The False Friend Dilemma: Why Trump Has Few Options In Dealing With Omarosa

Below is my column in the Hill newspaper on the continuing controversy surrounding the release of the tell-all book by Omarosa Manigault Newman.  Manigault Newman has continued her release of secret tapes featuring the President and his staff.  Her latest tape captures a private conservation with Lara Trump who offers Manigault Newman a $15,000 a month job with the Trump campaign on the promise that she will “stay positive.”  Trump refers to the rumor that Manigault Newman has dirt of Trump as she offered a job with few apparent duties or expectations other than “staying positive.”  Of course, many of us are still wondering what Manigault Newman did in the White House.  Nevertheless, the taping shows the utter lack of loyalty or honestly by Manigault Newman in dealing with friends and coworkers. 

The Trump campaign has now filed a civil action, which is discussed as a possibility in the column below.  The potential for criminal liability however is limited in this case.

Here is the column:

The disclosure that former White House aide Omarosa Manigault Newman secretly taped President Trump and others has produced legitimate outrage. These tapes include at least one conversation with chief of staff John Kelly in the Situation Room, the White House inner sanctum where the most classified matters are discussed. Various people have called for criminal prosecution or other measures against Manigault Newman. The dilemma of the “false friends” is not new, however, and the legal options for the White House are more limited than one might think.

The problem of false friends and secret recordings have been a longstanding element of our criminal jurisprudence. The idea that nothing protects us from false friends goes back to early English law and “eavesdropping” cases. In 1952, in a case called On Lee v. United States, the Supreme Court noted that the use of “false friends, or any of the other betrayals, which are ‘dirty business’ may raise serious questions of credibility” but do not raise serious problems under the Constitution.

Thus, a secret taping of a conversation is not itself illegal, absent other elements. One element would be if any of the conversations are deemed classified. Much of what a president discusses, particularly in places like the Situation Room, are considered classified. The secret recording or removal of classified information can be a crime.

The legal exposure of Manigault Newman follows the old real estate rule of location, location, location. It depends greatly on where she made her secret tapings. The District of Columbia is a “one party” consent jurisdiction, so it is not illegal as long as one party, in this case Manigault Newman, was a party to the conversation. It is the same law protecting former Trump counsel, Michael Cohen, who taped his own client secretly in New York, another “one party” state, and released one of those tapes in an apparent bid to attract Robert Mueller with a possible plea bargain.

Ironically, it also is the law that protected Trump after he reportedly told people he may have taped their conversations in New York. The situation becomes more dicey for Manigault Newman if she taped conversations at Mar-a-Lago, since Florida is a “two party” consent state. Absent the crossing of state lines into a two party consent jurisdiction, her actions were certainly reckless and reprehensible but probably legal.

This does not mean other sanctions cannot be applied. If she had security clearance, it should be rescinded, and she should be ineligible to hold one, or any position of trust for that matter, again. The Situation Room is a “sensitive compartmented information facility” where phones are barred for obvious security reasons. Not only could such devices be used to record or copy classified material, they could be used by foreign intelligence services as surveillance devices without the knowledge of people like Manigault Newman. Hers was a serious security breach, committed with awareness of the potential costs to the nation.

The Trump White House has used nondisclosure forms for employees, but these are civil matters, and there is considerable question whether they could be enforced. The forms state that violators could be penalized as much as $10 million for unauthorized disclosure of “confidential” information, defined as “all nonpublic information I learn of or gain access to in the course of my official duties in the service of the United States Government on White House staff.” However, such agreements are routinely violated. Take, for example, former FBI director James Comey. He signed such nondisclosure forms but has not hesitated to disclose information or to leak FBI memos to the media after being fired.

That brings us back to the problem of false friends. One must be careful whom is chosen as confidantes. Trump has chosen exceptionally poorly, with an array of characters ranging from Manigault Newman to Michael Cohen to Paul Manafort to a number of alleged mistresses. Ironically, his penchant for such associations has one curious advantage. These people have so little credibility that they are virtually useless as witnesses in investigations without ironclad corroboration from third parties.

In the case of On Lee v. United States, Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter was appalled by how false friends could be effectively rewarded under the law for their deceptions and betrayals. He objected that the “contrast between morality professed by society and immorality practiced on its behalf makes for contempt of law. Respect for law cannot be turned off and on as though it were a hot water faucet.” Yet, in both criminal and noncriminal contexts, there are those who have few qualms about turning that moral faucet off and on as suits their interests.

After an embarrassing stint on a celebrity edition “Big Brother” where she gave a breathless account of being “haunted” by her time in the White House, Manigault Newman has emerged as the latest made for television creature of convenience. Indeed, reality shows are built on the false friend dilemma because people love betrayals. But the most interesting dynamic in this story is the coverage. In this case, Trump is clearly a victim.

What Manigault Newman did was wrong, but it is hard for many to accept that Trump not only needs but deserves a level of confidentiality and trust in his communications. Indeed, the White House has pushed back on efforts by Congress and the special counsel to gain more information on its internal discussions. Manigault Newman is the poster child for those who want the courts to curtail such disclosures. Her exposure of confidential settings and communications is likely to be referenced in the litigation as the new reality for presidents absent stronger protections.

However, Manigault Newman is less of a legal problem than a political one for Trump. She is entertainment, which is precisely why a reality television star turned president takes her so seriously. This week, Trump tweetedthat while he knows it is “not presidential” to take on a “lowlife like Omarosa” and would rather not be doing so, “this is a modern day form of communication and I know the Fake News Media will be working overtime to make even Wacky Omarosa look legitimate as possible. Sorry!”

It is certainly not presidential. It is part of the sad reality that television shows, from “Big Brother” to “The Apprentice” to “The Kardashians,” have created. Manigault Newman is just another oddity of modern Americana. She is the personification of a culture in freefall where Kim Kardashian is paraded into the Oval Office on matters of criminal justice and lawyers like Michael Cohen release gotcha tapes on primetime shows.

The problem is not the lack of criminal penalties but the lack of shame in our society. Friendships and honor used to be controlling concepts before the death of shame. Manigault Newman dwells within a new shrine to celebrity status where shame is but a quaint and quixotic relic of the past.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley.

251 thoughts on “The False Friend Dilemma: Why Trump Has Few Options In Dealing With Omarosa”

  1. newsflash, someone is finally making a wise suggestion to decriminalize sex work…..
    unfortunately, it’s a “democratic socialist” which means it will likely fail and have no traction post election

    still a bell weather.,,, maybe the main stream parties will notice

    https://theintercept.com/2018/08/17/julia-salazar-sex-workers-rights/

    JULIA SALAZAR, A candidate for the New York state Senate, is doing what few Democratic politicians have done before: taking sex workers’ rights seriously. The 27-year-old democratic socialist, who is shaping her policy by consulting the sex work community, is one of the first candidates to definitively support those workers, including by proposing concrete steps toward decriminalization.

    Sex work — which refers to the willing exchange of money or goods for sexual labor, including escorts, prostitutes, pornography actors, and phone sex operators — intersects with labor, gender, immigration, race, LGBTQ, and criminal justice issues. It is often conflated with sex trafficking, which involves forcing someone into sex work through violence or other means, and as a result, nearly all mainstream political movements have failed to address the concerns of the sex work community. Salazar, who is challenging eight-term incumbent Democratic state Sen. Martin Dilan, has centered her campaign around affordable housing and other policy positions championed by the insurgent left. But her plan to defend sex workers’ rights has energized a community that has been understandably skeptical of electoral politics.

    One hundred sex workers and their allies have signed up to attend a canvassing event in the Brooklyn district for Salazar’s campaign on Sunday, ahead of the September 13 primary. This follows an event earlier this month, when upward of 120 sex workers and activists hosted a pizza party for Salazar to discuss labor rights and decriminalization.

    ….

    “Sex workers are workers and they deserve to be treated with dignity, including protections and decent working conditions, rather than the abuse and criminalization that they currently face,” Salazar told The Intercept in a statement. “I’m dedicated to defending workers’ rights, reforming our criminal justice system and ending exploitation, and we know that criminalization puts everyone in sex work at risk rather than protecting them.”

    Salazar’s platform outlines steps toward decriminalization that include an end to raids on massage parlors; working with district attorneys to stop charging sex workers with crimes; and creating a network of optional social services to address workers’ needs, such as housing, child care, syringe access, and job training. Her platform would also make it easier for sex workers with criminal records to access housing and jobs, along with repealing the exemption for sex workers under New York’s rape shield law.

    Lola Balcon, a community organizer for sex workers’ rights who has been working with the campaign, said Salazar is “so far ahead of everybody else” when it comes to understanding the scope of the sex workers’ rights movement, and why it concerns society’s most vulnerable. “This is an issue that should be talked about in every single race. And so to be the fourth or fifth person talking about it is incredible,” she added.

    There are 14 prostitution-related offenses in New York penal code alone, and they disproportionately impact women of color. Salazar is echoing the demands of sex work advocates, who have prioritized the repeal of a 1970s-era statute that prohibits “loitering for the purposes of prostitution.” Nearly 70 percent of defendants facing prostitution charges in the Brooklyn trafficking courts are black women, while 94 percent of those arrested on loitering charges are black women, according to a 2014 report by the Red Umbrella Project.

    Prostitution arrests at massage parlors, where workers are predominantly immigrants, are another point of focus for activists. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has been cracking down on massage parlors around the country, and some of the prostitution arrests have resulted in deportation. Between 2012 and 2016, massage parlor raid arrests in New York increased 2,700 percent, going from 38 people up to 649. “It’s pretty much an ICE machine,” Balcon said, adding that the agency has also used prostitution diversion courts to track down immigrant women it hopes to deport.

    SEX WORKERS ARE emerging as a force in electoral politics, outside the unprecedented energy for Salazar’s campaign, because of the growing political threat against their industry. In April, Congress nearly unanimously passed legislation collectively known as SESTA-FOSTA, which purports to curb online sex trafficking — a cause few people would vote against — by holding online platforms legally liable for any content found to “knowingly assist, facilitate, or support sex trafficking.” (FOSTA is short for the Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act, and SESTA for the Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act.) In effect, the legislation has hurt sex workers’ ability to work online, threatening their safety and livelihood.

    Sex workers use online platforms to access clients and share safety tips, and as a whisper network to warn each other of individuals who have been deemed unsafe. If a sex worker encounters a violent or suspicious client, sharing information with others in the community could prevent violence and potentially save lives.

