US General Election 2016

{{Well given he seems to have been hired to destroy the EPA this is hardly surprising.

In trade wars news things only get worse-

The European Union announced on Wednesday it would impose retaliatory tariifs beginning in July, in response to President Donald Trump’s duties on steel and aluminium imports from Europe.
“This is a measured and proportionate response to the unilateral and illegal decision taken by the United States to impose tariffs on European steel and aluminum exports,” Cecilia Malmström, the European commissioner for trade, said in a statement.
The EU said it will impose the “rebalancing” tariffs on about $3.3 billion (2.8 billion euros) worth of U.S. steel, bourbon, agricultural products including sweetcorn, orange juice, cranberries and certain clothing made of cotton.
“The EU's reaction is fully in line with international trade law,” Malmström said. “We regret that the United States left us with no other option than to safeguard EU interests.”

Given this is just the EU response- there's also Chinese, Mexican and Canadain tariffs to add to this too- it's over to Trump for the next move- back down or hit back with further tarrifs? Just remember as the President says 'Trade wars are easy to win!' even if every historical occurrence of one disagrees.}}}

{{In light of the following statement from the EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom, I would love to know what it is Trump's  trade team are actually trying to achieve-

"We told the American we were willing to engage in a positive trade agenda, looking at things that are of mutual interest to us. We could consider having a smaller trade agreement focusing on goods and tariffs where we would look at car, and car part tariffs and take them away and then of course the US would have to take away their tariff's, because on certain issues clothes and some machinery and trucks and shoes the American tariffs are much higher than the European. So we could have done a deal here and started talking about this, but not with the threat hanging over our head.....I did say this to Secretary Ross and that was also backed by an unanimous statement by 28 heads of states form the European Union, so I had the whole European Union backing me that we were willing to engage on this and talk about other issues, such as WTO reform, energy issues, certain issues where we could cooperate when it comes to regulatory that would have been good for both of us......but the American Administration have closed the door."

Given how much the EU seem willing  to have moved and subjects they were open to discussion on I find it hard to fathom what Trumps trade policy is- by the sound sof this could have been a chance for reform of international trade, and a better fairer system for all of us. So what is it Trump is actually trying to achieve? Why did he turn the EU offer down? }}

Pettytyrant101 wrote:{{ So what is it Trump is actually trying to achieve? Why did he turn the EU offer down? }}

I wish I had an answer. We're already feeling the effects. It feels like being shot down by friendly fire.

{{ I wish my rooting about in the news could produce at the least a reason for you Dave to have to suffer- but sorry, it seems needless. I just dont fathom it when the EU was not only willing to move on tariffs and deals but also to work on WTO reform.
Just think- America, the EU, Canada, Mexico could all right now be putting on a united front, agreeing new deals and setting about reforming the WTO and ensuring China meets the trade laws same as everyone else.
Instead America has insulted its closest allies and attacked their trade claiming America's allies are presenting a security threat to it and I dont see what his end game is supposed to be here.

The only thing I can think of, other than its a distraction tactic from other bonker things like claiming he can shoot Comey in the Oval Office and be above any prosecution, or its simply that he will do what thinks appeals to the base regardless of cost to the country and he said he would go after trade so he is. But given these tariffs will specifically hit his base I'm not sure where the wisdom in that lies so I really cant see what he is doing here, what if any strategy there is or what the end game is supposed to look like. }}

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/09/climate/trump-administration-science.html

I like how the article emphasizes it's not just science that's being ignored, it's ANY form of expertise.

To Trump it's all a poker game, and you win not by knowing odds or counting cards, but by bluffing and reading faces.

An interesting look into what it takes to keep the White House running day to day. I wish Eldo were around to comment on this from an Archival Studies point of view. Imagine going through these records 50 years from now when Trump's legacy is being written....

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/10/trump-papers-filing-system-635164

White House aides realized early on that they were unable to stop Trump from ripping up paper after he was done with it and throwing it in the trash or on the floor, according to people familiar with the practice. Instead, they chose to clean it up for him, in order to make sure that the president wasn’t violating the law.

Staffers had the fragments of paper collected from the Oval Office as well as the private residence and send it over to records management across the street from the White House for Lartey and his colleagues to reassemble.

“We got Scotch tape, the clear kind,” Lartey recalled in an interview. “You found pieces and taped them back together and then you gave it back to the supervisor.” The restored papers would then be sent to the National Archives to be properly filed away.

Yeah, the man doesn't like leaving a paper trail. Good thing all memos have to be short enough to match his attention span.

I wish Eldo were around to comment on this from an Archival Studies point of view- Dave

{{me too, though just around in general would do!  }}}

wowzer Trumpy and kim

{{Good day for China- far as I can tell all Trump has got is pledge to denuclerise and verify (and we've heard that several times before) although I think he will get that this time because China want it and Trump seems to have already given China what it wants upfront and at no cost-

'The US would suspend "provocative" war games it holds with South Korea. Mr Trump said he wanted to see US troops withdraw from the South. Analysts have said this is a major concession'- BBC

I'll say it is- and even worse and odder this bit wasnt even in the agreement- Trump just offered it up for free at hi press conference afterwards!!

Also the US "would provide "security guarantees" to North Korea." Exactly who is supposed to be wringing concession out of who here?

And the denuclerisation bit of the deal is nothing more than vague promises with no timetable or means of verification laid out -" the document lacks substance, in particular on how denuclearisation would be achieved."

