FEC commissioner: ‘I will not be silenced’

FEC commissioner: 'I will not be silenced'

@Getty

THE HILL

The FEC commissioner who asked President Trump to produce proof of his voter fraud claims on Tuesday said she will not be silenced by a watchdog’s attempt to investigate her for the request.

“But let there be no doubt: It is absolutely within my official duties as a federal election official to comment publicly on any aspect of the integrity federal elections in the United States,” Ellen Weintraub said in a statement. “I will not be silenced.”

Weintraub earlier this month called on Trump to produce evidence of his claim of mass voter fraud, specifically in New Hampshire, which she said was “an extraordinarily serious and specific charge.” Trump has provided no evidence of the unfounded claim.

“The scheme the President of the United States alleges would constitute thousands of felony criminal offenses under New Hampshire law,” Weintraub, a Democrat, said on Feb. 10.

Cause of Action, a 501(c)(3) which promotes government accountability, requested on Tuesday that the FEC Inspector General launch an investigation into Weintraub to see if she violated ethics regulations by calling on Trump to provide evidence of his claims.

Weintraub on Tuesday said that the president’s allegation is within her jurisdiction as the commissioner.

“Any such allegation challenging the legitimacy of federal elections would be of great concern to me,” she said.

“As it happens, this particular allegation falls squarely within the jurisdiction of the Federal Election Commission, since the expense of these buses has not been accounted for on any campaign-finance filing. Accordingly, I have asked the President evidence.”

Trump has blamed voter fraud for the reason he lost the popular vote to Democrat Hillary Clinton.

Republicans dismiss growing protests at home

Autoplay: On | Off

As Republican lawmakers face rising anger from constituents at town-hall events across the country, they’re dismissing the protests as coming from a “small but vocal minority” backed by big-money liberal interests.

This week, House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) became the latest Republican to see video of angry protesters shouting him down at an event in his hometown go viral.

Chaffetz struggled to control the crowd, which frequently booed him and erupted in chants of “do your job!” after Chaffetz was asked why his panel spent months investigating Hillary Clinton’s emails but so far hasn’t launched any probes into the Trump administration.

At meetings from California to Maine, GOP legislators have been greeted by hundreds and even thousands of angry progressives carrying signs, chanting and uploading videos of the lawmakers escaping into idling cars or facing hostile questions.

Liberals have been emboldened by the protests, believing their own version of the Tea Party movement has sprung up organically in response to President Trump and GOP majorities in Congress.

Republicans are not convinced.

House GOP conference vice chairman Doug Collins (R-Ga.) wrote in a letter to Republicans this week that they should not fear the “vocal minority” he says is “grasping for relevance in communities across the nation.”

Some, like Rep. Dave Brat (R-Va.), are blaming the protests on a group called “Indivisible,” which was started in December by a handful of former Democratic staffers on Capitol Hill.

“What I’m worried about is that the mainstream press can’t Google ‘Indivisible’ and the Soros-funded movement that is pushing all of this,” Brat told The Hill. “Indivisible’s game plan is to create chaos and humiliate public officials. The mainstream press can’t seem to do investigative journalism at all.”

Brat was referring to billionaire George Soros, whose significant financial contributions to liberal groups have made him into the nemesis of many on the right. But one of Indivisible’s founders says the group doesn’t have any connections to Soros, and Brat’s recommended Google search turned up no credible information on Indivisible’s supposed ties to the wealthy investor.

Thousands of local chapters of Indivisible have sprung up across the nation since the group launched in December. Founder Sarah Dohl told The Hill the group has no ties to Soros or any other major liberal donors.

The group started when she and Ezra Levin, both former staffers for Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas), posted an online guide for how progressives can oppose the Trump agenda and successfully influence lawmakers.

The guide went viral after it was tweeted by liberal activist George Takei and former Labor secretary Robert Reich.

Dohl and Levin set up a website in December, which they say has drawn 12.4 million page views and spawned more than 6,500 local groups in the two months since. The guide has been downloaded 1.5 million times, they say.

“We’re hearing from a lot of people on the ground that this is their first time ever getting politically involved,” Dohl said. “Before this movement sprung up, a lot of them had never even called their congressman.”

“We’re looking to adopt the Tea Party’s tactics of local activism and defensive politics,” Dohl continued. “They were able to slow a popular president and grind policymaking for a Democratic super-majority to a halt. We think we can do the same thing now because Trump and this GOP Congress don’t have nearly the mandate we had.”

Conservative talkers like Sean Hannity and former Speaker Newt Gingrich have fanned the notion on the right that the protests are “Astroturf,” rather than grassroots.

The White House has taken up that line too, with press secretary Sean Spicer claiming that the protesters are being paid to harass GOP lawmakers.

Republicans say their claims that the protests don’t represent their district’s voters have merit because many of the lawmakers targeted by protesters represent Trump-friendly districts.

Trump won 47 percent of the vote in Chaffetz’s district compared to Clinton’s 23 percent.

But Chaffetz wasn’t the only GOP lawmaker to face a hostile town hall in a red district on Thursday. Angry crowds also showed up at district events with Reps. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) and House Budget Committee Chairwoman Diane Black (R-Tenn.). Video from Black’s town hall of a teacher defending ObamaCare’s individual insurance mandate went viral, attracting attention on social media and CNN.

Seventy-two percent of voters went for Trump in Black’s central Tennessee district. And Trump beat Clinton by nine points in Amash’s Grand Rapids-area district in Michigan.