    The bill’s broad implications have had a chilling effect on internet speech, as many online platforms changed their terms of service or banned sexualized content altogether following its passage. Because platforms are not dealing with the nuances of sexual language, as computers can’t distinguish between community discussion and a post promoting trafficking with complete accuracy, the political advocacy of sex workers and trafficking victims is stifled as well. Under SESTA-FOSTA, a number of platforms have already shut down, including Craigslist personals and Backpage.com. The impact of the legislation hasn’t yet been empirically measured, but anecdotally, sex workers say more community members are facing violence, rape, and arrest.

    Sens. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and Rand Paul, R-Ky., were the only members of the upper chamber to vote against SESTA, and they did so over internet freedom concerns, not because of the bill’s potential to harm sex workers. Sens. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., despite having devoted their political careers to addressing economic inequality, voted in favor of the legislation even though it further criminalizes a form of labor.

    Sex work is another arena in which insurgent candidates are starting to buck mainstream political movements. Suraj Patel, a candidate who lost his congressional primary challenge to New York Democratic Rep. Carolyn Maloney in June, was one of the few critics of SESTA-FOSTA. He also held the first known town hall in U.S. history to include sex workers and discuss their issues, attracting a crowd of hundreds. Amy Vilela, a progressive candidate who ran in Nevada’s 4th Congressional District, similarly advocated for decriminalization to empower those working in the sex industry before losing her primary election. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the Democratic nominee in New York’s 14th Congressional District, was also one of the early critics of SESTA-FOSTA. Many sex workers realize that they need more allies in the halls of power, though; in June, dozens of sex workers from across the country converged in Capitol Hill for a first-ever lobbying day.

    The sex workers’ rights movement was re-energized by the passage of SESTA-FOSTA, and the increased prevalence of criminal justice reform as a critical election issue has made it easier for politicians to talk about. But Balcon also attributes the shift to the rise of the Democratic Socialists of America. DSA, so far, has been the only major organization on the left to stand with sex workers and absorb the labor struggle into their own. Salazar, herself a DSA member, has said she “unequivocally and unapologetically” considers sex work to be real work.

    Join Our Newsletter
    Original reporting. Fearless journalism. Delivered to you.
    I’m in
    Sex work is often conflated with sex trafficking, a false comparison that stems from a refusal to recognize sex work as a labor issue, a longstanding divide among feminists. Anti-sex work feminists often argue “no little girl grows up wanting to be a prostitute.” But does any little girl grow up wanting to work at an Amazon warehouse, either?

    “Literally no one cares more about stopping and preventing trafficking than sex workers because sex workers are most vulnerable to it,” Balcon said. “So if you’re not going to listen to the people who are the experts on preventing that in their own communities, then you don’t actually care about trafficking.”

    Salazar, for her part, recognizes the need to combat sex trafficking and exploitation in the sex industry, and she wants to do so by tackling the issues that impact all workers. Her campaign platform proposes targeting root causes of trafficking, “through economic opportunity, criminal justice, immigration reform, and the provision of housing and social services.”

    1. This is straight Libertarian philosophy, so I support her efforts to decriminalize sex work. The Europeans have made it work, so of course the domestic know-nothing mouth-breathers will start hyperventilating about “how we do it in frog-swaller BFE so we don’t need no Euro BS” or some such nonsense.

      to kurtzie’s post

      1. Thank you, Allan. At least that made it through. So my question is how do you get this 2-3 times business?

        1. 2-3 times the rate of fall in the U 6. Take the last year of Obama and compare to the first year of Trump. Take Jan to Nov. 2017 compare to 2018. (If you wish to use the whole year go ahead but Trump won in November which confuses issues.)
          2016 1st ten months: 9.9 9.7 9.8 9.7 9.7 9.6 9.7 9.7 9.7 9.5 Obama
          2017 1st ten months: 9.4 9.2 8.9 8.6 8.4 8.6 8.6 8.6 8.3 7.9 Trump

          Draw a graph and take a look or do subtraction. Go for a longer time frame and draw the graph. Remember, the closer one gets to theoretical full employment the rate of fall decreases. Look at how long it took to get near to normal employment figures. That should have happened faster.

          Forget about who is President or what party is in control. Forget about politics. Think only about fact and what you think is good (skip the pundits). Then make YOUR judgment call as to what is good and what is bad. I don’t judge these things based upon party or who the President is. I judge them based on what I think is best for the US. You can do the same.

          1. Allan, your analysis is quackery if you think Trump ‘improved’ our economic outlook. Last year’s tax cut was a sugar rush we can scarcely afford.

            The following is George Will’s column for today’s Washington Post. Will is, of course, a well-established conservative and ‘not’ an Obama defender.

            “Economists debate, inconclusively, this question: Do economic expansions die of old age (the current one began in June 2009), or are they slain by big events or bad policies? What is known is that all expansions end. God, a wit has warned, is going to come down and pull civilization over for speeding. When He, or something, decides that today’s expansion, currently in its 111th month (approaching twice the 58-month average length of post-1945 expansions), has gone on long enough, the contraction probably will begin with the annual budget deficit exceeding $1 trillion.

            The president’s Office of Management and Budget — not that there really is a meaningful budget getting actual management — projects that the deficit for fiscal 2019, which begins in six weeks, will be $1.085 trillion. This is while the economy is, according to the economic historian in the Oval Office, “as good as it’s ever been, ever.”

            Leavening administration euphoria with facts, Yale University’s Robert J. Shiller, writing in the New York Times, notes that since quarterly gross domestic product enumeration began in 1947, there have been 101 quarters with growth at least equal to the 4.1 percent of this year’s second quarter. The fastest — 13.4 percent — was 1950’s fourth quarter, perhaps produced largely by bad news: The Cold War was on, the Korean War had begun in June, and fear of the atomic bomb was rising (New York City installed its first air-raid siren in October), as was (consequently) a home-building boom outside cities and “scare buying” of products that might become scarce during World War III. Today, Shiller says, “it seems likely that people in many countries may be accelerating their purchases — of soybeans, steel and many other commodities — fearing future government intervention in the form of a trade war.” And fearing the probable: higher interest rates”.

            Edited from: “Another Economic Collapse Is Coming”

            Today’s WASHINGTON POST

            1. “Allan, your analysis is quackery”

              Peter Shill, you are an empty head. I agree with the point Will is making on the deficit. The problem with your analysis is the President doesn’t control spending. Congress does. I think the President is also upset at the deficit but he was more upset that when he needed some warships off the Korean coast he had to cannibalize from other ships to make that possible. He said he won’t permit such a budget again and did strengthen the military so I wait for the next bill. In the meantime, the tax cut and decrease in regulations are permitting higher tax revenues. (George Will and other no-Trumpers have turned out to be wrong about a lot of things regarding Trump.)

              Will the Democrats and Republicans get together to reduce spending? I don’t know. Neither party is doing its job. As far as ‘collapses’ of the economy, one has to recognize that our economic growth is cyclical. The US government spends far too much money and exerts far too much power. That needs to be rectified.

              1. OK, I see you can show rate of change increases. But I don’t think this is significant. Rates will change as the economy improves, and as it shrinks. As for wanting to reduce the deficit, you don’t appear to be doing that by throwing yourself a $92 million parade, or by launching an astronomical Space Force, or by shoveling money to Southwest Key and other detention center operators. And, of course, by giving tax breaks to corporations to use for buybacks.

                1. “I see you can show rate of change increases. But I don’t think this is significant. Rates will change as the economy improves, and as it shrinks.”

                  Hollywood, that is why you look at these indices. Everything else being equal a faster-growing GDP is better than a slower growing economy; A quicker drop towards full employment is better than a slower drop. Do you deny this? Trump represents faster growth and a more rapid fall in the unemployment rate. Obama represents the opposite.

                  On what basis do you say “I don’t think this is significant”? That is key. Facts and logical rationals standing behind one’s opinion. Think about it. If you can’t come up with such rationals then you are either wrong or lack knowledge. Both are OK if your attempt is honest.

                  I think Obama could have been a much better President if everyone had been more honest about his performance. After the main part of the recession was over, the idea was to grow GDP and reduce unemployment. One has to look at his programs to see if they actually accomplished those goals. Did they? Answer honestly and with thought.

                  I am not enthusiastic about a lot of expenditures but in an almost $20 Trillion dollar economy you are picking out peanuts. The Space Agency has a rational because there is a good chance that in the next world war, should there be one, space will be an important military consideration. To stay safe we have to stay ahead in technology. I don’t want to deal with the rest of your list because they represent a list where each item needs to be carefully defined and opinions might vary even among those on the same side of the aisle. It is more productive to start with the basics and work one’s way from there.

                  Go ahead and try and think about these things in an apolitical way. You will benefit greatly.

                  1. The graph above is the same one you posted at another time. When questioned on the graph you had no answers then because you just post what you think looks good even though you don’t know anything about what you are posting

                1. If one wishes to be dumb one can hand pick any data that suits their preference and make a dumb case for anything stupid that they might believe. One has to look at the entire economy. By the way who is the end person that pays corporate taxes? The consumer and in some cases those that lose their jobs.

                  1. If tax cuts bring in more revenue, then cutting taxes would be a no-brainer every time. But obviously that math isn’t sustainable.

                  2. One has to look at the entire economy. By the way who is the end person that pays corporate taxes?

                    They’re apportioned between the households of ownership, employees, and consumers.

    1. Here is the posting you replied to:


      When one hits bottom one can only go up. We hit bottom and Obama was responsible for the bottom continuing to fall. That is a neat trick done by an ideological idiot. Once the Obama caused bottom was reached there had to be a rapid increase in the parameters generally under discussion, however as normals are reached one can reassess how a President is doing at that time. Obama was doing terribly. It looked like his economic plans would leave America in a worse position than it had been for decades. Trump came along and reversed that stagnation. Will it continue? No one can predict the future but the educated guess is that Trump’s economy will do better than an Obama economy would have done.

      I’ll provide an example I have provided over and over again. The U6 unemployment rate under Obama was decreasing but that decrease was slowing down, partly because the tendency is for its rate to slow down as employment improves and partly because of Obama’s economic policies. When Trump came into office the rate of decline decreased 2-3 times faster than under Obama when the natural decline should have been slower. The reason the U6 declined faster was due to economic policy.

