***Official Political Discussion Thread***

whywesteppin said:
I am speechless

IMG_20180530_184821.jpg


at how DAPPER Donald looks in this photo. Melanie is looking good too. I'm glad they patched things up. They look so happy together! #MAGA


edit: this is absolutely UNCALLED FOR. DISGUSTING:

IMG_20180530_190903.jpg
Click to expand...
You can tell a lot about a person by the small things. The size of the picture frames of Trumps's parents and not a photo of them together.
 
Edit: Got beaten to it ^

:rofl:
Excerpt:
"Mark my words for it, I will make sure that you and I meet one day over in the courthouse and I will take you for every penny you still don't have, and I will come after your Daily Beast and everybody else that you possibly know," Cohen went on. "Do not even think about going where I know you're planning on going. And that's my warning for the day."

"Michael, besides the warning, do you have a substantive comment that I can include in the piece that reflects your views on this?"

"I have no views because there's no story," Cohen said before warning Mak to “tread very f---ing lightly because what I'm going to do to you is going to be f---ing disgusting.”

“Do you understand me? Don't think you can hide behind your pen because it's not going to happen." Cohen said. "I'm more than happy to discuss it with your attorney and with your legal counsel because motherf---er you're going to need it."
http://thehill.com/homenews/media/3...history-of-making-legal-threats-to-save-trump
NPR publishes audio of Cohen threatening reporter
 
https://www.axios.com/trump-pressur...ion-30e0f930-e688-47da-8f20-411864cea471.html
Scoop: Trump repeatedly pressured Sessions on Mueller investigation
President Trump pressured Attorney General Jeff Sessions to reclaim control of the Russia investigation on at least four separate occasions, three times in person and once over the phone, according to sources familiar with the conversations.

Why it matters: The fact that there were multiple conversations shows that Trump's pressure on Sessions to stop recusing himself was heavier than previously known. The sustained pressure made several officials uncomfortable, because they viewed it as improper and worry that it could be politically and legally problematic.

What we're hearing: The New York Times this week reported on one of these conversations— which occurred at Mar-a-Lago in March 2017 — and said Robert Mueller is investigating it. But Trump’s other direct conversations with Sessions about the subject have not been previously reported.

  • A source with knowledge of the conversations said they occurred throughout last year, until fairly late in the year — not just in the short period after Sessions recused himself last March.
The details: Two sources familiar with the conversations told me the president never, to their knowledge, ordered Sessions to cancel his recusal from the Russia investigation. Instead, he asked Sessions whether he’d “thought about” un-recusing himself.

  • Trump told Sessions he’d be a “hero” to conservatives if he did the “right thing” and took back control over the Russia investigation, according to two sources with knowledge of their conversations.
  • Trump also told Sessions he’d be a hero if he investigated Hillary Clinton, according to one of the sources.
Trump also repeated the “hero” line separately to aides and privately mused about whether it would be possible to limit the scope of the Mueller investigation to avoid his business affairs.

The White House declined to comment, as did a spokeswoman for Sessions.

“It’s not just payback; it’s punishment. It’s never enough to win. There’s never too much blood. There’s never too many guts on the floor. That’s his mentality. If you give him a paper cut he'll never forget that paper cut.”
— Source who talks frequently to Trump

Behind the scenes: Four sources with direct knowledge told me Trump has been obsessed by the Mueller investigation over the past year. That’s been clear from his tweets. But privately he’s been brooding about it so persistently, people close to him worry he can’t help but make the situation worse for himself.

He views the phrase “witch hunt” as his PR branding of the investigation, but he also truly believes he has been wronged. Much of his desire for investigating Clinton and Barack Obama comes from a desire for retribution, sources who have discussed the matter with Trump told me.

Trump takes out much of his anger on the White House Counsel Don McGahn, according to sources who’ve watched them interact. McGahn made it clear to White House staff from the outset that he was the person who should be communicating with the Justice Department.

The New York Times first reported that McGahn, following Trump’s orders, lobbied Sessions to remain in charge of the Russia investigation. A source with knowledge of their conversations shared more details with Axios:

  • McGahn spoke to Sessions about the recusal before Sessions decided to recuse himself. According to a source with knowledge of the situation, Sessions told McGahn he was considering recusal and McGahn asked the Attorney General whether he’d exhausted all his options, and whether he’d looked at the Department of Justice guidelines carefully.
  • Sessions told McGahn he’d already asked Justice Department ethics officials for their opinion. “At that point Don said, ‘well I’m out of it’,” the source said.
Click to expand...
 
