Skip navigation

Category Archives: Trumpedation


Gathering money to make bail after conviction or just not as wealthy as we have been led to believe.MA

Mary Papenfuss
,HuffPost•March 23, 2019

 (Screen Shot/Trump Store)
(Screen Shot/Trump Store)

(Screen Shot/Trump Store)
More
President Donald Trump has emblazoned the “Trump” brand name on images of the White House to sell in his Trump Store and at the Trump International Hotel in the capital. The products give the bizarre impression that the White House is a Trump hotel.
Walter Shaub, who was director of the Office of Government Ethics in both the Obama and Trump administrations, sharply criticized the products as the latest move to “monetize the presidency” for private gain.

The products among the new “Cherry Blossom Collection” bearing the White House image include soap, mugs, a T-shirt and a long-sleeved shirt. A line on the mug, which also includes a drawing of the Trump Hotel, reads simply: “Trump Washington D.C. Building.” A line beneath the White House on the T-shirt reads: “Trump Washington D.C.”

@Z_Everson

Replying to @Z_Everson and 5 others

Yesterday the official Trump Store debuted its cherry-blossom collection.

Four items on sale showcase the White House.

Via @1100Penn: http://bit.ly/2OpoXE5 

View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter
5,790 people are talking about this

Walter Shaub

@waltshaub

Our corrupt President’s hotel, in which he retains a conflicting financial interest, is selling products with the image of the White House on it. I’d say he’s monetizing the presidency again, but it’s a continuous effort so “again” wouldn’t make sense.

one voice @oneOvoice

OMFG

The Trump syndicate is calling the White House a “Trump Hotel” in its online merch marketing! pic.twitter.com/f1ueRmEIS1

168 people are talking about this

Vanity Fair quipped that the Trump Hotel is hawking “florals and potential conflicts-of-interest for spring.”
The hotel, located in a landmark building owned by taxpayers and leased by the Trump Organization, is at the center of a lawsuit arguing that the business violates the Constitutional prohibition against a federal official accepting payments or gifts from states or foreign governments — like those that book rooms and events there.
Shaub and other ethics experts say the hotel is an easy conduit for cash from anyone hoping to curry favor with the president. Now Trump appears to be underscoring the direct link between the hotel and “his” White House.
The Trump Organization last year used golf tee markers emblazoned with the presidential seal, but the seal is legally allowed only for official government business so they were removed.
It wasn’t immediately clear if the latest selling of the White House breached regulations, but Jessica Tillipman, a government ethics expert at George Washington University Law School, told the UK Independent that Trump profiting from his position was “bizarre and wrong.”
Trump, unlike other presidents, has neither divested from his businesses nor put his assets in a blind trust to avoid conflicts of interest.
This article originally appeared on HuffPost.

btn_donateCC_LG

Please Donate

Advertisements

There are mainstream and semi-mainstream personalities who promote conspiracy theories as a job. Some monetize these efforts with donations from believers and some other contributors yet the information offered is more hyperbole than fact. Conspiracy theories are just that, theories- until proven to be real. Many of these theories are derived from undeveloped ideas, half-truths and sometimes legends. These skewed versions somehow sound plausible to many due to their personal biases and circumstances. The beliefs in these theories and other off-center beliefs have become fodder for the extreme sides of politics while coloring the facts. Now that the Mueller investigation is done(?), we have more questions than answers and more Trumpian utterings from Congress and the OFFAL office stating exoneration. This is not the end of this as the truth is still unknown and thereby will promote more Conspiracy theories to carry us into the next major election.

btn_donateCC_LG

Please Donate


Abraham Lincoln said: “Truth is generally the best vindication against slander” and: I am not bound to succeed, but I am bound to live by the light that I have. I must stand with anybody that stands right, and stand with him while he is right, and part with him when he goes wrong. ”

Ivanka Trump Said:
Ivanka Trump

@IvankaTrump
Truth is generally the best vindication against slander. — Abraham Lincoln

104K
5:51 PM – Mar 24, 2019
Twitter

So Again the current administration cannot get it right.

btn_donateCC_LG

Please Donate


Tariff effects on recycling extends to Farmers, auto manufacturers and other industries yet TOTUS thinks we are winning? MA

