Lets see if we can keep this thread a little more civil.

I found this interview very interesting.  A lot of soft balls thrown at Trump, he explained his back pedalling on his more extreme issues as a lot of his claims as opening bids for negotiation purposes.  Which .. whatever .. I still think that those are insincere claims he used to get elected.

He does now come across way more presidential then he did prior to the election.  A lot of his noise, yelling, and rhetoric has been scaled back.

Do respect this one though:

Quote

 

Lesley Stahl: Are you gonna take the salary, the president’s salary?

Donald Trump: Well, I’ve never commented on this, but the answer is no. I think I have to by law take $1, so I’ll take $1 a year. But it’s a -- I don’t even know what it is.

Donald Trump: Do you know what the salary is?

Lesley Stahl: $400,000 you’re giving up.

Donald Trump: No, I’m not gonna take the salary. I’m not taking it.

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-donald-trump-family-melania-ivanka-lesley-stahl/

I actually think it's simpler. Trump didn't want to win. He just wanted to prove he could. I think at this point he's doing everthing he possibly can to be impeached and I think eventually he will be and will be OK with that.  Maybe 2 years once mid terms roll around and Democrats take over congress 

Edited February 15, 20178 yr by Goalie

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/13/americas/refugees-flee-united-states-for-canada/?iid=ob_lockedrail_bottomlarge

A Manitoba story from CNN. Refugees crossing from the USA and landing in Emerson, MB.  

Welcome Place sounds like they're doing good work.

 

4 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

Ah, makes sense now. Those weren't cheers, those were jeers of derision. 

nope.  The Latino comedian said that he was a legal immigrant to the US and he was happy that Trump was going to make sure that others like him came in legally.  Big cheer.  No derision.  I honestly don't think people in Canada understand how mad people are in the US about illegal immigration.  We are isolated from it because we don't have millions of people coming over our border from the North.  And we have the US as a big buffer zone between us and Mexico.

50 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

 

As for Russia aren't we basically accepting  the obvious here? Trump entered into a quid pro quo with Putin and is now at best owes him one. At worst completely compromised.  

I guess this is where the conspiracy theories lose me.  What is this quid pro quo?  As far as I can see the only person to really blame for the DNC losing the election is John Podesta, and/or Hillary Clinton.  They lost the election.  With a terrible campaign.  I don't think the Russians really had anything to do with it, and the people I talk to down here just roll their eyes when I say they must have been influenced by Russia in the election.  It actually is pretty insulting.

45 minutes ago, Goalie said:

I actually think it's simpler. Trump didn't want to win. He just wanted to prove he could. I think at this point he's doing everthing he possibly can to be impeached and I think eventually he will be and will be OK with that.  Maybe 2 years once mid terms roll around and Democrats take over congress 

I think this theory has merit.  I don't think the Dems are going to take over anything in two years.  They are a complete trainwreck right now.

We'll see. CNN is now reporting that four trump campaign people were talking on the regular with Russian intelligence during the campaign.

On one hand, scapegoating the Russians for the election loss is like yeah whatever. Clinton had lots of stink on her (some deserved, some not IMO) and the Trump campaign was pretty shrewd about their use of data and microtargeting voters. All due credit, they did some pretty inventive facebook stuff to squeak out their win.

On the other hand, were the Russians attempting to influence the election and did the Trump campaign collude with them in that? And if so, what's in it for Russia? And what's in it for Trump? There's a lot of smoke here. Why not investigate?

On the third hand, hope your vacation is excellent, KBF. Could definitely use some sun myself...

The theory is Russia hacked everyone but only used the damning info about the dems. Putin has personal reason to hurt Hilary. 

But Trump lying about his Russian business and relationships has to mean something. It's not like he was minimizing out of a genuine desire to appear tough on Russia since he doesn't seem to want to appear tough on them at all. 

The quid pro quo might not even be evident yet. Putin having Trump and/or others in the admin in his pocket is something he can use later. It could just be information flow or something more nefarious. 

That dossier sort of spelled it out. And some aspects have been confirmed though the most salacious aspects haven't. But it shows how a person can. E compromised.  

Flynn was screwed. Russia could have had evidence he lied to Pence and use that to exert influence later. Fortunately the justice department got the info and warned the admin of just that. 

Do we really think Russia has nothing on trump?  

@Goalie I agree trump didn't intend to win. I don't think he's hoping to get tossed out. I think it's simpler. I think he just doesn't understand the work and commitment required and that he can't run the country like one of his businesses.   If he gets impeached or forced to resign I don't think it will be by design but a by product of his arrogance and ignorance. 

Just now, johnzo said:

We'll see. CNN is now reporting that four trump campaign people were talking on the regular with Russian intelligence during the campaign.

On one hand, scapegoating the Russians for the election loss is like yeah whatever. Clinton had lots of stink on her (some deserved, some not IMO) and the Trump campaign was pretty shrewd about their use of data and microtargeting voters. All due credit, they did some pretty inventive facebook stuff to squeak out their win.

On the other hand, were the Russians attempting to influence the election and did the Trump campaign collude with them in that? And if so, what's in it for Russia? And what's in it for Trump? There's a lot of smoke here. Why not investigate?

On the third hand, hope your vacation is excellent, KBF. Could definitely use some sun myself...

Thanks Johnzo.  Hope you get some time off soon too.  Still a long way to football season!

Good points about Russia too.  Might as well find out what was going on.  Way back in 1980 the Reagan campaign did a deal with the Iranians to release the US hostages on the day of Reagan's inauguration in January 1981.  I never thought that was very kosher either.