      If you wish Hollywood we can discuss other economic policies and dissect them in a similar fashion. That is your choice. I am not always in agreement with Trump and I wasn’t always in disagreement with Obama. I consider myself a conservative/ libertarian or a classical liberal. I am a strong believer in the rights of man, but I am also pragmatic enough to recognize that a man alone is not as strong as a country together. I hate communism and socialism which is supposed to lead to communism. If you need a reason you can read books written by people like Bastiat, Milton Friedman or Hayek. Alternatively, you can view what happens when the rights of man are forgotten such as happened under Stalin, Mao, Hitler etc. I include Hitler because he was the head of the National SOCIALIST German Workers’ Party. [Note: It shouldn’t have to be said that people that have my type of belief are not racists. An individual’s race is not an issue and one doesn’t want to utilize race to promote tribalism or loyalty to a political party. That type of race-baiting IMO is racist.]”

        1. I didn’t bother with the article, only with your question. Corruption is bad. The bigger a government gets the more open it is to corruption. We should all be fighting against corruption in an apolitical fashion. I think you should lend your support to whoever is leading the nation and let them know you will support them in an apolitical campaign against corruption. One way of reducing corruption is to reduce the size of governments.

          Let’s move this to a more local level. The NYC Council is trying to negatively affect Uber and other app type cabs to protect the medallion owners. It doesn’t benefit the cab drivers, it makes it more difficult for people to get home to their families, so why are they doing this? Blatant corruption.

          How does one protect the individual? Free speech, individual rights and individual control over one’s property. Why should NYC make working people wait in the rain and spend more of their money to protect the very rich medallion owners? Congress, both sides, first protects itself, its livelihood and its status. In its spare time, it runs the nation poorly.

          1. The bigger a government gets the more open it is to corruption

            No, the more discretionary power generating politically-determined incomes, the more corruption.

            1. DSS, you are nitpicking and your response is incorporated in big government. Not only that but rent seekers develop as government expands. I don’t find your answer acceptable.

        2. Hollywood, I dealt with your question regarding the U6 along with the GDP. You then provided the legitimate question of corruption. Excellent question but it should lead somewhere. Presently it doesn’t seem we are seeing any more corruption in the financial area then we have been seeing to date. In fact we might be seeing less. So far GDP up, unemployment down, reduction in corruption a maybe but reducing the size of government is a great way to reduce corruption.

          1. Hollywood, it seems you recognized what I was talking about when dealing with the U6. I think you can see the same thing with the GDP. You then mentioned corruption and I provided a point that I think is non political “reducing the size of government is a great way to reduce corruption.” I was hoping you would comment on that as well.

  2. “The False FBI/DOJ/Intel “Deep State” “Swamp” Dilemma:

    Why Trump Has Few Options in Dealing With the Obama Coup D’etat –

    Annihilation Being the Singular Alternative”
    ______________________________________________________________________________________________

    “…VERY CONCERNED ABOUT COMEY’S FIRING, AFRAID THEY WILL BE EXPOSED.”

    – Bruce Ohr’s notes on Christopher Steele
    ________________________________

    “In one of Bruce Ohr’s handwritten notes listed as “Law enforcement Sensitive” from May 10, 2017, he writes “Call with Chris,”

    referencing Steele. He notes that Steele is “very concerned about Comey’s firing, afraid they will be exposed.”

    – Sara Carter

    1. George, The American people are going to needed the names & addresses for all these creeps.

      Reading/viewing they, (Fake News/Dems/Neocon Commie Nazi types), look like cornered rats with nothing left but complete voting fraud/rigging & Violence.

      One date I saw was they go ugly after 9/11/18? Don’t know well see.

      “Ellis made the comments after a coalition of news organizations — including The Washington Post, The New York Times, the Associated Press, CNN, NBC, Politico and BuzzFeed — requested the names and addresses of jurors seated for Manafort’s case. (RELATED: News Outlets Ask Manafort Judge To Release Jurors Names, Addresses)

      “There is no reason to believe that extraordinary circumstances exist that would justify keeping jurors’ names sealed — particularly after they have rendered their verdict,” their motion reads.

      But Ellis disagreed, and rejected the motion for fear the jurors would be subject to the same harassment he has received. ….:

      http://dailycaller.com/2018/08/17/manafort-judge-threatened/

  3. Turley says: “The problem is not the lack of criminal penalties but the lack of shame in our society. Friendships and honor used to be controlling concepts before the death of shame. Manigault Newman dwells within a new shrine to celebrity status where shame is but a quaint and quixotic relic of the past.”

    Are you kidding me? LACK OF SHAME? That should be emblazoned on Trump’s tombstone. Honor? WTF are you talking about? Trump is the most shameless, arrogant narcissist in history. Add on that he’s a racist, misogynist and xenophobe, too. He insulted the Shahs, a gold star family, and John McCain, a war hero. HONOR? Trump is not an honorable person. Poll after poll proves that Americans know this.

    Jon speaks of “false friends”. Trump is not friend material. He has no idea what friendship, in the altruistic sense, is. He is not trustworthy and those who deal with him know this, and also know they must take steps to protect themselves from the feces storm that will eventually come their way when they no longer have utility, but could be a threat because of what they know about him. He plays and uses people all the time, and when one of them plays and uses him back, well, they’re a “false friend”.

    Jon claims that Trump is a “victim”. Victim of what? Someone who beat him at his own game? Someone who took a page from his playbook about dribbling out sensational stories just to keep attention on them? She played him well, and that’s what he’s really upset about. That, and whatever other dirt she has on him. We can only imagine, but based on the degree of outrage, it’s probably juicy.

    Omarosa didn’t call Trump any names, but he called her a few. She offered her opinion that he’s in mental decline. She’s far from alone in making this observation. She taped conversations, in the Situation Room, but the conversations had nothing to do with any national security matter. Kellys firing of her and Trump’s feigned (or not) claim of lack of knowledge are not confidential matters. She has broken no law, but was smart enough to take out insurance for the future. So did Cohen. The rest of the Trump syncophants: are you paying attention? He’ll turn on you like the dog he is someday, and unless you want to go down as someone evil, keep a phone with you at all times and turn on the audio recording.

      1. Omarosa was a Trump sycophant. Trump is a typical rich jerk who attracts such people and suffers them. And like the usual rich jerk they come back to bite him, once he tosses them aside. However……. He is different in that he has esteemed to the highest office in the land, and is now serving the People. Hail to the Chief!

      1. that would be tens of thousands of people. have you taken a plebiscite of all the people who have worked for a billionaire? i think not. maybe you can name 100 but that will leave again maybe tens of thousands. literally. don’t be so smug it makes you stink like nuoc maam instead of fresh fish

        1. The man is shameless enough to tweet that Aretha Franklin supposedly worked for him because she did a show at the opening of one of his resorts, or something. Trump did that on the day that America was celebrated and mourning the loss of The Queen of Soul. Good Gawd, Kurtz! Trump is shamelessnees hypercubed.

          1. “The man is shameless enough to tweet that Aretha Franklin supposedly worked for him because she did a show at the opening of one of his resorts, or something. Trump did that on the day that America was celebrated and mourning the loss of The Queen of Soul. ”

            I couldn’t find any such tweet since Arethra died. This is Trump’s tweet.

            “The Queen of Soul, Aretha Franklin, is dead. She was a great woman, with a wonderful gift from God, her voice. She will be missed!
            8:36 AM – 16 Aug 2018”

            Does that make you a liar?

            By the way, if I tweeted I might write: ‘Donald Trump is doing a great job. He works for me.’

    1. Natacha said, “LACK OF SHAME? That should be emblazoned on Trump’s tombstone.”

      Yes. Trump is obviously shameless. What’s more, Trump hires shameless people so that he can publically shame them when he fires them. Trump did exactly that for thirteen seasons on TV. Hiring shameless people so that Trump could publically shame then when he pointed his finger at the camera and said, “You’re fired.” As such, the shameless culture in Turley’s complaint is Trump’s audience and Trump’s base. That culture of shamelessness elected Trump. Clearly and distinctly, shamelessness is the none-too-secret meaning of the slogan Make America Great [strike that–Shameless] Again.

      1. I think that Trump need to say to Natacha ” Ah feel your pain”, order to bring her on board.
        21+ months after the election, she’s coming around to accepting that Trump is in the White House, and clearly she’s grown to be more comfortable with that reality.
        But Trump needs to do the “empathy bit” before Natacha will consider voting for him again.

      1. What Natacha actually wrote, “He insulted the Shahs, a gold star family . . .”

        Who knows what Gnash thinks Natacha wrote? Not Ptom, that’s for sure.

  4. This may be why some states have enacted two party laws regarding recordings in private.

    If Manigault Newman recorded top secret information, or otherwise broke the law in regard to classified information, then she may be prosecuted. Here we arrive at another problem. How do we know that this is the extent of her recordings? For all we know, she’s been recording and selling classified information. The fact is that she released evidence that she brought a recording device into the Situation Room. She now should be thoroughly investigated to see what else she recorded. She has used these recordings for financial gain, and has shown herself untrustworthy. Was anything classified?

    From what little I read on the matter, she does not have a bombshell. Lara Trump claimed that the recordings covered several weeks of conversations about working on the campaign, which I assume she would have done even if she had not been fired. After she was fired, Lara would obviously ask her if she was disgruntled, as that was salient to the offered job. Who wouldn’t ask that question when offering a job in the campaign to someone who was fired for cause. And the recording of Kelly transcript essentially firmly informing her that she had made very serious ethical violations. He warned her that if she made a stink about her firing, that it would only blow back on her because she was fired for just cause. Where’s the bombshell? Kelly was a leader of men and likely understood her proclivities well.

    I agree with Professor Turley that one of Trump’s flaws is the selection of his confidents, as well as adultery. I also believe that he needs to utilize communications staff to make his Tweets more effective; i.e. less like a grenade he throws at his own feet. He has made great strides in keeping campaign promises, more than a jaded country expects from its candidates. The economy is doing well. I’m not sold on the trade war, because you do not go to a war you won’t win. If he goes to war, he’d better win. Trade wars tend to leave collateral damage, like to farmers. I am quite pleased that he actually kept America’s promise to move the Israel embassy to Jerusalem. Obamacare has been one of my most pressing issues. He tried to repeal and replace it first thing in office, but Congress was unprepared to keep its own campaign promises. And building a wall should not be controversial. What kind of maniac would not want control over who they admit into their country, and instead want it flung open to whoever strolls over? That is irresponsible. Cutting off illegal immigration and forcing it to go through legal channels will strike a financial blow against the cartels. The longer this is delayed, the more unlikely it is to happen. It’s like leaving your front door open all night because you think evil is an artificial construct created to sow mistrust.

    1. Oh, and she has changed her story from she heard there was a recording of Trump using the “N” word, to she actually heard the recording. The man who supposedly made it denies its existence. If it happened on a recording studio, someone is always listening. Another man whom she claimed heard it said she made it up.

      I find it interesting that Omarosa has been a friend of Trumps since, I think 2004. She has always praised him. After 14 years, she claims he was really a racist. Strange. Wouldn’t you think he would have mistreated a black woman at some point in the 14 years? The recording she had of Trump was described as he was upset that she was leaving.

      The only color Trump cares about is green, which is the color most businesses care about, even charities. Trump has flaws for sure, but criticism about him should be fair and accurate.

      Here is a partial list of all the awards and degrees that this supposed ignorant racist anti-Semite has received:

      Trump’s star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame Honorary

      Doctor of Laws from Lehigh University in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania (1988)[1][2][3]
      Doctor of Humane Letters from Wagner College in Staten Island, New York (2004)[4][5]
      Doctor of Business Administration from Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia (2012)[6][7]
      Doctor of Laws from Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia (2017)[8][9][1]
      Revoked

      Doctor of Business Administration from Robert Gordon University in Aberdeen, Scotland (honorary degree awarded 2010, revoked 2015)[10][11][12]
      Organization honors and awards[edit]
      A ceremony in which Trump receiving the 2015 Marine Corps–Law Enforcement Foundation’s annual Commandant’s Leadership Award. Four men are standing, all wearing black suits; Trump is second from the right. The two center men (Trump and another man) are holding the award.
      Trump receiving the 2015 Marine Corps–Law Enforcement Foundation’s annual Commandant’s Leadership Award in recognition of his contributions to American military education programs
      Tree of Life Award by the Jewish National Fund (1983)[13]
      Ellis Island Medal of Honor in celebration of “patriotism, tolerance, brotherhood and diversity” (1986)[14]
      Golden Raspberry Award for Worst Supporting Actor, for portraying himself in Ghosts Can’t Do It (1991)[15]
      Gaming Hall of Fame (1995)[16]
      Star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame (2007)[17][18]
      Muhammad Ali Entrepreneur Award (2007)[19]
      Multiple AAA Five Diamond Awards for his hotels.[20][21]
      WWE Hall of Fame (2013)[22]
      New Jersey Boxing Hall of Fame (2015)[23]
      The Algemeiner Liberty Award for contributions to Israel–United States relations (2015)[24]
      Marine Corps–Law Enforcement Foundation Commandant’s Leadership Award (2015)[25]
      Time Person of the Year (2016)[26]
      Financial Times Person of the Year (2016)[27]
      Friends of Zion Award by The Friends of Zion Museum (2017)[28]
      Sports Business Journal Most Influential Person in Sports Business (2017)[29]
      Temple Coin featuring Trump (alongside King Cyrus) from the Mikdash Educational Center in honor of Trump recognizing Jerusalem as the country’s capital. (2018)[30]
      Beitar Trump Jerusalem F.C., renamed themselves, adding Trump’s name for recognizing Jerusalem as country’s capital. (2018)[31]
      Atlantic City Boxing Hall of Fame (2018)[32]

      1. Karen, at the Church of Scientology’s main headquarters in Hollywood, one can take a free tour of the L. Ron Hubbard Life Exhibit. Said tour concludes at a gallery featuring all the awards and citations Mr Hubbard has won.

        The awards are so numerous they are displayed on special circular racks that spin towards the viewer, only to spin back as others spin forth. It goes on for several minutes until the viewer is completely overwhelmed by Mr Hubbard’s greatness.

        1. are you one of those suckers? how would you know? i never heard of such a thing.

          every time I watch that one lady bitch about them I just think about how HAWT she is

          1. Please allow me to explain the hidden meaning of Mr. Hill’s argument to you, Kurtz. Trump earns his “Honors” the old-fashioned way: He buys them with charitable donations. As for L. Ron Hubbard, the implication could be that he simply awarded himself his own “Honors.” Or maybe he earned a few of them the hard way. In any case, Mr. Hill is most certainly not a Scientologist.

            1. Diane, when you walk midtown Fifth Avenue in Manhattan you see one of Trump’s many honors, Trump Tower. Walk in. That is part of his legacy as is the skating rink, parks, and other buildings. His legacy is what he created. What have you ever done? To top off his career he is now President of the United States and working for the people and the nation as a whole.

    2. Karen, Honey, you are a disciple. You don’t see truth or reality. You are speculating that Omarosa not only recorded classified information, but sold it. All Hannity or Tucker would have to do to convince you is to just say that it happened. No evidence needed for a disciple like you, who are in the minority in this country. Most people see what’s there. You don’t.

      Why is or should it be the United States’ business to move the embassy to Jerusalem, instead of Tel Aviv, the capital, when this upsets Palestinians who have had a claim on that land, too, for millennia? There’s some money deal benefitting Trump behind this, but Americans will also likely lose their lives because the rest of the Muslim world is upset over the U.S. taking this action. So, more IEDs, more terrorist attacks. Again, how is making a statement of preference for Israel having dibs on Jerusalem, over Palestinians, the U.S.’s business?

      Obamacare has saved lives. People should be able to get care despite pre-existing conditions, and at an affordable price. The majority of Americans want a one-payer system. Republicans, who want to continue protecting the profits of big pharma, big hospital groups and big doctor groups, will fight to stop it. People will die as a result. They also put out lies, like it takes 10 years in Canada for elective surgery, and that Canadians don’t like their “socialized medicine”. These things are lies, but until Hannity or Tucker tell you, you won’t believe it.

      What’s the wall for? To keep out brown people from down south? Here’s a better idea: take away the incentive to come here in the first place. Make it a crime to hire an illegal, and heavily fine those who do so. No work, they won’t come, but that would hurt the wealthy hoteliers, non-union construction companies, landscapers, non-union factories, nanny services etc. who hire illegals and who benefit from cheap, illegals coming here and working for less and under less-than-desirable conditions. As a Fox Disciple, you listen with rapt attention when Hannity and Tucker tell you that the drug cartels are really benefitting from illegal immigration. No, it’s the wealthy Republicans who use this pool of near-slave labor who are benefitting. Make it cost them, and they won’t hire illegals.

      1. I’m not sure sure what world your living in, but your information is false. I am disabled I live in democrat controlled state & when lowering prescriptions have come up for a vote our senators have voted NO every single time. Democrats & a few republicans receive a lot of kickbacks from Big Pharma. There is a lot of corruption in this country, but I can tell you 1st hand that medicare for all is not the best health care, My dr DOES not decide what my treatment is. My insurance does. There have been times my dr has recommended treatment & because my insurance WILL NOT cover it they have denied it, I have had to pay out of my own pocket. So please explain how we provide free healthcare? Nothing is free, someone is going to have for the expensive treatments. My family helped out because my disability will not cover expensive treatments. A fixed income is JUST that – FIXED.
        I can say one other thing, one group of people I have found common ground with is Bernie Sanders voters, NO WE DON’T agree on everything, but there are many common things we do agree on. Sanders has voted NO on lowering prescription drugs but MANY democrats & republicans HAVE NOT & that is because they are in the pockets of BIG PHARMA (YES BOTH OF THEM). You can verify this by going to OpenSecrets.org you can look at where ALL politicians get their funds from it’s a wonderful tool!
        That is ONE THING BOTH President Trump & Sanders have in common. Why is that, because NEITHER OF THEM are bought out by BIG PHARMA! But because there is SO MUCH DIVISION so many of you fail to realize that.
        In addition, A lot of DON’T ACTUALLY WATCH Fox news anymore We know they are just as bais & corrupt as CNN & MSNBC! But again you believe everything you hear. Maybe if people stopped watching the news & started listening to each other & stopped accusing people of childish ridiculous stuff we could start working together.
        Our economy is doing well, whether or not you you want to admit it President Trump has accomplishments some great things. The fact is THERE IS CORRUPTION IN BOTH GOP & DEMOCRATS I realized that a long time ago. I wish others would stop accusing people on the right of being puppets for Fox news or the GOP. We understand that there is corruption. We know how to read & do research.

        1. Lollabells,
          I’ve pointed out before that if there is an absolute obsession with “Fox News” or “Hannity”, that obsession afflicts loons like Natacha.
          It does matter if one never watches Fox, or doesn’t even own a TV; if you disagree with Natacha, it must be because of Fox News.
          That is a standard, moronic ploy used by some of the less imaginative liberals.
          The claim that Trump will make money on the move of the embassy in Israeli is an example of her foaming-at-the-mouth, wild accusations.
          I don’t know if Trump’s upset election victory was what pushed Natcookoo, or if she was nuts before the election; whatever the case, she’s not playing with a full deck.

      2. come on you act like both things cant be true. YES, drug cartels benefit from human smuggling operations which they often maintain alongside drug smuggling. YES, rich republicants benefit from immmigrant labor, just as rich Democrats do too

      3. no money deal, but trump is savvy and he knows this symbolic gesture will win him the thanks of the Zionist lobby.

        since so many lefist jewish persons are out to get him, it’s easy to see this ploy as a skillful foil to split the opposition.

        likewise, he also knows that the microscopic number of people who understand and appreciate the Arab side of the Israeli question, probably won’t vote for him anyways

        while the ones who do, that like him, are going to stick with him in spite of this dubious choice to move the embassy. like me.

        Hail to the Chief!

        1. Trump opened the American embassy in Jerusalem. That will do more for peace than playing games for 50 years. Time for the wars to end and that Israeli sovereignty be recognized by its enemies.

  5. The media mostly refers to her by the first name Omarosa. The article here goes to her middle name. It is confusing.
    In any event, the friend of the devil is a friend of mine.

  6. I think Omarosa is making herself look far worse more than she is hurting Trump. I do not think all the crap she is slinging will change a single vote away from Trump. It is more likely she will cause a few more Democrats to #walkaway.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

    1. Squeeky – blacks (as a group) hated her when she supported Trump and now the black who do support Trump now hate her. 😉 She may gain votes for Trump. I didn’t follow the Apprentice, but my wife did. She said she was learning things for work. I did see Omarosa a couple of times and she had a toxic personality. She probably is great in bed but you don’t want her as a friend or co-worker.

