk a felony conviction. We can’t know the reason for the lie for certain. It’s possible to speculate—we have heard President Putin was supposed to get a posh apartment in the building, which sounds like the type of bribe US law prohibits payment of to further a foreign business deal. Some have speculated Trump would receive favorable treatment for his project — a quo for the quid of help Russia expected to receive from him after he became President. The bottom line is we don’t know exactly why the lie was told, why the extra months during which the Trump Organization continued to transact its deal with Russia was a matter of such sensitivity. But we do know the President saw it as important because knowing Cohen intended to lie to Congress, he did not stop him.

That’s the threshold conduct we have here — Trump knew (there are reports Cohen’s testimony was public before he gave it), but didn’t prevent Cohen from lying to Congress. And even if the president can claim he didn’t know in advance, Cohen’s testimony was widely reported and if the president found it to be untrue and objectionable, he could have taken steps to share a corrected version.

That he didn’t, might technically make him liable for the crime of misprision, 18 USC 4, concealing the commission of a felony. If misprision is on the minor end of the conduct spectrum, on the other end would be conduct the Special Counsel seems to have told us did not occur, commanding the felony, suborning perjury. If there was evidence that the president directed Cohen to lie, that would indeed be a smoking gun.

But where we are, is, rather, someplace in the middle, with the precise facts only known to parties and prosecutors. However Rudy Giuliani, who has often played the role for the president of outing and normalizing the worst facts ahead of the new cycle, indicated on the Sunday morning TV shows that the President and Cohen likely discussed the latter’s testimony and that negotiations over the Moscow deal went on through November 2016.

If the facts turn out to be that Trump and Cohen had such a conversation in advance of the testimony, then the president’s potential liability will turn on the details of their interaction. It is entirely possible that there was conduct short of a direct order that brought the two into an agreement, a conspiracy, about the lie Cohen would tell to Congress. Or, if Trump encouraged Cohen, that could make him an accomplice, alleviating any worries Cohen might have had that his lie would be uncovered.

Most of the public reporting and pleadings that have been filed in the case, tell us that Cohen discussed his testimony, before he gave it, with people in the White House. What it does not tell us is whether that included the president or whether perhaps those Cohen had conversations with shared those conversations with the president. We do not know if Cohen received any words of assurance that he was on the right course that were attributed to the president. It is perhaps, even possible, that staff in the White House shielded the president from knowledge of these conversations.

Giuliani, as he has so often done in advance of the release of stories damaging to the president, seems to have ruled out that last possibility, noting this morning that the president and Cohen likely discussed the testimony. And if that conversation in fact happened, it defies common sense to believe it could have transpired in a way that does not expose the president to some type of criminal involvement in the lies Cohen told.

Conspiracies don’t always include a clear agreement and a handshake. Far more often, they are a matter of nuanced conversations, gestures and continued action toward a desired outcome. The proverbial nudge, nudge, wink, wink. So the absence of a direct order is in no way fatal to Trump’s involvement, in a criminal fashion, in Cohen’s lie. But the real question is still why—why would a president do this?

None of what we know so far answers the “why” question. Why did Trump lie on the campaign trail? Why did Cohen lie to Congress? It’s possible that once we know the answer to that fundamental question, whether or not Trump was involved in Cohen’s lies to Congress will have far less significance as we consider other, even more serious, matters.

Prosecutors often find themselves at this point in a case; they know what happened but they don’t know why. Prosecutors aren’t required to establish motive in order to get a conviction, but motive can be very helpful in explaining why people made the choices they did. That’s what the public is really struggling to understand here, did the president make bad choices or is there something far more nefarious here?

Alex Whiting (@alexgwhiting), Professor at Harvard Law School and member of the board of editors of Just Security. He served as a former federal prosecutor at the Department of Justice and the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Boston:

Legally, there is no difference whatsoever between Trump explicitly directing Cohen to lie to Congress and Trump intentionally encouraging him to do so through implicit signals or tacit approval. In both cases, Trump would be guilty of aiding and abetting Cohen’s false statements to Congress. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C § 2, a person who “aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures” the commission of a crime is punishable as a principal. A case based on encouragement through silence or tacit signals would have to show that Trump intended to encourage and knew that his silence or his signals would do so. Also, silence alone would be insufficient to incur liability; it would have to be proven that under the circumstances, silence was understood by both Trump and Cohen to mean approval, e.g. if the two had an established practice by which Trump would intervene only if he objected to Cohen’s proposed statements or actions.

If there is no legal difference between these two scenarios, then why was the Buzzfeed report that Trump expressly directed to Cohen to lie received as such a bombshell when there has long existed evidence that Trump encouraged Cohen to lie through implicit signals or tacit approval?

The difference is less about substantive criminal law and more about evidence. If it were established that Trump explicitly directed Cohen to lie, then the case against the Trump for suborning false statements to Congress would be essentially open and shut. Crimes are typically analyzed in terms of acts (actus reus) and intent (mens rea). In the case of a direct statement from Trump to Cohen instructing him to lie, both the act and the intent would be established by proof of the statement itself. The statement is the act of counseling or commanding the lie, and the intent of its author in making the statement is perfectly clear from the statement itself.