1 minute ago, johnzo said:

We'll see. CNN is now reporting that four trump campaign people were talking on the regular with Russian intelligence during the campaign.

On one hand, scapegoating the Russians for the election loss is like yeah whatever. Clinton had lots of stink on her (some deserved, some not IMO) and the Trump campaign was pretty shrewd about their use of data and microtargeting voters. All due credit, they did some pretty inventive facebook stuff to squeak out their win.

On the other hand, were the Russians attempting to influence the election and did the Trump campaign collude with them in that? And if so, what's in it for Russia? And what's in it for Trump? There's a lot of smoke here. Why not investigate?

On the third hand, hope your vacation is excellent, KBF. Could definitely use some sun myself...

Remember trump publicly encouraged Russia to hack Hilary. So, collusion? Well that doesn't prove a nefarious relationship. But that's pretty outrageous in and of itself. 

Yeah, outrageous.  Doesn't rise to the level of criminal conspiracy, I don't think.

Much as I want to see this entire administration in the rearview mirror (preferably with skid marks on their necks and faces) I also want to know more before judging this particular bit of stupid.

There is a reason trump is lying about his Russian business and suddenly distanced himself from Putin during the latter stages of the election. And yet it wasn't to appear tough as he kept making overtures. He either knew he was compromised or he had a deal and was creating plausible deniability. 

38 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Flynn was screwed. Russia could have had evidence he lied to Pence and use that to exert influence later. Fortunately the justice department got the info and warned the admin of just that. 

But the Trump administration did nothing with the information. They were told about Flynn's conversations with the Russian ambassador and that he could be compromised in late January by the acting AG that Trump fired a few days later. It wasn't until the media got hold of it that Flynn resigned. 

4 minutes ago, Jacquie said:

But the Trump administration did nothing with the information. They were told about Flynn's conversations with the Russian ambassador and that he could be compromised in late January by the acting AG that Trump fired a few days later. It wasn't until the media got hold of it that Flynn resigned. 

Yes very true. Another point in the favour of a deal with the devil by trump. 

 

Edited February 15, 20178 yr by The Unknown Poster

He's off the deep end now. This could be the beginning of the end. What will it take for republicans to demand a full congressional inquiry....leading to potential impeachment?

What is going on with these people?

 

(CNN)High-level advisers close to then-presidential nominee Donald Trump were in constant communication during the campaign with Russians known to US intelligence, multiple current and former intelligence, law enforcement and administration officials tell CNN.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/14/politics/donald-trump-aides-russians-campaign/index.html

 

So Trump's position seems to be that the real story is the Intelligence community leaking information about his ties and communications with Russia...and also that he has no ties or communications with Russia.

11 hours ago, johnzo said:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/13/americas/refugees-flee-united-states-for-canada/?iid=ob_lockedrail_bottomlarge

A Manitoba story from CNN. Refugees crossing from the USA and landing in Emerson, MB.  

Welcome Place sounds like they're doing good work.

 

I hope that these people are properly vetted, though that could be pretty much impossible.  I would hate to see some criminals and bad hombres getting in to Canada just because they crossed the border in extremely cold weather.

25 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

I hope that these people are properly vetted, though that could be pretty much impossible.  I would hate to see some criminals and bad hombres getting in to Canada just because they crossed the border in extremely cold weather.

From same article in your quote:

Quote

Mohammed says he fled Ghana because he was labeled a criminal.

"I am wanted ... because of my sexual, sexual orientation," he says. "If they didn't kill me ... I would go to jail."

"Bad Hombre" indeed...

Edited February 15, 20178 yr by wanna-b-fanboy

Wouldn't the vetting 1st be done by the US?  Not saying that we shouldn't be doing our own but it's not like they are coming here straight from their own country.

42 minutes ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

From same article in your quote:

"Bad Hombre" indeed...

Let's hope he's telling the truth.  I would assume there would be more vetting than just accepting someone's story.

Just now, bigg jay said:

Wouldn't the vetting 1st be done by the US?  Not saying that we shouldn't be doing our own but it's not like they are coming here straight from their own country.

I doubt that the people who crossed at Emerson were vetted by anyone.

http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fg-immigration-trek-america-tijuana/

This isn't a commentary on whether or not all these people should be let into the country, but it is sad that this many people have it so bad in their home country they risk this voyage to get out. 

 

20 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

I doubt that the people who crossed at Emerson were vetted by anyone.

http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fg-immigration-trek-america-tijuana/

There may be a few like that but at least some of them came to the US through the normal refugee process so they would have been vetted prior to being allowed into the US.
 

Quote

 

Prior to Trump's election, many of the people who sought asylum in Canada came here after having their refugee claim or asylum case rejected by the U.S. Now, many haven't even bothered to make a claim there, said Hagos.

"They are really scared of what is going on in the U.S. and that the U.S. is not welcoming refugees and asylum-seekers anymore. So they just use it as transit [to get to Canada]," he said.

"I'm talking about people who are educated, people who have a very, very strong case [for refugee status in the U.S.]. They said that they cannot take the chance of [making a] refugee claim in the U.S. because they might get rejected, they might not get fair treatment."

 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/refugee-border-crossing-manitoba-1.3959558

Congressional Republicans have rolled out an ACA replacement proposal that eliminates the requirement that health insurance companies cover people for pre-existing conditions. (which is very popular). 

It also stipulates that you can't use your own health savings account* money to pay for an abortion.

*An HSA is a tax-free savings account that one uses to pay for health care expenses.  Don't know if there's a similar thing in Canada.

Edited February 15, 20178 yr by johnzo