monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Let us begin with Graff's incoherent opening:

Quote:

PRESIDENT TRUMP CLAIMED in a tweet over the weekend that the controversial Nunes memo “totally vindicates” him, clearing him of the cloud of the Russia investigation that has hung over his administration for a year now.

Nothing could be further from the truth.
In fact, if anything, the Mueller investigation appears to have been picking up steam in the past three weeks—and homing in on a series of targets.

Now someone might ignorantly accept that Graff has outlined an extensive series of known knowns about the Mueller investigation, but even the assumptions and guesses he is attempting to pass off as knownfacts don’t make a reasonable case that Trump himself is guilty of anything and so, irrespective of what the actual impact of the Nunes memo may or may not be, there is nothing in this screed that supports the assertion that Trump’s claim that he has been ‘totally vindicated’ by Nunes couldn’t be ‘further from the truth.’

(...)

Graff clearly assumes Trump is personally guilty of some crime or malfeasance, and his assumption encompasses Mueller nailing him on it. If Trump claiming he has been vindicated couldn’t ‘be further from the truth,” then the ‘truth’ must be that he is not only guilty but that he will be found guilty. This is something we currently know? If so, Mueller needs to step harder on his accelerator! Why is he dithering with additional activity when we all know Trump is guilty? Gosh, Graff isn’t trying to suggest Mueller is padding his bill is he?

Trump needs to face facts: Generals don't have supernatural powers

The news that retired Marine Corps General John Kelly had knowledge of the spousal abuse charges against Staff Secretary Rob Porter well before it was revealed in the media has raised new questions about the chief of staff chosen to restore order in a White House in disarray. This followed nasty comments Kelly made about Florida Rep. Frederica Wilson and people who had failed to apply for protection from deportation. 

Amid speculation that Trump is considering replacing him, Kelly received support Sunday from both presidential counselor Kellyanne Conway and Jeh Johnson, who was Homeland Security secretary in the Obama administration. Yet history indicates that few senior military officers have proven successful as high-level aides to presidents. Sometimes their terms of service to the man in the Oval Office have been downright disastrous.

Did you delete that post of yours?

Yeah, I deleted it because I really didn't want to dignify the member's scurrilous post with a response.

In three days, it will be the 2nd anniversary of Antonin Scalia's tragic passing. Though the coroner found that the death came as a result of natural causes, there was a footnote that allowed for the possibility that "3 years with Francis as Pope was just too much for the Justice". "Possibly", the report went on, "the Justice wished to be at Jesus' side in this time of need." "And perhaps", the footnote concluded, "the Justice thought that if he was up there with Jesus, he could help keep things on the beam."

Do you actually understand and appreciate the meaning of impossible?

Yet you all go on with this gigantic charade when you know that you are providing cover for a terrible, truly evil series of crimes.

You are supposed to be the "adults" who are running the USA.

"The office of Sheriff is a critical part of the Anglo-American heritage of law enforcement. We must never erode this historic office": Sessions, speaking at National Sheriffs Association Conference

When you are Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III, and are viewed as a racist by a wide variety of people, one would think you might consider the optics of praising “Anglo-American heritage” in front of a largely white crowd of cops.

The True North of the American Media’s Coverage of the Olympics

The ludicrous coverage of North Korea’s presence at the Winter Olympics suggests that for the metaphorical compass of many of the biggest institutions in America’s mainstream media, there is a new true north (no pun intended, but now that I think about it, I should have intended it): Whoever is in opposition to the Trump administration is the hero of the story — no matter the circumstances, no matter the stakes.

John McCain, Jeff Flake, Jim Comey, LaVar Ball, the intelligence community, corporate CEOs, kneeling NFL players, the North Korean regime — no matter what you’ve done in the past, no matter how much the media collectively previously hammered you, if you’re butting heads with the Trump administration, you will get the more sympathetic angle in the news coverage of that dispute.

No foreign leader has enjoyed coverage as good as North Korea’s Kim Yo Jong since Vogue profiled Asma al-Assad, first lady of Syria, back in 2011. (That was right before Assad’s regime killed tens of thousands of people and used chemical weapons in the Syrian civil war.) A sampling:

Reuters: “North Korea has emerged as the early favorite to grab one of the Winter Olympics’ most important medals: the diplomatic gold.”

CNN: “Kim Jong Un’s sister is stealing the show at the Winter Olympics!” Business Insider: “From her “side-eye” of US Vice President Mike Pence to hints at Korean unification, Kim has stolen the spotlight at the Winter Olympics.”

Washington Post: “The ‘Ivanka Trump of North Korea’ captivates people in the South at the Olympics.”

In the name of Otto Warmbier, could we avoid variations of the term “captive” in praising North Korea’s leaders during the Olympics?

The New York Times wrote, “Her quietly friendly approach while in South Korea — photographers repeatedly captured her smiling — seemed to endear her to some observers.”

If a smile is all it takes to “endear” you to a regime as brutal as North Korea’s, you are an exceptionally cheap date. Could you lower the bar a little more? As I joked Sunday, I await the headline, “Kim Jong Un’s Sister Shocks, Delights World By Not Killing Anyone During Meeting.”

Give USA Today some credit for remembering some history, deep in a story:

In 2006, 21 members of a North Korean cheering squad that had traveled to South Korea for an international athletic event were sent to a prison camp for talking about what they saw in the South, the South Korean newspaper Chosun Ilbo reported.

