Trump lost moving on with new year go Biden




Graham only ahead by 7% points in his home state and that is within the margin of error
‘Lindsey Graham epitomizes why people hate politics ...
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/01/lindsey-graham-epitomizes-why-people-hate-politics...
But now that he’s in the U.S. Senate, Graham is facing a tough 2020 re-election challenge from Jaime Harrison. ... Controversial Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) was blasted on MSNBC on Friday for a ...

Lindsey Graham Faces A Challenge In 2020
https://www.outsidethebeltway.com/lindsey-graham-faces-a-challenge-in-2020
Dec 09, 2019 · Lindsey Graham faces a potentially interesting challenge in his 2020 re-election bid. Lindsey Graham faces a potentially interesting challenge in his 2020 re-election bid. ... facing

Where’s Lindsey? After G.O.P. Outcry, Graham Emerges as a ...
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/29/us/politics/lindsey-graham-impeachment.html
Nov 29, 2019 · “Lindsey Graham Keeps Making Empty Promises” was the headline for a segment on Tucker Carlson’s prime-time Fox program. ... Like Mr. Trump, he faces re-election next year.


I think you will see a lot of people tired of all the corruption within the republican party.....changes due?




BTW....this could be his downfall …..in a state that voted on the bathroom bill

Four More Top GOP Outings Due? - rense.com
https://rense.com/general78/out.htm
If it were to come out that McCain's Mini-Me, Sen. Graham, is gay, his chances of being reelected in South Carolina next year would drop to zero: Lindsey Graham (R-SC), an unmarried/never married 52 year old with a funny, ****** way of walking, has been far more fastidious with his homosexuality [than former Rep. Mark Foley was].

Lindsey Graham gay rumors: Are they hurting his ...
lindsey-graham-gay-rumors-are-they-hurting...
Jun 15, 2015 · Lurking behind the media’s fascination with Graham’s singlehood is an assumption about his sexuality. Gay rumors have long plagued the senator, and other South Carolina politicians have even

MSNBC anchor gaybaits Lindsey Graham
gaybaits-lindsey-graham
MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle suggested this week that Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., may have been blackmailed into supporting President Trump’s agenda. As if that idea weren’t stupid enough ...


Progressive Super PAC Head Floats Lindsey Graham Sex Kink ...
www.newnownext.com/lindsey-graham-gay-sex-scandal-rumor-democratic-coalition/01/2019
Jan 14, 2019 · The head of a progressive super PAC is facing a backlash over tweets speculating that Sen. Lindsey Graham has gone from anti-Trumpster to a rabid pro-Trump supporter because he is being

Chelsea Handler Accuses Lindsey Graham of Being Gay, Faces ...
https://variety.com/2018/politics/news/chelsea-handler-lindsay-graham-tweet-1202661260
Jan 11, 2018 · Chelsea Handler is under fire for a tweet about South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, where she implied that the politician is gay and is being blackmailed by …

Bill Maher Drops Gay-Coded List on Lindsey Graham: WATCH ...
https://www.towleroad.com/2019/11/bill-maher-lindsey-graham
Nov 09, 2019 · Bill Maher went after Senator LindseyGraham’s “hypocrisy on steroids” on Real Time Friday night with a list less about the Republican South Carolina senator’s heinous, turn-about ...

MSNBC anchor implies that Trump is blackmailing Lindsey Graham
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6599353/...
Jan 16, 2019 · Graham, a lifelong bachelor, has flatly denied rumors that he is gay. ... 'It's fine on MSNBC to baselessly muse that Lindsey Graham is being blackmailed with 'something pretty extreme' (gee, I ...
 
Graham only ahead by 7% points in his home state and that is within the margin of error
‘Lindsey Graham epitomizes why people hate politics ...
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/01/lindsey-graham-epitomizes-why-people-hate-politics...
But now that he’s in the U.S. Senate, Graham is facing a tough 2020 re-election challenge from Jaime Harrison. ... Controversial Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) was blasted on MSNBC on Friday for a ...

Lindsey Graham Faces A Challenge In 2020
https://www.outsidethebeltway.com/lindsey-graham-faces-a-challenge-in-2020
Dec 09, 2019 · Lindsey Graham faces a potentially interesting challenge in his 2020 re-election bid. Lindsey Graham faces a potentially interesting challenge in his 2020 re-election bid. ... facing

Where’s Lindsey? After G.O.P. Outcry, Graham Emerges as a ...
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/29/us/politics/lindsey-graham-impeachment.html
Nov 29, 2019 · “Lindsey Graham Keeps Making Empty Promises” was the headline for a segment on Tucker Carlson’s prime-time Fox program. ... Like Mr. Trump, he faces re-election next year.


I think you will see a lot of people tired of all the corruption within the republican party.....changes due?




BTW....this could be his downfall …..in a state that voted on the bathroom bill

Four More Top GOP Outings Due? - rense.com
https://rense.com/general78/out.htm
If it were to come out that McCain's Mini-Me, Sen. Graham, is gay, his chances of being reelected in South Carolina next year would drop to zero: Lindsey Graham (R-SC), an unmarried/never married 52 year old with a funny, ****** way of walking, has been far more fastidious with his homosexuality [than former Rep. Mark Foley was].

Lindsey Graham gay rumors: Are they hurting his ...
lindsey-graham-gay-rumors-are-they-hurting...
Jun 15, 2015 · Lurking behind the media’s fascination with Graham’s singlehood is an assumption about his sexuality. Gay rumors have long plagued the senator, and other South Carolina politicians have even

MSNBC anchor gaybaits Lindsey Graham
gaybaits-lindsey-graham
MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle suggested this week that Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., may have been blackmailed into supporting President Trump’s agenda. As if that idea weren’t stupid enough ...


Progressive Super PAC Head Floats Lindsey Graham Sex Kink ...
www.newnownext.com/lindsey-graham-gay-sex-scandal-rumor-democratic-coalition/01/2019
Jan 14, 2019 · The head of a progressive super PAC is facing a backlash over tweets speculating that Sen. Lindsey Graham has gone from anti-Trumpster to a rabid pro-Trump supporter because he is being

Chelsea Handler Accuses Lindsey Graham of Being Gay, Faces ...
https://variety.com/2018/politics/news/chelsea-handler-lindsay-graham-tweet-1202661260
Jan 11, 2018 · Chelsea Handler is under fire for a tweet about South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, where she implied that the politician is gay and is being blackmailed by …

Bill Maher Drops Gay-Coded List on Lindsey Graham: WATCH ...
https://www.towleroad.com/2019/11/bill-maher-lindsey-graham
Nov 09, 2019 · Bill Maher went after Senator LindseyGraham’s “hypocrisy on steroids” on Real Time Friday night with a list less about the Republican South Carolina senator’s heinous, turn-about ...