Bob Tita 18 hrs ago
Used cans are piling up at scrapyards because U.S. aluminum companies are turning fewer of them into new metal, another indication of the economic challenges facing recycling.
Arconic Inc. and other aluminum rollers are producing less sheet for beverage cans and more higher-margin, flat-rolled aluminum for automotive and industrial components. Prices for used aluminum cans in the U.S. have fallen about 30% since last summer. Old cans are less versatile than other scrap. The makers of airplane and car parts prefer not to use aluminum made from recycled cans. More new cans in the U.S. are made from imported aluminum.
“We’d prefer to purchase domestic can sheet, but as of right now there is not enough to supply the domestic market,” said Jamie Westfahl, senior director of global packaging procurement for Denver-based brewer Molson Coors Brewing Co.
Producing aluminum for cans isn’t as profitable as rolling sheet for car companies. Aluminum rolling mills are paid about $1 a pound above the market price for the raw-aluminum ingots they use to make auto-body sheet, compared with about 35 cents a pound for converting can sheeting.
The challenging economics is a troubling sign for food and packaging companies that are facing pressure to embrace recycling. The glut of used cans shows how public calls for using more recyclable materials can fall short if companies decide it isn’t profitable enough to remake them into new products.
Other recycled materials are facing similar problems. Scrap paper and plastic prices have collapsed since China imposed higher standards on the purity of those products imported from the U.S. China implemented tariffs of 50% last year on aluminum scrap from the U.S. That has created a glut of shredded scrap from junked cars in the U.S. to mix with the growing stockpile of discarded cans.
Get news and analysis on politics, policy, national security and more, delivered right to your inbox

Atlanta-based Novelis Inc. has shifted some production in recent years from cans to making more aluminum sheet for vehicle bodies. The company opened new lines for auto sheet at a plant in Oswego, N.Y., and is building a plant to make automotive aluminum in Guthrie, Ky.
“We’ve done it. Our competitors have done it,” Novelis Vice President Andy King said. The company also recently increased production from its remaining can-sheet lines as demand for cans improves.
Arconic is investing $100 million at one of its plants to shift production from can sheet to automotive and industrial aluminum. The company stopped making can sheet at the end of last year at the plant near Knoxville, Tenn., that accounted for 14% of the aluminum used in beverage-can bodies and was a major consumer of discarded beverage cans.
Alcoa Corp. is bucking the trend, keeping its rolling mill in southern Indiana committed to just making can sheet. The company has increased production about 20% in the past two years. While making metal for cans isn’t as profitable as producing aluminum for auto bodies, can sheet has become more profitable recently because falling prices for used cans have reduced producers’ scrap costs and widened their margins.
“It’s a good market to be in,” said Tim Reyes, president of Alcoa’s aluminum business.
Aluminum cans have been the most recycled packaging in the U.S. since they supplanted steel as the beverage container of choice in the 1970s. Aluminum can be repeatedly melted and rerolled into paper-thin sheets. About 70% of the aluminum in the 94 billion beverage cans made for the U.S. and Canada last year came from scrap, according to the Can Manufacturers Institute trade group.

But can-sheet production in the U.S. fell 10% between 2011 and 2018 to 1.8 million metric tons annually, according to industry groups. Market consulting firm Harbor Aluminum Intelligence Unit LLC expects annual domestic capacity to make can sheet to fall to 1.73 million metric tons by 2020, down 30% from 2010.
The hole left in the U.S. market is being filled by imports. Can-sheet imports have increased more than 200% since 2013, based on U.S. Census Bureau data. About 70% of imports last year came from China despite the 10% tariff the Trump administration levied on imported aluminum last March. The administration also has granted exemptions on 362,000 metric tons of imported can sheet, most of it from Saudi Arabia.
Can manufacturers Ball Corp. and Metal Container Corp., a unit of beer maker Anheuser-Busch InBev SA, have asked the Commerce Department to exempt about 64,000 metric tons of Chinese can sheet from the tariff. Their requests are pending.
Beverage companies say can-sheet manufacturers have raised prices to reflect the tariff and lower U.S. production. Kelly Clay, chief executive of Wyoming-based Admiral Beverage Corp., said his costs for cans from Crown Holdings Inc. and Ball have increased 15% since the tariff took effect. That obliged him to raise prices on the drinks he bottles and distributes for PepsiCo Inc. in seven Western states by about 15% as well, to $3.35 for 12 cans of soda.
“I don’t know anybody in this industry that is getting any of these tariff exemptions off their can price,” he said.
Write to Bob Tita at robert.tita@wsj.com