Trump can go home as China intended boastful, prideful, claiming to be the great deal maker and to have achieved what none of his predecessors could have done- China dont mind, letting Trump have all the credit is how you get him to agree to what you want- and when Trump is out of office -even if he gets two terms China will still be there, US troops will still be being removed from the region, the nuclear shield probably too and China will be free to step up its global desires and aims of local conquest an influence in the region without western interference. }}}

No political bias found in FBI actions in the IG report.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/31856/bombshell-fbi-agent-said-hed-make-sure-trump-was-ben-shapiro

{{The report certainly makes interesting reading- though it cant be said Comey was benefiting anyone with his actions that are brought to task here.

The email exchange you give above Bungo is in the report but the report did find their political distaste for Trump did not affect their actions in their line of duty-

"they found no evidence "that these political views directly affected the specific investigative decisions that we reviewed."

And whilst the report gives Comey a kicking for a failure to follow procedure and similar it does conclude-

"that the prosecutorial decisions in the Clinton case were "consistent" with precedent and not affected by bias or other improper actions."

Its not good for Comey or other FBI members named, but nor do I see how it supports the Trump team claim of political bias given the report concludes there was none. }}}

{{{  "This is the one we've all been waiting on, this is the one I fear our colleagues may have put to much hype in it, because there is very little in it....If being insubordinate to Loretta Lynch and Sally Yates is is the worst thing they have on him, he ought to take Mrs. Comey out to the nicest restaurant they can find and celebrate. There is very little new."- Judge Napolitano, Fox News   }}}

I never saw any link between Strok's mention of an "insurance policy" and the Russia investigation.  It's not ruled out, but neither is there any clear link.

I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office — that there’s no way he gets elected — but I'm afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you're 40.

Nobody would claim that workers in the FBI are not biased against Trump.  But that's normal, the long time government servants, the once who know how to make everything work, continue to work regardless of the administration. Those who think the "deep state" works to destroy an administration they don't like are foolish: the only reason the government continues to run is because they continue to work despite their personal politics.  If you try to rehire a whole new civil service each time a new administration comes in it all comes crashing down around your head.  You need people in there who know how to do their job.

The investigation wasn't about bias, it was about whether bias affected the job they did.  They concluded it did not.

I still believe they are either trying to take him out or were actively working against him with the Russia probe and the Steele dossier, using opposition research as a basis for starting spying on the campaign. And now Muller dragging his feet with this investigation, trying to justify his job. I have yet to be convinced otherwise, especially when you’ve got the department investigating itself, Of course they’re going to try to CYA as much as possible. So eager to stop a duly elected president, but not to investigate and follow up on tips about suspected school shooters.

http://www.businessinsider.com/fbi-agents-called-trump-drumpf-supporters-retarded-report-2018-6?utm_source=reddit.com

It’s nice to know what the people in DC really think about us.

I agree an internal investigation is not convincing. An external investigation would have to look at behavior over several administrations to demonstrate if there's any difference in performance. But I think the reaction to Trump is more about his lack of professionalism than his politics - FBI I believe would tend to be more republican than democrat, though the numbers probably shift a bit with each administration.

halfwise wrote: I think the reaction to Trump is more about his lack of professionalism than his politics - FBI I believe would tend to be more republican than democrat.

I'm pretty sure you're right about that Halfy, but keep in mind that Trump never really was (or is) a Republican, and neither are a lot of people who voted for him. I'm in Trump country, and a lot of his core voters here historically vote Democrat, but choked at the thought of either another Clinton or another Bush as President. If I had to guess, I'd say a lot of the intelligence community might have personally favored Jeb because of his father. But as you say, they're pro's. They do their job, whatever you think of it....

And a lot of professionals are being forced out.  Years of experience gone.  No other administration has used this idealogical approach and it will be crippling.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/06/13/trumps-vino-vixen-compiles-loyalty-list-of-u-s-employees-at-u-n-state-mari-stull-political-appointee-state-department-international-organization-united-nations-political-retribution-chaos-dysfunction/

{{Trumps problem is he is the ultimate in ego and cannot fathom how a civil service works- or that a civil service can hate every policy you stand for but will still carry them out anyway.

A very telling line from Trump's interview on Fox & Arse Lickers this morning shows just how egocentric Trump's thinking is-

"If you took a poll at the FBI, I would win," Trump told Doocy. "I mean the real FBI, not the scum on top.” - Fox

Its like he thinks the civil service should all be pro Trump- and everyone who works there has to be pro-Trump ad worse he seems more concerned that he is more popular among the FBI than its directors or former Presidents.

The UK civil service is a good example as its so obviously pro-Tory in that most of them come from the same background, attended the same universities and private schools and are largely drawn from the salaried upper middle classes and lower ends of the upper classes- classic Tory ground in otherwords. Didn't stop the UK civil service however bending everything they could to support Blair's Labour administration going to war for example. They did what they were tasked with regardless of personal feelings and views towards the government of the day- thats how civil service works- you cant as Halfy says swap out everyone every government change for  thousands and thousand of new ones, its clerically impossible nor is it desirable to have to retrain everyone every four years or so and you'd lose your best people every time.

If Trump supporters expect to find every single civil servant in America in private exchanges praising Trump as their supreme leader they will be very disappointed. As will Trump if his aim with the FBI is popularity with them. }}}

{{His other problem, even when he does something right, is that he is a pathological liar and cant stop himself. He struck a deal with N Korea to bring back the remains of US soldiers who died in the Korean war- good thing. Then he goes on tv, not once but several times, and claims he did this because whilst campaigning for President 'so many parents' of the deceased begged him to
Given the war ended in 1953 that means Trump is claiming the 'so many' parents who begged him for help would all have to have been aged 100+ and 'so many' of them asked him to do this? It is so obviously a lie- yet he tells it anyway. There is no gain to it, there is no political benefit to it, there isn't even personal gain as its so obviously a lie that it only requires a seven year-old's ability to count to disprove- the only conclusion therefore is that he is a pathological liar who will lie regardless of circumstances or subject matter because he can't stop himself. }}