Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

He is the very model of a Very Stable Genius: Trump cont

959 replies

PerkingFaintly · 08/01/2018 23:23

We rushed out of the last thread without even a pocket handkerchief: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/a3124599-Trump-2018-Resistance-is-Never-Futile

So here's a new one, with its own

I am the very model of a Very Stable Genius.
I have a mighty button and no problems with my penius.
I have no time for television, golf or social media
Since my brain is way way better than the best encyclopedia.

I'm cutting tax, I'll build a wall, I'll take away their medicare
You can trust me 'cos I'm orange and I have the most amazing hair.
So with my total ignorance of matters heterogeneous
I am the very model of a Very Stable Genius!

Compared to other leaders, my behavior's quite unusual
My twisted tweets and pissed-on sheets have managed to amuse you all
I have to drink two-handed 'cause my fingers are the teeniest
I need a sippy-cup with the inscription "Stable Genius."

OP posts:
Thread gallery
56
lionheart · 16/01/2018 08:01

I'm thinking skittles.

edition.cnn.com/2018/01/15/politics/hope-hicks-congress-testify/index.html

lionheart · 16/01/2018 08:08

Constituents laugh out loud at GOP Senator Joni Ernst’s defense of Trump
By Tommy Christopher |
JANUARY 15, 2018
This is going to be a long year for Republicans.

Senator Joni Ernst(Photo by Chris Kleponis/Sipa USA)(Sipa via AP Images)
Donald Trump was already politically toxic to his party, but his racist rant last week is making things more uncomfortable for elected Republicans who have hidden from reporters, but now have to face constituents.

Sen. Joni Ernst’s (R-IA) experience at her first constituent event of 2018 could be a prelude of things to come. In Red Oak, Iowa, on Sunday, Ernst was asked about Trump’s recent comments about “shithole countries.”

At the otherwise friendly “Coffee with Joni” event, constituent Barb Melson confronted Ernst about “the damage that Trump is doing to our neighbors around the world with his white supremacy talk.”

Ernst insisted that Trump enjoys support from other world leaders.

“He is standing up for a lot of the countries,” Ernst told the crowd.

Ernst was then asked to “name a few.”

Her response drew a big laugh from the crowd.

“Norway,” Ernst replied unironically.

shareblue.com/constituents-laugh-out-loud-at-gop-senator-joni-ernsts-defense-of-trump/#.Wl0eoqWeGoE.twitter

badbadhusky · 16/01/2018 08:23

You do get the sense of pigeons coming home to roost for GOP. As they should!

OnTheDarkSideOfTheSpoon · 16/01/2018 10:34

How a Trump SoHo Partner Ended Up With Toxic Mining Riches From Kazakhstan

The long road from the old Soviet republic to the offshore financial centers of the Caribbean to London—and all the way to a partner in Midtown Manhattan's Trump SoHo.

www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-01-11/how-a-trump-soho-partner-ended-up-with-toxic-mining-riches-from-kazakhstan

There's more information here:

twitter.com/i/moments/879532799161761792

Plus this is what Bannon said in Fire and Fury:

Wendy Siegelman‏
@WendySiegelman
Bannon on Kushner: “they're going to get down deep in his st about how he’s financed everything ... The rabbis with the diamonds and all the st coming out of Israel ... and all these guys coming out of Eastern Europe ... all these Russian guys ... and guys in Kazakhstan”

And also this:

Wendy Siegelman
‏**@WendySiegelman**
According to a July '17 FT article, Felix Sater had agreed to co-operate with an international investigation into alleged money-laundering involving Kazakhstan and the Khrapunovs & Ablyazov

Big news today - Trump former biz partner Felix Sater assists in Kazakhstan $ laundering probe

www.ft.com/content/159eb2d8-6162-11e7-8814-0ac7eb84e5f1

OnTheDarkSideOfTheSpoon · 16/01/2018 12:32

Sally Yates
@SallyQYates
The arc of the moral universe bends toward justice, but it doesn’t get there on its own. “In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.” Martin Luther King, Jr.

badbadhusky · 16/01/2018 12:32

Every time Sally tweets, I girl crush. She’s brilliant!