Hmm, I wonder why that is. I can certainly think of a particular reason.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...n-china/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.1706ea5bd87a
Trump has officially put more tariffs on U.S. allies than on China
President Trump campaigned on going hard after China for ripping off the United States on trade. Yet a year and a half into his presidency, Trump has put more tariffs on longtime U.S. allies than he has on China, his supposed "bad guy" on trade. The Trump administration announced new tariffs Thursday on the European Union, Canada and Mexico.

Almost all of the reaction has been negative. Many are calling it a political and economic mistake.

America's allies are stunned, stocks slid on Wall Street as trade-war fears returned, and economists are warning that Americans will soon face higher prices on a wide variety of products. A slew of Republican lawmakers immediately trashed the move as bad for the economy and foreign relations.

"Europe, Canada & Mexico aren't China. You don’t treat allies the same way you treat opponents. Blanket protectionism is a big part of why we had a Great Depression. 'Make America Great Again' shouldn’t mean 'Make America 1929 Again.' " tweeted Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), joining an opposition that included many Republican officials and business groups.

Trump's latest move takes the focus off China. Most countries (and U.S. lawmakers) agree with Trump that China isn't playing fair on trade, but instead of turning the E.U. and Canada into allies in the trade fight against China, Trump is alienating them.

The president has threatened tariffs on an additional $50 billion in Chinese goods later this month, but he has often changed his mind, putting tariffs on hold or scaling them back before they go into effect. Right now, Canada and the E.U. are taking a bigger blow. (The E.U. and other allies would also bear the brunt of Trump's proposed tariffs on autos).

Of course, it could all change quickly with a Trump tweet or remark.

"The president has the authority unilaterally … to do anything he wishes at any point subsequent to today. There is potential flexibility going forward," Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said Thursday on a call with reporters.

Here's what happened: Trump is hitting the E.U., Canada and Mexico with a 25 percent tariff on steel imports and a 10 percent tariff on aluminum sent to the United States starting Friday. While China is also subject to the tariffs, the E.U. and Canada send far more metal to the United States, so the penalties will have a much larger impact on them.

"We don't buy steel and aluminum from China. We buy it from our allies," said economist Chad Bown, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics.

Take a look at total U.S. steel and aluminum imports last year from various countries to understand who's affected most (data compiled by PIIE):
Canada: $12.4 billion
European Union: $7.7 billion
Mexico: $2.9 billion
China: $2.9 billion
Japan: $2 billion

Here's what it means for Americans: Higher prices. It's uncertain, at this point, how much prices will go up, but any increase in the cost of metals will likely cause prices of beer cans, cars and many other items to increase, possibly as early as late summer.

"We don’t go out and buy steel beams, but we buy things that have steel in them. The things we buy will be more expensive," Bown said.

The Trump administration began putting tariffs on steel and aluminum imports in March, but Trump temporarily exempted a ton of countries (including Canada, Mexico and those in the E.U.). In March, the tariffs covered only about a third of metal imports. That hurt, but it was more like a pinprick.

Trump's latest move is more like a slap. It's likely to sting more, because about 80 percent of imports are covered by the tariffs now. Prices of metals will almost certainly rise in the United States. The price of hot-rolled coil steel, for example, is already up nearly 40 percent this year.

Why is Trump doing this? Trump argues these tariffs are necessary for "national security," both to have enough metal to build tanks and airplanes and for economic security. He says we need to do this to save the American steel and aluminum industries and their good-paying jobs. He singled out China for dumping cheap steel on the global market for years, driving prices so low that some American factories couldn't survive.

Most agree China is a major cause of the problems, but the issue is: The United States doesn't buy much steel from China. These tariffs aren't doing much to hurt China. Instead, U.S. allies are taking the punch, even though there's little evidence they are buying Chinese steel and then shipping it here (trans-shipment).

The Trump administration argues that the only way to curtail China's metal industry is to force American allies to agree to tariffs or quotas that limit how much steel they send to the United States. Their goal is to reduce demand for Chinese metals all over the world.

"China's direct exports to us are quite small, but their impact on the overall market is quite large," Ross said Thursday. "That was the fundamental reason why this [tariff] had to be very wide ranging."

Opponents of the tariffs say that the national security claim is bogus and that Trump would be far better off persuading allies to join him in dealing with China than imposing tariffs on them.

"To do tariffs in the name of national security is absurd," said Matthew Rooney, managing director of the Bush Institute, who worked for many years at the State Department. "It’s dangerous. It opens the door to other trading partners using national security as a justification to break their free-trade agreements."

What impact will this have on the U.S. economy? This move is unlikely to tank the U.S. (or global) economy. The tariffs affect billions of dollars of steel and aluminum, but that is relatively small in the context of the $19 trillion American economy. Ross called the impact "trivial." But the real issue is what comes next.

