[Trump / US politics thread 🚽]

56 minutes ago, Dannylex said:

You sound like a bot, no matter the news you always find an opportunity to insert "but Obama Obama sold weapons to ISIS.." that's what people call trolling.

 

As long as the news keep giving me reasons to criticize the previous administration and the hypocrisy of those who are now pointing the finger, that's exactly what you will get right on your face.

[Trump / US politics thread 🚽]

Why the US should not get along with Russia? Somebody here care to explain? I see no other reason than the american military industry always pressing for an ever present foreign enemy, creating artificial conflicts for profit.

By the way, its funny that Obama funded rebel groups in Syria for 6 years, mostly became ISIS, and no one was fired on his administration or ever held accountable. There goes their hypocritical logic.

[Would you pay thousands to look like THIS...]

3 hours ago, whyme? said:

Isn't the whole point of looking good to attract other people and make them want you!? This just makes people vomit and run away.

People are so dumb!

 

I think the whole point of looking good is first look good for yourself, then maybe other people will be attracted to you. In this case he probably thinks he looks good, but for the majority of people he looks awful... he definitely has some fucked up mental disorder and he is not even aware of it.

[Trump / US politics thread 🚽]

1 hour ago, MeakMaker said:

Why isn't Bernie Sanders president? Couldn't he run for the Democratic Party? 

 

Enjoying President Trump? Then Blame Democrats For Cheating Bernie Sanders

 

In a recent CounterPropa.com article, I explain that President Obama either bombed, sanctioned or sent American soldiers to the seven nations on President Trump’s travel ban. Thus, the precedent for Trump’s stance on refugees correlates directly to policies from the Bush and Obama years. These policies helped create the refugee crisis that Trump has so awkwardly addressed with his draconian executive order.

From Trump’s travel ban of Muslim majority nations to allegedly belligerent phone calls with world leaders, media and Democrats have reacted with outrage and disbelief. It’s as if the Democratic Party and loyal “lesser evil” voters didn’t think cheating Bernie Sanders would lead to such political turmoil. When Debbie Wasserman Shultz resigned from the DNC and friendly journalists covered-up the crime, it was too late; Bernie was forced out of the primary. The only chance for Democrats to defeat a populist Republican nominee, during an anti-establishment year in American politics, was destroyed along with Hillary’s yoga emails and Anthony Weiner’s self-portraits. Instead of addressing the causes of Clinton’s monumental collapse, Democrats have blamed Russia for influencing voters away from a candidate who faced endless scandal. In another CounterPropa piece, I highlight twenty-five reasons Democrats can’t blame Russia for Clinton’s loss to Trump.

The “most” qualified Hillary Clinton, complete with FBI criminal investigations and abysmal favorability numbers would eventually lose to a reality show star. Republicans now own Congress and the White House, all because Democrats and liberal media pushed with all their might for a losing candidate. Clinton was never positioned to defeat Trump, and I spent over one year warning the world in The Hill, Salon, and The Huffington Post.

These warnings were not only met with hostility, but any attempt at awakening the legions of Hillary supporters resulted in bullying, verbal harassment, and other vapid attempts at intimidation. Correct the Record didn’t spend $1 million for nothing.

So, enjoy President Trump, because Democrats worked hard to get him into the White House.

Take for example one of the Democratic Party’s most loyal journalists, Kurt Eichenwald. Before Democrats attacked Trump, they set their sights upon the only candidate capable of defeating the New York billionaire. Nothing epitomizes Democratic politics better than Mr. Eichenwald’s Newsweek article titled GET CONTROL, SENATOR SANDERS, OR GET OUT:

 

Violence. Death threats. Vile, misogynistic names screamed at women. Rage. Hatred. Menacing, anonymous phone calls to homes and offices. Public officials whisked offstage by security agents frightened of the growing mob. None of this has any place in a political campaign. And the candidate who has been tolerating this obscene behavior among his supporters is showing himself to be unfit for office. So, Senator Sanders, either get control of what is becoming your increasingly unhinged cult or get out of the race. Whatever respect sane liberals had for you is rapidly dwindling, and the damage being inflicted on your reputation may be unfixable. If you can’t even manage the vicious thugs who act in your name, you can’t be trusted to run a convenience store, much less the country.

…But Sanders has increasingly signaled that he is in this race for Sanders, and day after day shows himself to be a whining crybaby with little interest in a broader movement. His vicious—and often ridiculous—attacks on the party whenever he doesn’t win a contest have inspired a level of ignorant fanaticism among a large swath of his supporters that is becoming more akin to what might be seen at an out-of-control rally for Donald Trump. Signs are emerging that the Sanders campaign is transmogrifying into the type of movement through which tyrants are born.