btn_donateCC_LG

Please Donate


Where the so-called Constitutional leader of the Senate in this “emergency declaration”? The Senate leader(?) is conspicuously absent in the vote on the President’s veto, could it be fear or complicity? Had this been the former President, Bitch would have been all over as would the current seat-filler in the White House. It is apparent that the Senate leader is not the leader he espouses to be in that he does what is safe for his own personal and political well-being. It is my hope that his base is looking at his actions that have damaged them as well as the rest of the country. We have only the hope that Nancy Pelosi with her longtime service can manage an override on this veto. This ill-use of OUR money will certainly follow the path of his ill use of other people’s funds in his business life. As a reminder of our (voters) purpose: Disengage from straight line party rhetoric, disengage from “entertainment news” and above all remember two middle letters in politician is: “LI”.  the rise of TOTUS has brought us down as a Country and will continue unless we stand up now against the actions of ill staffed and managed Administration. Just a reminder this administration has squandered enough of our money to have improved border security several times even though the “crisis” was manufactured by this administration. Bottom line here: phone, email, tweet your representative and ignore “faux news”.

btn_donateCC_LG

Please Donate


Unfortunately, the Administration words ring hollow when one looks at the actions taken against migrants who are seeking a better life. Puerto Rico still in crisis, tax reform hurting many of the lower income people to name a couple. MA
By Betsy Klein, CNN
1 hr ago
President Donald Trump on Friday expressed his condolences to the people of New Zealand following mass shootings at two mosques in Christchurch that left at least 49 people dead.
“My warmest sympathy and best wishes goes out to the people of New Zealand after the horrible massacre in the Mosques. 49 innocent people have so senselessly died, with so many more seriously injured. The U.S. stands by New Zealand for anything we can do. God bless all!” Trump tweeted.
The White House also condemned the shootings.
“The United States strongly condemns the attack in Christchurch. Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families,” press secretary Sarah Sanders said in a statement Friday morning.
She continued, “We stand in solidarity with the people of New Zealand and their government against this vicious act of hate.”
National security adviser John Bolton said the US is “very concerned” and is following the events in New Zealand “very closely.”
“We’re obviously greatly disturbed on what seems to be a terror attack, this hate crime in New Zealand. We’ve been in touch with our embassy overnight, we’re still getting details, but the State Department and others are following up on it,” he told reporters Friday morning.
New Zealand’s Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, called the incident a terrorist attack in a Friday press conference, saying the suspects held “extremist views” that have no place in New Zealand or the world.
Forty-one people were killed at the al Noor mosque on Deans Avenue, said Mike Bush, New Zealand’s Police Commissioner. Seven people died at the Linwood mosque on Linwood Avenue, and one person died from their injuries in the hospital.
Bush said four people were taken into custody — three men and one woman. Police do not believe there are any other suspects but said it was still an open investigation. A man in his late 20s has been charged with murder and will appear at the Christchurch court Saturday morning local time, Bush said.
US Ambassador to New Zealand Scott Brown also expressed his condolences and pledged US solidarity.
“We’re heartbroken over the events in Christchurch today. We stand with our Kiwi friends and neighbors and our prayers are with you. Kia Kaha,” Brown tweeted.

btn_donateCC_LG

Please Donate


How many of Trump’s base and stalwart supporters will be affected? Possibly millions if we believe the numbers he gives us. MA