By contrast, proving the act and intent of encouraging Cohen to lie through implicit signals or tacit approval is more complicated, and relies on circumstantial evidence to prove that Trump either intentionally, but tacitly, signaled to Cohen to lie, or that he knew that Cohen was going to lie and knew that by remaining silent he would encourage Cohen to do so. Note here that it is not enough to prove that Cohen thought he was following Trump’s wishes, though Cohen’s understanding of Trump’s signals (through statements or silence) would be hi


  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    3
    Shares
  •  
  • 3
  •  

“Jared Kushner” – Google News: Book by Former Staff Member Describes a White House ‘Out of Control’ – The New York Times

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Book by Former Staff Member Describes a White House ‘Out of Control’  The New York Times

Cliff Sims, a former communications staff member, portrays a West Wing full of back-stabbing and duplicity under President Trump in “Team of Vipers.”

“Jared Kushner” – Google News


  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    3
    Shares
  •  
  • 3
  •  

1. Trump from Michael_Novakhov (198 sites): Palmer Report: Donald Trump has berserk meltdown about Nancy Pelosi

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  


Donald Trump lost to Nancy Pelosi yet again on Saturday when he made a disingenuous compromise offer on his border wall. It wasn’t anything that the Democrats were going to accept, and the mere offer to make pro-immigrant concessions was enough to prompt some of Trump’s base to turn against him. In the process, Trump threw San Antonio under the bus by falsely claiming that 1) it’s surrounded by a wall, and 2) it’s on the Mexican border. Now Trump is throwing a different U.S. city under the bus.




After Donald Trump lost to Nancy Pelosi, he did what he always does: he lashed out in inappropriate fashion. Not only did he launch a vicious and factually inaccurate attack on Pelosi, he also decided to viciously attack San Francisco, apparently just for the heck of it.






Here’s what Trump spewed across his Twitter page: “Nancy Pelosi has behaved so irrationally & has gone so far to the left that she has now officially become a Radical Democrat. She is so petrified of the “lefties” in her party that she has lost control…And by the way, clean up the streets in San Francisco, they are disgusting!”



For the record, there is no evidence that Nancy Pelosi has “lost control” of her party; the Democrats have shown that they’re fully behind her in the battle against Donald Trump. In addition, Pelosi has always been a lefty; after all, she represents the liberal city of San Francisco. If Trump knew anything about America, he’d know that.

Click here to help fund Palmer Report’s editorial takedown of Donald Trump!

•••••

Sign up for the free Palmer Report mailing list and never miss an article!



The post Donald Trump has berserk meltdown about Nancy Pelosi appeared first on Palmer Report.

Palmer Report

1. Trump from Michael_Novakhov (198 sites)


  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    3
    Shares
  •  
  • 3
  •  

1. Trump from Michael_Novakhov (198 sites): “trump and republican party” – Google News: GOP senators try to figure out how closely to run with Trump – The State Journal-Register

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

GOP senators try to figure out how closely to run with Trump  The State Journal-Register

Republican Sen. Cory Gardner helped mastermind the GOP’s midterm strategy of pushing Senate candidates closer to President Donald Trump. But heading …

“trump and republican party” – Google News

1. Trump from Michael_Novakhov (198 sites)


  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    3
    Shares
  •  
  • 3
  •  

“trump putin” – Google News: Teens in Make America Great Again hats mocked a Native American elder at the Lincoln Memorial – CNN

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Teens in Make America Great Again hats mocked a Native American elder at the Lincoln Memorial  CNN

A crowd of teenagers surrounded a Native American elder and other activists and mocked them after Friday’s Indigenous Peoples March at the Lincoln …

“trump putin” – Google News


  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    3
    Shares
  •  
  • 3
  •  

1. Trump from Michael_Novakhov (198 sites): Politics: Trump two years in: The dealmaker who can’t seem to make a deal

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

The president is trying to bend Congress to his will in the shutdown fight, but many say his negotiating skills are falling short. “It’s like McDonald’s not being able to make a hamburger,” one critic said.

Politics

1. Trump from Michael_Novakhov (198 sites)


  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    3
    Shares
  •  
  • 3
  •  

1. Trump from Michael_Novakhov (198 sites): “Trump liar” – Google News: Teens in Make America Great Again hats mocked a Native American elder at the Lincoln Memorial – CNN

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Teens in Make America Great Again hats mocked a Native American elder at the Lincoln Memorial  CNN

A crowd of teenagers surrounded a Native American elder and other activists and mocked them after Friday’s Indigenous Peoples March at the Lincoln …

“Trump liar” – Google News

1. Trump from Michael_Novakhov (198 sites)


  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    3
    Shares
  •  
  • 3
  •  

1. Trump from Michael_Novakhov (198 sites): Palmer Report: Hey Mike Pence, bite me!

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  


This week Mike Pence’s wife Karen Pence decided to return to teaching. That’s all well and good, except she took a teaching job at a school that specifically bans LGBTQ employees and students. This is extraordinarily bigoted, blatantly anti-American, and it’s borderline abusive to the kids. Just don’t tell that to Mike Pence, who is outraged that you’re outraged about bigotry.