 

Vicious thugs? Not many people would categorize Bernie’s campaign as “the type of movement through which tyrants are born.” In addition to the hyperbole, Eichenwald failed to provide the number of Bernie delegates arrested for violence and mayhem in Nevada.

This isn’t journalism. It’s public relations. It’s also the reason Democrats lost to Trump.

Every controversial decision Trump makes and each executive order should be correlated to Bernie Sanders being hounded by a “liberal” media beholden to Clinton. In addition to Eichenwald’s fantasy novel in Newsweek, The Washington Post’s David Fahrenthold wrote a piece titled How Bernie Sanders would transform the nation:

 

In the America that Bernie Sanders wants to create, tuition would be free for every student at every public college.

Which, of course, is another way of saying that the government would pay for it.

And with the government paying for college, colleges would run by government rules. Sanders’s rules. For one thing, Sanders thinks student centers are a waste of government money. He would make sure they did not get any more of it.

If he becomes president, Sanders would spend an enormous amount of money: $3.27 trillion. At the very, very least.

He is not just a big-spending liberal. His agenda is not just about money.

It’s also about control.

 

Bernie’s college plan was about control? Really? It’s amusing how Fahrenthold called Sanders a “big-spending liberal” without ever condemning Clinton’s decision to back free public college. Even long-time Clinton backer Robert Reich wrote articles defending Bernie Sanders from Fahrenthold’s faulty logic.

The key to understanding how Democrats win in 2018 and 2020 is to never forget what happened in 2016. There’s a reason states that voted for Obama twice chose Trump over Hillary, and these reasons have nothing to do with Vladimir Putin. Rather than ignoring the lessons of 2016, Democratic voters should always correlate President Trump with Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

In addition to Eichenwald and Fahrenthold, American media was full of friendly journalists eager to undermine Bernie in favor of Clinton. The list of hit pieces and condescending articles are endless, but let’s focus on The Daily Beast.

The Daily Beast is the most loyal of all the public relations firms associated with Hillary Clinton. To say its writers live in a centrist neoliberal bubble (where Hillary never called black youth superpredators or engaged in racist tactics against Obama in 2008) would be an understatement. This cult-like mentality surrounding Clinton’s candidacy is exemplified by a Michael Tomasky piece titled It’s All Over but the Shouting: Hillary Clinton Crushed Bernie Sanders:

 

It’s time for the guy with some of the Democratic vote to gracefully give way to the woman with much more of it.

So forgive me for being a little confused about why these margins give Bernie Sanders such “leverage” in what we presume to be his looming negotiations with Hillary Clinton over the future of the party of which he’s not a member.

Is there precedent for the losing candidate demanding that the winning candidate prove her bona fides to his voters? I sure can’t think of any.

 

Hillary didn’t “crush” anyone, the DNC cheated Bernie. Someone should remind Daily Beast writers that Debbie Wasserman Schultz reigned from the DNC for a reason; they were never neutral. We’ve yet to see Hillary Clinton face Sanders in a neutral Democratic Primary, without debate questions being leaked to Clinton. The woman with “more of the Democratic vote” eventually spent $1.2 billion dollars losing the Electoral College to a man who was caught on tape making disgusting remarks about women. It must be tough being part of the Democratic public relations machine, knowing that every Clinton scandal resulted in a Trump presidency. Combine that with the knowledge that Bernie Sanders was cheated for a candidate who lost to Trump and we have the autopsy of an election buried with regret.

The fact that Clinton didn’t address the concerns of Bernie voters is one of the many reasons Democrats lost. In addition, Bernie Sanders would have defeated Trump because Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania haven’t voted for a GOP candidate since the 1980’s. With a united Democratic Party around a populist candidate like Bernie Sanders (if that’s possible with a Democratic Party influenced by neocons and corporate lobbyists), these states would have again voted Democrat.

Have Democrats learned? Hardly. Now Chelsea Clinton is poised to take control of the Democratic Party, as I explain here. With the Clinton dynasty one of the causes of Trump’s White House, it’s bizarre to see Democrats rally around Chelsea Clinton.

Ignoring the past means repeating the same mistakes in the future. If Democrats elect a centrist in 2020, America will get eight years of Trump. Remember during the media frenzy of the next four years all the reasons Hillary Clinton lost to Trump. Before attacking Trump, Democrats attacked Bernie Sanders. Now we have President Trump, when we could have had President Sanders. Blame Democrats, not Vladimir Putin or WikiLeaks for the DNC cheating Bernie and rallying around a candidate under FBI criminal investigation.