MSNBC anchor implies that Trump is blackmailing Lindsey Graham
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6599353/...
Jan 16, 2019 · Graham, a lifelong bachelor, has flatly denied rumors that he is gay. ... 'It's fine on MSNBC to baselessly muse that Lindsey Graham is being blackmailed with 'something pretty extreme' (gee, I ...
I knew you really liked him. I think term limits would clean house on all sides
 
Will Trump's acquittal by Republicans embolden the President to continue chipping away at the Constitution that's held this country together for over 250+ years? Afterall, Trump has now established (through his lawyers) that a sitting President can do as he pleases, that whatever he/she does is fine as long as he/she feels it is in the public's best interest. Notice that no evidence is required, just a "feeling" or self opinion. That RIGHT is whatever the President says it is because it is in the public interest. Of course Trump's acquittal will embolden him, which is why we should realize that the worst from this President, and possibly future Presidents, is yet to come.
Look at what we NOW have here ... if a governor or mayor or congressional representative refuses to 'endorse' the President, the President can now withhold disaster aid (for example) to their area? That a sitting President no longer needs to yield documents or testimony to congressional oversight. That a sitting President can ignore any laws which might restrain his/her re-election as long as he/she feels it is in the public interest. What about shutting down any media outlets which the President feels are not in the best interest of the public? Or, ignoring any court order that the President feels cause frustration to his agenda. Maybe he could simply cancel the upcoming election if he feels it would be in the public interest, or deny his/her general campaign loss because he/she feels the election was bias thus not in the public interest. Thus, a President wishes to accept campaign financing/assistance from foreign countries, its ok for the sitting President to do so simply because he/she feels it is in the public's best interest.
Initially Republicans said the President did not commit a quid pro quo, but as evidence that he DID mounted up, Trump's shifty lawyers convinced Republicans that "yes, he committed a quid pro quo, BUT, that a sitting President can DO as he pleases", or as Trump, himself said early in his first term, that "he could go down on 5th Avenue and ******* someone and get away with it". Trump now believes he can do ANYTHING he wants and the Constitution allows him to do it, the law be damned.
Just as the Republicans pushed through the Citizens United decision to recognize and allow unlimited corporate contributions (as individual rights), what is taking place NOW is just another major chip at what has bonded our country for all these many years ... all because of some slick talking lawyers who are allowed to twist the issue in such a way as to tear down our country's laws.
Well, I FEEL that you folks who are supporting this MAY soon feel the pain of your own decision ... KARMA is serving notice again. The WILL of the PEOPLE is being removed as you sit back and foolishly gloat at a political win.
pic_twocentsWorth2.jpg
 
Last edited:
Will Trump's acquittal by Republicans embolden the President to continue chipping away at the Constitution that's held this country together for over 250+ years? Afterall, Trump has now established (through his lawyers) that a sitting President can do as he pleases, that whatever he/she does is fine as long as he/she feels it is in the public's best interest. Notice that no evidence is required, just a "feeling" or self opinion. That RIGHT is whatever the President says it is because it is in the public interest. Of course Trump's acquittal will embolden him, which is why we should realize that the worst from this President, and possibly future Presidents, is yet to come.
Look at what we NOW have here ... if a governor or mayor or congressional representative refuses to 'endorse' the President, the President can now withhold disaster aid (for example) to their area? That a sitting President no longer needs to yield documents or testimony to congressional oversight. That a sitting President can ignore any laws which might restrain his/her re-election as long as he/she feels it is in the public interest. What about shutting down any media outlets which the President feels are not in the best interest of the public? Or, ignoring any court order that the President feels cause frustration to his agenda. Maybe he could simply cancel the upcoming election if he feels it would be in the public interest, or deny his/her general campaign loss because he/she feels the election was bias thus not in the public interest. Thus, a President wishes to accept campaign financing/assistance from foreign countries, its ok for the sitting President to do so simply because he/she feels it is in the public's best interest.
Initially Republicans said the President did not commit a quid pro quo, but as evidence that he DID mounted up, Trump's shifty lawyers convinced Republicans that "yes, he committed a quid pro quo, BUT, that a sitting President can DO as he pleases", or as Trump, himself said early in his first term, that "he could go down on 5th Avenue and ******* someone and get away with it". Trump now believes he can do ANYTHING he wants and the Constitution allows him to do it, the law be damned.
Just as the Republicans pushed through the Citizens United decision to recognize and allow unlimited corporate contributions (as individual rights), what is taking place NOW is just another major chip at what has bonded our country for all these many years ... all because of some slick talking lawyers who are allowed to twist the issue in such a way as to tear down our country's laws.
Well, I FEEL that you folks who are supporting this MAY soon feel the pain of your own decision ... KARMA is serving notice again. The WILL of the PEOPLE is being removed as you sit back and foolishly gloat at a political win.
View attachment 3128226
Where's the other1 1/2
 
By always being the liberal leftist Democratic Party they have continued to push the line to destroy anything having do with conservative values. The Democratic Party has lost all sense of reality, everything they now stand for proves just where they are. I admit that Donald Trumps personality if far from politically correct, but if he doesn't get reelected in November, what will your answers be then? Instead of complaining about how bad you think Trump is, who do your beloved democrats have that can do the Job to your satisfaction? Another thing to remember is that this country is so divided right now, that if a Democrat or even a Democratic Socialist wins, the Republican Party that has had to put up with the constant harassment of President Trump from day one, will remember this and react accordingly. What is your solution ?
 
