We're not going to do anything about this failing thread. We're just going to watch it explode...Trump cont

[egosumquisum1]

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/2885618-There-is-no-evidence-that-this-so-called-thread-was-tapped-Trump-continued

As requested.

Actually, Across, I think the 'wonderful' bit has to be the main dish. Then you tag something on to it.

But he failed on Trumpcare, remember.

Spicer

When someone reports on the leak, they talk about the leak contents, not the fact something was leaked.

Duuuh

I'm thinking cozie, I'm thinking hard. But Pain is right in that the great fear is what might happen in the meantime. Nixon was a crook to be sure, but he was knowledgeable in politics and policy. He wanted to be president based on his beliefs of what was best for America and if it happened to benefit him, so much the better. Trumps wants to be president based on his beliefs of what is best for Trump and if it fucks over the rest of the country, he really doesn't give a shit.

Hopefully, as Pain says, the scandal swirling around Trump's head will begin to slow down his ability to 'get things done'. And hopefully he'll continue to alienate members of the GOP, especially those in Congress!

How come it's so easy for him/his gop cronies on their hobbyhorses to roll back on what Obama did? Is it because most of Obama's successes were with EO's?
I can see EO's flipping back and forth every 4 years now. Instability and anger.
I hope i live to see politics get boring again

Well you certainly don't order Congressional members to do things. Cajole, wheedle flatter etc etc, Yes - even a touch of the old pork barrel. But Tell - No.

Going back to what Saffron posted a few pages back.
The RAF are sending planes to keep an eye on Polish/Baltic airspace. It was on my DSis's local news.

7days EOs are a powerful tool as they essentially bypass Congress. They have the 'force' of a law, but they aren't 'technically' laws themselves. An EO may not violate an existing law, although it can 'reinterpret' one, nor can it violate the Constitution. For example, an EO cannot change the line of succession to the presidency (to create a family 'dynasty' for example), nor reinstate slavery. Congress does have the ability to 'nullify' them by vote and the SCOTUS can also rule them unconstitutional.

The Emancipation Proclamation was, in fact, an Executive Order. But it was later ratified by Congress and then added to the Constitution as the 13th Amendment.

Technically, are they put into abeyance if challenged and referred up to SCOTUS?

live.reuters.com/Event/Live_US_Politics/mobile&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=twitter&Theme=39&Whitelabel=True

25 minutes ago
House intel panel chief Nunes say he will not divulge his sources

U.S. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes said on Tuesday he will not divulge - even to other members of his panel - who gave him intelligence reports that indicated President Donald Trump and his associates may have been ensnared in incidental intelligence collection.

Asked by a Fox News reporter whether he would inform the other committee members about who gave him the reports he viewed on the White House grounds last week, Nunes said: "We will never reveal those sources and methods."

Arsehole.

Yes cozie, similar to the Muslim Ban EOs, both of which were stayed by different federal judges. Any federal court can 'stay' an EO pending judicial review.

And on another subject;

Nunes said: "We will never reveal those sources and methods."

Maybe someone should remind him of his Fearless Leader's own words, said last month in his speech to CPAC: "They shouldn’t be allowed to use sources unless they use somebody’s name. Let their name be put out there. Let their name be put out...... Let there be no more sources.”’

Arsehole

That's my top word for 2017.

And for those who voted....

Poll on donation of salary - results

It's going to annoy him so much.

I'm assuming, by the way, that that won't include the substantial donation he'll be giving to the WHCA Scolarship Fund in lieu of attending the annual dinner.

So he's signed an EO rolling back climate change policies by Obama. With an audience again, have all Presidents in the past had an audience when they sign something?

Seems to me, he would undo absolutely anything Obama has done if he could. Because it's Obama. Not for the good of the country. For his ego or for money and because he hates how popular Obama was.

I thought today was a 'closed signing'?

Obama frightens him, Roussette. For some reason.

I don't remember Obama making a huge show of signing anything, but it's possible he had a few people over, those who worked on the EOs.

Helsinki In fairness the sending of RAF planes to the Baltic is not as unusual as it sounds. The NATO has a special mission safeguarding the Baltic states and various members states send fighters on a rota en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltic_Air_Policing

It seems Obama could also draw a crowd for his EO signings.

www.google.co.uk/search?q=obama+signing+executive+order&client=ms-android-samsung&prmd=inv&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiIgd7vlPrSAhVBrxQKHR0RCTkQ_AUIBygB&biw=360&bih=560#imgrc=_

Don't click on the images. The topics of the EOs will show up and you'll feel even worse about having Trump now.

Sorry. That should have said.....'the substantial donation he'll doubtless be giving.......'

Ah right 'Elena'.
DSis's local news keeps going on about as to quote the newsreader "It's planes from our area." (East Anglia)

By 'substantial' I should add that I would have thought at least a 7 figure cheque.

Jake Vig‏ @Jake_Vig 4h4 hours ago
More
SALLY YATES: Imma testify.

DEVIN NUNES: Everything is canceled forever.

WHITE HOUSE: Nothing suspicious here.

PRESIDENT: golfs