“Where are these people coming from? They’re not coming from areas where they’ll vote,” one GOP campaign operative told The Hill. “All you’re seeing is an organized effort from these local groups under the umbrella of Indivisible and they’re casting wide nets to generate this support. When they show up at Chaffetz’s town-hall, they’re inviting people from all over Utah and even from Colorado to turn it into a show.”

An Indivisible leader from the 6th Congressional District in Illinois, where some 400 turned out to protest Rep. Pete Roskam (R-Ill.) this week, disputed that characterization.

“Wholly untrue,” said the leader, who is new to the political scene and requested anonymity. “None of us are savvy enough to organize nationally or bring friends in from out of state to stand in 30 degree weather and hold signs. That’s ridiculous. They’re using that narrative to dismiss us. Everyone I talked to at our rally was from this district.”

Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.), who had to be whisked away from an event in Roseville by the police, said he believes the protests are a mix of national coordination and local activism.

However, he warned that Republicans shouldn’t underestimate the movement.

“Democrats made a big mistake by not taking the Tea Party seriously,” he said in an email. “Both movements are a reminder that in the end, we will be judged on whether the vast majority of Americans believe we have improved the health care system for them and their families.”

Tim Phillips, the president of the conservative grassroots group Americans for Prosperity, which was at the forefront of the Tea Party movement, said he doesn’t think the protests are “Astroturf.”

But he said Republicans have triumphed under these conditions before, pointing to the massive protests that shut down the Wisconsin statehouse amid Gov. Scott Walker’s actions to undermine the labor movement in the state.

“They can mobilize hundreds of millions of dollars, the left has a massive operation,” Phillips said. “Anyone who expects it to be easy hasn’t been paying attention. So of course they’ll put thousands of people out there, if they don’t it’s malpractice on their part. In no way are we underestimating that… but we’ve pushed through this before.”

— Scott Wong contributed

Vice President Biden Nails Down Exactly Why Trump Was Able To Beat Hillary Clinton

Vice President Biden Nails Down Exactly Why Trump Was Able To Beat Hillary Clinton

MSNBC Screengrab

POLITICUS USA

In an ideal world where politics is centered around issues that matter, Hillary Clinton – not Trump – would be getting sworn in next week.

It’s been over two months since Donald Trump won enough electoral votes to defeat Hillary Clinton and become president, but there is still widespread disagreement about how it could possibly happen.

Many people blame Clinton for her flaws as a candidate, even though she won nearly 3 million more popular votes than Trump.

In an interview with MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell on Thursday, Vice President Joe Biden rejected some of these theories and nailed down exactly why Trump was able to squeak by last November.

Video:

Biden said:

Look, he lost the popular vote, but for 175,000 votes in three states, it would be a different outcome. So there’s a thousand reasons why you could attribute our candidate’s loss … It could be what happened with the FBI, it could be a whole range of things. But, you know, this is one election where I don’t think the issues really intruded. The University of Pennsylvania, the Annenberg School, they did a study showing how few minutes were devoted to any issue. Look, I’ll lay you eight to five that you go to ask any foreign person who’s not in the news media and say, “What was Hillary’s position on free college? Can you explain it? What was Hillary’s position on helping people with child care?”  Those issues never got into the game … All the outrageous things that were said and done by [Trump] sucked all the oxygen out of the air, so there was never a discussion about the economic issues. It never got there … If you get a chance to have to talk about whether or not a candidate groped somebody or whether or not the other candidate’s position is how they fund college tuition, what’s gonna get in the news is whether or not somebody groped somebody.

Biden is exactly right that there is likely a slew of reasons why Hillary Clinton came up short, at least when it came to the three states – Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania – that decided the Electoral College. But the argument repeatedly made that Clinton didn’t adequately address the economic needs of middle-class Americans is simply not true.

As the vice president noted, she had a set of concrete, detailed proposals dealing with economic issues that she repeatedly talked about. In fact, as Vox pointed out last month, jobs and the economy were the top-mentioned words in Clinton speeches during the campaign.

The problem wasn’t so much that Clinton’s message was wrong; it’s that the press didn’t cover it, thus the voters who decided the election likely knew very little about the former Secretary of State’s policy proposals – and there were plenty of them that would have made life better for the average American.

In an ideal world where politics is centered around issues that matter, and not driven by 140-character tweets or foreign meddling, Hillary Clinton – not Trump – would be getting sworn in next week.

Irony Alert: Comey Refuses To Comment Publicly On Possible Trump-Russia Investigation

Irony Alert: Comey Refuses To Comment Publicly On Possible Trump-Russia Investigation

Screenshot

POLITICUS USA

“I would never comment on investigations  …  in an open forum,” the FBI director said, straight face intact.

During a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on Tuesday, FBI Director James Comey refused to comment on whether his agency is investigating any connection between Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and Russia.

“I would never comment on investigations  …  in an open forum,” Comey responded, straight face intact.

The remark comes amid reports that Russia has damaging financial and personal information on Trump.

The irony of the FBI director’s refusal to answer the question posed by Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden did not go unnoticed by Independent Sen. Angus King of Maine.

Video:

When King pressed Comey on why he wouldn’t answer Wyden’s initial question on whether the FBI was investigation a possible Trump campaign-Russia connection, Comey repeated himself.

“I don’t, especially in a public forum, we never confirm or deny a pending investigation,” Comey said.

King shot back, with a chuckle: “The irony of your making that statement here, I cannot avoid, but I’ll move on.”

The irony, of course, is that Comey weighed in publicly about the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails twice in two weeks just before last year’s presidential election.

