US Politics

[Tracker]

Trump offered Jordan's king control of the West Bank — and more bonkers claims in bombshell new book

Reporters offer behind-the-scenes look at a tumultuous Trump presidency — and his wife's criticism
Former President Donald Trump offered Jordan's King Abdullah II control of the West Bank, touting it as a "great deal" even though the United States has no claim on the territory, according to a forthcoming book "The Divider: Trump in the White House 2017-2021."

The new book by New York Times chief White House correspondent Peter Baker and New Yorker staff writer Susan Glasser details behind-the-scenes accounts featuring Trump administration insiders, who share their experiences working for the 45th president. 

The occupied West Bank, which is at the heart of the Israel-Palestine conflict, was never Trump's to give away. The piece of land sits between Israel and Jordan and was formerly governed as part of Jordan. But Israel seized the West Bank in 1967 and since then, it has been occupied by Israeli forces. Their settlements are considered illegal under international law by much of the world. 

Upon hearing Trump's offer, Abdullah II thought he was "having a heart attack," he reportedly told an American friend, the authors wrote in an excerpt published by The Washington Post. "I couldn't breathe. I was bent doubled-over."
Trump made the offer just one month after his administration broke with decades of US policy by moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. The US government has long pushed for a two-state solution and expressed opposition to settlements despite its close ties with Israel. 

However, Trump repeatedly caused controversies and placed himself in the middle of the decades-long conflict. In 2019, he also announced that the US would no longer view settlements as illegal under international law. 

The book offers a look inside the criticism Trump received from his wife, first lady Melania Trump, for his handling of the pandemic. 

In a phone call with former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Melania Trump sought help convincing her husband to take the coronavirus more seriously, according to an excerpt published by CNN.

"'You're blowing this," she recalled telling her husband, according to the book. "'This is serious. It's going to be really bad, and you need to take it more seriously than you're taking it.' He had just dismissed her. 'You worry too much,' she remembered him saying. 'Forget it.'"

https://www.salon.com/2022/09/15/offered-jordans-king-control-of-the-west--and-more-bonkers-claims-in-bombshell-new-book/

[bustamente]

Trump in his mind thinks people in power in democratic countries love him instead of all of them laughing at him. To the rest he was the useful idiot.

[bustamente]

Trump's judge is doing her best to slow down the investigation.

[Tracker]

1 hour ago, bustamente said:

Trump's judge is doing her best to slow down the investigation.

That's what she was paid to do. We can only hope she is impeached as she would be next in line to be appointed to the supreme court by the next GOP administration. In her political views, she is somewhere to the right of Atilla the hun.

[HardCoreBlue]

12 hours ago, Tracker said:

That's what she was paid to do. We can only hope she is impeached as she would be next in line to be appointed to the supreme court by the next GOP administration. In her political views, she is somewhere to the right of Atilla the hun.

She is a perfect example of what's wrong with the Judiciary System and Garland is the first one to defend and protect it. He's just as guilty but in a different way.  

[Wideleft]

The Justice Dept.’s Jan. 6 investigation is looking at ... everything

New batch of subpoenas spell out three general areas of interest as investigators seek sweeping range of information

By Devlin Barrett, 

Jacqueline Alemany

Josh Dawsey

 and 

Rosalind S. Helderman

 

September 15, 2022 at 7:01 p.m. EDT

 

Dozens of subpoenas issued last week show that the Justice Department is seeking vast amounts of information, and communications with more than 100 people, as part of its sprawling inquiry into the origins, fundraising and motives of the effort to block Joe Biden from being certified as president in early 2021.

The subpoenas, three of which were reviewed by The Washington Post, are far-reaching, covering 18 separate categories of information, including any communications the recipients had with scores of people in six states where supporters of then-President Donald Trump sought to promote “alternate” electors to replace electors in those states won by Biden.

One request is for any communications “to, from, or including” specific people tied to such efforts in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, New Mexico, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Most of the names listed were proposed fake electors in those states, while a small number were Trump campaign officials who organized the slates.

Taken together, the subpoenas show an investigation that began immediately after the storming of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, and has cast an ever-widening net, even as it gathers information about those in the former president’s inner circle.