Dems need more’n the Great Gazoo to beat President Trump with the bozo candidates they’re running!!!!!!!



speaking of great Gazoo's………….trump will soon take it right up his.....when the right starts seeing they are having trouble holding onto office....he will be covered in gazooism….they will drop him like the turd he is!
 



would that be more of that right wing double standard...…..or just republican's trying to push ******* off onto the public


try again....only so many ways you can defend a loser.....but you keep trying I will give you that......but then you are a republican......and not known for thinking on your own


Here Are the Ways Trump Cashes In on Being President
trump-cashes-in-on-the-u-s...
Jan 14, 2019 · President Donald Trump | Nicolas Asfouri/AFP/Getty Images When candidate Donald Trump said he was gong to “drain the swamp,” most people thought it …

How Donald Trump's ******* Have Profited Off Their Dad's ...
https://www.gq.com/story/trump-*******-profit-presidency
Oct 14, 2019 · Just down the road from the White House is the Trump International Hotel, located in D.C.’s Old Post Office building leased in 2013 to one of Donald Trump’s holding companies for …

Five Ways the Trumps Have Gotten Richer Since the Election
https://www.newsweek.com/trump-family-profiting...
    1. Trump's continued global business ventures, despite vows of "no new foreign deals." The …
    2. Business is booming at Mar-a-Lago. Just days after Trump was inaugurated as the 45th president, …
    3. Trump's new hotel in Washington raked in $20 million in its first few months. The launch of …
    4. The first family profits from visits to Trump-branded properties and golf courses. Trump has spent
 



Odd ene though trump and Johnston good friends and trump pushed for him to get into office....if that did any good...….he told trump to stay out of the Brexit deal....and now he wants to support trump in some way....2 peas in a pod.....both bullshitters
 
GAO says Trump administration broke law by withholding ...
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/gao-says-trump-admin-broke-law-ukraine
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a legal opinion on Thursday saying that President Trump's administration broke the law by withholding defense aid to Ukraine — the issue at the ...

By Withholding Funds to Ukraine, Trump Broke the Law ...
https://reason.com/2020/01/16/by-withholding-funds-to-ukraine-trump-broke-the-law
Jan 16, 2020 · By Withholding Funds to Ukraine, Trump Broke the Law ... " If there is one thing that constitutional law scholars agree on, it is that the spending power is …



Report: Trump wanted Barr to tell the public he broke no ...
https://theweek.com/.../report-trump-wanted-barr-tell-public-broke-no-laws-ukraine-call
In late September, President Trump wanted Attorney General William Barr to hold a news conference and tell reporters that Trump didn't break any laws during his July 25 phone call with Ukrainian ...


FEC Chair: It's Illegal To Accept Election Help From ...
...
The notice, posted by FEC Chair Ellen Weintraub, comes one day after President Donald Trump told ABC News that he would accept dirt on his opponents in the 2020 election from another country, such as Russia or China.




Republicans Are Mostly Silent on Foreign Interference ...
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/10/how-republicans-learned-tolerate...
Oct 04, 2019 · Donald Trump encouraged two foreign governments, including a U.S. adversary, to interfere in the 2020 election. The bet was that his party wouldn’t object, and so far it’s paying off.

Does the Trump Administration Believe in the Rule of Law ...
our-work/analysis-opinion/does-trump-administration...
By behaving in ways that undermine the rule of law domestically and internationally, the Trump administration is compromising our integrity and security. We have to hope that the Trump Administration figures out quickly that protecting our core values is far more important than losing a case.



Comment: Republicans give Trump the all-clear with ...
republicans-give-donald-trump-the-all...
2 days ago · COMMENT: Republicans have decided it was OK. With their expected vote this coming week to acquit President Donald Trump of abusing power and obstructing Congress




Why Republicans Play Dirty
They fear that if they stick to the rules, they will lose everything. Their behavior is a threat to democratic stability.

The greatest threat to our democracy today is a Republican Party that plays dirty to win.
The party’s abandonment of fair play was showcased spectacularly in 2016, when the United States Senate refused to allow President Barack Obama to fill the Supreme Court vacancy created by Justice Antonin Scalia’s death in February. While technically constitutional, the act — in effect, stealing a court seat — hadn’t been tried since the 19th century. It would be bad enough on its own, but the Merrick Garland affair is part of a broader pattern.

Republicans across the country seem to have embraced an “any means necessary” strategy to preserve their power. After losing the governorship in North Carolina in 2016 and Wisconsin in 2018, Republicans used lame-duck legislative sessions to push through a flurry of bills stripping power from incoming Democratic governors. Last year, when the Pennsylvania Supreme Court struck down a Republican gerrymandering initiative, conservative legislators attempted to impeach the justices. And back in North Carolina, Republican legislators used a surprise vote last week, on Sept. 11, to ram through an override of Gov. Roy Cooper’s budget veto — while most Democrats had been told no vote would be held. This is classic “constitutional hardball,” behavior that, while technically legal, uses the letter of the law to subvert its spirit.

Constitutional hardball has accelerated under the Trump administration. President Trump’s declaration of a “national emergency” to divert public money toward a border wall — openly flouting Congress, which voted against building a wall — is a clear example. And the Supreme Court’s conservative majority, manufactured by an earlier act of hardball, may uphold the constitutionality of the president’s autocratic behavior.

Constitutional hardball can damage and even destroy a democracy. Democratic institutions function only when power is exercised with restraint. When parties abandon the spirit of the law and seek to win by any means necessary, politics often descends into institutional warfare. Governments in Hungary and Turkey have used court packing and other “legal” maneuvers to lock in power and ensure that subsequent abuse is ruled “constitutional.” And when one party engages in constitutional hardball, its rivals often feel compelled to respond in a tit-for-tat fashion, triggering an escalating conflict that is difficult to undo. As the collapse of democracy in Germany and Spain in the 1930s and Chile in the 1970s makes clear, these escalating conflicts can end in tragedy.

Why is the Republican Party playing dirty? Republican leaders are not driven by an intrinsic or ideological contempt for democracy. They are driven by fear.

Democracy requires that parties know how to lose. Politicians who fail to win elections must be willing to accept defeat, go home, and get ready to play again the next day. This norm of gracious losing is essential to a healthy democracy.
But for parties to accept losing, two conditions must hold. First, they must feel secure that losing today will not bring ruinous consequences; and second, they must believe they have a reasonable chance of winning again in the future. When party leaders fear that they cannot win future elections, or that defeat poses an existential threat to themselves or their constituents, the stakes rise. Their time horizons shorten. They throw tomorrow to the wind and seek to win at any cost today. In short, desperation leads politicians to play dirty.