Luckily, Comey was called out for his clear change of heart when it comes to publicly discussing his agency’s investigations. But the American people still deserve to know whether Trump – who will formally become president in 10 days – was coordinating with a foreign state in order to win a presidential election.

12 Moments Of Right-Wing Horror And Absurdity In 2016

12 Moments Of Right-Wing Horror And Absurdity In 2016

IMAGE: DonkeyHotey/Flickr

THE NATIONAL MEMO

President-elect Donald Trump had the most perfect New Year’s tweet. And by “perfect” we mean perfectly awful. Say what you will, the man has an uncanny ability to compress his entire sick personality into a mere 140 characters.

“Happy New Year to all, including to my many enemies and those who have fought me and lost so badly they just don’t know what to do. Love!” he tweeted.

It’s a little hard to celebrate the end of 2016, a truly awful year, when in 20 days, this petty, vindictive man with the maturity and impulse control of a five-year-old and the ossified views of a dinosaur will be president.

Though you may be cowering hungover under your bed in dread at the idea, we thought we’d take you on a little stroll to recap of some of the horrors—and absurdities—the right-wing visited upon us during the year that was.

1. Donald Trump staged a year-long assault on truth.

Donald Trump lies all the time. He lies malignantly, and he lies ridiculously. Of course, his entire political career is founded on the “birther” lie, which he still brags about. He ran his campaign on lies about black crime, dangerous immigrants, and non-existent jobs, more or less defrauding the American people in the same way he defrauded students at Trump University. In some cases, the lies he told were so utterly, demonstrably false that they were almost funny. Almost.

Two examples:

“There is no drought,” Donald Trump told Californians while campaigning there last May.

If there is a water problem, he continued, it’s because someone closed the water, and he’s going to open it.

“If I win, believe me, we’re going to start opening up the water so that you can have your farmers survive,” Trump said.

It’s just so crazy to say this. Arguably, it’s one thing to deny climate change, which is a bit complicated and requires scientists to explain it. But droughts? Not to mention air pollution. Dude, we can see those.

Another bizarre one in the final days of the campaign was a depiction of how President Obama treated a protester at a Clinton campaign rally:

“He was talking to the protester, screaming at him, really screaming at him,” Trump told his apparently insanely gullible crowd in Tampa, Florida.

“By the way, if I spoke the way Obama spoke to that protester, they [note: the mean old media] would say, ‘He became unhinged! He spent so much time screaming at this protester and frankly, it was a disgrace.”

This was, in fact, the very opposite of what had happened and been televised. Obama had urged the slightly rowdy crowd to take it easy on the protester, who was older and appeared to be a veteran. It was not just a lie, it was a masterpiece of projection. For, Trump is the one who consistently endangered protesters at his rallies by literally inciting his supporters to rough them up and worse.

2. Trump spokesperson Scottie Nell Hughes confirms facts don’t matter anymore.

The persistence and outrageousness of lies can be attributed the sobering reality that the Trump era helped usher in the “post-truth” world we now find ourselves living in. The tweeter-in-chief spreads unfounded conspiracy theories, spins minor victories into major coups, and occasionally in an unguarded moment spews some accidental truth about how he can’t believe how many people actually believe anything he says.

But still, you’re not supposed to just come out and say that truth and facts don’t matter.

CNN Trump surrogate Scottie Nell Hughes confirmed all of our worst fears after the election when she said, “There’s no such thing, unfortunately, anymore as facts,” on the Diane Rehm Show on WAMU, an NPR affiliate.

She was explaining the truth according to Trump to her fellow aghast panelists when it comes to the tweeter-in-chief’s claim of, “millions of fraudulent voters,” having given Hillary Clinton her 2.8 million popular vote victory.

Here is what Hughes purported to be her logic:

“Mr. Trump’s tweets amongst a certain crowd, a large—a large part of the population, are truth. When he says that millions of people illegally voted, he has some—in his—amongst him and his supporters, and people believe they have facts to back that up. Those that do not like Mr. Trump, they say that those are lies, and there’s no facts to back it up.”

That is seriously scary. We have a president and his minions who now believe truth is what he says it is.

3. Trump surrogates wildly misunderstand Pussygate.

Trump’s recorded assertions that he could grab women by the genitals because he is famous threw some of his surrogates into disarray, but not all. And a few of them performed some of the more hilarious contortions seen on the campaign trail to deflect attention from the damaging revelations.

One was Newt Gingrich who reinforced his already creepy image by conflating sex and sexual assault in a dustup with Megyn Kelly in October. While she pressed for answers and expressed concerns for women’s safety, Gingrich countered with the accusation that Kelly is just “fascinated with sex,” because she kept on talking about it.

Funnier still was Betsy McCaughey, the former Lieutenant Governor or New York, whose nut job takedown of Obamacare invented the concept of death panels. She argued that if you like Beyonce’s music, you can’t complain about sexual assault. Like other right-wingers, she seemed to think the problem with the tape was Trump’s foul language, rather than the whole rapey/consent thing.

Hillary Clinton, a fan of Beyonce, likes bad words more than Donald Trump, McCaughey argued, before whipping out and performing the lyrics to “Formation.”

“‘I came to slay, bitch. When he f-ed me good I take his ass to Red Lobster.’ That happens to be from Beyoncé, her favorite performer,” McCaughey said of Clinton. “Whom she says she idolizes and would like to imitate. There’s a lot of hypocrisy, in Hillary Clinton expressing such horror at language on the bus.”