“It looks like a multipronged fraud and obstruction investigation,” said Jim Walden, a former federal prosecutor. “It strikes me that they’re going after a very, very large group of people, and my guess is they are going to make all of the charging decisions toward the end.”

After being told the various categories of information sought in the indictment, Walden noted the focus on wide categories of communications among the individuals. He said he suspected it was part of a prosecutorial strategy to try to blunt any claims that Trump activists were just following the advice of lawyers in seeking to block the certification of Biden’s victory.

“It’s hard to say you were just relying on all these lawyers if there are text chains showing conspirator conversations, or consciousness of guilt,” Walden said.

Prosecutors seek Trump PAC fundraising info

A subpoena is not proof or even evidence of wrongdoing, but rather a demand for information that could produce evidence of criminal conduct. The new batch of subpoenas point to three main areas of Justice Department interest, distinct but related:

• the effort to replace valid Biden electors with unearned, pro-Trump electors before the formal congressional tally of the 2020 election outcome on Jan. 6, 2021
• the rally that preceded the riot that day
• the fundraising and spending of the Save America political action committee, an entity that raised more than $100 million in the wake of the 2020 election, largely based on appeals to mount pro-Trump legal challenges to election results.

Gift Article - https://wapo.st/3Dspb8Q

 

[HardCoreBlue]

17 hours ago, bustamente said:

Trump's judge is doing her best to slow down the investigation.

I thought as well when an appeal is submitted on a ruling it goes to a different judge?

[JCon]

Just now, HardCoreBlue said:

I thought as well when an appeal is submitted on a ruling it goes to a different judge?

Who is another Trump appointee. It's expected that they will recuse themselves due to a conflict of interest. I'm don't agree. I think they dig in, rule in favour of whatever Trump wants, which will push it up to a higher court. 

[bustamente]

3 minutes ago, HardCoreBlue said:

I thought as well when an appeal is submitted on a ruling it goes to a different judge?

It goes to the 11th circuit any decision it makes goes back to the original judge. Any ruling against Trump will be appealed drawing out the process even longer

Edited September 16, 2022 by bustamente

[HardCoreBlue]

Just now, JCon said:

Who is another Trump appointee. It's expected that they will recuse themselves due to a conflict of interest. I'm don't agree. I think they dig in, rule in favour of whatever Trump wants, which will push it up to a higher court. 

But she made a ruling in response to the DOJ appealing her original ruling no? Or was DoJ’s response to her original ruling not an appeal? I’m confused as usual.

[17to85]

4 minutes ago, HardCoreBlue said:

But she made a ruling in response to the DOJ appealing her original ruling no? Or was DoJ’s response to her original ruling not an appeal? I’m confused as usual.

The DOJ basically said to her, drop this part of the order or we appeal, she said no, they are now appealing.

[TrueBlue4ever]

My understanding is that the appeals court based in Atlanta that has appellate jurisdiction over this case has 11 members, 6 of whom were Trump appointees (all from the Federalist Society, and 4 of whom Trump put on his short-list for SCOTUS before Comey-Barrett got picked), so already concerns about partisan voting on the issue (stunning that a court should have to worry about that, but again the entire SCOTUS balance has had this issue for decades, which should de-legitimize any decision coming out of it regardless of which party you support). Some portions of the appeal before the circuit court (emergency measures - say in this case a review of the Judge’s ruling that the investigation must completely stop while the documents are being examined by the Special Master) can be reviewed by the District Court Justice, who can also look at opinions on the case before the court. The District Court is assigned by the Supreme Court, with one of its Justices appointed to cover the region.  The overseeing SCOTUS Justice for that district?  Clarence Thomas. 

[Mark F]

it is grotesque that the criminal Trump has got people arguing, discussing, explaining about this arcane legal stuff.

got to admit, the guy is a top  notch criminal.

and hes out there every day with new criminal threats.

anyone else would be in jail  long before this for his crimes.

 He makes more money, and laughs.

 

Edited September 16, 2022 by Mark F

[17to85]

Could you imagine if it were some staffer walked out with those documents? Be on death row by now.

[Mark F]

1 minute ago, 17to85 said:

Could you imagine if it were some staffer walked out with those documents? Be on death row by now.

exactly. look at the lengths they've gone to for assange.