OnTheDarkSideOfTheSpoon · 16/01/2018 12:32

Kyle Griffin
‏*@kylegriffin1*
Reminder: DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen is testifying today before the Senate Judiciary Committee. She's likely to be asked about Trump's "shithole" countries remark (FYI Dick Durbin is on the Judiciary Committee). www.judiciary.senate.gov/meetings/oversight-of-the-united-states-department-of-homeland-security

PerkingFaintly · 16/01/2018 13:42

More wisdom from HMS Pinafore - for Kirstjen Nielsen today, but pertinent for oh-so-many of 45's appointments...

(main song starts c 1:30 min)
OP posts:
OnTheDarkSideOfTheSpoon · 16/01/2018 13:59

Senators unveil bipartisan push to deter future election interference

thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/369056-bipartisan-senators-move-to-deter-future-election-interference?__twitter_impression=true

A pair of senators from each party is introducing legislation meant to deter foreign governments from interfering in future American elections.

The bill represents the latest push on Capitol Hill to address Russia’s meddling in the 2016 presidential election and counter potential threats ahead of the 2018 midterms.

Sens. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) on Tuesday introduced the “Defending Elections from Threats by Establishing Redlines (DETER) Act,” which lays out specific foreign actions against U.S. elections that would warrant penalties from the federal government.

Van Hollen said in a statement to The Hill that the bill would send “an unequivocal message to Russia and any other foreign actor who may follow its example: if you attack us, the consequences will be severe.”

Congress imposed additional sanctions on Moscow for the election interference last summer. However, fears have mounted over the potential for future foreign influence efforts, which some lawmakers have sought to address through legislation.

Under the bill introduced Tuesday, it would be up to the Trump administration to decide the retaliatory measures for potential election interference by China, Iran and North Korea, and any other nation that the administration singles out as a threat. The administration would be required to report to Congress within 90 days of the bill’s enactment on plans to counter potential election interference from each specific country.

In the event of future interference specifically by Russia, the bill expands on penalties already imposed by the Countering America’s Adversaries Act of 2017. For instance, it mandates that the U.S. government immediately impose sanctions on Russia’s finance, energy and defense sectors. It would also blacklist senior Russian political figures or oligarchs identified under the law, preventing them from entering the United States and blocking their assets.

Actions that would elicit retaliation include a foreign government or agent purchasing political advertisements to influence an election; using social media to spread false information; hacking and releasing or modifying election or campaign-related information; or hindering access to elections infrastructure, such as websites for polling places.

“We cannot be a country where foreign intelligence agencies attempt to influence our political process without consequences,” Rubio said. “This bill will help to ensure the integrity of our electoral process by using key national security tools to dissuade foreign powers from meddling in our elections.”

Under the legislation, the Director of National Intelligence would be required to report to Congress on any foreign efforts to interfere in an election within one month after each federal election.

Moscow’s 2016 influence campaign involved hacking and orchestrating the release of Democrats’ emails, propagating fake news through social media and probing state voter registration databases and other election-related systems.

In December, a bipartisan cadre of lawmakers introduced legislation aimed at helping states bolster cybersecurity of their voting systems, including authorizing grants for state officials to upgrade outdated voting technology.

lionheart · 16/01/2018 14:10

Me too bad. Smile

I wonder how much will leak from the committees today.

PerkingFaintly · 16/01/2018 14:30

It's very encouraging that that's a bipartisan effort against election interference.

OP posts:
Lweji · 16/01/2018 15:45

Slightly concerned that the NCBI site (US) is down. Should I blame the Russians or the North Koreans?

Initially worried that a missile might have struck.

cozietoesie · 16/01/2018 16:58

Thanks, lion.

OnTheDarkSideOfTheSpoon · 16/01/2018 17:47

Renato Mariotti
@renato_mariotti
THREAD: Why did Mueller subpoena Bannon to testify before the grand jury? How is that different from an informal interview with investigators? (Short answer: He likely wants to question Bannon without Bannon's attorney present.)