Mike Pence said in a new interview that “to see major news organizations attacking Christian education is deeply offensive to us.” Uh, no. There isn’t anything “Christian” about bigotry or homophobia. In fact there isn’t anything “Christian” about Mike Pence, a corrupt monster who – in Biblical terms – is more directly aligned with the views of Satan.






There are a number of Americans who, while not sharing Mike Pence’s evil and extremist views, have paid too little attention to realize that his mild mannered ways are a mere cover for the fact that he’s a deranged extremist. These people had better wise up quickly, because with Donald Trump’s presidency having perhaps just months or even weeks remaining in it, there’s a chance Pence will end up inheriting the presidency.



That’ll mean that – if Robert Mueller isn’t able to take down Mike Pence on treason related charges – we’ll have to oust or cripple this piece of crap the hard way. That’ll mean convincing the average American to stop listening to his mild mannered tone of voice, and look at the fact that he’s a perverted freak show who thinks he should get to dictate other people’s sexual orientation to them. Pence’s wife, who is attempting to enforce this on students, is even more of a deranged monster. And if you think I’m overstating any of this, you’re part of the problem.

Click here to help fund Palmer Report’s editorial takedown of Donald Trump!

•••••

Sign up for the free Palmer Report mailing list and never miss an article!



The post Hey Mike Pence, bite me! appeared first on Palmer Report.

Palmer Report

1. Trump from Michael_Novakhov (198 sites)


  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    3
    Shares
  •  
  • 3
  •  

FBI News Review: “fbi and trump” – Google News: Latest Bizarre Giuliani Interview Shows Donald Trump Lied To FBI About Trump Tower Moscow Deal, Experts Say – The Inquisitr News

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Latest Bizarre Giuliani Interview Shows Donald Trump Lied To FBI About Trump Tower Moscow Deal, Experts Say  The Inquisitr News

Giuliani again states that Trump discussed Moscow deal until November of 2016, months after FBI told him Russian was attacking the 2016 election.

“fbi and trump” – Google News

FBI News Review


  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    3
    Shares
  •  
  • 3
  •  

1. Trump from Michael_Novakhov (198 sites): “putin and trump” – Google News: Who is interpreter Marina Gross and can she shed light on Trump’s meeting with Putin? – ABC News

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Who is interpreter Marina Gross and can she shed light on Trump’s meeting with Putin?  ABC News

Who’s Marina Gross, the State Department interpreter who was the only other American with President Donald Trump during a one-on-one meeting with Russian …

“putin and trump” – Google News

1. Trump from Michael_Novakhov (198 sites)


  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    3
    Shares
  •  
  • 3
  •  

FBI News Review: “house judiciary committee” – Google News: Judiciary Committee Democrat Floats Perjury Probe Of Justice Brett Kavanaugh – The Daily Caller

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Judiciary Committee Democrat Floats Perjury Probe Of Justice Brett Kavanaugh  The Daily Caller

U.S. Rep. Joe Neguse, a Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, told constituents the panel will likely investigate Justice Brett Kavanaugh for perjury.

“house judiciary committee” – Google News

FBI News Review


  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    3
    Shares
  •  
  • 3
  •  

1. Trump from Michael_Novakhov (198 sites): “Trump and the Mob” – Google News: Letters to the Editor, Monday, Jan. 21, 2019 – Naples Daily News

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Letters to the Editor, Monday, Jan. 21, 2019  Naples Daily News

Today, Floridians will once again observe Martin Luther King Jr. Day, honoring the man who advanced and steered a civil rights movement that pushed America …

“Trump and the Mob” – Google News

1. Trump from Michael_Novakhov (198 sites)


  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    3
    Shares
  •  
  • 3
  •  

1. Trump from Michael_Novakhov (198 sites): “Russian Intelligence services and international organized crime and terrorism” – Google News: Trump presents ‘historic results’ of two years in office – Arutz Sheva

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Trump presents ‘historic results’ of two years in office  Arutz Sheva

Titled ‘Historic Results of President Trump’s First Two Years in Office’, the White House publishes a full list of achievements and actions.

“Russian Intelligence services and international organized crime and terrorism” – Google News

1. Trump from Michael_Novakhov (198 sites)


  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    3
    Shares
  •  
  • 3
  •  

1. Trump from Michael_Novakhov (198 sites): “Russian Intelligence services” – Google News: Democrats Prepare To Subpoena Deutsche Bank – “History Of Laundering Russian Money” – Jim Heath TV

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Democrats Prepare To Subpoena Deutsche Bank – “History Of Laundering Russian Money”  Jim Heath TV

Democrats now in control of the U.S. House of Representatives are working out which House panels will take the lead in investigating President Trump’s …

“Russian Intelligence services” – Google News

1. Trump from Michael_Novakhov (198 sites)


  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    3
    Shares
  •  
  • 3
  •