McCaughey was triumphant. She really scored there.

Later, after several women accused Trump of sexually assaulting them, McCaughey called such accusations an example of “man-shaming” and suggested the women should not be believed.

“With all due respect, that was the same thing that the folks over at Bill Cosby’s camp said,” CNN Don Lemon pointed out.

“Well, and sometimes they’re right and sometimes they’re wrong,” McCaughey countered.

Ummm, yeah. They were right.

4. Ted Cruz’s unconscionable defense of Senate’s despicable blocking of Obama Supreme Court appointment, and threat to continue under a Clinton administration.

In October, Ted Cruz, who for some reason had forgotten that everyone including his own party detests him, floated an idea about the Supreme Court. Maybe, if Hillary Clinton were to win the presidency, Senate Republicans really would just take all of their toys and go home and stonewall on any Supreme Court appointment she attempted to make. So there.

“There is long historical precedent for a Supreme Court with fewer justices,” Cruz lied at a campaign event. “Just recently Justice [Stephen] Breyer observed that the vacancy is not impacting the ability of the court to do its job, that’s a debate that we are going to have.”

Cruz’s threat did not quite pack the punch of fellow tea partier Joe Walsh’s threat to “grab a musket” if the election did not go Trump’s way, but was more in Cruz’s trademark mealy-mouthed and thoroughly dishonest style.

For starters, there is no long history of that, and secondly, Breyer did not say that. The Senate’s inaction on Supreme Court appointees has severely and demonstrably affected the high court’s ability to do its job. Deadlocking on cases involving immigration and unions and other vital issues that have come before it means the court is literally failing to do its job, which is to decide things.

The Supreme Court is only the best known example of the harm GOP stonewalling has done to the judiciary. Republicans have confirmed only 18 of Obama’s federal court nominees, and created a “judicial emergency,” which is a term for when courts are so back-logged and caseloads are so high that Americans’ access to justice is endangered.

Cruz knows about this emergency and has gleefully propagated it. Unlike his idiotic fellow traveler, John McCain, whom Cruz was echoing. Cruz is a lawyer and touts himself as a constitutionalist, but for some reason it’s okay for him to ignore that part of the constitution that gives the powers of appointing justices to the president.

Cut to present and Cruz’s name has sickeningly been floated for a Trump appointment to the Supreme Court, and Cruz accused the Democrats of threatening to be the most obstructionist party in history.

Ha! One hopes.

5. Melania Trump’s barely hidden misogyny revealed itself in her softball interview with Anderson Cooper in October.

At first glance, Melania Trump did a good job of seeming like a decent sane person in her softball interview with Anderson Cooper in October. She reported that her husband had apologized to her about bragging he sexually assaults women, and that she accepted his apology. But, she pointed out, it was not his fault. Billy Bush made him do it. Donald is, she acknowledged, a big kid, barely more mature than their 11-year-old, Barron.

But her mixed messages about her husband’s level of maturity were only part of the problem. On closer inspection, there was quite a bit of misogyny lurking behind her words and viewing women as the real predators seems pretty firmly ensconced in her worldview. Since boys will of course be endearing if potty-mouthed boys, Melania blamed the manipulative women who are always hitting on her husband, sometimes right in front of her, throwing themselves at him “unappropriately.” This was in the context of talking about sexual assault allegations, so the unmistakable conclusion was that she was implying some women ask for it.

As for Natasha Stoynoff, the People magazine writer who said Trump forcibly kissed her at Mar-a Lago, the most important thing Melania wanted to convey was that she was never friends with Stoynoff and would not recognize her on Fifth Avenue, despite the fact that Stoynoff attended the Trumps’ wedding. (And the most important thing Mr. Trump would have you know, is that Stoynoff is not his idea of attractive enough for him to sexually assault.) And Stoynoff has recently confirmed that knowing Trump would attack her looks did give her pause before going public with her ordeal. How many more?

6. Rudy ‘9/11’ Giuliani conveniently forgot when 9/11 happened.

In September, self-proclaimed September 11 hero Rudy Giuliani managed to forget when 9/11 happened so that he could make the laughably false statement that there were no terrorist incidents before Obama took office. Around the same time he made that brain fart, and right after the first debate where Trump tanked badly, Rudy posted a banner week that week sucking up Trump’s fumes. Here were some of the lowlights:

  • Immediately following the debate, Giuliani was the first to float the idea that Trump should skip the rest of the debates. Why? Because Trump blew it so badly, and his gnat-like attention span prevents him from actually preparing? No, because it was rigged! Lester Holt was so unfair when he corrected Trump a few times on his lies! (Especially when Holt pointed out to Trump that the police practice he and Giuliani so love, stop-and-frisk, is unconstitutional and racist.)
  • Later in the week, Giuliani joined the fray in criticizing Bill Clinton’s extramarital affairs, because that’s just extremely relevant to Hillary Clinton’s candidacy and Giuliani has always been an exemplary husband and father. Because he cares so much about women and children, Giuliani helpfully pointed out how “stupid” Hillary is to have stayed with Bill. In the same dizzying spew, Giuliani called Trump a “feminist” for hiring women (even if he fat-shames them and fires them for not being attractive enough). He also claimed Bill Clinton “violated” Monica Lewinsky, and as a former prosecutor, isn’t he supposed to know that’s not the case?
  • By the end of the week, Giuliani decided it was appropriate to make racist, anti-immigrant remarks and insult Mexicans working in the kitchen at the Waldorf Astoria during a black tie event there, even managing to offend the various business leaders assembled. Red-faced, the head of the Commercial Finance Association, obviously a left-wing organization, was forced to issue a formal apology to attendees.

