Page: 1 2 3 Next »

New Deal Democrat

Profile Information

Gender: Male
Hometown: West Virginia
Home country: USA
Member since: Wed May 14, 2014, 10:30 AM
Number of posts: 9,619

Journal Archives

How Donald Trump created one hell of a mess with Iran

The shooting down of a US military drone by Iran on Thursday emphasizes that the conflict between the United States and Iran is deepening.

It's a crisis that President Donald Trump predictably provoked by pulling out of the Iranian nuclear deal just over a year ago -- with no real Plan B beyond imposing ever-tougher sanctions on the Iranian regime.


As a result of the rising tensions in the Middle East since May, the Trump administration has dispatched an aircraft carrier group to the region and deployed a total of 2,500 more troops to the Middle East.

The US doesn't have much leverage over the Europeans when it comes to Iran, since they continue to support the Iran deal. And Trump himself is also quite unpopular in these countries, so if the conflict with Iran deepens, don't expect much help from them.
Posted by New Deal Democrat | Fri Jun 21, 2019, 06:09 AM (13 replies)

New York Times: Tax documents show Trump businesses lost more than $1 billion in a decade

Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump's businesses reported losses of $1.17 billion from 1985 to 1994, The New York Times reported Tuesday, citing information from tax documents from those years.

It appears Trump lost more money than nearly any other individual US taxpayer year after year, the Times reports, according to the 10 years of tax information the newspaper acquired.

Trump ran for president branding himself as a self-made billionaire, touting his financial success, but he has been steadfast in his refusal to release his tax returns to the public, despite mounting pressure from Congress. On Monday, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin formally denied a request from the House Ways and Means Committee for Trump's last six years of tax returns, a period not covered by the documents reported by The Times on Tuesday.

In 1990 and 1991, Trump's core business losses were more than $250 million each year -- more than double those of the closest taxpayers in those years, the Times reports.
Posted by New Deal Democrat | Wed May 8, 2019, 09:17 AM (26 replies)

In Muellers Own Words: Read the Special Counsels Summary of the Mueller Report

Robert Mueller's full 448-page legal document might be daunting to read, so here is an 18-page summary he expressly wanted the public to see.

U.S. Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s 448-page report into Russia’s interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election has been the cause of political confusion ever since it was submitted to Attorney General William Barr on 22 March 2019. While many Americans may have read a few news reports about the document, listened to some talking heads, or encountered various tweets claiming everything from the Report’s total exoneration of the president to its grounds for impeachment, we’re skeptical many citizens have read the entire document.

While we encourage everyone to read the full report (you can access the report on the U.S. Justice Department’s website, from various news outlets, or by purchasing a print or audio copies), we think a summarized version is more realistic. Enter the special counsel himself.

Mueller prepared an introduction and an executive summary for both volumes of his report. Mueller’s introduction and executive summary to Volume I, which addressed Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election, can be found here. You can read Mueller’s introduction and executive summary to Volume II, which dealt with issues of presidential obstruction of justice, here.

Hotlinks to the actual documents provided in the Snopes article that I have linked above.
Posted by New Deal Democrat | Sun May 5, 2019, 04:16 PM (55 replies)

The Secret to Winning in 2020

There is only one quality - beyond, of course, charisma - that Democrats should demand in their nominee. The Democrats need a candidate who can and will run as an economic populist.


Trump’s populism is a mirage, but many voters believed it in 2016. He was the rare Republican who criticized free trade and seemed to care more about protecting Medicare than reducing the budget deficit. Trump managed to out-populist Hillary Clinton, and it’s a part of why he won.

Four years earlier, Barack Obama was the populist candidate. He ran for re-election casting himself as the defender of working people and Mitt Romney as an out-of-touch rich guy. The 2012 Obama was “more populist than any major party presidential nominee in decades,” as a column in The Guardian put it. The 2008 Obama, of course, ran against the financial crisis occurring on George W. Bush’s watch.