Take German conservatives before World War I. They were haunted by the prospect of extending equal voting rights to the working class. They viewed equal (male) suffrage as a menace not only to their own electoral prospects but also to the survival of the aristocratic order. One Conservative leader called full and equal suffrage an “attack on the laws of civilization.” So German conservatives played dirty, engaging in rampant election manipulation and outright repression in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

In the United States, Southern Democrats reacted in a similar manner to the Reconstruction-era enfranchisement of African-Americans. Mandated by the 15th Amendment, which was ratified in 1870, black suffrage not only imperiled Southern Democrats’ political dominance but also challenged longstanding patterns of white supremacy. Since African-Americans represented a majority or near majority in many of the post-Confederate states, Southern Democrats viewed their enfranchisement as an existential threat. So they, too, played dirty.

Between 1885 and 1908, all 11 post-Confederate states passed laws establishing poll taxes, literacy tests, property and residency requirements and other measures aimed at stripping African-Americans of their voting rights — and locking in Democratic Party dominance. In Tennessee, where the 1889 Dortch Law would disenfranchise illiterate black voters, one newspaper editorialized, “Give us the Dortch bill or we perish.” These measures, building on a monstrous campaign of anti-black violence, did precisely what they were intended to do: Black turnout in the South fell to 2 percent in 1912 from 61 percent in 1880. Unwilling to lose, Southern Democrats stripped the right to vote from millions of people, ushering in nearly a century of authoritarian rule in the South.

Republicans appear to be in the grip of a similar panic today. Their medium-term electoral prospects are dim. For one, they remain an overwhelmingly white Christian party in an increasingly diverse society. As a share of the American electorate, white Christians declined from 73 percent in 1992 to 57 percent in 2012 and may be below 50 percent by 2024. Republicans also face a generational challenge: Younger voters are deserting them. In 2018, 18- to 29-year-olds voted for Democrats by more than 2 to 1, and 30-somethings voted nearly 60 percent for Democrats.

Demography is not destiny, but as California Republicans have discovered, it often punishes parties that fail to adapt to changing societies. The growing diversity of the American electorate is making it harder for the Republican Party to win national majorities. Republicans have won the popular vote in presidential elections just once in the last 30 years. Donald Trump captured this Republican pessimism well when he told the Christian Broadcasting Network in 2016, “I think this is the last election the Republicans have a chance of winning because you are going to have people flowing across the border.”
“If we don’t win this election,” Mr. Trump added, “you’ll never see another Republican.”


The problem runs deeper than electoral math, however. Much of the Republican base views defeat as catastrophic. White Christians are losing more than an electoral majority; their once-dominant status in American society is eroding. Half a century ago, white Protestant men occupied nearly all our country’s high-status positions: They made up nearly all the elected officials, business leaders and media figures. Those days are over, but the loss of a group’s social status can feel deeply threatening. Many rank-and-file Republicans believe that the country they grew up in is being taken away from them. Slogans like “take our country back” and “make America great again” reflect this sense of peril.

So like the old Southern Democrats, modern-day Republicans have responded to darkening electoral horizons and rank-and-file perceptions of existential threat with a win-at-any-cost mentality. Most reminiscent of the Jim Crow South are Republican efforts to tilt the electoral playing field. Since 2010, a dozen Republican-led states have adopted new laws making it more difficult to register or vote. Republican state and local governments have closed polling places in predominantly African-American neighborhoods, purged voter rolls and created new obstacles to registration and voting.

In Georgia, a 2017 “exact match law” allowed authorities to throw out voter registration forms whose information did not “exactly match” existing records. Brian Kemp, who was simultaneously Georgia’s secretary of state and the 2018 Republican candidate for governor,
tried to use the law to invalidate tens of thousands of registration forms, many of which were from African-Americans. In Tennessee, Republicans recently passed chilling legislation allowing criminal charges to be levied against voter registration groups that submit incomplete forms or miss deadlines. And in Texas this year, Republicans attempted to purge the voter rolls of nearly 100,000 Latinos.

The Trump administration’s effort to include a citizenship question in the census to facilitate gerrymandering schemes that would, in the words of one party strategist, be “advantageous to Republicans and non-Hispanic whites
,” fits the broader pattern. Although these abuses are certainly less egregious than those committed by post-bellum Southern Democrats, the underlying logic is similar: Parties representing fearful, declining majorities turn, in desperation, to minority rule.

The only way out of this situation is for the Republican Party to become more diverse. A stunning 90 percent of House Republicans are white men, even though white men are a third of the electorate. Only when Republicans can compete seriously for younger, urban and nonwhite voters will their fear of losing — and of a multiracial America — subside.

Such a transformation is less far-fetched than it may appear right now; indeed, the Republican National Committee recommended it in 2013. But parties only change when their strategies bring costly defeat. So Republicans must fail — badly — at the polls.

American democracy faces a Catch-22: Republicans won’t abandon their white identity bunker strategy until they lose, but at the same time that strategy has made them so averse to losing they are willing to bend the rules to avoid this fate. There is no easy exit. Republican leaders must either stand up to their base and broaden their appeal or they must suffer an electoral thrashing so severe that they are compelled to do so.

Liberal democracy has historically required at least two competing parties committed to playing the democratic game, including one that typically represents conservative interests. But the commitment of America’s conservative party to this system is wavering, threatening our political system as a whole. Until Republicans learn to compete fairly in a diverse society, our democratic institutions will be imperiled.

Opinion | Why Republicans Play Dirty

They fear that if they stick to the rules, they will lose everything. Their behavior is a threat to democratic stability.


Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I knew you really liked him. I think term limits would clean house on all sides



won't argue that...….think that was another trump proposal along with lobbyist and draining the swamp....I see one of the Dems has mentioned it....but will go NOWHERE...…..they have to vote on it...and they are not going to ******* the golden goose
 
The Trump Kleptocracy
The presidency is officially a cash grab — and a pitstop on the way to autocracy




The convictions of Paul Manafort and Michael Cohen this August shined a light on the type of people Trump chooses to work with. He said he’d employ the “best people”; instead, he employed crooks.

Trump is Leading the Most Corrupt Administration in U.S ...
https://www.newsweek.com/2017/11/10/trump...
Trump is Leading the Most Corrupt Administration in U.S. History, One of First-Class Kleptocrats . By Alexander Nazaryan On 11/02/17 at 9:54 AM EDT . Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump ...



Behind all the outrage, the Manafort and Cohen convictions show that Trump’s government is building an American kleptocracy. The Washington Post has described how kleptocracy, or “rule by thieves,” arises when a country’s elite begin to systematically steal from public funds on a vast scale.

This is where the United States is headed. Trump’s government is powered by people who want to see tax cuts for their own benefit, without a care for the cost to others. This runs from voters backing pro-tax-cut candidates to the upper echelons of the GOP that are complicit in what Fortune magazine is calling “the biggest wealth grab in modern history.”