Diagnosis: The bile has finally eaten all the way through Giuliani’s brain.

7. Britt Hume’s idiotic whining about how he’s not even allowed to say Hillary Clinton is shrill and needs to smile more.

Britt Hume, Fox News’ so-called reasonable one, gave the following critique after Hillary Clinton’s Democratic convention speech: “She has a habit, when speaking, of breaking into a kind of a sharp, lecturing tone, [it] makes you feel like. She has a great asset, as a public person, which is a radiant smile, but she has a not-so-attractive voice.”

Now, technically, he did not actually use the word “shrill” having somehow gotten the message that that word is not very well-disguised sexism. A few weeks later, Hume and Tucker Carlson, were having a little chat about what they can and cannot say about Hillary Clinton. It’s so frustrating being a white male these days. Everybody’s always picking on you, trying to take away the privileges to which you’ve become accustomed.

They were discussing the outrage of Clinton not smiling enough while she was talking to the families of dead soldiers during the “Commander-in-Chief” forum. Carlson said he admires Clinton’s toughness (ha! no), but thinks she undercuts that when she mentions the sexism in the media’s coverage of her. How so? Not sure.

But poor Hume just doesn’t even know what he can say anymore; everything has become so unfair.

“You know at the Democratic convention, I was on after her speech, and it struck me that she did some things effectively in that speech, particularly her critique of Donald Trump,” Hume said. “But she seemed—and she has at other times in the campaign—to be kind of angry and joyless, and yes, unsmiling. I said that on the air, and I really caught it on Twitter from people who said, ‘You’re just a sexist, I can’t believe somebody’s saying that.’ But it raises this question, Tucker, in America today, is it possible for a woman to be shrill, and if so, or joyless, or unsmiling, is it possible for somebody to say that without ending up in jail?”

The dreadful persecution of Hume continued apace and other men who wish to call women shrill with impunity continues .

8. Pond scum emerges, says vile scummy things, gets book contract.

If there is a more despicable piece of shower mold than Breitbart.com’s Milo Yiannopoulos, then we do not know it.

In a mediascape that normalized Trump’s demagogic drunk uncle act and legitimized him into the presidency, this other creature from a hateful lagoon was granted a hearing on ABC “Nightline” with Terry Moran.

Yiannopoulos has been banned from Twitter for leading a harassment campaign of deeply disgusting misogynist and racist abuse of the comedian Leslie Jones, something of which he is apparently proud.

“I like to think of myself as a virtuous troll,” Yiannopoulos bizarrely self-aggrandized in the interview.

We like to think of him with a stake driven through his tongue, but hey, we like to think lots of things.

Moran thought maybe he could pull some decency out of this cockroach, and asked if Yiannopoulos would tell Leslie Jones “she looks like a dude” in person.

“Yeah, probably,” Yiannopoulos replied. ”I probably would.”

“Then you’re an idiot, really,” Moran said

Moran again tried to reason with the moron. “You’re going to go after somebody’s body to denigrate their ideas? What grade are you in? Seriously. Are you a 13-year-old boy? Because somebody doesn’t have a weight that you think is proper? That’s revolting.”

Revolting is a word Yiannopoulos can relate to.

“I’ll tell you what’s revolting,” Yiannopoulos responded. “What’s revolting is the body positivity movement. What’s revolting is this idea now that you can tell women that they’ll be healthy at any size.”

And now, having discussed this vile piece of bellybutton lint, we need to go take a bath.

It was a great year for racist, misogynist Alt-Right scum! While some ended up in the White House, Yiannopoulos ended his 2016 with a book contract.

9. Trump sons went from comparing refugees to Skittles to just making sh*t completey up.

It was Donald Trump, Jr. who compared refugees to Skittles, prompting the candy to distance itself from the Trump campaign (as Tic Tac later did.) But it was son Eric who made up the absurd original lie of his father’s sh*tshow of a campaign in the Fall. He swore it was not President Obama’s Kenyan birth, or secret status as a Muslim “Manchurian candidate,” it was a Christmas story. Who doesn’t love a Christmas story?

During an interview, Eric said Trump entered the political sphere because the Obama/Grinches stole Chistmas. “He sees the tree on the White House lawn has been renamed ‘Holiday tree’ instead of ‘Christmas tree. I could go on and on for hours. Those are the very things that made my father run, and those are the very things he cares about.”

One teeny tiny leetle problem. It’s not true. As in has no basis in reality. Didn’t happen. Throughout the Obama Administration, The White House Christmas Tree was called the “White House Christmas Tree.” It’s not even the “White House Xmas Tree.” There’s been no concession to secularism, to separation of church and state. It’s a made-up story, a myth, a manufactured crisis, and all part of the nonexistent war on Christmas that isn’t being waged anywhere.

Eric also pointed out other pseudo outrages galvanizing his father’s run.

“He opens the paper and some new school district has just eliminated the ability for its students to say the Pledge of Allegiance, or some fire department in some town is ordered by the mayor to no longer fly the American flag on the back of a fire truck,” Eric Trump told The Stream’s James Robinson.

There are just a few things wrong with this statement. First of all, Donald Trump doesn’t open a paper. He opens his Twitter feed, Fox News or maybe Breitbart. Sometimes he glances at the National Enquirer, especially if “people are saying” there’s a good conspiracy theory about Ted Cruz’s father, or Hillary Clinton’s health on the cover. Second, a newspaper that covers things like that would go out of business fast due to snoozing readers.