Oxford Economics (among others) noted that these tariffs increase the chance of a full-blown trade war. Already, Mexico and the E.U. have fired back at Trump, announcing they will put tariffs (a.k.a. taxes) on some American goods sent to their countries. If Trump responds with more tariffs, the situation could escalate rapidly.

The overall impact on the U.S. economy might be small, but some Americans could be hurt a lot. The E.U. and Mexico plan to target many of their retaliatory tariffs on U.S. farmers, for example.

The tariffs could also be a blow to Trump's tax cuts. Middle-class households are saving about $900 this year on taxes, but the tariffs are likely to cause people to pay more for stuff at the store (or car dealership). If Americans end up paying $500 more for a car, that eats into the benefit of the tax cut significantly. Similarly, business executives might get nervous about what's going on with trade and start to pull back on investing in new factories and equipment.

The move is also likely to make it harder for Trump to get a new NAFTA deal with Canada and Mexico or trade concessions from the E.U. These countries are angry and don't want to be seen as caving to Trump's tough moves.

"This represents another signal that prospects for a near-term NAFTA deal are fading," Alec Phillips, chief U.S. political economist at Goldman Sachs, said in a note to clients.
Click to expand...
 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/gdpr-consent/?destination=/world/national-security/prosecutors-interview-comey-in-probe-of-his-former-deputy-andrew-mccabe/2018/05/31/1ede31f6-64e1-11e8-99d2-0d678ec08c2f_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.8d47507a4f13&noredirect=on&utm_term=.918762cb7ccb
Prosecutors interview Comey as they investigate whether McCabe should be charged
Investigators from the D.C. U.S. Attorney’s Office recently interviewed former FBI director James B. Comey as part of a probe into whether his deputy, Andrew McCabe, broke the law by lying to federal agents — an indication the office is seriously considering whether McCabe should be charged with a crime, a person familiar with the matter said.
Justice Department Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz accused McCabe in April of misleading investigators and Comey four times — three of them under oath — about authorizing a disclosure to the media. Horowitz referred the findings to the D.C. U.S. Attorney’s Office to determine whether criminal charges are warranted.

Lying to federal investigators can carry a five-year prison sentence, though McCabe disputes that he intentionally misled anyone. Comey’s interview, while significant, does not indicate prosecutors have reached any conclusions, and people familiar with the process said it is not surprising given the allegations McCabe faces. A referral from the inspector general does not guarantee charges will be filed.

Michael R. Bromwich, McCabe’s lawyer, said in a statement: “A little more than a month ago, we confirmed that we had been advised that a criminal referral to the U.S. Attorney’s Office had been made regarding Mr. McCabe. We said at that time that we were confident that, unless there is inappropriate pressure from high levels of the Administration, the U.S. Attorney’s Office would conclude that it should decline to prosecute. Our view has not changed.”

He added that “leaks concerning specific investigative steps the US Attorney’s Office has allegedly taken are extremely disturbing.”

A Justice Department spokeswoman and a lawyer for Comey declined to comment.

Even before the allegations against him, McCabe had become a lightning rod in the political battles over the FBI and special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s probe of Russian interference in the 2016 election. President Trump has frequently attacked the FBI’s former No. 2 official, largely over political donations his wife took from an ally of Hillary Clinton when she ran for a seat in the Virginia legislature. McCabe was fired in March.

The U.S. attorney’s investigation into McCabe is likely to intensify partisan squabbling, pitting respected law enforcement leaders against one another and potentially giving Trump ammunition to attack.

McCabe and Comey are at odds over the inspector general’s findings. McCabe asserts that Comey knew he authorized the media disclosure, and Comey claims otherwise. Comey has said he “could well be a witness” against McCabe if McCabe were ever charged and tried.

McCabe also is somewhat at odds with Justice Department leaders.

He oversaw an investigation, which now seems to have concluded, into whether Attorney General Jeff Sessions lied to Congress about his contacts with Russians. He also kept notes detailing an interaction with Sessions’s top deputy, Rod J. Rosenstein, that raise questions about a memo Rosenstein wrote justifying Comey’s firing.

Rosenstein’s memo took aim at Comey for his handling of the investigation into Clinton’s use of a private email server while secretary of state. McCabe’s notes, though, suggest Trump told Rosenstein before he authored the memo to mention Russia — though it was unclear in what respect, according to a person familiar with the matter.

The contents of the memo, which ultimately did not mention Russia, were first reported by the New York Times on Wednesday night. Bromwich suggested in his statement that the Times report might have motivated a disclosure of Comey’s interview.

“We think it is no coincidence that these leaks follow within 24 hours of media stories — based on other leaks whose source is unknown to us — about memos written by Mr. McCabe that suggest potential criminal conduct by the President,” Bromwich said. “We will be demanding a leaks investigation.”

McCabe’s interactions with Rosenstein could complicate any potential prosecution of McCabe because Rosenstein would likely be involved in a final decision on filing charges. McCabe has argued that the Justice Department’s actions against him, including his firing, are retaliatory for his work on the Russia investigation.

Mueller is investigating Comey’s firing as part of his examination into whether Trump obstructed justice, and Rosenstein is supervising Mueller’s probe. The president has said publicly that the Russia case was on his mind when he fired Comey, though he tweeted Thursday that he “never fired James Comey because of Russia!”

Sessions fired McCabe from the bureau just 26 hours before he could retire, based on the inspector general’s findings and a recommendation from the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility.

The next morning, Trump took to Twitter to celebrate the move.

“Andrew McCabe FIRED, a great day for the hard working men and women of the FBI - A great day for Democracy,” he wrote. “Sanctimonious James Comey was his boss and made McCabe look like a choirboy. He knew all about the lies and corruption going on at the highest levels of the FBI!”

By the inspector general’s telling, in seeking to advance his own interests, McCabe authorized two FBI officials to talk to the Wall Street Journal about a story he believed would cast him as standing in the way of a probe of Hillary Clinton’s foundation. Then, according to the inspector general, McCabe misled Comey and FBI and inspector general investigators about having done so.

The October 2016 story offered a detailed look at debates inside the Justice Department and FBI over two Clinton-related probes — the examination of her private email server and the separate case involving the foundation. It notably confirmed the existence of the foundation investigation and described an episode in which McCabe pushed back against a Justice Department official whom he perceived to be suggesting the FBI shut it down.

Comey and McCabe offered varying accounts of who authorized the disclosure for the article. They discussed the story the day after it was published, and Comey, according to the inspector general’s report, told investigators McCabe “definitely did not tell me that he authorized” the disclosure.

“I have a strong impression he conveyed to me ‘it wasn’t me boss.’ And I don’t think that was by saying those words, I think it was most likely by saying ‘I don’t know how this s--- gets in the media or why would people talk about this kind of thing,’ words that I would fairly take as ‘I, Andy, didn’t do it,’ ” Comey said, according to the inspector general.

McCabe has countered that emails between the two “clearly show that Mr. McCabe specifically advised Director Comey that he was working with colleagues at the FBI to correct inaccuracies in the story before it was published, and that they remained in contact through the weekend while the work was taking place.” Those emails, though, were in reference to a different Wall Street Journal story about donations McCabe’s wife had received from a political action committee controlled by Terry McAuliffe, a Clinton ally, McCabe’s lawyer has acknowledged. The inspector general ultimately credited Comey’s account.

Lying to Comey might not itself be a crime. But the inspector general alleged McCabe misled investigators three other times.

He told agents from the FBI inspection division on May 9, 2017, that he had not authorized the disclosure and did not know who had, the inspector general alleged. McCabe similarly told inspector general investigators on July 28 that he was not aware of one of the FBI officials, lawyer Lisa Page, having been authorized to speak to reporters, and because he was not in Washington on the days she did so, he could not say what she was doing. McCabe later admitted he authorized Page to talk to reporters.

The inspector general also alleged that McCabe lied in a final conversation in November, claiming that he had told Comey he had authorized the disclosure and that he had not claimed otherwise to inspection division agents in May.

Bromwich has said previously that McCabe’s statements are “properly understood as the result of misunderstanding, miscommunication, and honest failures of recollection based on the swirl of events around him, statements which he subsequently corrected.” He has also blasted McCabe’s treatment and asserted that the inspector general did not detail “any understandable motive for his alleged wrongdoing.”
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

onewearz
Anybody ever use Hims for hairloss ?
Replies
10
Views
896
streetlights
streetlights
cragmatic
Hikers of NT - Official Hiking Thread
2 3
Replies
53
Views
4K
lovehateself
lovehateself
therealest1
Official Wu-Tang Clan Thread
Replies
3
Views
388
therealest1
therealest1
grittyman
NB Two WXY V5
Replies
1
Views
794
Tim_walsh
T
therealest1
Ol' Dirty Bastard: A Tale Of Two Dirtys on A&E
Replies
0
Views
409
therealest1
therealest1

Latest News

View All News

Thread Gallery

View Full Gallery

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

Site contents may not be incorporated into AI training data or any other derivative works without prior express written consent.

Links to participating merchants may generate referral or affiliate commissions that help support our community. See our policies for details. NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

| Xenforo Add-ons © by ©XenTR | Media embeds via s9e/MediaSites
Back
Top Bottom