H. A. Goodman is the creator of CounterPropa.com and the thoughts above are inspired by his new publication.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/enjoying-president-trump-then-blame-democrats-for_us_5899769ce4b0985224db5997

 

 

 

[Disappreciate *FLUSHED* First Lady of the United States MELANIA!!!]

Melania sues Mail Online a third time for claiming she was an escort

 

Melania Trump filed her third defamation suit against the Mail Online over an August 2016 article that accused her of having once been a prostitute, arguing for the first time that it ruined her “once-in-a-lifetime opportunity” to cash in on the presidency.

”Mail Online’s conduct was extreme and outrageous in falsely making the scurrilous charge that the future First Lady of the United States worked as a prostitute,” reads the Manhattan Supreme Court suit, filed Monday by her lawyer Charles Harder, who won Hulk Hogan a $140 million verdict against Gawker in a Florida case financed by billionaire Trump supporter Peter Thiel.

”Plaintiff had the unique, once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, as an extremely famous and well-known person…to launch a broad-based commercial brand in multiple product categories, each of which could have garnered multi-million dollar business relationships for a multi-year term during which plaintiff is one of the most photographed women in the world,” the Manhattan suit says.

“These product categories would have included, among other things, apparel, accessories, shoes, jewelry, cosmetics, hair care, skin care and fragrance,” according to the $150 million filing.

“The [statements] also constitute defamation per se because they impugned on her fitness to perform her duties as First Lady of the United States,” the suit alleges.

The suit comes just three days after a Maryland judge tossed a similar claim against the Mail Online for jurisdictional reason. The suit is still pending against a local blogger who wrote a similar story.

Mrs. Trump also sued the Daily Mail newspaper, in U.K., over a version of the article which ran in print. The Mail Online’s website is headquartered in New York.

The Aug. 19, 2016 article, “Naked photoshoots, and troubling questions about visas that won’t go away: The VERY racy past of Donald Trump’s Slovenian wife” was read by millions of people, the Manhattan suit says.

The article was retracted.

It claimed that the future First Lady masqueraded as a model in New York in the 1990s, when she really worked for an escort agency that catered to wealthy men.

The story said the women carried two “composite cards”– one with measurements and agency details and another that “stated whether they prefer the older men and described their abilities in the bedroom.”

The claims are “completely false” and Mrs. Trump never worked in the “sex business,” the suit says.

“As a result of defendant’s publication of defamatory statements about plaintiff, plaintiff’s brand has lost significant value, and major business opportunities that were otherwise available to her have been lost and/or significantly impacted,” the suit says.

She is represented by Charles Harder, the same attorney who won Hulk Hogan a $140 million verdict against Gawker in a Florida case financed by billionaire Trump supporter Peter Thiel.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

 

http://nypost.com/2017/02/06/melania-trump-sues-mail-online-for-claiming-she-was-an-escort/

 

[Trump / US politics thread 🚽]

 

24 minutes ago, LSD said:

 

What for?? Are they planning to secede from the union again?? 

[Putin / Russian Politics Thread]

Kremlin to check if Fox News host who called Putin ‘killer’ apologizes by 2023

 

The remarks of Fox News host Bill O’Reilly who called Vladimir Putin “a killer” have put the news channel in an awkward situation, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said, adding that Russia is very patient and can wait till 2023 for an apology.

Fox News host Bill O’Reilly labelled Russian President Vladimir Putin “a killer” during a Sunday interview with US President Donald Trump, in which they discussed the Republican’s numerous statements on his willingness to work with Russia to deal with issues such as terrorism. 

Moscow said on Monday it expected an apology from Fox News, saying that it considers O’Reilly’s words “unacceptable and insulting.”

O’Reilly, however, dismissed the call for an apology. “I’m working on that apology but it may take a little time,” O’Reilly said late Monday. “You might want to check in with me around… 2023.”

On Tuesday, Peskov reacted to O’Reilly’s comment, saying that Russia has “a different understanding of the rules of etiquette and manners than this gentleman [O’Reilly].”

“But we are very kind and very patient. We will put a note in the calendar for the year 2023 and return to him with this question,” Peskov added.

According to Putin’s spokesman, the incident is even more “unpleasant” for Fox News Channel than for Russia.

“We are not inclined to exaggerate this or to blow this out of proportion,” he said, suggesting the Kremlin would not pursue the incident further.

“But in any case the insult that is voiced by a correspondent of a media outlet and subsequently passed over in silence by its chief editorial office characterizes these media negatively.”

https://www.rt.com/news/376557-kremlin-fox-apology-putin/

[Would you pay thousands to look like THIS...]

1 hour ago, karbatal said:

I thought the Ken dude had died?

 

It was the other Brazilian Ken-Doll who died....
 

Brazilian real-life 'Ken doll' who spent £30,000 on surgery dies after five-month battle with leukaemia 

• 20-year-old Celso Santebanes died after contracting pneumonia
• He started his transformation after winning a modelling contest aged 16 
• He charged up to £10,000 for a VIP appearance 
• Celso discovered he had cancer when fillers in his legs became infected

 

A real-life Ken doll has died after losing a five-month battle against leukaemia.

Brazilian Celso Santebanes, 20, spent £30,000 on surgery to turn himself into a human version of Barbie's boyfriend.

He started his transformation into manufacturer Mattel's iconic toy after winning a modelling contest at the age of 16.

 

 

He was catapulted to fame after being spotted by a talk show in his native Sao Paulo and began to charge up to £10,000 for a VIP appearance.

Celso, a doll enthusiast, grew up with a shelf-full of dolls and claimed that his family had always told him he looked like the doll, which inspired him to become a 'human puppet'.

He changed his last name from Borges Pereira to Santebanes, the name of his favourite character on a Mexican TV show.   

He launched his own line of Celso Dolls in Los Angeles shortly before falling ill.

Celso died at a university hospital in Uberlandia in the state of Minais Gerais on Thursday after contracting pneumonia.

 

He had been admitted to the hospital on May 26 for chemotherapy sessions.

He was buried yesterday.

Dad Celio Borges said: 'When he was starting to fulfill his dreams, he discovered his illness and his dreams were interrupted.

'He had plans but God had others.' 

 

 

 

Celso discovered he had cancer after going to hospital to treat infections caused by hydrogel fillers injected into his legs four years ago.

The former miner had four ops on his nose, chin and jaw - plus silicone implants in his chest - after friends told him he looked like a puppet.

In an interview with a Brazilian newspaper after he was discovered, he said: 'This is so magical. My life has changed. 'I feel like the whole of Brazil is supporting me.

'People are sometimes frightened by the way I look, and stop me to say how much I look like a doll.

'I do suffer a lot of prejudice. But the world is full of judgmental people, I don't care.'

But in January this year, Celso announced that he was starting a 'new cycle' in his life, and that he was 'no longer concerned with the issue of aesthetics'. 

'For me that doesn't matter,' he told the Latin Times. 'What matters now is my health and I will fight for it.' 

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3113540/Brazilian-real-life-Ken-doll-spent-30-000-surgery-dies-five-month-battle-leukaemia.html

[Trump / US politics thread 🚽]

"nonviolent color revolutions". Give me a fucking break. The ukraine turmoil was anything but "nonviolent". A huge mess captained by neonazis thugs in central Kiev which ended up in street bloodshed. There was nothing peaceful about that apocaliptic scene. This is LA Times publishing a little alternative fact.

[Trump / US politics thread 🚽]

2 minutes ago, elijah said:

But Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia have like 30ty percent Russian minority in their eastern parts. If a referendum is a valid way to secede from a country and become part of another, is it a far fetched possibility?

 

Donetsk and Lugansk also held referendums and Russia could care less about their willing to secede from Ukraine like Crimea.

Russia only supports those movements when it has a very clear strategic interest. In case of Crimea it was all about securing the Sevastopol port for its black sea fleet. The issue about the language of course gave them a huge boost, but in the end of the day it was obviously about an strategic decision.

[Trump / US politics thread 🚽]

The stupid sanctions should be lifted immediately. There is nothing worth keeping those measures. Time to move on from Obama's childish and worthless sanctions which have only damaged the world's economy.

[Trump / US politics thread 🚽]

30 minutes ago, Kim said:

No she wasn't.

Would YOU show your face in public if you voted for that Psycho?

But really, he's just dragging someone else into his argument...as usual.

Oh i see. Too bad then. Maybe when things comes down a bit here she may be back around. I enjoy reading everyone's point of view, even if i don't agree with them. This is what a board is supposed to be anyway.

[Trump / US politics thread 🚽]

9 minutes ago, Pud Whacker said:

i wish on was on some rich fuckers payroll!!!

im simply a spectator, i read, i look, i listen.  you cant see the forest from the trees. 

i understand everyone needs someone to blame and @Sloane was run out of town.

I fought bigger monsters in Hollywood.

and thats the truth. 

What? Sloane was banned? Why? 

[Trump / US politics thread 🚽]

Just now, drunkbysix said:

Why did Hilary win the popular vote then?

Because a huge part of the electorate still believed she could do better than a blunt fascist buffon like Trump. But half of America voted for him and this is proof enough of the mess that the US is at now due to the previous government mistakes. A truly divided nation in grave turmoil.

[Trump / US politics thread 🚽]

14 minutes ago, MeakMaker said:

These people always stress that they didn't vote for Trump but then again they always say negative things about Hillary or Obama. It simply doesn't make sense. They might as well voted for him if they find him without fault. 

 

It does makes sense. All of this problems were agravated (if not, actually created) by the Obama/Hillary administration. If everything was fine then Trump wouldn't be elected. He was elected precisely because of the mess caused by Obama policies. The dems never thought that their artificial arab spring would cost them the presidency years later. They are paying a huge price for instigating a sectarian general conflict in the middle east in 2011 onwards. We are in 2017 witnessing the results of their actions and Trump is the face of this reactionary movement.

[Trump / US politics thread 🚽]

49 minutes ago, elijah said:

But so is Trump USA. I fear a US-Iran war. The Iraq war would be like a walk in the park.

Yes. Trump is in for a big mistake with Iran. Iraq was an easy pick compared to a fully armed Iran backed by Russia.

US-Iran war would be Israel's ultimate wet dream.

[Europe/EU Politics Thread]

7 hours ago, elijah said:

The USA policy towards EU is mind boggling and it feels like it is not dictated by American interests.

Everything the US does is always dictated by american interests only. The US doesn't want a powerful indepedent EU to challenge the american world dominance, it only wants a submissive vassal to keep the american interests secured and it has been like this ever since the cold war with NATO. 

If the EU collapses the US would be the first to quickly adapt its policy and seal new "deals" with european nations to keep their obedience in check.

[Trump / US politics thread 🚽]

Trump: ‘Iran is playing with fire, I won't be as kind as Obama’

US President Donald Trump has tweeted that "Iran is playing with fire," and warned Tehran that he won’t be as “kind” as former President Barack Obama. His comments come after Tehran’s missile test this week.

It comes a day after the US president threatened Tehran that military options are "not off the table" in response to the missile test.

On Monday, Fox News cited US officials as saying that Iran had carried out medium-range ballistic missile tests.

That was followed on Thursday by reports from CNN, NBC News and Reuters, all quoting sources, that said Washington could roll out fresh sanctions against Iran as early as Friday.

Iran has confirmed that it tested the missile, and that the launch was "in line" with its plans.

"We will not allow foreigners to interfere in our defense affairs," Defense Minister Hossein Dehghan told Tasnim news agency on Wednesday.

In another tweet posted on Thursday, Trump wrote that "Iran was on its last legs and ready to collapse," but the US "gave it a life-line in the form of the Iran Deal: $150 billion."

In response to Trump’s tweet , Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif also took to social media, posting a statement saying that Iran is unmoved by US threats and will never initiate war.

Almost two years ago, Tehran and five world powers signed a historic deal under which Iran agreed to curb its nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief.

Tehran asserted on Wednesday that its missile tests did not involve rockets with nuclear warheads, meaning they are not covered by the deal agreed with world powers.

Zarif added that Iran is using ballistic missiles as part of its defense program. 
The $150 billion that Trump was referring to in his Tweet was apparently the amount Iran gained access to as a result of the deal, including billions of dollars in assets unfrozen in foreign banks around the globe.

With the sanctions lifted, in theory those funds would be unlocked. However, the US Treasury Department estimated back in the fall that once Tehran fulfills its obligations related to the funds, it would have about $55 billion left.

https://www.rt.com/usa/376184-trump-not-kind-iran-missile/

[Trump / US politics thread 🚽]

10 minutes ago, jaron said:

Its scary, every new day, the news are full only about Trump and his decisions.

I never heard from any president in the world, who said, this telephone conference was the worst!!!

Thats really harsh,

oh, I hope Iran will not give up and stay agains Donald !!!

 

It's even worse than that... it seems that he HANG UP THE PHONE on Australia PM's face!!!!

 

‘Worst so far’: Trump ‘hangs up’ on Australian PM after heated call, report says

 

In a tense telephone call with Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, President Donald Trump has reportedly accused Canberra of trying to export terrorists to the US, pledging to review a "dumb deal" to take in hundreds of asylum seekers.

As part of the deal agreed by Australia and the Obama administration in November, Washington gave the go-ahead to take in up to 1,250 asylum seekers to Australia held in offshore processing camps on Pacific nations Papua New Guinea and Nauru.

In return, Canberra would resettle refugees from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras.

In a tweet on Wednesday night, in which he referred to the asylum seekers as “illegal immigrants,” Trump wrote: “Do you believe it? The Obama Administration agreed to take thousands of illegal immigrants from Australia. Why? I will study this dumb deal.”

Do you believe it? The Obama Administration agreed to take thousands of illegal immigrants from Australia. Why? I will study this dumb deal!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) 2 февраля 2017 г.

Trump had described the Saturday phone call with the leader of Australia, which had been scheduled to last 60 minutes but reportedly took less than half that, as "the worst so far," the Washington Post said, citing unidentified senior US officials briefed on the call.

Trump said he was “going to get killed” politically, accusing Canberra of an attempt to export the “next Boston bombers,” the newspaper said.

According to the Australian Department of Immigration, there are 383 detainees on Nauru and 871 on Manus in northern Papua New Guinea.

In October, Amnesty International accused Australia of turning Nauru into an "open-air prison," saying that the government is subjecting asylum seekers to an “elaborate and cruel system of abuse.”

Turnbull told Trump during their phone conversation that Washington would not have to accept all of the refugees, but only to allow each through the normal vetting procedures. At that, Trump vowed to subject each refugee to “extreme vetting,” the senior US official told the newspaper, adding that the US president did not see a specific advantage America would gain by honoring the deal.

The call only lasted a quarter of an hour, ending with Trump hanging up on Turnbull after the Australian PM attempted to discuss other subjects, such as Syria, the Post reported.

Officials said that the president told the Australian PM that he had spoken with four other world leaders that day – Russian President Vladimir Putin among them – and that “this was the worst call by far.”

The US officials also told the Post that although Trump had been firm in conversations with other state leaders, including Mexico, his treatment of Turnbull stood out because of the special bond between the US and Australia, countries which fought together in wars including in Iraq and Afghanistan and shared intelligence.

Turnbull has declined to shed light on the contents of the call.

"These conversations are conducted candidly, frankly, privately. If you see reports of them, I'm not going to add to them," he told the media in Melbourne, as quoted by Reuters.

The official read-out of Trump’s conversation with Turnbull meanwhile stated that the two leaders had “emphasized the enduring strength and closeness of the US-Australia relationship that is critical for peace, stability, and prosperity in the Asia-Pacific region and globally.”

Before Washington appeared to backtrack on the resettlement deal, Trump’s press secretary, Sean Spicer, said the US would take 1,250 people from the detention centers.

“There will be extreme vetting applied to all of them,” the White House spokesman said on Tuesday. “That is part and parcel of the deal that was made. And it was made by the Obama administration with the full backing of the United States government,” he added.

Last week Trump caused an uproar when he signed an executive order banning citizens of Syria, Iraq, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, Yemen and Iran from entering the US for 90 days.

Rejecting allegations that the step amounted to a “Muslim ban,” Trump said it will only be in place until new security policies are implemented. “To be clear, this is not a Muslim ban, as the media is falsely reporting. This is not about religion – this is about terror and keeping our country safe,” Trump said in a statement on Sunday, adding that there are more than “40 different countries worldwide that are majority Muslim that are not affected by this order.”

“My policy is similar to what President Obama did in 2011 when he banned visas for refugees from Iraq for six months. The seven countries named in the Executive Order are the same countries previously identified by the Obama administration as sources of terror,” he noted.

 

https://www.rt.com/usa/376050-trump-australia-call-refugees/

[Trump / US politics thread 🚽]

Iran to dump the US dollar in response to Trump's travel ban

 

Tehran plans to ditch the use of the American currency in financial reporting after US President Donald Trump issued a travel ban on seven countries, including Iran.

According to the local news agency PressTV, the Central Bank of Iran is seeking to replace the dollar with a new common foreign currency or use a basket of currencies in all official financial and foreign exchange reports.

The governor Valiollah Seif said it would come into force in the new financial year starting March 21, 2017.

The agency quotes Seif recommending using currencies with a “high degree of stability.”

The decision comes after President Trump temporarily banned citizens of Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen from entering the US.

After Trump’s election, the Iranian rial saw record lows against the dollar. On December 27 it plunged to its all-time low of 41,600 rials to the dollar.

The head of the central bank said the US did not have a significant role in Iranian trade and could be replaced with currencies of Iran’s key partners like the European Union, China, and the United Arab Emirates.

Tehran has agreements with Russia, Turkey, Azerbaijan and Iraq to use national currencies in the local trade.

Iran gets oil revenues in US dollars, and exchanging $41 billion for other currencies has significant risk, analysts have warned.

The local business newspaper Donya-ye Eqtesad responded that Iran uses dollars only in official reporting, and the US currency has largely been replaced with other currencies.

 

https://www.rt.com/business/375789-iran-dollar-trump-ban/

[Trump / US politics thread 🚽]

Just now, karbatal said:

Oh really? 

*goes and open a new thread to express indignation*

 

yes really! there is no big deal about that dwarf anyway!

 

[Trump / US politics thread 🚽]

2 minutes ago, karbatal said:

Pud, i think you are having some midlife crisis or something. You are much more inteligent than that. As Kim said, there are plenty of other threads to expess all opinions, and your opinions here in this thread, by the way, haven't been deleted. What is absurd is to open more and more threads to say the same. Or would it be freedom of speech to delete a second Beyonce thread? What if I suddenly i'm very angry because i think Kylie is not a dwarf and open a thread to say "Kylie is the most wonderful person and is no a midget at all?". It would be deleted. 

 

But Kylie is a midget...

[Trump / US politics thread 🚽]

4 hours ago, jazzyjan said:

Very true.   Also, proving yet again how unfit as a person to be president he is,  fancy tweeting about a deal to the public.  A deal with a country/friend/ally that has been loyal to the USA for years.   Where is the respect ?   He does not know how to show any restraint.  

Donald Trump slams 'dumb' refugee deal with Australia after 'worst' phone call

 

US President Donald Trump has hit out at what he says is a "dumb deal" to take "illegal immigrants" from Australia.

The deal to take refugees from Manus Island and Nauru was brokered between the Federal Government and the US in the closing weeks of the Obama administration.

Mr Trump took to Twitter this afternoon to question the deal, which has been the subject of days of mixed messages from the White House

 

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump  7h7 hours ago

More

Do you believe it? The Obama Administration agreed to take thousands of illegal immigrants from Australia. Why? I will study this dumb deal!

 

The President's tweet — which incorrectly labels refugees "illegal immigrants" and cites "thousands" of people instead of 1,250 — came just hours after details of his conversation with Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, which Mr Trump reportedly described as "the worst by far", were published by the Washington Post.

Mr Trump reportedly accused the Prime Minister of seeking to export the "next Boston bombers" to the US, and complained that the deal was going to kill him politically.

Mr Turnbull later told Melbourne radio station 3AW that the resettlement deal entered into with the Obama administration "wasn't a commitment to take everybody, sight unseen".

"It was always premised on their very rigorous processing," he said.

 

 

 

[Trump / US politics thread 🚽]

2 hours ago, Hector said:

 

"Call it what you want!"

[Trump / US politics thread 🚽]

17 minutes ago, karbatal said:

Well, to be fair i see the country (from afar) more united now than one month ago.

It looks pretty much divided for me...

 

Exclusive: A third of Americans think Trump's travel ban will make them safer

Imposing a temporary travel ban on citizens from seven Muslim countries, President Donald Trump said the move would help protect the United States from terrorism. But less than one-third of Americans believe the move makes them "more safe," according to a Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll released on Tuesday.

The Jan. 30-31 poll found roughly one in two Americans backed the ban, which also suspends admission of all refugees for 120 days, although there were sharp divisions along party lines.

Trump has pushed back against critics who say the travel ban targets Muslims. He says the "extreme vetting" is necessary to protect the country and its borders.

"This is not about religion," Trump said in a statement after announcing the travel ban on Friday. "This is about terror and keeping our country safe."

In the Reuters/Ipsos poll some 31 percent of people said the ban made them feel "more safe," while 26 percent said it made them feel "less safe." Another 33 percent said it would not make any difference and the rest said they don't know.

Trump's executive order blocked citizens from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen and placed an indefinite ban on Syrian refugees.

Some Republican lawmakers criticized Trump's order and said it could backfire by giving terrorist organizations a new recruitment message.

"This executive order sends a signal, intended or not, that America does not want Muslims coming into our country," senators John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said in a joint statement.

The Reuters/Ipsos poll found that 49 percent of Americans agreed with the order and 41 percent disagreed. Some 53 percent of Democrats said they "strongly disagree" with Trump's action while 51 percent of Republicans said they "strongly agree."

Democrats were more than three times as likely as Republicans to say that the "U.S. should continue to take in immigrants and refugees," and Republicans were more than three times as likely as Democrats to agree that "banning people from Muslim countries is necessary to prevent terrorism."

Cheryl Hoffman, 46, of Sumerduck, Virginia said she was thrilled that Trump ordered the ban.

"I understand that the country was founded on immigrants," said Hoffman, who participated in the poll. "Please, I get that. But I’m worried that refugees are coming in and being supported by my tax dollars."

Another poll respondent, Veronica Buetel, 57, of Green, Ohio felt just the opposite: "Yes, we do live in scary times, but there are other, better ways to root out terrorism."

Westy Egmont, director of the Immigrant Integration Lab at Boston College, said Americans have grown increasingly hostile toward refugees and immigrants as the influx has shifted from Eastern Europeans to people from countries like Iraq, Somalia and Afghanistan.

"The rise of those numbers, as relatively small as they are, have gathered just enough attention to set off a small reaction from people who are genuinely uncomfortable with the diversity around them," Egmont said.

Most Americans, however, don't think the country should show a preference for Christian refugees, as Trump has suggested. Some 56 percent, including 72 percent of Democrats and 45 percent of Republicans, disagreed that the country should "welcome Christian refugees, but not Muslim ones."

On Tuesday, the Trump administration sought to clarify that citizens of U.S. ally Israel who were born in Arab countries would be allowed into the United States.

The Reuters/Ipsos poll was conducted online in English in all 50 states. It gathered poll responses from 1,201 people including 453 Democrats and 478 Republicans. It has a credibility interval, a measure of accuracy, of 3 percentage points for the entire sample and 5 percentage points for the Democrats and the Republicans.

(Reporting by Chris Kahn, editing by Ross Colvin)

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-immigration-poll-exclusive-idUSKBN15F2MG

 

 

 

More Americans approve of Trump’s travel ban than disapprove – poll

Despite nationwide protests and several major Republican figures speaking out against President Trump’s controversial travel ban, a new poll has revealed that more Americans actually support the ban than oppose it.

A Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll released on Tuesday found that 49 percent of Americans approved of the executive order to ban citizens from seven mostly Muslim countries from entering the US. Forty-one percent disapproved.

Some 53 percent of Democrats said they “strongly disagree” with the decision. They were also more than three times as likely as Republicans to say that the US “should continue to take in immigrants and refugees.”

Meanwhile, 51 percent of Republicans said they “strongly agree” with the ban, and were more than three times as likely to agree that “banning people from Muslim countries is necessary to prevent terrorism.”

Thirty-one percent of respondents said the ban made them feel safer, compared to 26 percent who said it made them feel less safe. Forty-three percent said they “didn’t know.”

Republicans were more likely to say the ban made them feel safer, at 58 percent, while only 10 percent of Democrats felt the same.

When asked whether the US should welcome Christian refugees, but not Muslim ones, 72 percent of Democrats disagreed, compared to 45 percent of Republicans.

And finally, 68 percent of Republicans agreed that the travel ban is setting a “good example” of how to confront terrorism, while 70 percent of Democrats said it’s a bad example.

The poll comes amid worldwide protests of Trump’s executive order, which suspends the admission of citizens from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen for 120 days.

UN human rights experts said on Wednesday that the ban contravenes international law and could have devastating effects for those at risk of facing inhumane treatment in their home countries.

"Such an order is clearly discriminatory based on one’s nationality and leads to increased stigmatization of Muslim communities," the experts said in a statement, as quoted by Reuters.

"Recent US policy on immigration also risks people being returned, without proper individual assessments and asylum procedures, to places in which they risk being subjected to torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, in direct contravention of international humanitarian and human rights laws which uphold the principle of non-refoulement," they added.

The ban has also been widely criticized by Democrats, as well as several Republicans, including senators John McCain (AZ) and Lindsey Graham (SC).

“This executive order sends a signal, intended or not, that America does not want Muslims coming into our country,” the senators said in a joint statement.

Meanwhile, Trump has denied allegations that the ban targets Muslims because of their faith, but is rather intended to keep people out of the US from countries afflicted by terrorism who could pose a threat.

“This is not about religion,” Trump said in a Friday statement. “This is about terror and keeping our country safe.”

The Reuters/Ispos poll, which was conducted online on January 30-31, surveyed 1,201 people from all 50 states, including 453 Democrats and 478 Republicans. It has a margin of error of three percentage points for the entire sample and five percentage points for Democrats and Republicans.

https://www.rt.com/usa/375923-trump-travel-ban-poll/