It was left to Buzzfeed — Buzzfeed! — to bring some sanity and perspective back to the situation:

In 2015, a South Korean report said that between 2000 and 2013, almost 1,400 North Korean citizens were publicly executed, reportedly as a means to “keep the population in line. Thousands of North Koreans were required to witness firing squad executions in public stadiums in 2013, according to a South Korean newspaper.

Some of these reporters will no doubt insist they’re not touting the charm of Kim Yo Jong and the North Koreans; they’re merely reporting on the reaction of some portion of South Korean public. The South Koreans live their daily lives in the crosshairs and no doubt have a strong cultural appetite for dreams of a peaceful reunification. Last month I wrote, “Sometimes South Korea feels like our buddy who’s still convinced he can patch things up and get back together with the crazy ex-girlfriend who tried to run him over with her car.” I suppose that if you live next door to a crazy dangerous psychopath long enough, you welcome the days the neighbor smiles instead of threatening you.

The New York Times wrote, “Her quietly friendly approach while in South Korea — photographers repeatedly captured her smiling — seemed to endear her to some observers.”

If a smile is all it takes to “endear” you to a regime as brutal as North Korea’s, you are an exceptionally cheap date.

Some of these reporters will no doubt insist they’re not touting the charm of Kim Yo Jong and the North Koreans; they’re merely reporting on the reaction of some portion of South Korean public. The South Koreans live their daily lives in the crosshairs and no doubt have a strong cultural appetite for dreams of a peaceful reunification. Last month I wrote, “Sometimes South Korea feels like our buddy who’s still convinced he can patch things up and get back together with the crazy ex-girlfriend who tried to run him over with her car.” I suppose that if you live next door to a crazy dangerous psychopath long enough, you welcome the days the neighbor smiles instead of threatening you.

The True North of the American Media’s Coverage of the Olympics

US President Donald Trump has unveiled his long-touted plan to revamp US infrastructure, but critics labelled it a "scam".

Mr Trump wants Congress to authorise $200bn (£144bn) over a decade to spend on roads, highways, ports and airports.

The president hopes the US states and private sector will stimulate another $1.3tn in improvements.

The plan was a Trump election promise, but it could entail Americans paying higher local taxes, fees and tolls.

The blueprint is part of a $4.4tn budget proposal which abandons the long-held Republican goal of balancing the federal budget within a decade.

A senior administration official who briefed reporters over the weekend said the $200bn investment would be paid for "out of savings from other areas of the federal budget".

The plan calls for $50bn of public funding dedicated to modernising infrastructure in rural areas, many of which voted for Mr Trump in the 2016 elections.

The proposal includes $100bn for an incentives programme "to spur additional dedicated funds from States, localities, and the private sector".

The administration also seeks $20bn in loans and bonds to finance projects including transportation and water.

The blueprint allows states to add or increase tolls on inter-state highways, and to charge fees to use highway rest areas.

However, it bans states from charging for "essential services such as water or access to restrooms".

The plan also seeks to reduce the time required to obtain environmental permits.

The Trump administration is planning to sell off Reagan National and Dulles International airports near Washington DC as part of the proposal.

"The Federal Government owns and operates certain infrastructure that would be more appropriately owned by State, local, or private entities," the plan says.

The plan already faces stiff opposition.

It does not offer as much new federal funding as Democrats seek. They have advocated public infrastructure investment of five times the amount just proposed by Mr Trump.

"After a full year of empty boasts, the president has finally unveiled a puny infrastructure scam that fully fails to meet the need in America's communities," said House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi.

On the right, deficit hawks are likely to baulk at any new spending unless savings can found elsewhere in the budget.

Some critics say the administration's plan is a bid to privatise the nation's infrastructure, shifting the cost burden on to states, which would pass it on to citizens.

Environmentalists say the proposal to streamline the review process for permits would increase risks to vulnerable wildlife.

"It's a scam to line the pockets of corporate polluters by gutting protections for our environment," said the Center for American Progress.

But one prominent business group was full of praise for the president's proposal.

"It could help us reclaim our rightful place as a global leader on true 21st-century infrastructure," said Jay Timmons, head of the National Association of Manufacturers.

The administration has called this proposal a starting point for negotiations.

But Mr Trump has made it a legislative priority this year, as November's mid-term congressional elections loom.

The president met state and local officials on Monday, including the governors of Wisconsin, Louisiana, Virginia and Maine.

He will try to sell the proposal to congressional leaders on Wednesday.
"We have spent $7 trillion in the Middle East, $7 trillion. What a mistake," Mr Trump said at the White House on Monday.

"And we're trying to build roads and bridges and fix bridges that are falling down and we have a hard time getting the money and its crazy."

Who do liberals hate more? Police officers? Or white people?

I've never felt so negatively about an elf before.

When you are Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III, and are viewed as a racist by a wide variety of people, one would think you might consider the optics of praising “Anglo-American heritage” in front of a largely white crowd of cops.

Response is totally voluntary. No one is compelled to answer, read, or even take notice of anything that anyone says here. If I don't know enough about a subject or deem it beneath my interest I don't feel any need to converse on that topic.

Evidently not the way you do.

The entire history of the human species has been characterized by terrible, truly evil crimes. Against reason. Against other people. And against nature.

We're not under any compulsion to participate in your crusade.