We’re living in a populist era. The question is who figures out how to thrive in it. In 2016, it was Trump. It doesn’t need to be in 2020.

I want a president who will actually be an economic populist, not one who will just run as one.
Posted by New Deal Democrat | Wed Feb 27, 2019, 09:55 AM (20 replies)

Trumps Lawyers, in Confidential Memo, Argue to Head Off a Historic Subpoena

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s lawyers have for months quietly waged a campaign to keep the special counsel from trying to force him to answer questions in the investigation into whether he obstructed justice, asserting that he cannot be compelled to testify and arguing in a confidential letter that he could not possibly have committed obstruction because he has unfettered authority over all federal investigations.

In a brash assertion of presidential power, the 20-page letter — sent to the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, and obtained by The New York Times — contends that the president cannot illegally obstruct any aspect of the investigation into Russia’s election meddling because the Constitution empowers him to, “if he wished, terminate the inquiry, or even exercise his power to pardon.”

Mr. Trump’s lawyers fear that if he answers questions, either voluntarily or in front of a grand jury, he risks exposing himself to accusations of lying to investigators, a potential crime or impeachable offense.

Mr. Trump’s broad interpretation of executive authority is novel and is likely to be tested if a court battle ensues over whether he could be ordered to answer questions. It is unclear how that fight, should the case reach that point, would play out. A spokesman for Mr. Mueller declined to comment.®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

All Trump has to do is tell the truth while under oath. His lawyers don't seem to trust him to perform this simple act of honesty.
Posted by New Deal Democrat | Sat Jun 2, 2018, 09:48 PM (56 replies)

Dont Believe the Liberal F.B.I.

In the 1960s and 1970s, the American right set about undermining trust in the mainstream media, which it saw as dangerously infected with liberal assumptions. Later, in debates over evolution and the environment, some on the right attacked the validity of modern science. By the turn of the millennium, it was an article of faith among conservative ideologues that whole realms of human expertise were in fact intricate structures of propaganda that trapped the unwary in a matrix of deceit.

In an invaluable 2017 Vox essay titled “Donald Trump and the Rise of Tribal Epistemology,” David Roberts quoted a 2009 Rush Limbaugh rant: “Science has been corrupted. We know the media has been corrupted for a long time. Academia has been corrupted. None of what they do is real. It’s all lies!” With Trump, this ethos reached the White House. And now, to protect Trump, the right has expanded its war on empiricism to that most conservative of institutions, the F.B.I.

That’s the best way to understand the farce surrounding the infamous classified memo written by aides to Representative Devin Nunes, the Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, which Trump reportedly believes will help discredit the Russia investigation. The events involved in the creation of this memo, and the multifront political battle over efforts to make it public, are so absurd and convoluted that they’re difficult to summarize, and in some ways that’s the point.


“I think the most disappointing realization for me of the past year was not how bad of a president Trump turned out to be - that was foreseeable - but how unwilling members of Congress would be to stand up and defend our system of government,” (Democratic Representative Adam) Schiff told me. The most dangerous thing about the release of the Nunes memo is not the memo itself, but Republicans’ shamelessness in using national security processes to deceive the people they’re supposed to serve.
Posted by New Deal Democrat | Fri Feb 2, 2018, 10:08 AM (16 replies)

What the 'Dreamer' fight is really about

The loud fight over what will happen to America’s “Dreamers” isn’t what it seems. For both sides, it’s a fig leaf used to mask their true intentions.


Democrats once used to talk about ending outright illegal immigration. They worried that it put downward pressure on wages. They thought it eroded union efforts and sapped political support among Democrats’ blue-collar base, while overtaxing finite social services to the detriment of the American underclass.

In the current age of identity politics, a new generation of progressive Democrats has recalibrated mass illegal immigration as a godsend. Over the last 20 years, it has vastly expanded the Latino vote as well as empowered ethnic tribunes. Immigration has galvanized minority registration in general and encouraged bloc voting. One tangible result is that the American Southwest is slowly turning blue, or at least purple.

Many pre-Trump Republicans favored illegal immigration too, although for different reasons: They worried more about obtaining workers rather than future constituents and voters. The Chamber of Commerce/Wall Street wing of the GOP thus ignored the issue for the last half-century.


Illegal immigration flourished because Democrats wanted future constituents, and Republicans sought inexpensive labor. But an irate public has had it with open borders - and both parties are scrambling to hide their past and present agendas for now by focusing on the idealized Dreamers.

Democrats have lost their way. And the Wall Street wing of the GOP will work with them to pass amnesty for the Dreamers. Congress will probably throw Trump a bone by funding his wall, but I don't think there will be any meaningful change in policy or enforcement.
Posted by New Deal Democrat | Mon Jan 15, 2018, 11:25 AM (8 replies)

Trump challenges Tillerson to an IQ test. The White House claims it was a joke.

President Trump and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson tried Tuesday to smooth over tensions in their relationship during a White House lunch after the president proposed an “IQ tests” faceoff with his top diplomat, who earlier had privately called Trump a “moron” and disparaged his grasp of foreign policy.

Hey, I've seen that excuse before. Like when he asked Russia to hack Hillary's emails. Just joking, hee hee.

Then there was the time he thanked Putin for expelling US diplomats from Russia. What a kidder!

Remember when he said that Obama was literally the founder of ISIS. I keed, I keed!

My personal favorite was when when he told police officers to be "rough" with suspects. What, you couldn't tell he was joking again?
Posted by New Deal Democrat | Wed Oct 11, 2017, 01:26 AM (34 replies)

Bob Corker Says Trumps Recklessness Threatens World War III

WASHINGTON — Senator Bob Corker, the Republican chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, charged in an interview on Sunday that President Trump was treating his office like “a reality show,” with reckless threats toward other countries that could set the nation “on the path to World War III.”

In an extraordinary rebuke of a president of his own party, Mr. Corker said he was alarmed about a president who acts “like he’s doing ‘The Apprentice’ or something.”

“He concerns me,” Mr. Corker added. “He would have to concern anyone who cares about our nation.”

Mr. Corker’s comments capped a remarkable day of sulfurous insults between the president and the Tennessee senator — a powerful, if lame-duck, lawmaker, whose support will be critical to the president on tax reform and the fate of the Iran nuclear deal.
Posted by New Deal Democrat | Sun Oct 8, 2017, 09:40 PM (32 replies)

Partisan split at House intel committee over canceled open hearing

The House Intelligence Committee chairman and the panel's top Democrat publicly disagreed Friday over the handling of their investigation into Russian meddling into the US election, coming after the announcement that President Donald Trump's campaign chairman agreed to testify before the committee.

"Yesterday, the counsel for Paul Manafort contacted the committee yesterday to offer the committee the opportunity to interview his client," committee chairman Devin Nunes announced during a news conference. "We thank Mr. Manafort for volunteering and encourage others with knowledge of these issues to voluntarily interview with the committee."

Nunes also announced that the committee is bringing in FBI Director James Comey and National Security Agency Director Mike Rogers for a second briefing, this time behind closed doors so that they can provide more information. The committee is also delaying its March 28 hearing, a decision infuriating Democrats on the committee.

"Chairman just cancelled open Intelligence Committee hearing with (former Director of National Intelligence James) Clapper, (former CIA Director John) Brennan and (former deputy Attorney General Sally) Yates in attempt to choke off public info," Rep. Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the committee tweeted moment before going to speak to the press Friday morning.

Schiff refused to say whether he thought Nunes should step down from his position, telling reporters, "What's really involved here is the cancellation of this open hearing and the rest is designed to distract."
Everybody was supposed to be distracted watching Republicans fold on Obamacare repeal while Nunes quietly announced we don't need to know anything else about Trump's conspiracy with the Russians.
Posted by New Deal Democrat | Fri Mar 24, 2017, 06:16 PM (1 replies)
Go to Page: 1 2 3 Next »