The Kool-Aid in the Trump household was clearly very strong.

10. Before Trump surrogate Carl Paladinosaid horrendously racist and hateful things about the Obamas, he said other horrible racist things.

Back in August, while Trump was attacking the Khan family for having an American war hero son while being Muslim, his pal and upstate New York school board official Carl Paladino went on “Imus in the Morning” to defend his right to do so. He started by making stuff up about Hillary Clinton.

“We’ve got an un-indicted felon [he means Clinton] as his opponent and you’re talking about Khan, about [Trump] making a remark about this man? All right, I don’t care if he’s a Gold Star parent. He certainly doesn’t deserve that title, OK, if he’s as anti-American as he’s illustrated in his speeches and in his discussion. I mean, if he’s a member of the Muslim Brotherhood or supporting, you know, the ISIS-type of attitude against America, there’s no reason for Donald Trump to have to honor this man.”

It’s hard to be worse than Trump himself, but apparently manageable for some.

Keeping the level of discourse as high as possible, Paladino went on insist that Obama is a Muslim and Hillary Clinton is “devious” for hiding her alleged health problems, health problems that have been debunked.

“But if you’re really looking at what’s been exposed about Hillary and Hillary’s demeanor, I mean, just look at the deviousness. If it is true about her health problems, I mean, how devious can a woman possibly be? And not telling the American people that she’s got some sickness, she’s definitely impaired.”

Diagnosis: Paladino is morally impaired.

11. Bill O’Reilly instructs black people to hate Black Lives Matter.

In December Bill O’Reilly let his White Supremacist flag fly in a rant about opponents of the Electoral College.

But we shouldn’t let that despicable moment obscure another one back in July, when several police officers in Dallas were gunned down after a peaceful Black Lives Matter demonstration, which has nothing to do with the shooting.

Bill O’Reilly took the opportunity to insist that everyone must hate and fear Black Lives Matter immediately. He and other Fox Newsians spent a good deal of their post-Dallas airtime whipping up as much hysteria and anger as possible against a group that has a name and a message no sane person can argue with. But sane people do not sit at Fox roundtables, as an episode of “Outnumbered” clearly shows. Meanwhile, colleagues Megyn Kelly and racist ex-cop Mark Fuhrman took it upon themselves to lecture black people to stop exaggerating about problems with police. You got that, Philando Castile, Eric Garner and Alton Sterling?

But O’Reilly is just so sick and tired of black people not listening to him when he tells them what is good for them. Speaking to his guest, NAACP director Hilary Shelton on Friday, O’Reilly said, “So, you know what I think? I think that if you really want, if African Americans really want to bring the country together and have good racial relations, they have to distance themselves from Black Lives Matter. Am I wrong?”

Yeah, you’re wrong, Shelton said, explaining that the Black Lives Matter marches are occurring for a very good reason. And lots of people understand that.

But white people ha-a-a-te Black Lives Matter, O’Reilly whined, mistaking the echo chamber in his head for reality once again. “White Americans despise this crew. And if black Americans don’t understand that, we’re just going to grow further apart.”

Shelton carried on saying reasonable things that are in the spirit of bringing people together, among other things pointing out that people of all races join Black Lives Matter marches and believe in the movement and in justice for all Americans.

All on deaf ears. O’Reilly was just too busy breaking the douchebag-o-meter.

12. Fox Newsians say asking Trump for his tax return is discrimination against rich people—with straight faces.

No, seriously, Kimberly Guilfoyle really did say this. She and her other co-hosts from “The Five” were discussing this terrible miscarriage of justice—the fact that Mitt Romney suggested there might be a bombshell in Donald Trump’s unreleased tax returns, and that now everyone is all over his case to release them. The Donald has come up with various reasons not to produce them, including the hilarious statement that the IRS picks on him because he’s such a strong Christian. One suspects the real secret the Donald is hiding is that he is not nearly as wealthy as he makes himself out to be, which is the only revelation in the universe that could bring the shameless reality star the remotest sense of shame.

But Guilfoyle and equally idiotic Eric Bolling just think it is so mean—so, so rude—to ask the Donald to produce his tax returns. Co-host Dana Perino tried to explain that the office of the presidency is that of a public servant, not the gold-plated throne from which to order decrees that Trump imagines it to be, and pointed out that although taxes are “complicated for [insert the word rich] people,” they would likely be an issue in the general election.

Juan Williams pointed out that Donald’s taxes are “relevant right now.”

Guilfoyle jumped all over that, whining, “What about discrimination, Juan?”

Huh?

“Against rich people,” Guilfoyle said. “And one percenters. Nobody ever asks to see the poor—it’s so rude.”

So rude. Poor people get all the breaks.

Dan Rather: Nuclear weapons are not for the petulant, ill-informed ‘king’ to boast—they can end us

NEW YORK - JANUARY 15:  News Anchor Dan Rather attends the Broadway opening night of "Soul of Shaolin" at the Marquis Theatre on January 15, 2009 in New York City.  (Photo by Neilson Barnard/Getty Images)

Dan Rather/Getty Images

DAILY KOS

Once again, acclaimed political commentator Dan Rather shares, with gusto, his opinion on the menacing Donald Trump — And “he’s not even president yet.” Rather is sucinct (sic) and spot on as he describes how bad it can get with Trump holding the reins of America’s military and nuclear arms. This is no game. This is a “shortcut to the very end of life on earth as we know it.”