Trump Tax Plan Benefits Wealthy, Including Trump - The New ...
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/27/us/politics/trump-tax-plan-wealthy-middle-class...
Sep 27, 2017 · The plan would also benefit Mr. Trump and other affluent Americans by eliminating the estate tax, which affects just a few thousand uber-wealthy families each year, and the alternative minimum tax ...




It is far from the first time a person like Trump has run a country. History may determine it was inevitable that the United States would go the way of countries like Russia, Turkey, China, and many others, electing a leader who could facilitate transferring the country’s wealth to a small number of private individuals. The thing about kleptocracy is that it doesn’t need to break the law because those doing it are writing the law—but the outcome is the same.

How many republican lawyers in congress - Answers





Answers - The Most Trusted Place for Answering Life's Questions


Answers.com is the place to go to get the answers you need and to ask the questions you want


www.answers.com republican_lawyers_in_congress
May 29, 2012 · Sixty percent of the U.S. Senate is lawyers. Enough said. 37.2% of the House of Representatives are lawyers. There are 81 Republican lawyers in Congress who list "lawyer




Trump was helped to power by a


conspiracy of billionaires, including Vladimir Poroshenko and Robert Mercer. From this angle, you could argue that while the Russian attack on American democracy was partly political, it was mainly just about business. After all, the Russian government is a mafia gang for whom international politics is a business operation. By helping to power a man they helped make rich, they can weaken one of the main international obstacles to their own efforts to drain Russia of cash.

Unequal Russia: is anger stirring in the global capital of ...
https://www.theguardian.com/inequality/2017/apr/25/unequal-russia-is-anger-stirring-in...





This presidency is but a brief window to grab as much cash as possible before being inevitably booted back out.



The extent of Trump’s kleptocracy is becoming clear now, with his second proposed tax cut for the rich. The Trump government is ramping up the national debt by $1.5 trillion over 10 years while taking hundreds of billions of dollars out of the economy in tax cuts for the rich. In America, around two-thirds of all stocks and mutual funds are owned by just 5 percent of the people, and any tax-cut benefits for corporations will mainly just benefit that group. It is estimated that 34 percent of Trump’s December tax cuts benefit just the top 1 percent of the country’s rich.

US national debt rises $2 trillion under President Trump
fox43.com/2019/01/04/us-national-debt-rises-2-trillion-under-president-trump/

Yet as he cuts taxes for a rich minority, Trump is also freezing public sector pay because there’s not enough money. As Forbes magazine observed:

President Trump has cancelled the pay increases for public sector workers that were due to take effect in January 2019. His reason for doing so? The tax cuts that his administration has introduced are set to create the largest fiscal deficit since the Great Recession. Now this largesse has to be paid for.

In effect, his tax bills have taken money out of the economy and primarily redistributed it to corporations, CEOs, and the super rich.
This is not about Republican political ideology, and it is not mere economic incompetence. It is bare-faced kleptocracy. For Trump, his family, and the less principled crooks around him, this presidency is but a brief window to grab as much cash as possible before being inevitably booted back out of the White House. They’re like a bunch of ******* getting the keys to the world’s biggest candy store without any adults around to supervise them.


To understand the situation with more clarity, look at Russia, which is a more advanced version of what Trump seems to be building. In 2013, the Independent reported that just 110 people held one-third of Russia’s wealth.

The story of modern Russia is that of a massive transfer of wealth from the country to a small ruling elite. According to sociologist and expert on Russia, Elisabeth Schimpfossl, “When this first post-Soviet generation passes its wealth on… it will be the single biggest transfer of assets within the smallest group of people ever to have occurred.”

Beyond the human cost of kleptocracy is the danger that progressively draining the country of money creates the sort of inequality that leads to social and political unrest.

Russia’s kleptocracy has laundered hundreds of billions of dollars out of the country over the years. Meanwhile, Poroshenko’s latest attempt to increase the pension age means most Russian men will die before they are eligible for a state pension.

Most Russians, especially the elderly, are already living in a state of perpetual poverty. This reflects two stark realities: First, there is not enough money left in the Russian state coffers to pay pensions, and second, Russian men have a low life expectancy—arguably because the theft of its kleptocratic government means there is not enough money for health care, education, and the other things people need.

The average life expectancy in Russia is in the mid-sixties, but that’s an average many men fall short of. If all the money tied up in former state enterprises, and then in Russian oil and gas, had flowed back into a well-managed economy run by an honest and effective government, Russian life expectancy would have gone up, people would have adequate health care and education.

The same thing is now happening in the United States. Policies designed to protect the population—but which restrict businesses from making more money—are being abandoned.



Until now, the West was characterized by progress, which in a simple sense can be reflected in life expectancy. As countries become more efficient and effective, they generate more tax, and this is used to support better health care, education, and enforcement of laws that protect the population from harm.


Banning dangerous practices, such as the use of asbestos in building materials and lead in petrol, and introducing public health actions like immunization, universal health care, seatbelt laws, and smoking bans may negatively impact businesses, but it positively impacts people, which should be the point of government. People on their own cannot ******* rich and powerful corporations to stop harming them; they rely on the government to do that.

How the Trump Administration Pulled Back on Regulating ...


https://e360.yale.edu/features/how-
trump-administration-has-pulled-back-on-regulating...
The Trump administration has halted bans on toxic chemicals that are known to cause serious health threats. These moves, led by an ex-industry group executive now at the EPA, have allowed the continued use of products found to cause cancer, birth defects, and other ailments.




One of the simplest functions of any government is to ensure the people are afforded some degree of protection against the excesses of corporations and criminals, at least to the extent those excesses do not negatively impact life expectancy.

But, alarmingly, life expectancy is going down in the United States, primarily because the government is putting commercial and personal financial interests ahead of the health and well-being of its citizens.


Beyond the human cost of kleptocracy is the danger that progressively draining the country of money creates the sort of
inequality that leads to social and political unrest. This results in political instability and ever-increasing authoritarianism to keep order.

U.S. income inequality at highest level in 50 years ...
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/u-s-income-inequality-highest-level-50-years...
Sep 26, 2019 · — The gap between the haves and have-nots in the United States grew last year to its highest level in more than 50 years of tracking income inequality, according to Census Bureau figures.




Trump is increasingly undermining the media and law enforcement because those are the two main tools a state has to prevent kleptocracy.