Tara Golshan 18 hrs ago
President Donald Trump’s 2020 budget breaks one of his biggest campaign promises to voters: that he would leave Medicaid, Social Security, and Medicare untouched.
“I’m not going to cut Social Security like every other Republican and I’m not going to cut Medicare or Medicaid,” Trump told the Daily Signal, a conservative publication affiliated with the Heritage Foundation, in 2015.
Over the next 10 years, Trump’s 2020 budget proposal aims to spend $1.5 trillion less on Medicaid — instead allocating $1.2 trillion in a block-grant program to states — $25 billion less on Social Security, and $845 billion less on Medicare (some of that is reclassified to a different department). Their intentions are to cut benefits under Medicaid and Social Security. The impact on Medicare is more complicated, which I’ll get into a bit later.
Over time, the Trump administration tried to whittle down the president’s promise to just Social Security and Medicare. Office of Management and Budget Deputy Director Russ Vought said Monday, March 11, that Trump is “keeping his commitment to Americans by not making changes to Medicare and Social Security.” But even that is not true.
Like “every other Republican,” Trump has repeatedly proposed and supported cutting these programs. The White House did not respond to a request for comment.
How Trump is proposing changing Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security
When it comes to Medicare, the White House has been very clear: “He’s not cutting Medicare in this budget,” Vought said. “What we are doing is putting forward reforms that lower drug prices. Because Medicare pays a very large [share] of drug prices in this country, [that] has the impact of finding savings. We are also finding waste, fraud, and abuse.”
Here’s what’s actually happening: This budget proposes finding $845 billion in savings over 10 years from Medicare as we know it. But $269 billion of that figure is reclassified under the Department of Health and Human Services, bringing the Medicare cuts to $575 billion. As Vox explained, the administration says it will achieve these cost reductions by targeting wasteful spending and provider payments and lowering prescription drug costs.
The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, which advocates for fiscal responsibility, estimates that 85 percent of these cuts will come from reductions in provider payments, 5 percent would come from policies around medical malpractice, and 11 percent would come from reducing drug costs through the Medicare Part D program. Medicare Part D is the only area of these reforms that could raise out-of-pocket drug prices for some while lowering it for others. Otherwise, premiums, deductibles, and copays would largely be left unaffected.
Unsurprisingly, the Federation of American Hospitals is not a fan of this part of Trump’s budget proposal. In a statement, they called the reforms “devastating for seniors.” More surprisingly, as Axios’ Sam Baker points out, these reforms are pretty similar to policies Barack Obama proposed in 2012 that Republicans panned.
But when it comes to Trump’s proposed changes to Medicaid and Social Security, the intent is unambiguous: These are cuts to benefits.
The 2020 budget’s Medicaid reforms include adding work requirements and repealing Medicaid expansion and one of the most successful policies within the Affordable Care Act. Medicaid expansion reduced the uninsured rate by more than 6 percent in states that enacted the policy; it continues to show better health outcomes and is popular in conservative states. But Trump is envisioning changing Medicaid altogether; his budget proposes transforming the current pay-as-needed system to a block grant, where states are given a capped lump-sum fund that doesn’t grow with increased need or rising costs. The budget proposes a $1.2 trillion “Market-Based Health Care Grant.”
In isolation, the Medicaid budget cuts amount to $1.5 trillion over 10 years, but looked at in the context of the new block grant as well the work requirements and ACA cuts, the cuts round out to about $777 billion — which could leave millions more uninsured.
The budget also continues an attack on Social Security, including to a program which gives assistance to those who have disabilities that prevent them from being in the workforce. In all, the cuts to Social Security amount to $25 billion over the next 10 years, cutting roughly $10 billion from the Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) program, which the administration says will be found through cutting down on fraud — a common conservative talking point.
Trump broke this promise from the beginning
This is Trump on the campaign trail in 2015:
Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump
I was the first & only potential GOP candidate to state there will be no cuts to Social Security, Medicare & Medicaid. Huckabee copied me.

7,337
10:38 AM – May 7, 2015
Twitter Ads info and privacy

19.4K people are talking about this

Trump’s budgets — and the policies he has supported around health care — and government spending in Congress reflect the opposite. Some of this can be attributed to Trump’s appointed budget chief Mick Mulvaney; the former congressman who was part of the ultraconservative Freedom Caucus has long rallied for cutting Medicare, Social Security, and Medicaid.
In fact, Mulvaney once bragged to a Politico reporter that he tricked Trump into accepting a proposal to cut Social Security by calling SSDI just disability insurance — spinning it to the president as general welfare reform. The idea has been in every single one of Trump’s budget proposals to Congress since the president came to office.
Then there was the Republican Obamacare repeal push; every bill proposed massive cuts to Medicaid in order to pay for tax cuts elsewhere. Trump supported every iteration of Republicans’ Obamacare repeal-and-replace bills. He even held a party for House Republicans in the White House Rose Garden when the lower chamber of Congress narrowly passed a proposal that slashed more than $800 billion from Medicaid over 10 years.
Republican lawmakers have long argued that spending around mandatory programs that make up 70 percent of the federal budget — like Medicare and Social Security — needs to be reined in, in order to tackle the national debt. Trump drew red tape around those programs, as well as Medicaid, on the campaign trail in 2015 because they are extremely popular federal programs.
Now, his policy positions around those programs break from that promise.

btn_donateCC_LG

Please Donate


The proposed budget as outlined below indicates how out of touch the current administration is or perhaps they do not care about the effects this budget if passed will have on the country and especially the neediest of us all no matter the race. This administration seems to have the idea that these cuts will only affect mostly nonwhite Americans. The point of this budget is to get money for a wall that in its use will not stem the flow of drugs, illegals as the administration likes to tout. Better thinkers have pointed out what is needed in conjunction with some “barriers”  are more personnel (jobs) and electronic surveillance (jobs). This is an indication of “trump” method of conducting business e.g create a crisis or situation then through solutions at it and hope something works, if not move on like grazing cattle . Examining the current cabinet composition we can easily see that they are not the “best” people as TOTUS assured us he would appoint (drain the swamp?). MA

JIM TANKERSLEY and MICHAEL TACKETT 1 hr ago

As budget deficit balloons, few in Washington seem to care

WASHINGTON — President Trump sent Congress on Monday a record $4.75 trillion budget request that proposes an increase in military spending and sharp cuts to domestic programs like education and environmental protection for the 2020 fiscal year.
Mr. Trump’s budget, the largest in federal history, includes a nearly 5 percent increase in military spending — which is more than the Pentagon had asked for — and an additional $8.6 billion for construction of a border wall with Mexico.
White House officials said the budget would include a total of $1.9 trillion in cuts to mandatory safety net programs, like Medicaid. It also proposes new work requirements for working-age adult recipients of supplemental nutrition assistance, federal housing support and Medicaid, a move the administration said would reduce spending on those programs by $327 billion.

The president is asking for a 5 percent, cut in nondefense discretionary spending, compared to 2019 spending caps set by Congress. That would amount to $100 billion less than Congress actually spent on nondefense discretionary programs in 2019, when it busted those caps.
Those cuts would not be across the board but come from programs at federal agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency, where Mr. Trump has previously suggested cutting funds. The budget would also reduce spending on foreign aid, international cultural exchange programs and federal employee retirement plans.
A few domestic spending programs would see increases, if Mr. Trump’s budget were to become law. Those include efforts to reduce opioid addiction and a 10 percent increase in health care spending for veterans. Mr. Trump will also propose a new school-choice program, $200 billion in infrastructure spending and efforts to reduce the cost of prescription drugs.
The budget would not balance for 15 years, breaking Mr. Trump’s 2016 campaign promise to pay off the entire national debt within eight years. Mr. Trump’s first budget proposed to achieve balance in 10 years.
The budget forecasts trillion-dollar deficits for four straight years, starting in 2019.
The budget is unlikely to have much impact on actual spending levels, which are controlled by Congress. As with any president in a time of divided government, the blueprint is more of a declaration of Mr. Trump’s re-election campaign priorities than it is a guide to spending decisions in Washington this year. Democratic leaders in both the House and Senate pronounced the budget dead on arrival on Sunday. Mr. Trump’s budgets largely failed to gain traction in previous years, when Republicans controlled both chambers.
Budget details released by White House officials highlight several areas of conflict between Democrats and Mr. Trump, starting with immigration enforcement. Along with renewing the wall funding fight that led to a record government shutdown late last year, Mr. Trump is asking for more personnel at United States Customs and Immigration Enforcement and a policy change meant to end so-called sanctuary cities, which do not hand over undocumented immigrants to federal officials when they are arrested in local crimes.
Administration officials fanned out to defend the president’s budget. Russ Vought, the acting director of the Office of Management and Budget, blamed Democrats for “our nation’s $22 trillion debt,” while omitting that the debt has soared under Mr. Trump.
In an Op-Ed on FoxNews.com, he said that the president’s proposed cuts in domestic spending were in line with his campaign promises. He then outlined a number of programs, such as $68 million “being spent every year on international labor activities, including promoting unions in countries in South America,” that he said highlighted wasteful spending.

btn_donateCC_LG

Please Donate


One would think that a Cabinet Secretary would come prepared to answer questions when called before a Congressional committee but I guess a consummate liar has no need for facts or preparation especially when trying to please another consummate liar. MA
March 7, 2019

On Wednesday, the Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristen Nielsen testified about the situation on the southern border before the House Homeland Security Committee. The committee, headed by Democrat Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, more or less berated the Secretary on the Trump administration’s zero tolerance policy, which has led to 2,600 migrant children being separated from their parents, many being housed in cages, and several dying.

When questioned, Nielsen said she had no idea how many children were currently in ICE custody and denied that the “fenced-in” areas that kept migrants separated from one another were cages. She also explained she did not believe that the no tolerance policy would lead to trauma for children beyond the trauma endured while traveling from their home country to the Southern border. This suggests she either deliberately ignored the American Academy of Pediatrics’ warning that these separations would cause, for many children, irreparable psychological harm, as well as the countless protestations from academics and scientists — much less the real stories of kids dramatically regressing cognitively while in custody away from their parents.
Despite the consistent line of questioning about the harms the policy she was responsible for enacting would do for children, Nielsen focused on her talking points: that the border crisis was not manufactured, that migrant flow is a threat to national security, that parents shouldn’t be bringing their children to America, and that she did not know how many kids were in the system.
That the DHS secretary wouldn’t know how many kids are detained in a system that she controls is alarming, but no more alarming than the fact that Nielsen said she wasn’t aware that the family separation process would cause trauma to kids. Her callousness and irresponsibility are, at least, consistent.
Here’s a fact: Many children didn’t recognize their parents upon reunification because they were too distraught and other regressed back into diapers despite being potty trained. Additionally, thousands reported being sexually abused. Nielsen, in this testimony, essentially shrugged her shoulders and said that the price Americans should be willing to pay for national security. For Americans who care about kids, this is a disgusting idea.
It’s specifically troubling that the Trump administration has so little regard for kids in light of the fact that new statistics indicate that over half of new babies born in this country aren’t white. But troubling doesn’t mean surprising. If the cages were filled with white kids, rather than the kids of people who might not speak English or are fleeing violence from their home countries, the administration would act or, at the very least, familiarize themselves with the potential fallout of their policies. After all, Trump has remained focussed on murders of Americans by undocumented migrants despite the fact undocumented immigrants commit fewer crimes than citizens. Make no mistake, racism hurts kids and racists don’t care.
Nielsen doesn’t know how many kids her department has traumatized. And she doesn’t know how many kids her department will traumatize. Today, business goes on as usual.

btn_donateCC_LG

Please Donate


Each day is another day without a proper administration abetted by a neer do well Congress. TOTUS has shown his truth on a daily basis. Our GOP leader in the Congress is still waffling about how to do the job he was elected to do and TOTUS has visited Alabama (with no paper towels) and ordered FEMA  to put 100% effort in the recovery and repair. This was not the attitude in Puerto Rico which is still struggling to make corrections. The future of America is currently in the (small) hands of a Narcissistic ignoramus who has the backing of an uninformed and underinformed core of American voters and a self-serving legislature. It is plain to see that there is a news(?) outlet that opines for TOTUS and giving him their take on what he should be doing. The worst part of this is an underinformed voter who perceives TOTUS as a good leader, the rest of the country and many allies see a near-manic leader in the mode of past dictators who are no longer with us.  The tactics used by Ultras on all sides is lies, lies and more lies. The solution is informed voting.

btn_donateCC_LG

Please Donate

%d bloggers like this: