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/

12 hours ago, Zontar said:

So Bernie wants to "keep America white" too ?

I don’t know.  You’re the one that brought him up. You’re not playing whataboutism again are you?   Is bernie the president?  

Hey how about that stephen Miller? You’re a big fan right? 

Guess which question AG Barr dodged today.

 

 

The report must be incredibly damning 

 

Almost a character study....

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/438172-trump-wondered-why-washington-didnt-name-mount-vernon-after\

Or simply the lack of it.

Edited April 10, 20196 yr by do or die

Good I don't want to hear about this EVER AGAIN

https://deadline.com/2019/04/house-passes-save-the-internet-bill-restoring-net-neutrality-1202593083/

AG Barr is digging a hole

1 hour ago, bustamente said:

AG Barr is digging a hole

what did he do?

18 minutes ago, Mark F said:

what did he do?

Barr has hitched his horse to Trump and is going into a territory that is not becoming of an AG.

Sessions was fired for this very reason

6 hours ago, iHeart said:

Good I don't want to hear about this EVER AGAIN

https://deadline.com/2019/04/house-passes-save-the-internet-bill-restoring-net-neutrality-1202593083/

Haha, Senate won't pass that. They're corrupt as all F. 

1 minute ago, JCon said:

Haha, Senate won't pass that. They're corrupt as all F. 

Several people in the senate need to go, *cough cough* McConnell *cough cough*

be interesting to see what Trump does in regards to Assange.  His Russian handlers won’t like today’s developments. 

11 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

be interesting to see what Trump does in regards to Assange.  His Russian handlers won’t like today’s developments. 

It will be high-profile and messy but I don't expect Russia will allow Assange to escape the UK alive. 

9 minutes ago, JCon said:

It will be high-profile and messy but I don't expect Russia will allow Assange to escape the UK alive. 

I suspect the American's will keep good care of him until he's on US soil.  I have little doubt DOJ law enforcement want this guy bad...the connections to Russia and to Trump could be shocking.  But you have to think Trump will intervene (or order his AG to intervene).  

1 minute ago, The Unknown Poster said:

I suspect the American's will keep good care of him until he's on US soil.  I have little doubt DOJ law enforcement want this guy bad...the connections to Russia and to Trump could be shocking.  But you have to think Trump will intervene (or order his AG to intervene).  

Extradition is going to take a while, no? Unless they've already cleared that hurdle with the earlier charges? 

The official charges are not that strong. 

 

2 minutes ago, JCon said:

Extradition is going to take a while, no? Unless they've already cleared that hurdle with the earlier charges? 

The official charges are not that strong. 

 

I guess its a lot of breaking news but sounds like the UK arrested him on behalf of the US.  I would think extradition would be pretty quick.  Although, would the UK folks want to keep him out of Trump's hands...  Someone (who knows who) is going to have a long, difficult talk with Assange that he will not like....

3 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

I guess its a lot of breaking news but sounds like the UK arrested him on behalf of the US.  I would think extradition would be pretty quick.  Although, would the UK folks want to keep him out of Trump's hands...  Someone (who knows who) is going to have a long, difficult talk with Assange that he will not like....

Maybe not so quick if you look at the similar case with the Huawei exec in Canada.  She was arrested December on behalf of the US and she's still in Canadian custody (and will be for the foreseable future).

Odd that this is going down just as the Spygate "conspiracy theory" is beginning to boil...

(fun fact, Wikipedia admins are still reverting every edit to the Spygate "conspiracy theory" page that updates it)

Just now, bluto said:

Odd that this is going down just as the Spygate "conspiracy theory" is beginning to boil...

(fun fact, Wikipedia admins are still reverting every edit to the Spygate "conspiracy theory" page that updates it)

When the AG gives it credibility with zero evidence....disgraceful.   Its funny because of all the evidence of Russian interference in the election and their contacts with Trump's people and Trump calls it a witch hunt.  Now you have the AG say he has zero evidence but wants to look at how the investigation began...talk about witch hunt.

1 minute ago, bluto said:

Odd that this is going down just as the Spygate "conspiracy theory" is beginning to boil...

(fun fact, Wikipedia admins are still reverting every edit to the Spygate "conspiracy theory" page that updates it)

What's Spygate?

8 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

When the AG gives it credibility with zero evidence....disgraceful.   Its funny because of all the evidence of Russian interference in the election and their contacts with Trump's people and Trump calls it a witch hunt.  Now you have the AG say he has zero evidence but wants to look at how the investigation began...talk about witch hunt.

So you don't think that the Trump campaign was surveiled? I didn't think that was still in dispute... (only whether or not it was proper/legal/justified)