|
Post by kcrufnek on Aug 17, 2019 2:43:30 GMT -6
amp.dailycaller.com/2019/08/16/witness-don-lemon-assault-caseDigusting’ Behavior: Witness Comes Forward In Don Lemon Assault Case The former boss of the man who filed an assault lawsuit against CNN’s Don Lemon came forward as a witness to the alleged assault, according to Fox News. Dustin Hice filed a lawsuit Sunday against Lemon, a CNN host, alleging that Lemon “rubbed his genitalia” and then shoved his fingers in Hice’s face at a Long Island, New York, bar in 2018. CNN said that Lemon “categorically denies these claims” in a statement to the Daily Caller News Foundation Tuesday. George Gounelas, Hice’s former manager at the bar where the alleged assault took place, told Fox News he witnessed the incident and supported Hice’s claims. “He [Lemon] put his hands down his pants, inside his board shorts, grabbed his [genitals], and then came out with two fingers and, like, clipped Dustin’s nose up and down with two fingers asking ‘do you like pussy or dick?'” Gounelas alleged according to Fox News. “If someone had done that to me, I probably would have punched him.” This was after Lemon came up to Hice and allegedly said something “along the lines of, ‘Do you like me? Is that why you’re bothering me, because you wanna fuck me?” Fox News reported. Hice had previously offered to buy Lemon a drink. Gounelas said that he laughed at the incident and made fun of Hice for being “gross,” but feels bad now, Fox News reported. He also said that other people probably saw the alleged assault. (RELATED: CNN Hired Photo Editor Who Refers To Jews, Police As ‘Pigs’ And Called For People To Be Murdered) “The place was packed. I’m sure other people saw,” Gounelas said. “It was a known thing in the Hamptons, not like this quiet thing. Everybody knew Dustin and what happened to him. Every time we went out, every bartender offered him a Lemon drop shot, making fun of him. He got some shit for it.” Hice first asked Lemon for $1.5 million in order to drop the lawsuit, a source close to Lemon said. Lemon did not agree and said he had done nothing wrong. Lemon “was wearing a pair of shorts, sandals, and a t-shirt, put his hand down the front of his own shorts, and vigorously rubbed his genitalia, removed his hand and shoved his index and middle fingers in Plaintiff’s moustache and under Plaintiff’s nose,” the lawsuit reads. “The plaintiff in this lawsuit has previously displayed a pattern of contempt for CNN on his social media accounts,” a CNN spokesperson said in a previous statement to the DCNF. “This claim follows his unsuccessful threats and demands for an exorbitant amount of money from Don Lemon. Don categorically denies these claims and this matter does not merit any further comment at this time.” CNN did not immediately respond to a request for comment. This has been known since pretty much the beginning. It's a big ol' joke around the news room. ha ha ha
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Aug 18, 2019 7:15:38 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Aug 18, 2019 7:16:17 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Aug 18, 2019 7:21:22 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 18, 2019 7:22:29 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 18, 2019 7:24:47 GMT -6
White Antifa "protesters " hurling racial insults at a minority police officer, yet they are not considered racist by the media/left because they agree with their violence. The world we live in.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 18, 2019 7:25:58 GMT -6
thefederalist.com/2019/08/16/the-new-york-times-is-clueless-about-conservatives/The New York Times Is Clueless About Conservatives A recently released transcript shows just how biased the New York Times really is and how little they want to do to fix it. David Marcus By David Marcus AUGUST 16, 2019 This week, Slate released a transcript of a meeting held by New York Times Executive Editor Dean Baquet and his staff. The meeting was apparently called because of reaction to a headline about Donald Trump’s speech in the wake of the El Paso shooting. But much of the meeting was concerned with something else: when and how the paper of record should use the term “racist.” Before getting to that subject specifically, though, a few general thoughts about the meeting. As a conservative, what leaps off the page is the fact that the staffers actually seem to think the paper skews right, and they want it to skew more progressive. One staffer seemed to call on Baquet to hire radically and aggressively progressive scribe Roxanne Gay as the public editor. This reminds me of Yankees fans who call into sports radio to say Yanks general manager Brian Cashman is bad at his job because he failed to acquire a middle reliever at the trade deadline. Forget the fact that he’s won championships and has put together a juggernaut this season, he stinks. The overwhelming majority of everything the Times prints skews left. It’s amazing that the staff doesn’t understand this. Even rare examples of conservative ideas are too much for them. Defining “Racist” The conversation about the use of the term “racist” was telling in this respect. The underlying subtext was, “Is Donald Trump a racist?” “Are his supporters racist?” On this, all parties seemed to agree that the answer is yes — at least, nobody said no. Baquet’s objection to using the term, for which he was grilled, had less to do with whether the application is accurate than what outcome using the word would have. He worried it could make the term less powerful or turn off certain readers. When asked specifically what standard the New York Times uses in deciding to use the term racist, Baquet said this: You know, we actually should have a written standard. I wasn’t expecting two weeks ago — and [associate managing editor for standards] Phil [Corbett] is working with me and the masthead to come up with it. I can think of examples, like, you know, the governor — was it the governor of Virginia with the costume? I mean, it’s hard for me to answer, but yes, I do think there are instances when we would use it. It’s hard for me to articulate an example of it. To call this vague would be generous, and it’s Ralph Northam, by the way. I recently wrote about how racism is now defined by the old Potter Stewart axiom: I know it when I see it. Well, this is what that looks like. But worse, given his remarks about how the word affects readers, it is clear Baquet is less interested in establishing a clear standard for what racism is than in bringing the paper’s readership in line with his left-leaning worldview. Rejecting Viewpoints As it turns out, I have a little personal experience with the New York Times and the issue of racism. Several months ago, after twice having run columns there, I pitched a piece to them about how Americans have two very different and often contradictory views of what constitutes racism. The pitch was accepted, I wrote to it, and I tried, at least, to be fair to both the conservative and progressive definitions. Generally speaking, the former being based in belief and intent, the latter on systems of oppression. A few days later, the Times rejected the piece — which, pieces get rejected. I just ran it here at The Federalist, instead. But reading this transcript, it is absolutely clear to me that even analysis of the conservative definition would have been seen as unacceptable to at least some on the staff. Take this comment from a staffer: I’m wondering to what extent you think that the fact of racism and white supremacy being sort of the foundation of this country should play into our reporting. Just because it feels to me like it should be a starting point, you know? Like these conversations about what is racist, what isn’t racist. I just feel like racism is in everything. It should be considered in our science reporting, in our culture reporting, in our national reporting. And so, to me, it’s less about the individual instances of racism, and sort of how we’re thinking about racism and white supremacy as the foundation of all of the systems in the country. What this staffer is suggesting is that in a country where a recent poll showed 51% of Americans think Trump is a racist and 45% don’t, the paper of record should simply ignore the conservative viewpoint and actually do reporting based on the opinion of the 51%. Covering Conservatism I’ve had two conversations with high-level people at the Times about conservatism and how they cover it. On both occasions, I heard a sincere desire to do so. But I also heard a woeful lack of understanding about why conservatives are so wary of their coverage. When I brought up the hiring of Sarah Jeong, who had a history of anti-white tweets, and said that obviously such tweets about any other group would bar someone from being hired, I was told “the double standard is hard to defend.” That’s just not good enough, and though, as I say, I think they were sincere in their desire to present conservative viewpoints, not only do they not seem to grasp them, but their staff seems to be in control of the paper’s politics. I don’t know that there is any solution to this problem, or that even if there were, most people at the Times would want to fix it. More likely, it is simply time to accept that the New York Times is a progressive newspaper, not that there’s anything wrong with that. In fact, the entire concept of objective news is a rather suspect one. I read the New York Times, I enjoy it, sometimes I do the crossword, but to the extent I ever did, I can no longer see it as a straight paper with limited bias. This transcript makes that blatantly obvious. So, by all means, read the Times. But make sure you go in with your eyes wide open.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 18, 2019 13:21:14 GMT -6
Ahh, the joys of open borders and Democrat leadership. California is not just a public toilet but now there is evidence that leprosy is on the rise in Los Angeles County. Barack Obama changed US law in 2016 and allowed immigrants with blistering STDs and leprosy to migrate to the US. drive.google.com/file/d/1K9zuhu4RTa17x6KHlP-B7ojFhsahgmXK/viewLeprosy, also known as Hansen’s disease, is rarely seen in the United States, but cases continue to emerge in Los Angeles County, a new report says. “Hansen’s disease still exists, and we need to educate medical students and physicians,” coauthor Dr. Maria Teresa Ochoa from Keck Medical Center of the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, told Reuters Health by email. Dr. Ochoa and colleagues identified 187 patients with the disease in a review of medical records from their leprosy clinic spanning 1973 to 2018. Most patients were Latino, originating from Mexico, and they experienced a median delay in diagnosis of more than three years, the team reports JAMA Dermatology, online August 7. Multibacillary leprosy (MB) cases outnumbered paucibacillary leprosy (PB) cases by nearly eight to one (88.6% vs. 11.4%, respectively), and Latino patients were more likely than non-Latino patients to have MB, as were patients from Central or South America (versus other regions). Most patients (80.7%) received multidrug therapy, and most (92.6%) received antibiotics for more than two years, especially if they had MB. Only about half of patients (56.7%) had World Health Organization (WHO) grade 0 disability (no signs or symptoms suggestive of leprosy or disability) at the one-year follow-up, whereas 16.0% had grade 1 disability (loss of protective sensation) and 26.2% had grade 2 disability (visible deformity) at the last follow-up. Among the patients who lost protective sensation, 87.7% (50/57) did not regain it following therapy.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 18, 2019 13:54:57 GMT -6
www.breitbart.com/clips/2019/08/18/msnbc-guest-tiffany-cross-it-is-not-white-peoples-place-to-determine-if-trump-is-racist/Sunday on MSNBC’s “AM Joy,” The Beat DC managing editor Tiffany Cross said if you are not “a person of color,” it’s not “your place” to determine if President Donald Trump is a racist.Cross said, “It’s accurate, you have to call a thing a thing. I think that’s part of the reason why we got here because in 2015, when he kicked off his campaign with a bunch of racist rhetoric, there was a hesitancy to call it out. The first two years of his presidency when he introduced ridiculous white supremacist policies and would follow that up with additional racist rhetoric and we have an echo chamber of people repeating these things, we didn’t call a thing a thing. So I feel like now finally we are here. I understand there are maybe some people who get tired hearing about it. You know, kind of tough luck. There are a lot of people who live it and endure it every day for decades and centuries who get tired of experiencing it.” She added, “I think a good rule of thumb is, if you are not a person of color and millions of people of color across this country are saying a thing is racist, it’s not your place to say that it isn’t. Once we make that point, we can address it with the president. Nobody tried to convince his base. He won based on hostile views of race. Right now you are trying to point out to people that you are fighting for the soul of the country.”
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 19, 2019 8:56:06 GMT -6
The protesters in Hong Kong have been waving the American flag & singing our national anthem,(showing that America still embodies the spirit of freedom against oppressive regimes the world over). Now, another favorite has appeared over there:
I'm waiting for the MSM to either drop the story, or find a way to blame it on Trump/Russia.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 19, 2019 9:18:03 GMT -6
Cruz then paraphrased Baquet’s remarks: “The Editor says (in effect) ‘for 2 yrs, we covered ‘Russia, Russia, Russia,’ facts be damned; now we’ll scream ‘racism, racism, racism’ for 18 mos, and the rest of the media follow us.’ That’s not journalism.”
Finally, Cruz quoted the New York Times own description of the 1619 project.
“What is the 1619 project? In NYT’s words: ‘It aims to REFRAME OUR COUNTRY’S HISTORY, understanding 1619 as OUR TRUE FOUNDING, and placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of the STORY WE TELL ourselves about who we are,’” Cruz tweeted.
Not only will the Times cover Trump as a racist, but it will ensure readers believe the story of America includes little else but racism.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 19, 2019 9:19:58 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 19, 2019 10:51:11 GMT -6
So, Twitter not only is biased against conservatives, but they are helping the Chinese Communist government as well:
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 19, 2019 14:47:32 GMT -6
So, the New York Times is going to rewrite history & the founding of our country to show it was born in sin & therefore should be remade to atone?
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 19, 2019 16:33:03 GMT -6
Federalist Co-Founder:
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 19, 2019 20:00:36 GMT -6
The master of trolling did it again. Today, President Trump tweeted out a photo of Greenland with a picture of Trump International Hotel Las Vegas photoshopped into the photo, writing: "I promise not to do this to Greenland!"(In reference to reports he's looking into the possibility of buying the world's largest island in Greenland from Den,ark,(historically we have made such purchases before,(the Louisiana purchase, buying the Dutch West Indies and renaming them the U. S. Virgin Islands, etc).
And, the political left had a fit over it:
Works for Beto:
Daily Beast reporter
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Aug 20, 2019 1:32:18 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 20, 2019 6:40:39 GMT -6
Trouble in liberal utopia? www.foxnews.com/us/la-residents-fed-up-with-officials-demand-change-after-homeless-crisis-spirals-in-cityLA residents fed up with officials, demand change after homeless crisis spirals in city It’s the stale stench of liquor and human waste that hits you first. Then it’s visual — row after row of dirty tarp tents crammed together on the sidewalk next to piles of rotting trash and broken appliances. There are half-dressed, drugged-out shells of people wandering aimlessly in the middle of the street. Some curse at cars. Others just stare. There are fights, prostitution and rodent burrows. This is the fabled Skid Row in Los Angeles and it’s a disaster. Like several West Coast cities Fox News visited, Los Angeles is dealing with a homeless crisis. However, unlike the East Coast, LA can’t hide all of its homeless in shelters or low-income housing. Failed liberal policies coupled with decades of neglect and mismanagement have turned an old problem into a modern-day nightmare. Some fear the City of Angels is at the point of no return and are angry at elected officials who talk a big game but rarely deliver. “I don’t want to see them on camera anymore,” Marquesha Babers, who lived on Skid Row as a teenager, told Fox News. “I don’t want them to write any more articles about how much they care or how much they’re trying to change things. I want to see them do it.” ............. I don't know why they would be upset by these conditions. I mean, they voted for the liberal leaders and their policies which brought all of this upon them. So, if they want change, they need to force it.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 20, 2019 10:47:11 GMT -6
Katie Williams says, “I feel like if I have more liberal views and less conservative views then this wouldn’t even be an issue. She assured me that that was not the case. And yet as soon as I turn around there are posts about Human Rights Campaign, which are great. I’m all for the Human Rights Campaign. But for them to not say anything about that and then for them to criticize me for supporting my sitting president? I couldn’t even believe it.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 20, 2019 12:15:51 GMT -6
Add to the increasing pile of failed liberal/Democrat ideas/policies/etc. bigthink.com/technology-innovation/france-solar-roadThe French government initially invested in a rural solar roadway in 2016. French newspapers report that the trial hasn't lived up to expectations. Solar panel "paved" roadways are proving to be inefficient and too expensive. Turns out that solar power highways aren't all they're cracked up to be. In 2016, France put forth an audacious plan to build 620 miles (1,000 kilometers) of solar highways composed of photovoltaic panels. They believed that the completed roadway would be able to one day power up to 5 million homes. The French government invested €5 million to test out the concept. It's now been nearly three years since their first trial run with a paved 0.6 mile solar stretch in rural Normandy. Engineers and government officials estimated that this first solar road could power up to 5,000 homes. That wasn't the case. So far the "Wattway" initiative has been a disappointing failure. France’s failed solar roadway The Wattway in France consists of 2,800 photovoltaic panels, running the length of one kilometer (0.62 miles) stretching from the small town of Tourouvre-au-Perche. The construction group responsible for the building, Colas, said that the solar panels were covered with a special resin that contained silicon, which protected the cells from 18-wheeler traffic. The project seemed to be doomed from the start. This region in Normandy, France is not known for its abundance of sunshine. Usually, a city in Normandy only has 44 days of strong sunlight. Since the opening of the road, panels have routinely come loose or broken into pieces. In May 2018, 90 meters (300 feet) of the roadway had to be destroyed. It was quickly apparent that the solar panels couldn't withstand the wear and tear of sustained traffic or the forces of nature. In a report from the Global Construction Review, it was found that engineers didn't take into account the damage that would be caused by thunderstorms, leaf mold, and huge tractors that would be using the road. In the first few months, the highest amount of energy generated from the roadway hit only half their stated goal at around 150,000kWh before falling to 78,000 in 2018 and finally 38,000 in early 2019. The vice president of the Network for Energy Transition, Marc Jedliczka, stated: "The technical and economic elements of the project were not sufficiently understood. It is a total absurdity to innovate at the expense of solutions that already exist and are much more profitable, such as photovoltaics on roofs." The idea for solar roadways has been met with a great deal of skepticism from many experts in the renewable field. They've routinely been found to be too expensive and inefficient. Moving forward with other solar projects Two local roofers, Pascal and Eric, were interviewed by the French newspaper Le Monde concerning the project. "The engineers of this project surely did not think about the tractors that would roll over," they stated. While the resin coating was able to stop the panels from being crushed, it created so much extra noise that the locals had to lower the speed limit to 70 km/h (43 mph). The roadway has been described as degraded, and "pale with its ragged joints. . . solar panels that peel off the road and the many splinters that enamel resin protecting photovoltaic cells." The first large scale solar roadway has turned out to be completely bunk. It's unlikely that this idea will be feasible in the near future. Colas Wattway has admitted as much. Managing director Etienne Guadin told Le Monde that this roadway wouldn't be going to market. "The Tourouvre model is not the one that we are going to market. Our system is not mature on long distance traffic. . . We are now focusing on small modules of 3, 6 or 9 sq. m — enough to provide enough electricity for a CCTV camera, bus shelter lighting or an electric bicycle charging station."
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 20, 2019 13:34:49 GMT -6
Imagine what could be accomplished if the left would simply stop obstructing the duly elected President? www.nationalreview.com/news/new-york-sues-to-block-trump-administrations-crackdown-on-migrants-who-use-public-services/amp/New York Sues to Block Trump Administration’s Crackdown on Migrants Who Use Public Services By JACK CROWE August 20, 2019 1:37 PM New York joined Vermont and Connecticut Tuesday in filing a lawsuit to block the Trump administration’s attempt to crack down on immigrants who rely on public services. New York attorney general Leticia James announced Tuesday that she, along with the attorneys general of Vermont and Connecticut, has filed suit against the federal agencies responsible for expanding the public-charge rule to make it more difficult for immigrants who rely on public services to obtain a visa. “Quite simply, under this rule, more children will go hungry, more families will go without medical care and more people will be living in the shadows and on the streets. We cannot and we will not let that happen,” James said. Under the new rule, which will take effect October 15 barring intervention from the courts, immigrants’ reliance on food stamps and public health insurance will be counted against them when they apply for permanent residence or citizenship. Prior to the change, the public-charge rule applied only to cash-assistance programs such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and the Supplemental Security Income program. The Trump administration, in defending their expansion of the public-charge rule, has argued that it will “protect American taxpayers.” But the plaintiffs in the suit filed Tuesday argue that it is yet another example of the administration’s efforts to “isolate and exclude Latino immigrants and other immigrants of color.” They list nine similar instances in the suit, including the “travel ban” on migrants from Muslim-majority countries and the attempted rescinding of DACA, which currently shields some 700,000 young illegal immigrants from deportation. A number of other states, including New Mexico, Colorado, Rhode Island, Maine, Maryland, and Massachusetts have also filed suit to block the expansion of the public-charge rule, James said Tuesday.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 20, 2019 14:43:16 GMT -6
Obama speechwriter responds:
Cruz responds:
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 20, 2019 15:07:42 GMT -6
www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/08/20/obama-trump-2020-227627The Obamas’ First Big Anti-Trump Statement of 2020 The former first couple’s Netflix documentary offers a quiet response to Trump’s promises to reinvigorate the industrial heartland. .......... In a final scene of the Netflix documentary American Factory, the chairman of a Chinese auto glass company walks through the sprawling floor of one of the company’s factories in Dayton, Ohio, as an aide points to different departments where employees will soon be replaced by robotic arms and other machines. “We’re hoping to cancel four workers in July or August,” the aide tells him, almost proudly, before adding, “They are too slow.” Scenes like this are typical in the film, which depicts the fallout after Shanghai-based Fuyao Glass revives a former GM plant and hires many of its American former employees. The employees are at first excited to have new jobs, but soon find themselves struggling to swallow a fraction of their former pay, difficult working conditions and the prospect that, no longer protected by a union, they could be fired at any moment. The documentary, which debuts on Netflix on August 21, never mentions President Donald Trump by name—but its message is clear: Trump’s promise to reinvigorate the industrial heartland is going to take a lot more than a campaign slogan. There are no easy solutions. And if some manufacturing jobs do come back, they’re going to look nothing like they used to. Americans will have to accept a new reality to stay competitive in the global marketplace—one that they might not like, and one that Trump doesn’t acknowledge. This message is also coming straight from Barack and Michelle Obama. American Factory is the first project to come from the Obamas’ production company, Higher Ground, as part of the deal they made with Netflix to produce a slate of series, movies and documentaries that reflect their values. Higher Ground acquired the movie after its debut at the Sundance Film Festival. The Obamas have largely kept a low profile as the 2020 presidential race heats up. The former president reportedly has met with a number of Democratic contenders, and has criticized divisive rhetoric “from our leaders” without mentioning Trump by name. But this film is a statement all on its own. Even though the Obamas have avoided overtly partisan material for their Netflix slate (other projects include a biopic of Frederick Douglass and a preschool series called "Listen to Your Vegetables & Eat Your Parents”), American Factory hits right at a central issue of the 2016 presidential election—and likely the next one. Reviving American manufacturing is an issue Obama has tried to tackle before. His stimulus package pumped billions into green manufacturing projects. And his reelection campaign in 2012 leaned heavily on the bailout of General Motors and Chrysler, saving auto manufacturing and related jobs across the industrial Midwest. The results of Obama’s efforts, though, were mixed. His administration touted the growth of the wind and solar industries, but overall job gains are unclear. While the manufacturing sector turned around after a precipitous dive during the Great Recession, the growth was slow and steady, and never quite returned to where it was when he took office. Now, not only is Obama watching Trump reverse much of his green economy agenda through deregulation, he’s also watching Trump claim to know how to produce the manufacturing boom that eluded him.
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Aug 21, 2019 0:17:42 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 21, 2019 10:01:37 GMT -6
When President Trump floated the idea that the United States might be interested in buying Greenland from Denmark, top Danish officials blasted him.
Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen ridiculed the notion, saying it was “absurd.”
“It’s an absurd discussion, and [Greenland Premier] Kim Kielsen has of course made it clear that Greenland is not for sale. That’s where the conversation ends,” she said.
“Thankfully, the time where you buy and sell other countries and populations is over. Let’s leave it there. Jokes aside, we will of course love to have an even closer strategic relationship with the United States,” Frederiksen said. “Greenland is not for sale. Greenland is not Danish. Greenland belongs to Greenland. I strongly hope that this is not meant seriously,” Frederiksen told newspaper Sermitsiaq.
Of course, U.S. presidents have sought to buy the strategic island in the past. In 1946, the U.S. offered to pay Denmark $100 million to purchase Greenland. That deal fell through, but Denmark in 1951 allowed the U.S. to build military bases and radar stations on Greenland. The U.S. Air Force still has a base in northern Greenland.
After he was ridiculed, Trump felt disrespected and promptly canceled his upcoming trip to Denmark. But he also praised the prime minister for being frank, saying his visit was mostly to discuss the notion of buying Greenland.
“Denmark is a very special country with incredible people, but based on Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen’s comments, that she would have no interest in discussing the purchase of Greenland, I will be postponing our meeting scheduled in two weeks for another time,” Trump wrote Tuesday on Twitter. “The Prime Minister was able to save a great deal of expense and effort for both the United States and Denmark by being so direct. I thank her for that and look forward to rescheduling sometime in the future!”
….The Prime Minister was able to save a great deal of expense and effort for both the United States and Denmark by being so direct. I thank her for that and look forward to rescheduling sometime in the future!
— Donald J. Trump (@realdonaldtrump) August 20, 2019
But that made the great Danes even more angry.
Frederiksen said Trump’s decision left her “disappointed and surprised.”
“I’d like to say that I am, of course, both disappointed and surprised that the American president has cancelled his state visit,” Frederiksen told press in Copenhagen on Wednesday afternoon. “Like many others, I was looking forward to the visit. We were full speed ahead with preparations.”
Helle Thorning-Schmidt, a former Danish prime minister, also weighed in, writing on Twitter that Trump’s cancellation was “deeply insulting to the people of Greenland and Denmark.”
Queen Margrethe II, who had extended the Sept. 2 invitation to Trump, also found the president’s decision “came as a surprise.”
“That’s all we have to say about that,” the Royal House’s communications director said in a TV interview.
The Danish royal house’s staff had canceled summer vacation to prepare for the presidential visit, and one newspaper said food and drink had already been ordered for a state dinner hosted by the Queen.
“Danish national daily Berlingske’s political commentator Thomas Larsen has also given his views on the controversial decision,” the U.K.’s Express newspaper reported.
He said: “It’s an unheard of situation. You almost lack words. No one is behaving like this on the international scene and certainly not an American president.
“This is an insult of the highest weight. A state visit usually helps confirm a friendship, a relationship and an alliance between two countries.
“But I think the royal house and the State Department are aware that it is a special gentleman sitting in the White House these days.”
“But that he cancels for this reason, I don’t thing anyone could have imagined. I think people are paralysed.” ............
So, the EU elected leadership there decided to slight the President on Denmark possibly selling Greenland to the U.S.,(much like they did the West Indies, which became the US Virgin Islands), so, he cancels his planned state trip there & this upsets them even more? Looks like they are understanding the age old lesson of actions and how they lead to consequences.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 21, 2019 10:17:29 GMT -6
www.dailywire.com/news/50870/danish-officials-furious-after-trump-cancels-trip-james-barrettWhat started off as what many dismissed as a Trumpian whim has rapidly escalated into an international scandal. In response to Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen blasting his talk of the United States purchasing Greenland from Denmark as "absurd," President Trump abruptly canceled a two-day state visit to Denmark scheduled for next month. Now, Danish officials are reportedly "furious." Play Video The controversy over the "buying Greenland" idea started with a report last week by The Wall Street Journal citing two White House advisers who told the paper that Trump has inquired multiple times about the U.S. purchasing the island from Denmark. "In meetings, at dinners and in passing conversations, Mr. Trump has asked advisers whether the U.S. can acquire Greenland, listened with interest when they discuss its abundant resources and geopolitical importance, and, according to two of the people, has asked his White House counsel to look into the idea," the Journal reported last Thursday. His inquiries, sources said, received mixed responses, some shrugging it off as a "passing fancy," while others thought it would be a strong strategic move economically. The report sparked a media firestorm and was quickly met with a rather terse response from Greenland's autonomous government: "Greenland is not for sale," a government spokesperson said in a statement reported by CNN. Trump, however, hasn't let it go, using the blowup as a chance to issue some trolling tweets, including one featuring a photoshopped image of Greenland's coast with a giant golden Trump Tower dominating the skyline. "I promise not to do this to Greenland!" Trump joked Monday. But things turned more serious when Prime Minister Frederiksen ripped Trump's "absurd discussion" about purchasing the island. Trump responded on Tuesday in a pair of tweets announcing that he was going to reschedule their planned meeting next month for "sometime in the future," a move that suggests he's far more serious about the discussion than many suspected. "Denmark is a very special country with incredible people, but based on Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen’s comments, that she would have no interest in discussing the purchase of Greenland, I will be postponing our meeting scheduled in two weeks for another time," he wrote. "The Prime Minister was able to save a great deal of expense and effort for both the United States and Denmark by being so direct. I thank her for that and look forward to rescheduling sometime in the future!" According to The Washington Post, Trump's decision has left Danish officials are "furious." The Post quotes a number of Danish officials ripping Trump as "disrespectful" and a "spoiled child" who "lives on another planet." "It's an insult from a close friend and ally," Danish Member of Parliament Michael Aastrup Jensen told the Post. "He said Trump's interest in purchasing Greenland took the country by surprise and was initially widely considered to be a joke, before Danes realized the full extent of 'this disaster,'" the Post reports. "Jensen said Danish lawmakers felt misled and 'appalled' by the president, who 'lacks even basic diplomatic skills,' he said." "There was no word [ahead of time] about: 'I want to buy Greenland and that's why I'm coming,'" Jensen told the paper. The Post also cites a tweet by Denmark's former business minister Rasmus Jarlov. "For no reason Trump assumes that (an autonomous) part of our country is for sale. Then insultingly cancels visit that everybody was preparing for. Please show more respect," Jarlov wrote. Frederiksen was more measured in her response, saying her invitation for discussion about a stronger relationship between the two countries still stands and that she hopes Trump's response to her rejection of the idea would not "change the character of our good relations," the Post notes.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 21, 2019 13:21:13 GMT -6
www.breitbart.com/clips/2019/08/21/trump-denmarks-prime-ministers-comments-were-nasty-you-cant-treat-the-u-s-like-they-did-under-obama/Wednesday on the White House lawn before leaving for an event in Kentucky, President Donald Trump defended canceling his upcoming meeting with Denmark’s Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen because she said the idea of selling Greenland was “an absurd discussion.” Trump said, “I looked forward to going, but I thought that the prime minister’s statement that it was absurd that it was an absurd ides was nasty. I thought it was an inappropriate statement. All she had to do is say we wouldn’t be interested. We can’t treat the United States the way they treated us under Obama. I thought it was a very not nice way of saying something.” He added, “She’s not talking to me. She’s talking to the United States of America. You don’t talk to the United States that way. At least under me.”
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 21, 2019 15:14:45 GMT -6
Trump took to Twitter to double down on Denmark with some truth bombs:
“For the record, Denmark is only at 1.35% of GDP for NATO spending. They are a wealthy country and should be at 2%. We protect Europe and yet, only 8 of the 28 NATO countries are at the 2% mark. The United States is at a much, much higher level than that,” he wrote.
“Because of me, these countries have agreed to pay ONE HUNDRED BILLION DOLLARS more – but still way short of what they should pay for the incredible military protection provided. Sorry!” he wrote. ..............
In other words, if/when Greenland is sold,(as it was dangled before & the Danes have a history of selling islands to the United States), we have more than compensated them for it.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 22, 2019 4:42:46 GMT -6
“That was a tough torch to carry and, as John said, there were many lonely days because he always said what was on his mind,” Cindy McCain said.
McCain added that her husband “never did anything deliberately to be hurtful or anything. … I don’t see anybody carrying that mantle at all, I don’t see anyone carrying the voice — the voice of reason.” .............
Which would explain him traveling all the way to Washington to give a theatrical thumbs down on repealing/replacing Obamacare,(which he campaigned on and told his constituents he would do), and he also peddled the widely disproven Steele dossier to American intelligence agencies, etc. McCain was a RINO and a major Never Trumper. His actions proved that he did not have the country, nor her people in mind. The only thing he wanted to do was to protect the establishment & maintain the status quo. Trump called him on his bs & he and his family got mad about that happening.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 22, 2019 4:51:07 GMT -6
Senator Whitehouse facing an ethics complaint for his brief where he threatened the SCOTUS, is a start, but the rest of his democrats who signed/sponsored the brief should face similar: dailycaller.com/2019/08/21/whitehouse-scotus-complaint/Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island is navigating an ethics complaint and vigorous criticism from the right after filing a brief in a Second Amendment case before the Supreme Court. The senator’s legal filing broached the possibility of court-packing and accused the justices of elevating conservative political rules over the law. Whitehouse defended the brief, saying the court’s reputation is currently at risk. ........... Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island has attracted an ethics complaint and vigorous criticism from conservatives after raising the prospect of court-packing in a new legal filing before the Supreme Court. Depending on one’s perspective, Whitehouse’s extraordinary brief is either a cogent indictment of the court’s seemingly partisan valence or particularly blunt strong-arming of the nation’s highest judicial tribunal. “Senator Whitehouse’s bald-faced threat to ‘heal’ or face the consequences is inappropriate and shows just why an independent judiciary is essential to our system of government,” Elizabeth Slattery, a legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “The justices should, and most likely will, ignore attempts to intimidate them, and instead focus on what the Constitution requires.” “And further, the facts don’t bear out Senator Whitehouse’s claim that the justices are driven by a partisan agenda,” Slattery added. “Just look at the voting records of the newest justices, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, who ended up on opposite sides in nearly a third of cases last term. That doesn’t look like the outcome-oriented judging to me.” Whitehouse filed an amicus (or “friend of the court”) brief in a Second Amendment case the justices will hear in their new term, which begins in October. The filing urged the justices to dismiss the case and broadly accused the court’s conservative majority of dutifully serving monied Republican political interests. Four other Democratic senators joined Whitehouse’s brief. “The Supreme Court is not well. And the people know it. Perhaps the Court can heal itself before the public demands it be ‘restructured in order to reduce the influence of politics,'” Whitehouse wrote, alluding to court-packing measures that have gained traction in progressive circles. “Particularly on the urgent issue of gun control, a nation desperately needs it to heal.” The brief elsewhere accused the conservative justices, dubbed “the Roberts five,” of cooperating with “an industrial-strength influence campaign” that advances an extreme political agenda through strategic litigation and outside spending from conservative groups with common funding sources. Judicial Watch, the conservative oversight group, filed a complaint with the Rhode Island Supreme Court Monday alleging that Whitehouse’s brief violated legal ethics rules. Judicial Watch said Whitehouse is not licensed to practice law in Washington, D.C., and maintains “inactive” status with the Rhode Island Bar Association. As such, if Whitehouse composed the brief in Rhode Island or in his Washington offices, he may have broken rules barring unauthorized legal work. The brief itself also breaks professional conduct rules, Judicial Watch believes, noting Rhode Island rules require lawyers to “demonstrate respect for the legal system” and use “the law’s procedures only for legitimate purposes and not to harass or intimidate others.” “Senator Whitehouse is violating basic legal ethics in threatening the Supreme Court while engaging in the unauthorized practice of law,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement. “He should be held accountable for these abuses.” Whitehouse did not respond to the DCNF’s request for comment on the complaint. (RELATED: Second Amendment Looms Over Supreme Court After Back-To-Back Massacres) Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) in a hearing on Justice Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation on September 28, 2018. (Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images) Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse in a hearing on Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation on Sept. 28, 2018. (Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images) The Trump campaign said Whitehouse’s allusion to court-packing is consistent with a general progressive push for structural reforms of U.S. politics, such as abolishing the electoral college. “When Democrats lose elections, they try to change the rules to favor themselves politically, whether it’s attacking the electoral college or threatening court-packing,” campaign spokesman Daniel Bucheli told the DCNF. “The nomination and confirmation of two new justices, both of whom are widely respected for their legal careers, will positively impact this country for years to come,” Bucheli added. The case that occasioned Whitehouse’s brief involves a challenge to New York City’s gun transportation regulations. A city ordinance — since amended — required licensed gun owners to transport their unloaded firearms in a locked container. Licensees were only authorized to move their weapons between their home and a gun range. They could not carry firearms beyond city limits. The plaintiffs are several city residents who wish to bring their guns to shooting competitions outside the city or to vacation homes for self-defense. Though they lost before a federal trial judge and the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court agreed to hear their case in January. After the court granted review, the city issued new rules relaxing the challenged restrictions and urged the justices to dismiss the case as moot. For his part, Whitehouse has defended the filing, telling the Washington Post that the court urgently needs to consider its reputation as it approaches a docket heavy on politically salient disputes like gun control, gay rights in the workplace and the president’s power to terminate the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. “In the same way that you might warn somebody walking out on thin ice — ‘Hey, the ice is thin out there, you want to be careful, maybe you want to come in’ — I think that was the motivation for filing this brief,” the senator said.
|
|