[bustamente]

Any other person would be indicted with what has come out in the last few days, Trump only lifeline is to drag this process on and on indefinitely and the DOJ might let him do it.

[Tracker]

What is being played out here is nothing less than the fate of democracy in America. As dire as that may sound, I do not think it an overstatement.

[bustamente]

They put a criminal in the WH, did they think he would stop being a criminal after he left. Interesting that this judge has decided to hitch her career toa career criminal.

[Tracker]

The National Archives has evidence that Trump ripped up classified documents and information.

The Washington Post reported, “The records recovered by the FBI included documents that detailed top-secret U.S. operations and information about a foreign government’s nuclear-defense readiness, The Washington Post has reported. Some of the documents retrieved by the Archives had also been torn up, which Trump had a habit of doing.”

Destroyed documents that were recovered by the FBI that probably have Trump’s DNA on them are powerful pieces of evidence that Donald Trump mishandled classified information. Ripping up classified materials would be a textbook definition of mishandling classified information.

Trump has a habit of ripping up papers and documents after he reads them. Trump’s habit of tearing up documents was so problematic because it violates the Presidential Records Act that staffers had a designated room where they taped documents back together that  Trump destroyed.

The DOJ is investigating Trump for mishandling government documents. It doesn’t matter if the information was classified or not. Ripping up documents that belong to the US government is a crime.

[HardCoreBlue]

3 hours ago, Tracker said:

The National Archives has evidence that Trump ripped up classified documents and information.

The Washington Post reported, “The records recovered by the FBI included documents that detailed top-secret U.S. operations and information about a foreign government’s nuclear-defense readiness, The Washington Post has reported. Some of the documents retrieved by the Archives had also been torn up, which Trump had a habit of doing.”

Destroyed documents that were recovered by the FBI that probably have Trump’s DNA on them are powerful pieces of evidence that Donald Trump mishandled classified information. Ripping up classified materials would be a textbook definition of mishandling classified information.

Trump has a habit of ripping up papers and documents after he reads them. Trump’s habit of tearing up documents was so problematic because it violates the Presidential Records Act that staffers had a designated room where they taped documents back together that  Trump destroyed.

The DOJ is investigating Trump for mishandling government documents. It doesn’t matter if the information was classified or not. Ripping up documents that belong to the US government is a crime.

Then stop reporting ‘mishandling’ FFS!

[17to85]

41 minutes ago, HardCoreBlue said:

Then stop reporting ‘mishandling’ FFS!

 

[Wideleft]

Gaetz sought pardon related to Justice Department sex trafficking probe

Testimony by a former White House aide is the first indication the congressman sought protection from the inquiry

By Jacqueline Alemany

 and 

Amy Gardner

 

September 17, 2022 at 12:40 p.m. EDT

 

Congressman Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) told a former White House aide that he was seeking a preemptive pardon from President Donald Trump regarding an investigation in which he is a target, according to testimony given to the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Johnny McEntee, according to people familiar with his testimony, told investigators that Gaetz told him during a brief meeting “that they are launching an investigation into him or that there’s an investigation into him,” without specifying who was investigating Gaetz.

McEntee added that Gaetz told him “he did not do anything wrong but they are trying to make his life hell, and you know, if the president could give him a pardon, that would be great.” Gaetz told McEntee that he had asked White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows for a pardon.

Asked by investigators if Gaetz’s ask for a pardon was in the context of the Justice Department investigation into whether Gaetz violated federal sex trafficking laws, McEntee replied, “I think that was the context, yes,” according to people familiar with the testimony who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters.

The testimony is the first indication that Gaetz was specifically seeking a pardon for his own exposure related to the Justice Department inquiry into whether he violated sex trafficking laws. His public posture in the final months of the Trump administration was much less specific, repeatedly calling for broad preemptive pardons to fend off possible Democratic investigations.

McEntee testified that Gaetz met him briefly one evening and discussed the issue of a pardon but McEntee could not recall whether their conversation happened before or after the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection, according to people familiar with the testimony.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/09/17/matt-gaetz-pardon-sex-trafficking-probe/

 

[Tracker]

                                       

[bustamente]

America stands for hate

 

[bustamente]

He could call them bootlickers and tell them they are stupid and they would still scream his name and give him their last pennies, truly insane