Rather also shares his views on the gross faux pas made by Reince Priebus who presumably compared Jesus Christ, the King of Peace to Donald Trump, the King of Hate.

Here are both commentaries by Dan Rather via his Facebook page.

Nuclear weapons are not a game. They are not a toy for the petulant and ill-informed to boast about on off-handed tweets. They are not gaudy hotels and apartment buildings to line up to make yourself feel stronger and more important. They are a direct shortcut to the very end of life on earth as we know it.

I suspect Donald Trump knows very little about our nuclear posture, its history, and the delicate balance our presidents have been walking since the early days of the Cold War. This was a man who in a primary debate didn’t seem to understand our nuclear triad. And that’s “Nukes for Dummies” level. Now recent tweets and comments suggest he’s thinking of a new arms race. When Mr. Trump suggested that countries like Japan and Saudi Arabia develop nuclear weapons during the campaign his apologists told those of us who were worried, he didn’t really mean it. Where are those voices now? Because whether he means what he says, or even knows what he means, really doesn’t matter at this point. Just by Trump saying it, the world order that we have known is at risk.

He’s not even president yet and he’s plunging us into a potential crisis that no one really thought would come. Surely there are many Republican Senators and foreign policy experts who understand the dangers of his rhetoric. Because the stakes with nuclear weapons are so high, that even slight changes in their status are cause for great

Dan Rather spoke of a foreboding doom on Friday. This morning, while apologizing for the timing, Rather touched on another incredibly disturbing story.

I am sorry to break the Christmas spirit, but a colleague brought the issue of GOP Chairman Reince Priebus’ Christmas message to my attention and, even on a holiday – news is news.

The controversial part of the message reads:

“Over two millennia ago, a new hope was born into the world, a Savior who would offer the promise of salvation to all mankind. Just as the three wise men did on that night, this Christmas heralds a time to celebrate the good news of a new King.”

Many on social media reacted in outrage to what they read as an equation of Donald Trump to Jesus. A few hours later CNN reported “RNC spokesman and incoming White House press secretary Sean Spicer said the reference had nothing to do with Trump. ‘Christ is the King in the Christian faith.'”

I am just not sure how one would explain the word “new” in the quote.

Thank you, Dan Rather. During a time of mass deception, we can’t have enough truth.

Related Stories:

Dan Rather: ‘To call Trump a con man is a disservice to the art of the con’—Hillary was prepared

Dan Rather: Trump’s threats towards Hillary were of a despot, tyrant, or monarch – not a president

Final Popular Vote Total Shows Hillary Clinton Won Almost 3 Million More Ballots Than Donald Trump

THE HUFFINGTON POST

It’s by far the largest margin of victory in the popular vote for a candidate who did not win the election.

Donald Trump is set to be sworn in next month as the 45th president of the United States, despite garnering almost 3 million fewer votes than his challenger.

With the presidential election results now certified in all 50 states and Washington, D.C., Hillary Clinton won a total of 65,844,610 votes ― 48.2 percent ― compared with Trump’s 62,979,636 votes ― 46.1 percent ― according to David Wasserman of the nonpartisan Cook Political Report. Other candidates took 7,804,213 ballots, or about 5.7 percent of the popular vote.

Clinton’s margin of victory in the popular vote is the largest in raw numbers for any candidate who has gone on to lose in the Electoral College. Her margin of victory is almost six times larger than that of Democrat Al Gore, whose popular vote win in 2000 is now the second-largest in this category. Gore received about 500,000 more votes than Republican George W. Bush, but came up short in the Electoral College after a hotly contested race in Florida.

Trump’s substantial deficit in the popular vote makes his margin by percentage of votes the third-worst among winning candidates since 1824 (when the popular vote was first officially recorded), according to an analysis by The New York Times published earlier this week.

Thanks to the Electoral College, none of this matters. Trump won 306 electoral votes to Clinton’s 232 on Election Day, securing him a comfortable victory last month. Although many of Trump’s opponents had spent the past few weeks trying to figure out how they could deny the real estate mogul a path to the White House, the Electoral College on Monday further secured his win.

A total of 304 electors cast their votes in favor of the GOP nominee, meaning just two Republican electors defected. Some 227 cast their presidential ballots for Clinton, with five Democratic electors switching their vote. Those seven defecting electors voted for other candidates.

Trump’s team has tried to deflect focus away from the popular vote over the past month, with Trump himself even mentioning what he referred to as a “massive landslide victory” in the Electoral College. PolitiFact ruled that claim “false,” noting that Trump’s win ranks near the bottom in terms of the portion of total available electoral votes won by a candidate.

Nick Wing

Clinton Says ‘Personal Beef’ by Putin Led to Hacking Attacks

Stephen Crowley/The New York Times

New York Times · 41 mins ago

Hillary Clinton said on Thursday that the hacking attacks carried out by Russia against her campaign and the Democratic National Committee were intended “to undermine our democracy” and were ordered by Vladimir V. Putin “because he has a personal beef against me.”

Speaking to a group of donors in Manhattan, Mrs. Clinton said that Mr. Putin, the Russian president, had never forgiven her for the accusation she made in 2011, when she was secretary of state, that parliamentary elections his country held that year were rigged.

“Putin publicly blamed me for the outpouring of outrage by his own people, and that is the direct line between what he said back then and what he did in this election,” Mrs. Clinton said.

It is the first time Mrs. Clinton has publicly addressed the impact of the hacks since the intelligence community concluded that they were specifically aimed at harming her campaign.

“Make no mistake, as the press is finally catching up to the facts, which we desperately tried to present to them during the last months of the campaign,” Mrs. Clinton told the group, which collectively poured roughly $1 billion into her effort. “This is not just an attack on me and my campaign, although that may have added fuel to it. This is an attack against our country. We are well beyond normal political concerns here. This is about the integrity of our democracy and the security of our nation.”

In her remarks, she endorsed the proposal of a bipartisan group of senators to investigate the hacking and said the inquiry should be modeled on the commission set up after the Sept. 11 attacks. “The public deserves to know exactly what happened, and why, in order for us to prevent future attacks on our systems, including our electoral system,” she said.

Mrs. Clinton said the hacking was one of two “unprecedented” events that led to her defeat. The other was the release of a letter by James B. Comey, the F.B.I. director, shortly before the election disclosing new questions about emails handled by her private server. The letter, she said, cost her close races in several battleground states.

“Swing-state voters made their decisions in the final days breaking against me because of the F.B.I. letter from Director Comey,” she said.

Mrs. Clinton first talked about the impact of Mr. Comey’s letters in a conference call with donors a few days after the election. Since the election she has kept a low profile, mostly appearing on social media in photographs by passers-by who have spotted her walking her dogs near her home in Chappaqua, N.Y.

By

Hillary Clinton Breaks Her Silence On Who She Thinks Is To Blame For Election Loss (DETAILS)

RALEIGH, NC - NOVEMBER 08:  Democratic presidential nominee former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton speaks during a campaign rally at North Carolina State University on November 8, 2016 in Raleigh North Carolina. With less than 24 hours until Election Day in the United States, Hillary Clinton is campaigning in Pennsylvania, Michigan and North Carolina.  (Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

ADDICTING INFO

Everyone had their suspicions as to the timing of FBI Director James Comey’s letter regarding Hillary Clinton’s email server that he later rescinded in relation to the election. In addition, many were fairly certain that Russia had direct involvement in our election. And now, as it turns out, both things definitely did affect the election, and the first person who will agree with that definitely seems to be Hillary Clinton herself.

Breaking her silence while speaking to donors about what seemed to directly impact the election away from her winning, Clinton didn’t hold back and called out Russian President Vladimir Putin by name.

According to NBC News:

“Hillary Clinton told donors on Thursday night that her loss was partly due to U.S. election hacks directed by Russian President Vladimir Putin and FBI director James Comey’s election-eve letter to Congress related to her use of a private email server.

“Putin publicly blamed me for the outpouring of outrage by his own people…that is the direct line between what he said back then and what he did in this Election,” Clinton is heard saying in an audio recording first obtained by the New York Times and verified as authentic by several sources present at the event to NBC News.”

Clinton also said:

“He is determined not only to score a point against me, which he did, but also to undermine our democracy.”

And as it turns out, Putin was directly involved with the hacks and how the information gained was to be used. In fact, NBC News reported:

“Putin’s objectives were multifaceted, a high-level intelligence source told NBC News. What began as a “vendetta” against Hillary Clinton morphed into an effort to show corruption in American politics and to “split off key American allies by creating the image that [other countries] couldn’t depend on the U.S. to be a credible global leader anymore,” the official said.”

Putin very clearly wanted Donald Trump to win and used information gained to release only what he wanted to skilfully get what he wanted out the the U.S. election.

And now that all of this has been revealed, President Obama is vowing retaliation against Russia, saying:

“I think there is no doubt that when any foreign government tries to impact the integrity of our elections that we need to take action and we will at a time and place of our own choosing…some of it may be explicit and publicized; some of it may not be.”

And while Donald Trump and his campaign are clearly pleased with the election results and want to peacefully continue a transition while thinking all accusations against Russia are just excuses for a Clinton loss, evidence proves quite to the contrary.

Hopefully, we will get to the bottom of this and justice will prevail.

By Sarah

GOP rep: Trump may exceed Obama on ‘violating our rights’

 

GOP rep: Trump may exceed Obama on ‘violating our rights’

© Greg Nash

THE HILL

Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) says he has concerns about President-elect Donald Trump’s respect for the Constitution.

“President Trump has made clear that he supports a very strong surveillance state,” he said Thursday in Grand Rapids, Mich., according to MLIve.com. “And he may even go beyond what President Obama did in terms of violating our rights.”

“I’ll be supportive when I think he’s right and I’ll be critical when I think he’s wrong,” Amash added of Trump. “I’ve been a critic of the Obama administration. There were many times when the Obama administration didn’t follow the Constitution, and I took them to task. I will do the same with the Trump administration.”

Amash also said he wouldn’t shy away from breaking with fellow Republicans over Trump’s policies, citing government spending as one potential division.

“I will take positions that sometimes the political establishment – my own party – won’t like,” he said. “I will take positions that sometimes the Trump administration won’t like. And sometimes I will take positions that the Democrats won’t like. My job is to be fair.”

“We need to make sure we are keeping our debt under control,” Amash added. “Whenever you have one party controlling all of government, you tend to have less of a check on spending.”

Trump will enter the White House next month with Republican majorities in both the House and Senate behind him.

Many rank-and-file Republicans have rallied around the president-elect after their party’s often bruising presidential primary.

Amash initially endorsed GOP Sens. Rand Paul (Ky.) and then Ted Cruz(Texas) before Trump earned the Republican presidential nomination.

The Michigan lawmaker has been a vocal critic of Trump, and refused to back either him or Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton before Election Day.

BY MARK HENSCH –

%d bloggers like this: