US Politics

[خره مينه لګته وي]

Trump blames Obama for town hall protests and security leaks

US President Donald Trump has said he believes Barack Obama is behind a wave of protests against Republican lawmakers, and national security leaks.

He told Fox News: "I think President Obama's behind it because his people are certainly behind it", but added: "I also think it's just politics."

Mr Trump offered no evidence for his claims and his predecessor in the White House has not commented.

The president also spoke about his budget plans and other issues.

President Trump's interview was broadcast hours before he is due to give his first address to a joint session of Congress.

A senior White House official told the BBC the president would talk about a "renewal of the American spirit", offering an "optimistic vision".

In the speech he is expected to set out in greater detail his plans to cut spending and boost the economy.

Mr Trump has said his proposal to increase the defence budget by $54bn (£43bn) would be paid for by a "revved up economy".

The foreign aid purse and the environmental department face a squeeze to pay for it, but analysts are doubtful the spending promises can be kept without increasing the deficit.

The president said he would get "more product for our buck" in terms of buying military hardware and would ask for a "form of reimbursement" from countries making use of the US military.

In other developments:

• Mr Trump is to sign an executive order that reviews an Obama-era rule protecting waterways from development and pollution
• He said he would be a "hypocrite" if he attended the White House Correspondents' Dinner, given his difficult relationship with the media
• More than 120 retired military officers have sent a letter to lawmakers urging them to keep funding for diplomacy, saying it prevents conflict
• Billionaire Wilbur Ross is the new commerce secretary, having taken the oath of office

In the Fox News interview, Mr Trump was asked about the protests faced by some Republican politicians at town hall meetings across the country.

He said he was certain Obama loyalists were behind both those protests and White House leaks.

"In terms of him being behind things, that's politics. And it will probably continue," he added.

He was asked for more detail on how he would find the money for the 10% increase in military spending he has proposed for 2018. Proposed cuts elsewhere are unlikely to cover the proposed increase.

Which Trump will show up? Anthony Zurcher, BBC News, Washington
An address to Congress is a different kind of presidential speech. Will the American public see a different Donald Trump?

If history is any guide, that seems unlikely. Every time there has been talk of a pivot or shift of focus for candidate Trump, or president-elect Trump, or President Trump, the end result has been the same Donald Trump as always - blustering and belligerent, unvarnished and unapologetic.

Mr Trump would be well-served to take a different tack tonight, however. While he's spent his first month in office in a blizzard of activity, issuing executive orders and squelching controversies, there's been little progress with his agenda in Congress.

Top-line items like tax cuts and healthcare reform will be heavy legislative lifts with a balky conservative caucus in the House and a narrow Republican majority in the Senate, requiring presidential leadership of a kind not yet demonstrated by Mr Trump.

Recent opinion polls have shown the president's standing with the public improving after a dismal first few weeks, but any progress can quickly evaporate if his "man of action" bravado runs headfirst into congressional obstinance.

Tuesday night's speech is the president's first major opportunity to avoid that outcome.

The White House sent Mr Trump's 2018 budget blueprint, which begins on 1 October, to federal agencies on Monday.

The agencies will then review the plan and propose changes to the cuts as the White House prepares for negotiations with Congress.

The Republican-controlled Congress must approve any federal spending.

Mr Trump's plan is expected to face a backlash from Democrats and some Republicans over the planned cuts to domestic programmes.




http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39113446

 

[Nilgiri]

Even though, Donald Trump is leading in all polls so far, but his chances of getting Republican nomination is quite bleak.

Trip down memory lane for me

 

[CBU-105]

Trip down memory lane for me

whole thread is a great read leading up to Nov 8, anti/never Trumpers ki proper hawa nikal gayi thi.

also, caught bits of his congressional address,

, very presidential, and no one heckled like some were saying, even Pocahontas was applauding bits of it.

 

[F-22Raptor]

I thought Trump did a good job tonight. It might be his best speech to date. When he sticks to the issues, he's not to bad. When he goes off on his tangents about fake news, the election was rigged, and all the other crap he's a total train wreck. I hope the Donald Trump we saw tonight is what what we get moving forward. I'm not holding my breath though.

 

[cloud4000]

I thought Trump did a good job tonight. It might be his best speech to date. When he sticks to the issues, he's not to bad. When he goes off on his tangents about fake news, the election was rigged, and all the other crap he's a total train wreck. I hope the Donald Trump we saw tonight is what what we get moving forward. I'm not holding my breath though.

Surprising what the man can do if he sticks to a script and stops free-lancing. He would accomplish so much more and people would take him more seriously. The key will be if he's learning or will he revert to being the same old Donald.

 

[RabzonKhan]

Must watch, Bernie Sanders’ brilliant response to Trumps speech to Congress.
Sanders criticized Trump for leaving out important issues, especially Medicare and Medicaid. He also criticized him for breaking his pledge to “drain the swamp”.




DNC chair Perez and vice chair Ellison comment on President Trump's speech:

That is an outright lie. Most of his district is White too. Where are you getting this from?




Louis Farrakhan said those things, not Keith Ellison.

"CNN's KFile reviewed Ellison's past writings and public statements during the late 1980s through the 1990s, which revealed his decade-long involvement in the Nation of Islam. However, none of the records reviewed found examples of Ellison making any anti-Semitic comments himself, and Ellison disavowed his early comments in 2006 after it became an issue during his run for Congress."

http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/01/politics/kfile-keith-ellison-nation-of-islam/


Here's what Keith Ellison himself said about Farrakhan in a letter he wrote to the Jewish Community Relations Council of Minnesota & the Dakotas in 2006:

"I wrongly dismissed concerns that they [Farrakhan's remarks] were anti-Semitic. They were and are anti-Semitic and I should have come to that conclusion earlier than I did."

"I have long since distanced myself from and rejected the Nation of Islam due to its propagation of bigoted and anti-Semitic ideas and statements, as well as other issues. I have a deep and personal aversion to anti-Semitism regardless of its source, and I reject and condemn the anti-Semitic statements and actions of the Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan, and Khalid Muhammed."

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3Ds-8NoJgE1TkhUOVpKbE1lam9hbjJYdm8xb0pEcmZrSnN3/preview


Many Jewish Leaders endorsed him too:

"Some 300 Jewish community leaders have signed a letter in support of Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., who is running to serve as head of the Democratic National Committee.

About 100 rabbis are among the signatories, most of them noted liberals, to the letter that was issued ahead of the DNC-sponsored regional candidate forum in Phoenix on Saturday. The letter states that it is not an endorsement of Ellison for DNC chair, but rather “a call to reject the unfair and baseless accusations some have leveled at him.”

http://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/300-Jewish-leaders-sign-letter-supporting-Rep-Keith-Ellison-478580


So did Chuck Schumer, the Jewish (and very pro-Israel, establishment Democratic) Minority Leader of the Senate.




Also, remember Reverend Jeremiah Wright, who said things like this?

"The government gives them [African Americans] the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, God damn America, that's in the Bible for killing innocent people. God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme."

"After September 11, 2001, he said: "We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back into our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost."

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/DemocraticDebate/story?id=4443788&page=1


Here's how the Obama campaign responded at the time:

"In a statement to ABCNews.com, Obama's press spokesman Bill Burton said, "Sen. Obama has said repeatedly that personal attacks such as this have no place in this campaign or our politics, whether they're offered from a platform at a rally or the pulpit of a church. Sen. Obama does not think of the pastor of his church in political terms. Like a member of his family, there are things he says with which Sen. Obama deeply disagrees. But now that he is retired, that doesn't detract from Sen. Obama's affection for Rev. Wright or his appreciation for the good works he has done."

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/DemocraticDebate/story?id=4443788&page=1

Do you think Obama was so "controversial" too?

I was talking about racist Louis Farrakhan, sorry if I was not clear enough, anyhow, as I said, I’m not a Democrat and quite frankly I’m not interested in the nitty-gritty of Democratic Party’s politics.

But I hope Democrats can focus on what unites them, hint,

Trip down memory lane for me

Very funny, maybe you missed it, but I also said: “No one knows the answer to that question, too far out to tell.”

 

[RabzonKhan]

Well, well, well, Trump’s Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions has been caught lying, (thanks to the Washington Post, one of the best Link), not once, but twice, he lied to Sen. Al Franken and to Sen. Patrick Leahy at his confirmation hearing.

Sen. Al Franken asked Jeff Sessions, “if there was any evidence that anyone affiliated with Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of this campaign, what would you do?”

Sessions replied, “I’m not aware of any of those activities. I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communication with the Russians.”

Al Franken Questions Jeff Sessions On Russia:

A questionnaire from Sen. Patrick Leahy, asked Jeff Sessions, “several President-elect’s nominees or senior advisers have Russian ties. Have you been in contact with anyone connected to any part of the Russian government about the 2016 election, either before or after election day?”

Jeff Sessions answered, “no”.

Even though, Sessions has announced that he will recuse himself from any Russian probe, I think that is not enough, he has lied under oath....he should resign.

No matter how much Trump administration and the Republican Party tries to cover up, but this issue is going nowhere, there is something very fishy. To really find out what the heck is going on, Congress should appoint a special prosecutor to investigate potential ties between Trump and Russia.





Tiny hands!

Trump used two hands to drink a glass of water.

https://twitter.com/x/status/836779213298544640

 

[CBU-105]

Tiny hands!

Trump used two hands to drink a glass of water.

classic sign of the nerves, body language 101.

He delivered quite well though, addressed the recent news about some of the anti semitic and hate crime stuff, said he'll work with allies in the muslim world to stop the radicals.. and had a powerful moment with the poor widow of that fallen DEVGRU SEAL.

I thought it was very classy and charismatic of him to comfort her with that 'joke' or whatever you call it, people do that at funerals, it's a normal human comforting someone who's hurting badly thing. I found that fat pig Michael Moore's remarks quite deplorable.

Van Jones' initial remarks were telling, he spoke the truth while under the influence of the shock that President Trump had delivered by being so Presidential, too bad they bullied the shit out of him to later say "the virus is mutating" or something but it is, he's quickly learning on the job and easing into the statesman's role he needs to fulfill.

Good stuff, on an interview on Fox' fox and friends earlier that day he'd graded himself a 'C' on messaging and said he's going to change it with the speech.

I don't think he's going anywhere till he serves his 2 terms proper, it's almost a given already. He's not perfect (nobody is) but he's not a nazi, and he's certainly not a 'gift' to his political opponents and enemies, he's a jack in the box real venomous viper cobra hybrid 'gift'.

 

[ptldM3]

View attachment 381354


Well, well, well, Trump’s Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions has been caught lying, (thanks to the Washington Post, one of the best Link), not once, but twice, he lied to Sen. Al Franken and to Sen. Patrick Leahy at his confirmation hearing.

Sen. Al Franken asked Jeff Sessions, “if there was any evidence that anyone affiliated with Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of this campaign, what would you do?”

Sessions replied, “I’m not aware of any of those activities. I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communication with the Russians.”

Al Franken Questions Jeff Sessions On Russia:

A questionnaire from Sen. Patrick Leahy, asked Jeff Sessions, “several President-elect’s nominees or senior advisers have Russian ties. Have you been in contact with anyone connected to any part of the Russian government about the 2016 election, either before or after election day?”

Jeff Sessions answered, “no”.

Even though, Sessions has announced that he will recuse himself from any Russian probe, I think that is not enough, he has lied under oath....he should resign.

No matter how much Trump administration and the Republican Party tries to cover up, but this issue is going nowhere, there is something very fishy. To really find out what the heck is going on, Congress should appoint a special prosecutor to investigate potential ties between Trump and Russia.





Tiny hands!

Trump used two hands to drink a glass of water.

https://twitter.com/x/status/836779213298544640

I'm hoping for your sake and dignity you are drunk because I find it hard to believe a sober person can be this foolish. The democrat sock puppet asked Sessions if he had contacts with Russians during the campaign. He truthfully answer no. He met with the Russian embassador 2 times prior to being involved with the Trump campaign but that is not what was asked and it was not a secret he met with the embassador, there was 49 other embassador when Sessions spoke with Kislyak about gulf and grandchildren at a convention in plain view. I also didn't know it was illegal to communicate with Russian diplomats, if that's the case, the Obama administration is guilty but of course its the job of senators to speak to foreign dignitaries and diplomats.

Funny thing is many democrats also met with that same Russian embassador. The democrats are malicious and desperate, basically they are doing everything in there power to derail the Trump administration even causing this drama. It's no secret that Sessions met with the Russian embassador, it was part of his job but the democrats worded the question in a way that will make Sessions look bad and since most liberals are brain dead morons that just riot over everything. The democrats are hoping that stupid liberals fall for the false narrative and fake news and start riots hoping to destroy the administration.


By the way, where were you when the Eric Holder lied? When there is real lying by democrats they play it off but like to play word games with others and accuse the Republicans of lying when they are in fact telling the truth.


Same Russian embassador that Sessions spoke with is seen sitting and talking with democrats:

 

[F-22Raptor]

Inside Trump’s fury: The president rages at leaks, setbacks and accusations


President Trump spent the weekend at “the winter White House,” Mar-a-Lago, the secluded Florida castle where he is king. The sun sparkles off the glistening lawn and warms the russet clay Spanish tiles, and the steaks are cooked just how he likes them (well done). His daughter Ivanka and son-in-law Jared Kushner — celebrated as calming influences on the tempestuous president — joined him. But they were helpless to contain his fury.

Trump was mad — steaming, raging mad.

Trump’s young presidency has existed in a perpetual state of chaos. The issue of Russia has distracted from what was meant to be his most triumphant moment: his address last Tuesday to a joint session of Congress. And now his latest unfounded accusation — that Barack Obama tapped Trump’s phones during last fall’s campaign — had been denied by the former president and doubted by both allies and fellow Republicans.

When Trump ran into Christopher Ruddy on the golf course and later at dinner Saturday, he vented to his friend. “This will be investigated,” Ruddy recalled Trump telling him. “It will all come out. I will be proven right.”

“He was pissed,” said Ruddy, the chief executive of Newsmax, a conservative media company. “I haven’t seen him this angry.”

Trump enters week seven of his presidency the same as the six before it: enmeshed in controversy while struggling to make good on his campaign promises. At a time when White House staffers had sought to ride the momentum from Trump’s speech to Congress and begin advancing its agenda on Capitol Hill, the administration finds itself beset yet again by disorder and suspicion.

At the center of the turmoil is an impatient president increasingly frustrated by his administration’s inability to erase the impression that his campaign was engaged with Russia, to stem leaks about both national security matters and internal discord and to implement any signature achievements.

This account of the administration’s tumultuous recent days is based on interviews with 17 top White House officials, members of Congress and friends of the president, many of whom requested anonymity to speak candidly.

Gnawing at Trump, according to one of his advisers, is the comparison between his early track record and that of Obama in 2009, when amid the Great Recession he enacted an economic stimulus bill and other big-ticket items.

Trump’s team is trying again to reboot this week, with the president expected to sign a new executive order Monday implementing an entry ban for some countries after the initial one was blocked in federal court. The administration also intends to introduce a legislative plan later in the week to repeal and replace Obama’s health-care law, officials said.

The rest of Trump’s legislative plan, from tax reform to infrastructure spending, is effectively on hold until Congress first tackles the Affordable Care Act.

White House legislative staffers concluded late last week that the administration was spinning in circles on the health-care plan, amid mounting criticism from conservatives that the administration was fumbling.

With Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price on the road with Vice President Pence, a decision was made: Mick Mulvaney, director of the Office of Management and Budget, would become the point person, though officials insisted Price had not been sidelined.

On Friday, Mulvaney convened a meeting at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building with top administration officials and senior staff of House and Senate leaders to hammer out the final details of the proposal to replace the Affordable Care Act.

“Mulvaney has been essential in helping us get health care over the finish line,” said Marc Short, the White House legislative affairs director.

On Capitol Hill, Price is seen by some Republicans as more knowledgeable about health-care policy than Mulvaney, given his experience as a physician and his time as chairman of the House Budget Committee. But Mulvaney benefits from the close relationships he has forged with Trump’s top advisers and with the House’s conservative wing.

Trump, meanwhile, has been feeling besieged, believing that his presidency is being tormented in ways known and unknown by a group of Obama-aligned critics, federal bureaucrats and intelligence figures — not to mention the media, which he has called “the enemy of the American people.”

That angst over what many in the White House call the “deep state” is fomenting daily, fueled by rumors and tidbits picked up by Trump allies within the intelligence community and by unconfirmed allegations that have been made by right-wing commentators. The “deep state” is a phrase popular on the right for describing entrenched networks hostile to Trump.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-
Calif.), an advocate of improved relations between the United States and Russia, said he has told friends in the administration that Trump is being punished for clashing with the hawkish approach toward Russia that is shared by most Democrats and Republicans.

“Remember what Dwight Eisenhower told us: There is a military-industrial complex. That complex still exists and has a lot of power,” he said. “It’s everywhere, and it doesn’t like how Trump is handling Russia. Over and over again, in article after article, it rears its head.”

The president has been seething as he watches round-the-clock cable news coverage. Trump recently vented to an associate that Carter Page, a onetime Trump campaign adviser, keeps appearing on television even though he and Trump have no significant relationship.

Stories from Breitbart News, the incendiary conservative website, have been circulated at the White House’s highest levels in recent days, including one story where talk-radio host Mark Levin accused the Obama administration of mounting a “silent coup,” according to several officials.

Stephen K. Bannon, the White House chief strategist who once ran Breitbart, has spoken with Trump at length about his view that the “deep state” is a direct threat to his presidency.

Advisers pointed to Bannon’s frequent closed-door guidance on the topic and Trump’s agreement as a fundamental way of understanding the president’s behavior and his willingness to confront the intelligence community — and said that when Bannon spoke recently about the “deconstruction of the administrative state,” he was also alluding to his aim of rupturing the intelligence community and its influence on the U.S. national security and foreign policy consensus.

Bannon’s view is shared by some top Republicans.

“It’s not paranoia at all when it’s actually happening. It’s leak after leak after leak from the bureaucrats in the [intelligence community] and former Obama administration officials — and it’s very real,” said Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. “The White House is absolutely concerned and is trying to figure out a systemic way to address what’s happening.”

The mood at the White House on Tuesday night was different altogether — jubilant. Trump returned from the Capitol shortly before midnight to find his staff assembled in the residence cheering him. Finally, they all thought, they had seized control. The president had even laid off Twitter outbursts — a small victory for a staff often unable to drive a disciplined message.

“He nailed it, and he knew it,” said Kellyanne Conway, counselor to the president.

The merriment came to a sudden end on Wednesday night, when The Washington Post first reported that Attorney General Jeff Sessions met with the Russian ambassador despite having said under oath at his Senate confirmation hearing that he had no contact with the Russians.

Inside the West Wing, Trump’s top aides were furious with the defenses of Sessions offered by the Justice Department’s public affairs division and felt blindsided that Sessions’s aides had not consulted the White House earlier in the process, according to one senior White House official.

The next morning, Trump exploded, according to White House officials. He headed to Newport News, Va., on Thursday for a splashy commander-in-chief moment. The president would trumpet his plan to grow military spending aboard the Navy’s sophisticated new aircraft carrier. But as Trump, sporting a bomber jacket and Navy cap, rallied sailors and shipbuilders, his message was overshadowed by Sessions.

Then, a few hours after Trump had publicly defended his attorney general and said he should not recuse himself from the Russia probe, Sessions called a news conference to announce just that — amounting to a public rebuke of the president.

Back at the White House on Friday morning, Trump summoned his senior aides into the Oval Office, where he simmered with rage, according to several White House officials. He upbraided them over Sessions’s decision to recuse himself, believing that Sessions had succumbed to pressure from the media and other critics instead of fighting with the full defenses of the White House.

In a huff, Trump departed for Mar-a-Lago, taking with him from his inner circle only his daughter and Kushner, who is a White House senior adviser. His top two aides, Chief of Staff Reince Priebus and Bannon, stayed behind in Washington.

As reporters began to hear about the Oval Office meeting, Priebus interrupted his Friday afternoon schedule to dedicate more than an hour to calling reporters off the record to deny that the outburst had actually happened, according to a senior White House official.

“Every time there’s a palace intrigue story or negative story about Reince, the whole West Wing shuts down,” the official said.

Ultimately, Priebus was unable to kill the story. He simply delayed the bad news, as reports of Trump dressing down his staff were published by numerous outlets Saturday.

Trouble for Trump continued to spiral over the weekend. Early Saturday, he surprised his staff by firing off four tweets accusing Obama of a “Nixon/Watergate” plot to tap his Trump Tower phones in the run-up to last fall’s election. Trump cited no evidence, and Obama’s spokesman denied any such wiretap was ordered.

That night at Mar-a-Lago, Trump had dinner with Sessions, Bannon, Homeland Security Secretary John F. Kelly and White House senior policy adviser Stephen Miller, among others. They tried to put Trump in a better mood by going over their implementation plans for the travel ban, according to a White House official.

Trump was brighter Sunday morning as he read several newspapers, pleased that his allegations against Obama were the dominant story, the official said.

But he found reason to be mad again: Few Republicans were defending him on the Sunday political talk shows. Some Trump advisers and allies were especially disappointed in Sen. Marco Rubio (Fla.), who two days earlier had hitched a ride down to Florida with Trump on Air Force One.

Pressed by NBC’s Chuck Todd to explain Trump’s wiretapping claim, Rubio demurred.

“Look, I didn’t make the allegation,” he said. “I’m not the person that went out there and said it.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...22680e18d10_story.html?utm_term=.53b84bc2d5fd

Trump is an utter s**t show...

 

[CBU-105]

Trump was brighter Sunday morning as he read several newspapers, pleased that his allegations against Obama were the dominant story, the official said.

lol, that read hilariously.

but this is exactly the kind of yellow journalism/fake news that Trump's always railing against, what "sources" ?

make what you want of the guy or his policies but he does have reason to be mad about the leaks, anyone in his position would.

 

[Darmashkian]

I don't. It seems like the Democratic Party still hasn't learned its lessons....

Keith Ellison would have been the first Muslim head of the Democratic Party (though that's not why I supported him, obviously).

Both candidates seem bad to me,though I would choose Ellison to lead the Dems if I wanted victory for them.
He is a risky bet,but he seems smart & knows how to strengthen the party base.He is willing to go in a new direction & he recognized the fact that Trump could win pretty early.

i believe that Tom Vilsack could have helped to get back the forgotten rural dems back
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...f8e0dd91dc7_story.html?utm_term=.af925a9070cb

=================================================================
Tom Perez brings nothing new to the table from what I can say.He has the establishment support+fundraisers behind him which HRC has. & the Latino head/representation card doesn't matter because to all those to whom it appeals already vote Dem.

Oh yes,wasn't he the Secretary for Labour in Obama's administration? Shouldn't some of the blame for white unionized workers abandoning the Dems which has has been going on since Obama won gone to him? Getting the support of the Union heads & managements does not matter much.They endorsed HRC & campaigned for her too, yet the white workers went for Trump.

& hasn't he been accused of being a race baiter & anti-white(which many cultural liberals & even white ones are). What a way to polarize white people away from you. Isn't that one other reason why the most unpopular guy to run for POTUS post WW2 won?

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...le-not-entitled-protection-voting-rights-act/

http://freebeacon.com/politics/5-sc...t-democrats-if-thomas-perez-is-their-vp-pick/ (read the black panther part)
http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/25/democrats-unify-around-shutting-down-white-people/

& he's not moderate to many people,he is a leftist idealogue as many conservatives see(& so do I)
https://capitalresearch.org/article...-be-near-the-top-of-hillary-clintons-vp-list/
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/445269/new-dnc-chairman-tom-perez-no-moderate-all
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Keith Ellison is a Muslim convert... that's enough to make lots of new conspiracy theories about him(Check Obama as reference;the present POTUS himself made numerous insinuations about him[He's a muslim??,He was not born here]etc).
Add to that his past is very shady. Allegations of being anti-white,anti-semitic,pro-Islamism etc...

https://thefederalist.com/2017/02/28/keith-ellison-wasnt-smeared-he-was-exposed/
http://dailycaller.com/2016/11/26/keith-ellison-once-proposed-making-a-separate-country-for-blacks/

I'm not going to get into any argument about him. Remember , "IN POLITICS- Perception matter more than facts" .
& all these allegations+articles & Trump's tweets would have energized the Republican base & could have turned off independents.

BUT... wasn't Trump supposed to make HRC win. Infact during primary time her surrogates in the media gave him excessive coverage for this very reason with the belief that him as POTUS candidate will make HRC the POTUS!!

Repubs are thinking the same way about Ellison as Democrats thought about Trump-[They are screwed,LOL HRC will sweep the floor, 4 more years of the WH for us ] & look what happened. =D

Ellison will only be DNC head,not the POTUS candidate.If he could have stayed in the shadows & focused on building the grassroots & wining the trust of the white working class which Bernie(who endorsed Ellison) got. Then perhaps Victory in 2020 would be possible.

He did a good job strengthening the party in Minneapolis & winning the trust of voters & even non-voters who he encouraged to vote. He lives in Dem bastion but never takes his voters for granted & always spends time with them answering thei queries!

His 3000+ county strategy sounded good to me & was one which I saw could help the Dems nationally.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...y-in-dnc-bid/?utm_term=.e48e46d92619#comments
http://www.startribune.com/rep-ellison-hones-new-voter-turnout-strategy-for-democrats/363536691/
=====================================================================
Anyway Perez has a long way to unify the party. He has to get the moderates,the economic leftists,the cultural leftists, the union workers,Silicon valley,the liberal free market guys etc etc together.

& the way the DNC was biased against Bernie & the lack of repentance it has displayed since then doesn't help to unite the party & it also shows what they think of Bernie & his supporters

http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/0...-backfired-and-democrats-began-bashing-perez/

Look at the comments in the videos below. Trump,the liberal MSM(exaggerating fake news media)+Bannon & everybody else will get them to vote for the Dems. But the same passion & hope which Obama created in them & got them to campaign & get voters out will be very tough for any "usual establishment person" to do.

Perez has a tough job ahead of him,but if he can gain the trust & loyalty of everyone then he can change things

@Nilgiri @T-72M1 What do you think?

 

[CBU-105]

What do you think?

I don't know man, not qualified to opine on the inner workings of the Democratic party, I'm a Trump watcher (and fan) but not that deep into US politics.

@RabzonKhan @LA se Karachi and other murricans here probably have a better idea on it.

I will say this though, the opposition there don't have an answer to Trump and are very unlikely to come up with a suitable contender to face him next time around either. The man is a relentless campaigner, and unlike other prominent right wing American leaders of the past, nobody can bully him by calling him racist, sexist etc, he'll get in the gutter and beat them to a pulp instead.

he's no homophobe either

so that's another one of the left's favorite cultural weapons blunted and rendered useless.

and because the mainstream media is so maniacally opposed to him, being a Trump supporter is becoming cool and the new counter culture for young people, easy to see why too.

for god's sake, the guy took on the pope, and won !

so far so good, I just hope he doesn't march into Iran for Israel's sake or something stupid like that.

 

[RabzonKhan]

Trump's 'Muslim Ban 2.0' is still the same flawed, un-American mess
BY MARIA CARDONA, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR - 03/06/17

Trump Muslim ban take two! Or you could call it a kinder, gentler Muslim ban. But make no mistake: It is a Muslim ban, no matter how much the Trump administration tries to wrap it in better legal reasoning, more docile language, and ribbon that screams national security.

Trump and his Muslim ban still have a huge uphill battle waiting for him simply because truth, reality, facts, his own quotes, and a country who yearns to uphold American values, are not on his side.

Let’s break down the difficulties Trump will face starting immediately:

First and foremost, and incredibly damning, are the reports that intelligence analysts from Trump’s own DHS agency dispute Trump’s notion that these countries that are part of the ban pose a major threat to our national security. They found scant evidence that citizens from these countries are a danger to us.

In fact, DHS found that additional vetting before entry won’t make us safer because most foreign-born, U.S.-based violent extremists become radicalized after living in the U.S. for a number of years rather than being radicalized when they first arrive.

Second, there is still that pesky fact that, from 9/11 through today, no immigrant or refugee from the countries included in the Muslim ban has ever successfully perpetrated a terror attack on U.S. soil that resulted in any deaths of American citizens.

Trump’s team has expanded the notion to counter that there have been attempts by nationals of these countries to hurt Americans, and some have succeeded. Fair enough. This is where actual vetting (not banning), FBI, police and intelligence work comes into play and becomes more important than ever.

And if the Trump administration’s reasoning continues to be the 9/11 terrorist attacks, then the burning question is why aren’t any of the countries whose citizens have perpetrated the most horrific acts of terror on our soil, part of the Muslim ban? Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Pakistan are all countries that people came from to do us harm in the U.S.

Could it be that Trump has major business dealings in these countries and he doesn’t want to do anything to harm those business relationships that continue to enrich him while he is in the Oval Office? We will never know since Trump refuses to release his tax returns.

Third, Trump is on the record from many times during the campaign saying he wants a complete ban on Muslims entering the country.

Period.

This was his intent from the beginning and he cannot escape the echo of his own campaign promise that excited his base, pushing many to a frenzied anti-Muslim bias that has sadly resulted in violence and hate crimes perpetrated against Muslim citizens and those who look like they might be Muslim.

To put it simply, Trump’s new version of the same ole’ Muslim ban seeks to codify bias, discrimination, fear and hatred against Muslims, and in essence helps validate some of his supporters’ anti-Muslim attitudes. You can’t get more un-American than that.

Fourth, the arbitrary nature of the list of countries in the ban is underscored by the removal of Iraq from the original list. I am glad they removed Iraq and Trump realized they are our allies, but it lays bare that the Trump administration is simply using the “Obama list” of countries that it designated as needing more vetting, as an excuse and not a real reason based on national security measures.

Trump officials say that Iraq has enhanced their security procedures for vetting. That’s great! But is it true? They did that in three weeks, just since the last Muslim ban?

In fact, Former DHS Deputy General Counsel Jonathan Meyer said “Taking Iraq off does harm the case for the travel ban” and “adds to the mounting evidence that this order is not based on risk-based policy-making.”

Reports state Iraq lobbied hard to get off the list, and Secretary Tillerson pushed Trump to take them off, again proving the capricious reasoning behind the list of Muslim countries included in the ban.

Fifth, the ban was supposed to be a matter of extremely “urgent national security.” Reince Priebus and Trump himself said the reason the first ban was done so quickly was so dangerous people could not sneak in with several days’ notice.

And yet, they have waited this long. Not to get it right, but apparently so Trump could enjoy more time in the positive after-glow of his so-called “presidential” speech before Congress from last Tuesday. I guess for this administration any positive press is more important than keeping Americans safe.

Good to know where we stand.

The new Muslim ban even has a phase-in period of 10 days. Aren’t they afraid some “bad hombres” will rush in?

Sixth, the Muslim ban, even though many of the courts have upheld our American values and prevented the first one from going into effect, has already had negative economic outcomes. There has since been a “devastating drop” in tourism and a 17 percent reduction in international flights to the U.S.

And last but not least, the new “and improved” Muslim ban, just like the first Muslim ban, will not increase our national security. It will do exactly the opposite.

It puts us more at risk and makes us less safe, by allowing radical terrorist groups like ISIS to point to the Muslim ban as a reason Islam should be at war with the west.

Trump’s insistence on the ban gives these groups a powerful recruiting tool that increases the chances of radicalization that can come from anywhere, including (and most likely) from inside the United States.

We are not fighting terrorism with this ban. We are feeding it.

Americans deserve better. We deserve a day when the president and the administration govern with facts, live in reality, listen to the experts, understand history, are rigorous in seeking out the truth, and ultimately legislates to continue making this country great.

Sadly, that day is not today, and that president is not Donald Trump. Link

 

[RabzonKhan]

Vermont Elects Nation’s First Muslim Party Chair, Sends ‘Strong Message to Trump’

by ALEX SEITZ-WALD

Two days before the Trump administration rolled out the new version of what critics call a Muslim ban, Vermont Democrats elected the nation's first Muslim state party chairman.

Faisal Gill, who was elected Saturday, said the decision of the Democratic State Committee to name him interim chair is a clear rebuke of Trump.

"To have a Muslim and immigrant to be the state party chair sends a really strong message to Trump and his type of politics that this is not where the country is at," he told NBC News.

The White House released a new executive order Monday restricting travel from six Muslim-majority countries after a federal court halted an earlier version. Trump says the move is necessary for security, but Gill and other critics say it's merely an attempt to legally discriminate against Muslims.

Gill is an outsider to ultra-white, ultra-liberal Vermont in more ways than one. In a state that is nearly 95 percent white, a Pakistani-born former Republican from Virginia stands out.

"Us and Wyoming keep going back and forth for least diverse," Gill quipped.

After emigrating to the U.S. and going to law school, Gill served five years in the Navy's JAG corps before entering Republican politics in Virginia. That led to a post in the Department of Homeland Security under George W. Bush.

A clear majority of Muslim-Americans had voted for Bush in 2000, finding a natural home in the socially conservative, pro-business GOP. And after the September 11 terror attacks, Bush went out of his way to preach tolerance for the racial minority.

But Gill was a canary in the coalmine for a darker view of political Islam that crept into the party from its right flank, and eventually overtook it when Trump won the Republican nomination.

Far-right activists like Frank Gaffney, who last year denied reports that he was advising Trump, accused Gill of hiding ties to shady Muslim groups, which led to critical coverage on conservative blogs and Fox News and then, most importantly, letters from leading Republican Sens. Jon Kyl and Charles Grassley calling on DHS to investigate Gill.

By the time the investigation was concluded, Gil was cleared of wrongdoing, but done with the Republican Party for good.

Be became a Democrat and moved to California, where he volunteered on campaigns, before moving again to Vermont.

"The Republican Party basically has embraced this intense level of hatred and, to me, it's no surprise that it led to Donald Trump," he said. "The Republican Party is just not a party that speaks to minorities anymore."

Gill supported Bernie Sanders, Vermont's hometown hero, in the Democratic presidential primary last year and backed fellow Muslim Keith Ellison to be chairman of the Democratic National Committee this year. But he had to overcome a 29-year-old self-described "Berniecrat" to win the Vermont party chairmanship.

Ellison, a Minnesota congressman, would have been the first Muslim to lead a national party, but fell short in a vote this month to former Labor Sec. Tom Perez.

In a statement, Ellison also condemned Trump's new travel ban. "Let's not kid ourselves: the new Muslim Ban is still a Muslim Ban. Yes, it's lawyered up a bit, but that's all," he said.

Gill will have to run again for a full term as party chairman, and could face stiffer opposition next time in a state where Sanders wins elections by 3-to-1 margins. He's fairly new to the state and failed to win a Democratic primary for a state Senate seat last year. Link

@LA se Karachi, your views?