1/ As @nytimes reported above, Mueller subpoenaed Steve Bannon to testify before the grand jury. He's the first person in Trump's person in Trump's inner circle to be subpoenaed. Other White House staff agreed to be informally interviewed.
2/ Typically witnesses in an investigation like this one are interviewed informally, especially if they have their own attorney, as Bannon does. So this is a very unusual move. It could mean a couple of things.
3/ First, federal prosecutors often will send over a grand jury subpoena as a first step to then negotiate the informal interview. Ultimately the subpoena is the leverage they have to get a subject to comply with an interview.
4/ I doubt that's what happened here because Bannon is represented by a skilled attorney who also represents Priebus and McGahn, who were already interviewed by Mueller. That means Mueller's team is already in touch with his attorney and has a relationship with him.
5/ If they called Bannon's attorney, he'd no doubt agree to an interview, because the alternative is a grand jury subpoena. Why is testifying before the grand jury worse for someone being interviewed? Because their attorney can't be present in the room with them.
6/ No one is allowed in the grand jury room other than the witness, the prosecutors, the grand jurors, and the court reporter. Also, the fact that there is a court reporter makes it easier for the prosecutor to charge the witness with making a false statement.
7/ Typically, prosecutors also prefer the freewheeling informal interview, because they can ask a broader array of questions in a less tense setting, with a FBI agent present. Often defense lawyers can help their clients remember details by directing them to key documents.
8/ False statements in an informal interview can be prosecuted, as Papadopoulos and Flynn discovered. Typically the desire to prosecute false statements doesn't drive a decision to issue a grand jury subpoena.
9/ The most likely reason that Mueller prefers to have Bannon testify before the grand jury is because his attorney won't be present and it will be easier to catch Bannon off-guard and receive truthful answers. Testifying before a grand jury is intimidating.
10/ When I was a federal prosecutor, I didn't like when multiple witnesses in the same case had the same attorney, even though it was usually permissible. I was worried that the attorney would use their increased knowledge of the case to help the witnesses tailor their testimony.
11/ Mueller may be concerned that Bannon won't be as candid with his attorney present as he would be with no attorney in front of the grand jury. Grand jury questioning, with a court reporter, also lends itself to a harsher questioning style akin to cross-examination. /end

cozietoesie · 16/01/2018 17:55

Ho.

PerkingFaintly · 16/01/2018 17:58

Just seen the news about Bannon and rushed here and... you're way ahead of me as always.

Brew & Cake for excellent work!

OP posts:
OnTheDarkSideOfTheSpoon · 16/01/2018 18:09

Jim Acosta
@Acosta
As I attempted to ask questions in Roosevelt Room of Trump, WH press aides shouted in my face to drown out my questions. I have never encountered that before.

OnTheDarkSideOfTheSpoon · 16/01/2018 18:10

Is it wrong that I think the bannon news exciting? Glitterball

OnTheDarkSideOfTheSpoon · 16/01/2018 18:18

Daniel Dale
@ddale8
To defend the president, the U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security just said under oath that she does not know if Norway is predominantly white.
Still ridiculous, but there was a second part to this quote. Full quote is: "Um, I actually do not know that, sir, but I imagine that is the case."
mobile.twitter.com/davidmackau/status/953299623686307840

SheGotBetteDavisEyes · 16/01/2018 18:20

Perdue and Cotton have been 'outed for lying.' Whilst I believe that they did lie, has something else come to light about that meeting to 'prove' what was actually said?

And no, Pain, it would wholly wrong not to feel somewhat giddy. Grin

OnTheDarkSideOfTheSpoon · 16/01/2018 18:45

It’s such a rollercoaster. Jim Acosta was asked to leave the presser, which I think is unheard of. On the other hand, this seems positive:

Ed O'Keefe
@edatpost
GRAHAM: "Tuesday we had a president that I was proud to golf with, call my friend, who understood immigration had to be bipartisan. ... I don’t know where that guy went. I want him back."

OnTheDarkSideOfTheSpoon · 16/01/2018 19:21

Chad Pergram
@ChadPergram
Sources say Bannon told by WH not to answer questions before House Intel Cmte about the White House and the transition. Did not assert executive privilege. Committee subpoenas him during the meeting to comply while in the hearing.

BerylStreep · 16/01/2018 19:24

Someone may have already mentioned it, but I thought a court had found that Trump was overtly racist in his housing allocation against black and Latino families back in the day. I thought he had been fined heavily as a result.

Swipe left for the next trending thread