The Trump Administration's Treatment Of Law Enforcement ...


https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-current-administrations-treatment-of-
law...
Jun 16, 2017 · Comey was not the first high ranking law enforcement official to be fired unexpectedly by the Trump administration. In March, Preet Bharara was fired from his position as United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, even though President Trump had personally told him he would stay. Mr. Bharara oversaw a prosecutor’s office ...





As Russia, Turkey, and Venezuela have shown, kleptocrats use nationalism and populism to keep their base because they cannot use economic progress to win votes. They blame foreign governments, conspiracies, and immigrants for the failures actually caused by their own wholesale theft of the country’s assets.


They blame a biased media, foreign propaganda, and “enemies of the people,” when the news explains what is happening
. Meanwhile, they counter the truth with media they control—which either doesn’t say what is happening, tells lies, or distracts people from reality. Gradually, the economy unwinds and the social problems caused by these policies collide with the diminished public services that can no longer deal with them.

'Enemy of the People': Trump's hatred of the press is for ...
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/10/30/donald-trump-hatred-press-enemy...
Oct 30, 2018 · Donald Trump's hatred of the press, lies and bullying echoes dangerous regimes of the past Trump uses attacks on the media, totalitarian language, cartoonish conspiracy fictions and a …


This is how nationalism and populism become fascism.

Relaxing regulations on things that harm people puts added pressure on the health care system.

The increase in sickness reduces the performance of the economy. The resulting increase in social deprivation leads to an increase in crime. Conventional policing is underfunded and undermined by an increasingly corrupt and weakened judiciary, so laws become more draconian and policing becomes
more militarized.

Trump has altered over 800 Obama-era regulations, Wilbur ...
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/oct/13/...
Oct 13, 2017 · Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said Friday that President Trump is “systematically” removing hundreds of regulations put in place by the Obama …



The kleptocratic policies continue to break things in a self-perpetuating cycle. The corrupt rich become even more rich, while the rest of the country becomes even more poor. The inequality leads to unrest, which is managed by ever more propaganda, less freedom, more control and censorship, and harsher policing.

Perpetually blaming others creates an ever-increasing need to find scapegoats, which spills over into outright attacks on minority groups or on foreign governments. We have seen this with Russia’s wars, used to distract people from local economic hardships. Turkey and Venezuela have blamed the United States, Hungary blames immigrants, and generally, every would-be dictator will blame anyone but themselves.

This is how a democracy becomes a kleptocracy, and then an autocracy, and then a dictatorship
. This is how nationalism and populism become fascism.

Kleptocratic leaders become trapped in a cycle of their own making. The more wealth they amass, the worse things get for the poor, the harsher the steps they take to maintain order and power. They reach a point where they are so wealthy, and the people around them are so angry, that losing power would mean losing their wealth and, likely, their lives.

Although I doubt Trump could bring about a dictatorship like this, we are already looking at a situation where he could face criminal prosecution once he leaves office. This provides a powerful incentive for him to take more drastic measures to stay in power, weaken or corrupt the legal system that could later prosecute him, and muddy the media’s ability to report on his kleptocracy. He will probably fail, but not before he does immense damage to the United States.
 
AP FACT CHECK: Distortion in Trump's impeachment defense

WASHINGTON (AP) — In his first formal response to impeachment charges, President Donald Trump misrepresented the testimony of a key witness who described an exchange of favors in the Ukraine matter.

The claim marked a week of frequent exaggeration and distortion by the president heading into the opening statements of his impeachment trial.

Just as his tax cuts are far from the biggest in history, the economy isn't the best ever and his election victory in 2016 was no landslide of historic proportions, Trump's two trade deals don't stand atop the field of presidential endeavors. One is a partial settlement of trade grievances with China; the other is a refresh of what past presidents created for North America.

Meanwhile, the Democratic presidential contenders weren't immune from misrepresentation in their final debate before the first votes of the 2020 campaign, in Iowa.

A look at the claims:

IMPEACHMENT

TRUMP, via attorneys
: “Individuals who have stated for the record that they spoke to the President about the subject actually exonerate him. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland stated that when he asked the President what he wanted from Ukraine, the President said: ‘I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo.’” — response to impeachment charges filed Saturday.

THE FACTS: That assertion omits key context on what Sondland told House investigators.

As one of the officials most deeply involved in trying to get Ukraine to do Trump's bidding, Sondland testified that there was indeed a quid pro quo in the matter and “everyone was in the loop.” Specifically, Sondland said it was understood that Ukraine's new president would only get a meeting with Trump in the Oval Office if he publicly pledged to investigate the Bidens and the Democrats.

“Was there a ‘quid pro quo?’ Sondland asked in his statement to the House Intelligence Committee. ”As I testified previously, with regard to the requested White House call and White House meeting, the answer is yes."

Moreover, on the more serious matter of withholding military aid to Ukraine unless the country investigated Democrats, Sondland testified that a this-for-that explanation was the only one that made sense to him.

Testimony from other officials shored up the picture of a president and his associates systematically trying to get Ukraine to do what Trump wanted during a period when the military assistance approved by Congress was put on hold without explanation.


TRUMP:
“The President acted at all times with full constitutional and legal authority and in our national interest.” — response to impeachment charges.

THE FACTS: That, of course, is in dispute. The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress, found the White House violated federal law in withholding security assistance to Ukraine, an action at the center of Trump’s impeachment.

Its report said the Office of Management and Budget broke the law over the military aid, which Congress passed less than a year ago, saying “the President is not vested with the power to ignore or amend any such duly enacted law."

The money was held up last summer on orders from Trump but freed up in September after Congress pushed for its release and a whistleblower's complaint about Trump's July call with the Ukrainian leader became public.

The Government Accountability Office said the White House budget office violated the Impoundment Control Act by delaying the security assistance for “policy reasons,” rather than technical budgetary needs.

The budget office has said it disagrees with that finding and the hold was appropriate and necessary. Trump argues he delayed the $391 million in U.S. assistance because of concerns about corruption, although the Defense Department had already previously certified to congressional committees that Ukraine had made enough progress on reducing corruption to receive the aid.



TRUMP:
“House Democrats ran a fundamentally flawed and illegitimate process that denied the President every basic right, including the right to have counsel present, the right to cross-examine witnesses.” — response to impeachment charges.

TRUMP: “'We demand fairness' shouts Pelosi and the Do Nothing Democrats, yet the Dems in the House wouldn’t let us have 1 witness, no lawyers or even ask questions." — tweet on Jan. 13, referring to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

THE FACTS: Not true. The House Judiciary Committee, which produced the articles of impeachment, invited Trump or his legal team to come. He declined.

Absent White House representation, the hearings proceeded as things in Congress routinely do: Time is split between Democratic and Republican lawmakers to ask questions and engage in the debate. Lawyers for Democrats and Republicans on the committee presented the case for and against the impeachment articles and members questioned witnesses, among them an academic called forward by Republicans.

The first round of hearings was by the House Intelligence Committee and resembled the investigative phase of criminal cases, conducted without the participation of the subject of the investigation. Trump cried foul then at the lack of representation, then rejected representation when the next committee offered it.

His lawyers will participate in the Senate's impeachment trial, which resumes Tuesday.



TRUMP, on House intelligence chairman Adam Schiff: “Mr. Schiff created a fraudulent version of the July 25 call and read it to the American people at a congressional hearing, without disclosing that he was simply making it all up.” — response to impeachment charges.

THE FACTS: It's incorrect that Schiff didn't disclose what he was doing.

Trump is overstating Schiff's exaggerations, which the president has repeatedly described as lies and “massive frauds.” The California Democrat, in what he said was a parody during a committee hearing in September, was mocking the president's pleas in his July call to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, as Trump does with his critics routinely.

Schiff made clear he was providing an account that was in "essence" what he believed Trump was conveying to Zelenskiy, when "shorn of its rambling character."

___

TRUMP: “You had a fake whistleblower that wrote a report that bore no relationship to what was said. Everything was false." — remarks Thursday.


THE FACTS: Trump's statement is false. The whistleblower's account of a phone call between Trump and Ukraine's leader in July closely resembled what was said, judging by the rough transcript released later by the White House itself and by the testimony of officials who listened in on the call.

Witnesses in the impeachment hearings and other sources also verified the whistleblower's description of events before and after the call as Trump and his aides pressed Ukraine to investigate one of Trump's political rivals, Democrat Joe Biden. The Senate impeachment trial will explore whether Trump abused his power.


TRADE


TRUMP
on his trade agreement with China: “This is the biggest deal there is, anywhere in the world by far.’’ — remarks Wednesday at the signing.

TRUMP on the China deal and his updated North American trade agreement: “So we've done two of the biggest trade deals. They are the two biggest trade deals in the world ever done.” — remarks at the White House on Thursday.

THE FACTS: Neither claim is true.

The China agreement is not nearly as big as the U.S.-Mexico-Canada agreement, so it's not the largest ever, much less “by far.”
The deal with Canada and Mexico was an update of the long-standing North American Free Trade Agreement worked out by Presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton.

The North American agreement also is not the largest ever.


For instance, 123 countries signed the Uruguay Round agreement that liberalized trade and produced the World Trade Organization in 1994. The organization's initial membership accounted for more than 90% of global economic output, the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston found, and that was before China joined the organization.

Also bigger: the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which would have joined North America with Pacific Rim countries in freer trade. Trump took the U.S. out after the deal was negotiated and before the U.S. ratified it. The European Union was formed from a giant deal.

The China deal leaves tariffs in place on about $360 billion in imports from China and pushes substantial remaining disputes ahead to a second phase of negotiations.


TRUMP
on China deal: “I did the biggest deal ever done in the history of our country yesterday in terms of trade — and probably other things too, if you think about it.” — remarks Thursday.

THE FACTS: Trump is even more wildly off the mark in speculating that his China trade deal eclipses all other international agreements, even outside trade.

The Montreal Protocol, aimed at protecting Earth's ozone layer, was ratified by every member state of the United Nations. A variety of other agreements — on the rights of children, world health standards, droughts — achieved nearly universal ratification. More than 190 countries signed the Paris accord on climate change, of which more than 180 have ratified it. The U.S. is pulling out of it.


ECONOMY

TRUMP:
“In Wisconsin, the unemployment rate has reached its lowest level in history.” — Milwaukee rally Tuesday.

THE FACTS: He's citing outdated figures.

Wisconsin did post a record low unemployment rate of 2.8% in April and May. But it has since edged up and is now at 3.3%. That's slightly lower than the U.S. average of 3.5%, but suggests that the state hit a rough patch in the middle of last year.


TRUMP: “More than 300,000 people under Obama, 300,000 people, left the workforce. Under just three years of my administration, 3.5 million people have joined the workforce.” — Milwaukee rally.

THE FACTS: Trump is wrong about Barack Obama’s record.

More than 5 million people joined the U.S. labor ******* during Obama’s presidency, according to Labor Department figures. These gains reflect the recovery from the Great Recession as well as population growth.
More than 4.8 million people have joined the labor ******* in three years of Trump's presidency.


TRUMP: “Under the Trump economy, the lowest-paid earners are reaping the biggest, fastest and largest gains. ... Earnings for the bottom 10% are rising faster than earnings for the top 10%, proportionally.” — Milwaukee rally.

THE FACTS: Actually, the top 10% of earners saw the biggest raises of any income bracket over the past year. Their usual weekly earnings jumped 8% or $168, according to the Labor Department. The bottom 10% saw weekly incomes grow 7% or $30.

Over a broader range — the top and bottom 25% — weekly earnings also grew at faster rate for the wealthier group.


TRUMP:
“We’ve created 7 million jobs since the election including more than 1 million manufacturing and construction jobs. Nobody thought that was possible.” — Milwaukee rally.


THE FACTS: His numbers are roughly right, though they are less impressive than Trump claims.

Job gains under Trump over the past three years were lower than during the final three years of Obama’s presidency. More than 8 million jobs were added during that period under Obama, including 1.2 million combined in manufacturing and construction.

What these figures suggest is that much of the job growth under Trump reflects the momentum from a recovery that officially began in the middle of 2009.


IMMIGRATION

TRUMP:
“We have loopholes. Like a visa lottery. We put things in the lottery, and they come in — they become American citizens. Do you think these countries are giving us their finest? Oh, let's give them our best citizens.” — Milwaukee rally.

THE FACTS: This is a perpetual falsehood from the president. Countries don't nominate their citizens for the program. They don't get to select people they'd like to get rid of.

Foreigners apply for the visas on their own. Under the program, citizens of countries named by the U.S. can bid for visas if they have enough education or work experience in desired fields. Out of that pool of qualified applicants, the State Department randomly selects a much smaller pool of tentative winners. Not all winners will have visas approved because they still must compete for a smaller number of slots by getting their applications in quickly.

Those who are ultimately offered visas still need to go through background checks, like other immigrants.


TRUMP: “Mexico's paying for the wall. ... You know that. It's all worked out.” — Milwaukee rally.

THE FACTS: Mexico isn’t paying for Trump's long-promised border wall.

Trump has argued that the updated trade agreement with Canada and Mexico will pay for the wall because of economic benefits he predicts will come from the deal. Nothing in the trade agreement would cover or refund the construction cost or require a payment from Mexico.

baby CARE

BIDEN,
on his early days in Washington: "I was making $42,000 a year. I commuted every single solitary day to Wilmington, Delaware — over 500 miles a day, excuse me, 250 miles a day — because I could not afford ... baby care. It was beyond my reach.” — Democratic presidential debate Tuesday.

THE FACTS: That's a stretch.

Biden's wife and ******* died in a car accident after he won a Senate seat in 1972 As a single parent working far out of town, Biden might have faced steeper baby care costs than people who work locally do. But his Senate salary — actually $42,500 — was worth more than $256,000 in today's dollars. That's more than four times the median household income.


HEALTH CARE

TRUMP:
“I was the person who saved Pre-Existing Conditions in your Healthcare, you have it now." — tweet on Jan. 13.

THE FACTS: That's false. People with preexisting medical problems have health insurance protections because of Obama's health care law, which Trump is trying to dismantle.

One of Trump’s major alternatives to Obama's law — short-term health insurance, already in place — doesn’t have to cover preexisting conditions. Another alternative is association health plans, which are oriented to small businesses and sole proprietors and do cover preexisting conditions.

Meanwhile, Trump's administration has been pressing in court for full repeal of the Obama-era law, including provisions that protect people with preexisting conditions from health insurance discrimination.

With “Obamacare” still in place, insurers in the individual marketplace must take all applicants, regardless of medical history, and charge the same standard premiums to healthy people and those who have poor health or past medical problems. Before Obama's law, any insurer could deny coverage or charge more to anyone with a preexisting condition who was seeking to buy an individual policy.


BERNIE SANDERS: “'Medicare for All' ... will cost substantially less than the status quo.” — Democratic debate.

THE FACTS: There’s no guarantee of that.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said in a report last year that total spending under a single-payer system like the Vermont senator and Democratic presidential candidate favors “might be higher or lower than under the current system depending on the key features of the new system.”

Those features have to do with the design of the system, questions such as payment rates for hospitals and doctors, and whether patients are required to pay part of the cost of their care. Sanders says his plan would require no cost-sharing from patients, no copays and no deductibles. But completely free care could trigger a surge in demand for medical services, raising costs. Other countries that provide coverage for all do use cost-sharing to help keep spending in check.

A research report last year by the nonprofit Rand think tank estimated that a Medicare for All plan similar to what Sanders wants would modestly raise total U.S. health spending.


MILITARY

TRUMP
, on killing Iran Gen. Qassem Soleimani: “The Democrats and the Fake News are trying to make terrorist Soleimani into a wonderful guy." — tweet on Jan. 13.

TRUMP: “You know what bothers me? When I see a Nancy Pelosi trying to defend this monster from Iran ... When Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats want to defend him, I think that’s a very bad thing for this country.” — remarks on Jan. 9 at event on environmental regulations.

THE FACTS: That's a fabrication. Democrats did not praise or defend the Iranian general. They criticized the action Trump took.

Pelosi called the U.S. missile strike “provocative and disproportionate” while branding Soleimani a “terrible person." Similarly, Democratic presidential candidates criticized Trump's strategy and the fact he didn't notify or consult Congress in advance, while making clear they considered Soleimani anything but “wonderful.”

The Iranian was “a murderer, responsible for the deaths of thousands, including hundreds of Americans," said Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

Even so, Republican Rep. Doug Collins of Georgia asserted Democrats were “in love with terrorists” then retracted the statement and apologized.

I left parts of my body in Iraq fighting terrorists,” Democratic Sen. Tammy Duckworth of Ilinois, a former Army pilot who lost both her legs while serving in Iraq, told CNN after hearing Collins' initial remarks. “I don’t need to justify myself to anyone


TRUMP: “Our military has been totally rebuilt.” — Milwaukee rally.

THE FACTS: It hasn’t.

The administration has accelerated a sharp buildup in defense spending, but it will take years for freshly ordered tanks, planes and other weapons to be built, delivered and put to use.

The Air *******’s Minuteman 3 missiles, for instance, a key part of the U.S. nuclear *******, have been operating since the early 1970s, and modernization started under the Obama administration. They are due to be replaced with a new version, but not until later this decade.


BIDEN:
"I was asked to bring 156,000 troops home from that war, which I did. I led that effort." — Democratic debate.

THE FACTS: Biden is roughly right about bringing troops home, but he didn't mention that the U.S. had to send some back.

Obama did designate Biden, his vice president, to take the lead in pulling U.S. forces out of Iraq and coordinating efforts to maintain stability in Baghdad. His results were mixed. Biden and Obama failed to win agreement from the Iraqi government to keep a limited number of U.S. troops there after December 2011. That was the deadline for a complete U.S. pullout under a deal negotiated by the Bush administration. Biden was still vice president when Obama was compelled to return American troops to Iraq in 2014 after the rise of the Islamic State group.


ELECTABILITY

TRUMP,
on the 2016 election: “There have been some great movements where somebody came along and out of the nowhere, won the state of New Hampshire, won Iowa, won South Carolina down the way, won a state someplace, but we won 32 states.”

THE FACTS: Trump won 30 states, not 32.

It was no landslide. He won with about 57% of electoral votes, a comfortable margin but no better than average or below average. Obama and Clinton each won bigger victories twice and many other presidents outperformed Trump.

Moreover, Republican Trump lost the popular vote to Democrat Hillary Clinton, a rare occurrence for a winning candidate.

Trump routinely inflates the number of electoral votes he won, too.
 
Curiosity makes me ask. Are you guys ok with their plan to reduce the amount of money provided for medicaid? I mean really, He's only doing things that provides a profit to anyone aligned with him.


NOT ME......the cuts in Medicaid are to help pay for his big friggn tax cut for the wealthy....this guy is in it for himself....country be damned......and he is just using the fools that support him!
 
Back
Top