      1. “Toxic” is the perfect word to describe her. Can you imagine anybody hiring her after the way she has tried to stab Trump in the back? I guess maybe if a reality show needs a villain.

        Trump tried to give her a chance, but some people can not handle success. She is one of them. I look for her to become an addict/drunk as she ages, and becomes less relevant. IIRC Tommy Sotomayor said something about Sandra Bland, that when she realized that she couldn’t cash the checks her mouth had been writing, she hung herself. I would not be surprised if Omarosa checks out the same way.

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

                1. such things must pass the special scrutiny test allan

                  that’s where they seem special so they get scrutinized

      2. Paul, you didn’t watch “The Apprentice”?

        Neither did I. Reality shows are rather devoid of intelligent content. But that was Donald Trump.

        1. Peter Hill – Honestly, I can be bought, they pay me enough money and I would do The Apprentice. 🙂

  7. From the copy editor without portfolio: It’s “who is chosen.” not “whom is chosen” as confidantes.

  8. Omarosa is a combination of Trump’s Frankenstein monster and a woman scorned (hell hath no furry). He should have treated Amarosa’s recent book release/media tour as serious as a hurricane and just patiently sat it out instead of succumbing to his counter-punching instincts. “Not every insult requires a response.” ~ Leander Whitlock character in HBO’s Boardwalk Empire (played by Dominic Chianese).

      1. Excerpted from the article linked above:

        On Tuesday, Manigault-Newman would not say whether Stone could have passed Trump information about the WikiLeaks releases, but she said that Mueller has “rightfully” zeroed in on Stone in his probe.

          1. Admiral William McCraven says Trump is the Omega dawg. “That’s a paraphrase.” Go read the Admiral’s own words at the end of last page of yesterday’s thread about Trump revoking Brennan’s security clearance. Then go back to sleep, perchance to dream of Fake Alpha Trump’s response to True Alpha McCraven’s triple-dog dare.

            1. Ms. Late4Yoga: The admiral followed the lead of left media and got himself outraged about Trump purportedly taking away Brennan’s security clearance to silence him. Brennan is still free to blather using in his fake sophisticated cadence on NBC who pays him. Brennan has not acted in accordance with CIA guidelines for former employees – this coupled with Trump’s constitutional powers makes it OK for security privilege (not “right”) to be terminated. Good Day Ma’am

              1. Bill Martin,….
                In response to, and retaliation for, Admiral “McCraven’s” political grandstanding, I found my old draft card, and will burn it.
                If he thinks he’s the only one who can make meaningless gestures to jump on board of a bandwagon, I’ve got some other guys in their 60s, far remove from any threat of conscription, who will flag down a CNN or MSNCB mobile van and do a group incineration of their draft cards while the cameras are rolling.
                ( A couple of those less gung-ho may actually be burning their grocery stores loyalty card….kind of like the gesture of John Kerry when he threw somebody ELSE’S medals over the wall in the 1970s).
                That otta fix the Admiral, just like pulling the “McCraven'” security clearance will “fix” Trump.

            1. Excerptd from the article linked above:

              Omarosa Manigault Newman says she’s been interviewed by special counsel Robert Mueller’s team investigating Russian election interference.

              The former aide to President Donald Trump didn’t say when she was interviewed and declined to provide any other details.

              Appearing Tuesday on MSNBC, Manigault Newman also declined to say whether she’s been called to sit before a grand jury.

              She says, “I feel like my hands are tied because as you know I do love to communicate about the things that are going on in my life, but unfortunately I can’t elaborate.”

              When asked if she has secretly taped audio recordings that would be of interest to Mueller, Manigault Newman says, “If he calls me, I certainly will participate with anything that he needs.”

            2. Late4Yoga: Of course Omarosa will not be silenced. She has a book to sell. This is not so difficult to figure out. Remember – simple logic. #Late4YogaGotNoGame

              1. Cherry picking the argument is logic chopping. But you’re right: Chop logic is simple logic. Now try something more complicated like refuting or rebutting the part where Mueller interviewed Omarosa. Why? She’s not allowed to say why. But she did say that Trump knew that the Russians had hacked emails before Wikileaks released them. Gee. Maybe that’s why Mueller interviewed Omarosa. What does your simple logic tell you, Tab?

                1. $imple: $ell book to publishers u$ing hype/innuendo for advance dollar$; $ell book to public u$ing hype/innuendo and prom$es of more to come. $ell, $ell, $ell. I$ that a $imple enough explanation for you Ms Late4Yoga? #BillMartinOwnsLate4Yoga

                  1. Really? Mueller interviewed Omarosa to enhance her book sales? Or Omarosa is lying about Mueller interviewing her and Omarosa’s lie is to enhance her book sales?

                    Are you familiar with the concept of denial as a defense mechanism in psychology? I ask because denial as a defense mechanism is not often proffered as an instance logic simply because it’s simple.

                    P. S. Your ownership claim is also delusional.

                  2. Bill Martin,…
                    You will need to be at the top of your game….it looks like you are debating with someone who took Psych 101, and is therefore an expert in areas like “defense mechanisms”.
                    Pay Lucy4Dinner her nickel.

                    1. Late4Yoga is my Omorosa this morning. Once she gets started, hard to stop her and on top of that she loves going down rabbit holes. I sometimes feel like Elmer Fudd after dealing with her.

                    2. Bill Martin,….
                      It is no accident that she goes down rabbit holes and tries to con you into following.
                      In order to train for exchanges with her, practise nailing jello to the wall.
                      Once you’ve perfected that, you’ll be better prepared for “dialogues” with her.

                    3. catechresis–mixed metaphor. Example: Elmer Fudd nails jello to the wall of a rabbit hole after Lucy pulls the football away from Charlie Brown–again.

                      You what, Tom? Omarosa is like that. Isn’t she?

                2. L4Yoga enables both David Benson and Marky Mark Mark – All you have to do is play the scenes of Omarosa from The Apprentice and she is toast as a witness. She was kicked out of the Clinton WH and the Trump WH that is great for your resume. Yep, she is the ideal witness.

                  1. Trump refuses to hire anybody who would make an ideal witness. That’s not an accident. But if you get enough impeachable witnesses to say the exact same thing about Trump, then Trump’s defense will be reduced to the claim that they’re all lying and only Trump is telling the truth. I’m pretty sure we’ve all heard that defense from Trump before.

        1. Late4Dinner

          Keeping up with Omarosa is at least as important as learning about Trump’s 34 year history with Russian mobsters.

          1. Thanks, Bill. But I must respectfully disagree with everything you said except for the sarcasm. Good to see you check in, again, anyhow.

            1. You…what
              …L4D
              Now she’s sending telegrams.
              I gave up the intense training regimen of nailing jello to the wall….it was almost as messy as trying to have an orderly exchange with L4D.

              1. I promptly corrected my error. (See below) Keeping up with Omarosa is not at all important. That’s the sarcastic part of Bill’s comment with which I agreed. Unless and until you learn how to “follow the thread,” you won’t ever even be able to nail Jello with a dinner fork. (Don’t hurt yourself.)

                1. There is a better chance of nailing Jello to the wall than getting direct, straightforward, uncluttered comments from L4D in an exchange.
                  But her effort is noteworthy….she not only writes her part of the “dialogue”, but she’ll tell you what you said as well.
                  Rephrasing and distorting the words of others must be a bit time-consuming, but we know that she’s willing to do the work.

                  1. Bill McWilliams was being sarcastic. That’s a fact. Bill McWilliams is almost always being sarcastic. Now here’s how sarcasm works: whatever the exact opposite of the statement is is what the speaker intended. Therefore, stating that keeping up with Omarosa is not at all important is a good faith interpretation of Bill McWilliams sarcasm. It takes a true Elmer Fudd to confuse sarcasm for sincerity. Eh–What’s up Doc?

          2. Wait a second. The part about Russian mobsters rings true. Please pardon my sarong, Bill. Or is that still Trump’s job.

        2. she cant say because she doesnt know.

          she is waaaaay below stone. she is not an operator. she is talking furniture like siri

            1. Dale Carnegie just updated Kurtz’s diploma to a higher level. Some people, like Omarosa, deserve absolutely no respect and fall into a tiny class of people known as the classless. Diane appears to qualify for membership in that group.

          1. Sarcasm?

            ‘I won’t insult your intelligence by suggesting that you really believe what you just said.’

            William F. Buckley Jr.

    1. Bill, you’re right! Trump is Frankenstein and Omarosa is Bride Of Frankenstein; a couple that really deserves each other.

      1. Funny how President Bonespur hired and rehired her four times.

        Since he only hires “the best”, Omarosa must be the “best of the best”.

        1. He hired her because she was compromised and, therefore, more readily thrown under the bus when the need arose. That’s how Trump does most of his hiring.

  9. Trump should take some legal advice from Tina Turner-We don’t need another hero

    Meantime the publisher of Omarosa’s book, Simon & Schuster said:

    “Should you pursue litigation against S&S, we are confident that documents related to the contents of the book in the possession of President Trump, his family members, his businesses, the Trump Campaign, and his administration will prove particularly relevant to our defense.”

    1. First, Tina Turner is awesome.

      Second, “we are confident that documents related to the contents of the book in the possession of President Trump, his family members, his businesses, the Trump Campaign, and his administration will prove particularly relevant to our defense.” So that means that these supporting documents are not in the possession of S&S, and they are depending upon Omarosa’s word that they exist…the word of a proven liar.

      Good luck with that.

        1. At least we now know the real reason those two civil servants were fired for taping Trump’s documents back together again.

  10. MAGNIGAULT NEWMAN IS THE SOUR APPLE TRUMP DESERVES

    Donald Trump has shown no loyalty to anyone outside his own family. Trump has turned on, or abused, several prominent Republicans. Jeff Sessions, Rex Tillerson, Mitch McConnell, Jeff Flake and Bob Corker are names that come to mind. Almost anyone in Trump’s way is invariably abused.

    Therefore it is darkly comical that a woman from Trump’s previous employment becomes the loose cannon rolling on Trump’s deck. If recordings surface of Trump mouthing the ‘N’ word, it will paralyze his presidency.

    Trump defenders would rush to claim recordings were ‘taken out of context’. That Trump was ‘only joking’ or ‘trying to make a point’. But more than likely there would be a tsunami of abuse cascading back at Trump.

    Any pretense of respect, for the presidency, would evaporate amid such a backlash. It would be open season on Trump from every corner of the media; driving Trump defenders to the point of exhaustion. Defending Trump would become thankless, lonely work.

      1. I would care but it seems awfully unlikely such a thing would not have instantly leaked. If this woman has audio recording, maybe. Nothing short of that will count imo.

        1. Stories about the tapes have been leaked for years. Completely discounting Omarosa who is self-serving in all she does. Penn Jillette of Penn & Teller has stated he was “in the room.” Mark Burnett is protecting Trump from the release of the tapes, until such time as it becomes too inconvenient to do so.

          1. If there is a tape then it will surface. I am frankly surprised that in all this anti trump frenzy, that if one existed it has not been unearthed. I’m pretty sure the Mars rover has abandoned its NASA mission in order to dig for dirt on Trump on Mars.

            Until and unless a serious allegation is proven, then it should not be treated as fact. Don’t you find it odd that she could have known him for 14 years, and all of a sudden she claims he started repeatedly using the N word? She taped so many conversations, why wouldn’t she have a recording of him using the N word?

            Just wait for the facts to come out, and then discuss them rationally. If such a tape exists, then it will come out. The US is not a racist country, and such slurs are condemned.

            1. Tom Arnold is trying to do a series searching for Trump tapes about pussy grabbing and N-word use. Will he get there? Or will it be another Al Capone’s vault?

      2. Enigma:

        Before you accuse anyone of using the “N” word, you had better have proof. The guy who Omarosa claimed made the recording claims it never happened. Another guy whom she claimed heard the recording said it never happened. Omarosa herself claimed she’d never heard it, and then changed her story.

        Gossip like this is irresponsible. If there has been a tape out there for years, then it will surface and the truth will out. In addition, in what context was the word supposedly used? Complaining about the use of the N word in rap, for example?

        Instead of waiting for the evidence, you create a meme that claims it for fact. This is a guy who promoted minorities and women far above the glass ceiling that existed at the time in most other companies in the country. Omarosa herself had no problem with him for 14 years. If he was a rampant racist, don’t you think she would have noticed by then?

        This is the weaponization of gossip. There are consequences for malicious memes like this. This contributes to Trump supporters being assaulted across the country, afraid to wear any clothing in support of their president. How would you feel if that had been the case for Obama supporters? If they would be faced with violence if they wore that Iconic image of Obama?

        It is far and away beyond a discussion of an accusation and whether or not it happened. It presents it as fact. The very people who are supposed to be the source have claimed she lied. Would you want someone to do this to you?

        “The right wing has normalized behavior”??? Perhaps you should reference how the Left wing has normalized racist attacks on conservative black women. Remember those white Democratic men literally screaming as loud as they possibly could in the face of petite Candace Owens? Did they forget their Klan hoods? What’s changed? Vote Democrat or you will be accosted in restaurants and screamed at until you toe the line? The are STILL using violence, intimidation, and intolerance to enforce the black vote. Or what about the mainstreaming of violent attacks on conservatives across the country? That tends to happen when it has become accepted to call half the country evil. The Left cannot or will not see and understand its own terrible behavior.

        Before you try to change the world, change yourself.

        1. Karen: “This contributes to Trump supporters being assaulted across the country, afraid to wear any clothing in support of their president”.

          Almost every day of the week Trump names someone in a hostile tweet and labels them with vile names. That person is then considered an ‘enemy of the state’ in the mind’s of Trump supporters. But in your mind, Trump supporters are the victims!

          1. All anyone has to do to demonstrate how lacking in truth Peter’s comments are is to check around the country and see how many guards conservatives require on college campus’s and how many guards if any Liberals require.

            The facts are in numbers that can be calculated and those numbers demonstrate how wrong Peter is.

        2. Karen S – Maybe you can succeed where Kellyanne Conway failed. Name a senior African-American employee working in the White House? I saw the tape involving Candace Owens which you call “normalized” although I can’t think of another instance. Not only was she never in danger, she was laughing. You may have been able to convince yourself that Trump doesn’t have the word in his vocabulary. His history shows it permeates his entire soul. Which of the instances I described of his racism didn’t occur? They all did, and you don’t care.

          1. See, a lot of black people think racist only applies to whites. A lot of them have actually been taught that in school. Asian Americans should see the obvious. bu hao!

        1. TBob – That candidate should lose the election. Racism shouldn’t be accepted or rewarded, because once they get into office… no telling what kinds of policies they’ll implement.

          1. nice of you to say so. I think tribalism is part of most elections like it or not. some people like it when it cuts their way, but not against them.

            1. Mr. Kurtz,…
              If Elizabeth Warren runs for the nomination in 2020, will “tribalism” help her or hurt her?😉😊

              1. that’s a good question. i think that tribalism is a wider phenomenon. there are a lot of places in the world where race is not a factor but tribal hate and warfare is a real continuing issue. like africa.

                and tribe is not always a bad thing nor tribalism. what holds a people together? what brings values to the next generation? where does identity come from?

                racism is an overused and perjorative word. I think tribalism gets more at the sense that a people’s togetherness can be good or bad, but it is real and important to people one way or another

      3. raises hand: yes i wouldnt care
        about 20 million more behind me wont care either.
        that’s counting it lowly

          1. i’m one of the rare white people who has no problem confessing my own sense of tribal solidarity. lots of different tribes, no one simple equation, life is complicated. but I feel not a lick of guilt in my heart about it either.

            I grew up in integrated schools, learned to stick together early on in life.

            1. The belief that some here have amazingly concluded is true is that there was some date that oppression ended. What is the actual truth is that every system has been replaced with something else with the same intention. Slavery begat Jim Crow which begat systemic racism begat the present day version. Changing focus to something else is not a solution, it’s a distraction. It is nice that we are capable of multitasking and addressing more than one ill at a time.
              Regarding the suggestion that oppression was something of yesteryear. Give me the date that it ended and I’ll happily demonstrate why you’re wrong.

              1. Racism is built into the structure of the US economy. All of it–education, housing, employment, health-care, financial service, legal services, the justice system, the corrections system and the list goes on and on. The fact that there is and always has been a Black middle class doesn’t change the economic structure of racism any more so than the fact that there is and has always been a White underclass.

                I grew up in a virulently racist house with a virulently racist extended family, as well. One can banish the N-word from one’s mouth, but never one’s mind. It sticks there, forever. And even if one could banish the N-word from one’s own mind, that would not have any effect upon the built-in economic structure of racism in America.

                1. Yes.there has always been a black middle class, but from time to time they were taken down several notches whenever they got too established.
                  Lest Squeaky think I’ve forgotten to slip back into history. There have been a few areas in the past that accumulated enough black wealth to be designated, “Black Wall Street.” Most notably in the Greenwood district outside Tulsa, OK. In 1921, 35 blocks of the are was destroyed by fire and BOMBS DROPPED BY THE NATIONAL GUARD. Like many other alleged “race riots” it started over a rumor of a black uprising with no basis in fact. As important as the destruction was the complicity of the government cover-up. Some things have always been the same.

                    1. L4Yoga enables both David Benson and Marky Mark Mark – thanks for the link to the article.

                  1. ““Black Wall Street.” Most notably in the Greenwood district outside Tulsa, OK. In 1921, 35 blocks of the are was destroyed by fire and BOMBS DROPPED BY THE NATIONAL GUARD. Like many other alleged “race riots” it started over a rumor of a black uprising with no basis in fact. ”

                    Just 3 years later the DNC held its convention where the KKK was highly represented. The following is a WSJ piece in full because there is a paywall.

                    The Democrats’ Missing History

                    Jeffrey LordUpdated Aug. 13, 2008 12:01 a.m. ET
                    As Democrats prepare to nominate Sen. Barack Obama to be the first black president, the Democratic National Committee and its chairman, Howard Dean, have whitewashed the party’s horrific and lengthy record of racism. The omission is in the section of the DNC Web site that describes the party’s history. The missing history raises the obvious question of whether the Democrats, unable or simply unwilling to put their party on record as taking direct responsibility for one of the worst racial crimes of the ages, will be able to run a campaign free of the racial animosities it has regularly brought both to American presidential campaigns and American political and social life in general.

                    What else to make of the official party history as presented by the DNC on its Web site? It is a history so sanitized of historical reality it makes Stalin look like David McCullough.

                    The DNC Web site section labeled “Party History,” linked here, is in fact scrubbed clean of the not-so-little dirty secret that fueled Democrats’ political successes for over a century and a half and made American life a hell on earth for black Americans. Literally, the DNC official history, which begins with the creation of the party in 1800, gets to the creation of the DNC itself in 1848 and then–poof!–the next sentence says: “As the 19th Century came to a close, the American electorate changed more and more rapidly.” It quickly heads into a riff on poor immigrants coming to America.

                    In a stroke, 52 years of Democratic history vanishes. Disappeared faster than the truth in the Clinton administration. Why would this be? Allow me to sketch in a few facts from those missing 52 years. For that matter, lets add in the facts from the party history before and after those 52 years, since they aren’t mentioned by the Democrats’ National Committee either.

                    (cont)

                  2. So what’s missing?

                    There is no reference to the number of Democratic Party platforms supporting slavery. There were six from 1840 through 1860.
                    There is no reference to the number of Democratic presidents who owned slaves. There were seven from 1800 through 1861
                    There is no reference to the number of Democratic Party platforms that either supported segregation outright or were silent on the subject. There were 20, from 1868 through 1948.
                    There is no reference to “Jim Crow” as in “Jim Crow laws,” nor is there reference to the role Democrats played in creating them. These were the post-Civil War laws passed enthusiastically by Democrats in that pesky 52-year part of the DNC’s missing years. These laws segregated public schools, public transportation, restaurants, rest rooms and public places in general (everything from water coolers to beaches). The reason Rosa Parks became famous is that she sat in the “whites only” front section of a bus, the “whites only” designation the direct result of Democrats.
                    There is no reference to the formation of the Ku Klux Klan, which, according to Columbia University historian Eric Foner, became “a military force serving the interests of the Democratic Party.” Nor is there reference to University of North Carolina historian Allen Trelease’s description of the Klan as the “terrorist arm of the Democratic Party.”
                    There is no reference to the fact Democrats opposed the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments to the Constitution. The 13th banned slavery. The 14th effectively overturned the infamous 1857 Dred Scott decision (made by Democratic pro-slavery Supreme Court justices) by guaranteeing due process and equal protection to former slaves. The 15th gave black Americans the right to vote.
                    There is no reference to the fact that Democrats opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1866. It was passed by the Republican Congress over the veto of President Andrew Johnson, who had been a Democrat before joining Lincoln’s ticket in 1864. The law was designed to provide blacks with the right to own private property, sign contracts, sue and serve as witnesses in a legal proceeding.
                    There is no reference to the Democrats’ opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1875. It was passed by a Republican Congress and signed into law by President Ulysses Grant. The law prohibited racial discrimination in public places and public accommodations.
                    There is no reference to the Democrats’ 1904 platform, which devotes a section to “Sectional and Racial Agitation,” claiming the GOP’s protests against segregation and the denial of voting rights to blacks sought to “revive the dead and hateful race and sectional animosities in any part of our common country,” which in turn “means confusion, distraction of business, and the reopening of wounds now happily healed.”
                    There is no reference to four Democratic platforms, 1908-20, that are silent on blacks, segregation, lynching and voting rights as racial problems in the country mount. By contrast the GOP platforms of those years specifically address “Rights of the Negro” (1908), oppose lynching (in 1912, 1920, 1924, 1928) and, as the New Deal kicks in, speak out about the dangers of making blacks “wards of the state.”
                    There is no reference to the Democratic Convention of 1924, known to history as the “Klanbake.” The 103-ballot convention was held in Madison Square Garden. Hundreds of delegates were members of the Ku Klux Klan, the Klan so powerful that a plank condemning Klan violence was defeated outright. To celebrate, the Klan staged a rally with 10,000 hooded Klansmen in a field in New Jersey directly across the Hudson from the site of the convention. Attended by hundreds of cheering convention delegates, the rally featured burning crosses and calls for violence against African-Americans and Catholics.
                    There is no reference to the fact that it was Democrats who segregated the federal government, at the direction of President Woodrow Wilson upon taking office in 1913. There \is a reference to the fact that President Harry Truman integrated the military after World War II.
                    There is reference to the fact that Democrats created the Federal Reserve Board, passed labor and child welfare laws, and created Social Security with Wilson’s New Freedom and FDR’s New Deal. There is no mention that these programs were created as the result of an agreement to ignore segregation and the lynching of blacks. Neither is there a reference to the thousands of local officials, state legislators, state governors, U.S. congressmen and U.S. senators who were elected as supporters of slavery and then segregation between 1800 and 1965. Nor is there reference to the deal with the devil that left segregation and lynching as a way of life in return for election support for three post-Civil War Democratic presidents, Grover Cleveland, Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt.
                    There is no reference that three-fourths of the opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Bill in the U.S. House came from Democrats, or that 80% of the “nay” vote in the Senate came from Democrats. Certainly there is no reference to the fact that the opposition included future Democratic Senate leader Robert Byrd of West Virginia (a former Klan member) and Tennessee Senator Albert Gore Sr., father of Vice President Al Gore.
                    Last but certainly not least, there is no reference to the fact that Birmingham, Ala., Public Safety Commissioner Bull Connor, who infamously unleashed dogs and fire hoses on civil rights protestors, was in fact–yes indeed–a member of both the Democratic National Committee and the Ku Klux Klan.
                    Reading the DNC’s official “Party History” of the Democrats and the race issue and civil rights is not unlike reading “In Through the Looking Glass”: ” ‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean–neither more nor less.’ ”

                    Here’s this line from the DNC: “With the election of Harry Truman, Democrats began the fight to bring down the final barriers of race . . .” Truman, of course, was elected in 1948, and to his great credit he did in fact, along with then-Minneapolis Mayor Hubert Humphrey, begin to push the Democrats towards a pro-civil-rights stance. This culminated in the passage of the 1960s civil rights laws–legislation that redid what had been done by Republicans a hundred years earlier but undone by the Democrats’ support for segregation. But the notion that “Democrats began to bring down the final barriers of race” raises the obvious questions. What were these barriers doing there in the first place? And who exactly was responsible for creating them?

                    * * *

                  3. AS IF TO CONFIRM the “Who, me?” racial psychology behind the DNC Web site, Nancy Pelosi’s Democrats passed a House resolution on July 29 sponsored by Tennessee Democrat Steve Cohen. The resolution, passed by voice vote, concludes this way:

                    Resolved, That the House of Representatives–
                    (1) acknowledges that slavery is incompatible with the basic founding principles recognized in the Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal;
                    (2) acknowledges the fundamental injustice, cruelty, brutality, and inhumanity of slavery and Jim Crow;
                    (3) apologizes to African Americans on behalf of the people of the United States, for the wrongs committed against them and their ancestors who suffered under slavery and Jim Crow; and
                    (4) expresses its commitment to rectify the lingering consequences of the misdeeds committed against African Americans under slavery and Jim Crow and to stop the occurrence of human rights violations in the future.
                    What word is missing here?

                    You got it. The word “Democrat.” Never mentioned anywhere. As with the DNC website, all these terrible things–somehow, apparently, it seems, so they keep hearing–happened. Ms. Pelosi, Mr. Cohen and their fellow House Democrats just can’t understand how. But, you know, whatever. They are sorry. Really.

                    Are they? Let’s take them up on this.

                    After all those Democratic platforms and conventions that championed slavery and segregation, what do you think the chances are they will use the occasion of Mr. Obama’s nomination to have the Democratic platform formally apologize for the active, frequently violent and decidedly official support of the Democratic Party for slavery, segregation, lynching, the Ku Klux Klan and all the rest?

                    Better yet, do you think they’ll pass a resolution promising to use the funds raised from all those Jefferson-Jackson Day fundraisers to pay reparations for slavery? (Did I mention that while the DNC discusses party co-founders Jefferson and Jackson, it neglects to mention that between them the two owned an estimated 360 slaves?)

                    Will the NAACP and other groups seeking reparations from nongovernment entities for their role in supporting slavery (companies like Aetna, Wachovia and Chase along with educational institutions like Brown University) finally zero in on the prime historical mover behind some of the worst chapters in American history? Will they sue the Democrats?

                    The Democrats are poised to nominate a black man for president of the United States. But will they apologize for slavery? Will they start paying reparations not from tax dollars but their own dollars for what they have done?

                    Do they have the guts to publicly admit what serious history records of their deeds? Are they capable of running a campaign without playing the race card as they have played it for the better part of two centuries? Can they even escape the race psychology that has indelibly branded them as America’s Party of Race?

                    Or, when it comes to their own responsibility for race relations in America, will they order up more of what, under the circumstances, is a very appropriate word for the DNC website?

                    Whitewash.

    1. Peter Hill – little Jeffy Flake, John McStain, was always a Never Trumper. He was up for re-election this year and could not even get the money to run in the primary. The comments to his ads on FB were scathing.

      1. Paul, you’re saying those Republicans deserve to be publicly ostracized?

        One should note that during Obama’s first two years, there were still so-called Blue Dog Democrats in the House who didn’t completely support Obama. But I don’t recall Obama singling them out in malicious tweets. Obama was above the fray; as presidents ‘used’ to be.

        1. Peter Hill – McStain was publically ostracized by the Arizona Republican Party. Flake is being ostracized by the voters.

              1. Putin is to Trump as Bill Clinton was to Monica Lewinski.

                Omarosa is to Trump as Linda Tripp was to Monica Lewinski.

                Trump is the new Lewinski.

            1. Peter Hill – the Republican Party took a vote on McStain. The voters voted with their feet on Flake.

                  1. PC Schulte,
                    Could have been any adversary which recognizes that the Senate will collapse without Sen. Flake in it😉😊.
                    I’m still waiting for his next book, Profiles in Courage, to come out.
                    He already swiped one title from Goldwater, so recycling JFK’s title is probably coming next before he announces his candidacy for the GOP nomination.

        2. Obama was above the fray; as presidents ‘used’ to be.

          Because he had people like Lois Lerner and Sally Yates painting houses for him.

      1. I’m pretty sure that Ron is one of yours. (I’m not suggesting that you’re in any way responsible for Ron. Trump is.)

    1. Ha! Ron, Trump just tweets a bunch of sh!t when he feels he’s been attacked – his outlet no matter how childish – but as far as we know he’s not responsible for any deaths.

      1. You guys need to come up with a new conditioned response. The link quotes a piece in the WSJ. Joke’s on you. And Trump.

        1. The WSJ has that paywall thing going on. You did them a favor. I read it and appreciate the favor. They remain blessedly ignorant of their own ingratitude.

    1. Hollywood:

      If so, then such a restriction needs to apply to every single politician who has ever paid current and former mistresses or undertaken any activities to maintain discretion.

      Until and unless this standard applies to everyone, then it should not be selectively applied. Presidents including Woodrow Wilson, JFK, and Clinton have all been tom cat philanderers who paid for discretion.

      The law is supposed to apply equally to all and it most emphatically does not.

        1. Hollywood:

          Do you claim that the law has been applied equally to Democrats and Republicans?

          If so, compare and contrast the following. Hillary paid a British spy for information from Russian spies on her political opponent. Without vetting it, she tried to release this fraudulent document just before the election, when it would be too late to disprove. This document was also used as the basis of the FISA court to investigate Donald Trump, without it being disclosed to the judge that it was unveiled opposite research by Hillary Clinton and the DNC.

          She also took over the debt of the DNC in order to defraud Bernie of a fair shot.

          Mueller was tasked with investigating Russian activity in our election and so he investigated who was proven to have interacted with Russian spies in order to try to benefit in the election. No! Just kidding! He investigated her victim. He also investigated everyone in his administration. If he found them to have broken any laws whatsoever, with nothing to do with the campaign, administration, Russia, or the Baltic Sea, he then threatens them with throwing every law against them that he can, piling on the charges and duplicate charges, until they would face 300 years in prison unless they have some dirt on either Trump or another person in his administration, again, not even requiring that such dirt have anything to do with Russia. He has threatened people with more jail time to alleged tax evasion than pedophiles get for raping dozens of children, for serial rapists, and for murderers.

          Defend this, if you can.

          1. Karen: the Steele Dossier is a dossier.

            Consult a dictionary for the definition of ‘Dossier’, then tell of us if the Steele Dossier is a “fraudulent document”.

          2. “Mueller was tasked with investigating Russian activity in our election”.
            That is not correct, Karen S. Rosenstein’s directive to Mueller was to investigate possible coordination between THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN, and only the Trump campaign, and the Russians.

    1. Apparently, Trump is not facing that issue but claiming that the case must be arbitrated by AAA in NYC. I assume this is based on the NDA’s language.

        1. Have you forgotten about Linda Tripp’s unauthorized recordings of her telephone conversations with Monica Lewinski?

          In what jurisdiction did that take place?

          1. L4Yoga enables both David Benson and Marky Mark Mark – I am specific to inside the WH now. Do the laws of DC include the WH?

            1. You think a different law applies inside the castle? Again, Trump will first rely on his NDAs. As Turley has stated, “It depends greatly on where she made her secret tapings. The District of Columbia is a ‘one party’ consent jurisdiction, so it is not illegal as long as one party, in this case Manigault Newman, was a party to the conversation.”

              1. hollywood – Omarosa has two problems (at least): was the edited recording in the Situation Room (a SCIF) legal because no phones are allowed in there and do the laws of DC cover recording conversations in the WH? And we are not even going into violating her NDA.

          2. Maryland.

            https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/tripp073199.htm

            “After a 13-month investigation, Tripp, 49, who lives in Columbia, was indicted on two counts of violating a rarely used Maryland law that makes it a crime to record telephone conversations without the consent of all parties. Tripp has said she recorded more than two dozen phone conversations with Lewinsky in 1997. She also has said she had been warned during that period that secret taping in Maryland was illegal.”

            1. Thanks, anonymous. (pssst–I knew it was Maryland on Tripp’s end of the phone calls. But I wanted to find out if Paul truly does know everything).

              1. L4Yoga enables both David Benson and Marky Mark Mark – If you have been following along, I have been trying to find out if the laws of DC are effective inside the WH. I also have openly exposed my ignorance of the modern gasoline engine and the fact that I will not overcome that ignorance.

  11. In all these posts, where it seems like Turley might make some gesture toward acknowledging the deep damage Trump is doing to the country and the Presidency, he always holds back, and instead treats him protectively and sympathetically.

            1. Oh Hollyweird, The same ol cop out when no one can back up their claim, “Where’s your proof he didin’t” LOLOLOLOL.

              For someone who follows a blog like this, You should know the burden of proof is on you, to post such dribble is why no one likes Leftist, except Leftist. I’ll bet money, you’re a troll on Reddit too.

              1. I like that you pick those two (basically trends begun under Obama). What will you say when the economy goes sideways? Gorsuch. Oh boy.

                1. When one hits bottom one can only go up. We hit bottom and Obama was responsible for the bottom continuing to fall. That is a neat trick done by an ideological idiot. Once the Obama caused bottom was reached there had to be a rapid increase in the parameters generally under discussion, however as normals are reached one can reassess how a President is doing at that time. Obama was doing terribly. It looked like his economic plans would leave America in a worse position than it had been for decades. Trump came along and reversed that stagnation. Will it continue? No one can predict the future but the educated guess is that Trump’s economy will do better than an Obama economy would have done.

                  I’ll provide an example I have provided over and over again. The U6 unemployment rate under Obama was decreasing but that decrease was slowing down, partly because the tendency is for its rate to slow down as employment improves and partly because of Obama’s economic policies. When Trump came into office the rate of decline decreased 2-3 times faster than under Obama when the natural decline should have been slower. The reason the U6 declined faster was due to economic policy.

                  If you wish Hollywood we can discuss other economic policies and dissect them in a similar fashion. That is your choice. I am not always in agreement with Trump and I wasn’t always in disagreement with Obama. I consider myself a conservative/ libertarian or a classical liberal. I am a strong believer in the rights of man, but I am also pragmatic enough to recognize that a man alone is not as strong as a country together. I hate communism and socialism which is supposed to lead to communism. If you need a reason you can read books written by people like Bastiat, Milton Friedman or Hayek. Alternatively, you can view what happens when the rights of man are forgotten such as happened under Stalin, Mao, Hitler etc. I include Hitler because he was the head of the National SOCIALIST German Workers’ Party. [Note: It shouldn’t have to be said that people that have my type of belief are not racists. An individual’s race is not an issue and one doesn’t want to utilize race to promote tribalism or loyalty to a political party. That type of race-baiting IMO is racist.]

                  1. I have on multiple occasions tried to post a link to Portal Seven showing the Unemployment rate–U-6, 2000-2018. Each time the site has rejected my post. Why?

            2. Hollywood and Stuart:

              Mespo asked a simple question. I, too, would like to know why you believe Trump has deeply damaged the country. I hear this often, but whenever I ask, I receive the same response. Something along the lines of if I don’t know already then they can’t explain it to me. Which means…they can’t explain it to me. It’s just a feeling.

              Or perhaps they are still blaming Trump for all the violence and intolerance the Left has mainstreamed while they Black Shirt the conservatives. Ever watched the #WalkAway videos? For a party that purports to be kind and tolerant, they are a rather bigoted lot. Not everyone, of course, but it’s accepted by the Party itself as well as prominent people in news and Hollywood. It is sad, and I hope the party reforms. It would be far better for the country if we could just argue about the size of government and spending.

                    1. There you go, using damn “facts” again. Unfair! Why don’t you be like our President and just make up “alternative facts”?

                      “I made a speech. I looked out. The field was — it looked like a million, a million and a half people.’’

            1. Enigma:

              “Any Soybean farmer could tell you.” I agree that trade wars in general leave collateral damage, especially in farming, which is a precarious industry. I have said before that you should not start a war that you cannot win. If Trump goes to war, he’d better win. This was also the problem I had in CA where Democrats militantly fought farmers, such as almond orchards, on their multi-generational water rights, only to excitedly support marijuana farming, which is an extremely water intensive crop.

              Trump has given financial aid to farmers. We’ll have to see how this plays out. This is why I don’t like trade wars. The US has been hurt by other country’s protective tariffs for many years, as well.

              Again, how has Trump deeply damaged the entire country? Please explain so that I can understand this position. He’s certainly flawed. Sent some really self destructive Tweets. But deeply damaged the country is a bridge way too far. It’s rather difficult to take that position when the economy is doing so much better, far and away better than it did under Obama.

              Why specifically does the Left feel that Trump is ruining the country? I mean, the hatred is so extreme. Are there specific facts this is based on, or is it based on such things as the meme you shared, which presented gossip as established fact? Is everyone just making up memes and using that as the basis for bashing conservatives? Did they actually believe that they would never lose another election?

              It has been a great many years where I have felt the the Left has become increasingly antagonistic and intolerant of the right. Reagan was called a Fascist, for example. All Republican presidential candidates have been called Fascist for years, denoting that he public school system failed to teach that Fascism was supposed to be an improvement of Socialism. Nothing has stopped the tide. Not reason. Not rational argument. No one has snapped out of it and said, you know, wanting smaller government and lower taxes might really not be the work of the devil. This trend was established long before Trump and has now reached such proportions that over 60% of people polled fear violence from anti-Trump people. The Klan is a tiny minority of horrible people with no power whatsoever. They don’t run anything. Don’t control anything. Don’t have a say in anything. The extremists on the Left have infiltrated our government to the point that government agencies like the IRS actually prey upon conservatives.

              1. Trump hasn’t harmed the entire country, there are some great beneficiaries of his policies. His tax cuts were great for corporations and shareholders whose shares were repurchased. The 1% is running to the bank.
                Corporations who had to comply with regulations to make sure the nations water and air supply are raking in additional profits as they no longer have to bother with worrisome regulations. Flint, MI isn’t the only location with deadly water, more of the same is coming to a community near you.
                Betsy DeVos is freeing Charter Schools from any need not to discriminate. Scott Pruit served only himself and not the public. Stephen Miller has targeted various minority groups, especially Muslims and immigrants of color. Ivanka and Jared have been promoting their own business interests (as has Donald). Wilbur Ross headed the Bank of Cyprus which is one of the top money laundering banks in the world. Steve Mnuchen is enriching himself and having the time of his life on the public tab. These are apparently your people, some of them might be going to jail soon.
                I know I went too far in saying they’ll be going to jail. White collar crime, especially when committed by high-level politicians, rarely ends up in jail terms. Especially when Trump is willing and able to use his Pardon power to free his friends and family. This is going to play out in front of our eyes in the next few months. We need only wait and see.

    1. Stuart, the Trumpers on this thread are suspicious of Turley. The Professor isn’t differential enough to Donald Trump.

      1. I guess he styles himself as neutral, and thereby gets readers across the board. It’s ok for a blog, but not for a human being, in my opinion, considering what’s going on.

      2. No, Professor Turley leans left but he has strong feelings towards freedom of speech and civil liberties something all Americans should appreciate.

      3. Peter Hill,…
        I don’t know how closely you follow the comments made here; if you did follow them, you would know that some of those with TDS “are suspicuious of Turley” for not initiating inpeachment proceeding here, or for not indicting Trump in his columns.
        As there are some “Trumper” who “are suspicious of Turley.
        If JT had the time, I have no doubt that he’d have some interested responses to those harboring those “suspicions”.

    2. deep damage to the fragile self esteem of snowflakes, deep damage to the false image of the deeply flawed and biased cia and fbi, one could go on and on about the deep damage he is doing to various sectors of this country who need a kick in the pants! Go Trump! Hail to the Chief!

    1. Hollywood, when I lie down with dogs, I almost get licked to death, and then start laughing hysterically because the dogs won’t quit and I have a hard time getting up…. It’s a riot!

        1. Damned if I can recall lying with you, Allan. You must not have been memorable. Or maybe you are hallucinating again?

    2. Ha Hollyweird we know,

      You’re an Islamic satanic lunatic supporting that type govt cloaked as a religion.

      Your type not only hates the USA, Dogs, Women, kids, unless you’re raping them, or BBQ’d pork.

      ?, wouldn’t you creeps be happier back in your sand box sh*thole ME with your own kind?

      You know, like make the Middle East Great Again!….. Oh, that’s right, nothing has every been great when Islam is running it!

      Now leave us & go back to marrying your sister or 1st cousins & Ph’in your goats on the side.

        1. Perfectly pleasant woman that Xavier Cugat thought might be an addition to his band. As it turned out, she had a career as filler on the Mike Douglas Show and like venues, playing the dumb blonde and dancing with her dog.

                1. I must admit that I didn’t see that one coming. Shall I interpret your sympathy for Monica as an instance of chivalry, Sir?

                  1. L$D:
                    Sure, she was set upon by a predator. Her best friend outed her without permission. What would you call that kind of betrayal? BTW I’m fairly unpredictable.

            1. Mespo,…
              Who could forget about the dog dancing that Bill on King of the Hill did with the dog he got from the pound?

Leave a Reply