car54 January 27, 2017 Share January 27, 2017 If the press took 3 days off and did not report one thing with Trump's name on it, he'd have a nervous breakdown. That is part of why he's getting more and more erratic as his first week goes on--being in the news gets him high--and now he's' on TV and in the news all day every day for anything he does or says and it's got him high as a kite. Bannon is a dangerous man---and the family needs to intervene and get him out of that office. 7 Link to comment
DXD526 January 27, 2017 Share January 27, 2017 Did anyone else think Sen. Franken looked like a Stepford politician? He had this dead look in his eyes, like a robot. I depend on him to pick me up and inspire me when things get rough, but last night, he had the opposite effect. He looked so beaten down, like he's already given up. Is this the new Dem strategy? It scared the shit out of me. Dominionists control our government and we can't even count on the likes of Franken to fight for sanity? We are really screwed... 4 Link to comment
BuckeyeLou January 27, 2017 Share January 27, 2017 18 minutes ago, DXD526 said: Did anyone else think Sen. Franken looked like a Stepford politician? He had this dead look in his eyes, like a robot. I depend on him to pick me up and inspire me when things get rough, but last night, he had the opposite effect. He looked so beaten down, like he's already given up. Is this the new Dem strategy? It scared the shit out of me. Dominionists control our government and we can't even count on the likes of Franken to fight for sanity? We are really screwed... That is what I thought! Sen. Franken has always been an energetic spokesman for progressives, but on Rachel's show, I thought he seemed "low energy"(to borrow from the Donald), he seemed like he had just given up. This worries me, have the Democrats in Congress just 'given up" and figure they can not do anything against Republican plans?! 2 Link to comment
M. Darcy January 27, 2017 Share January 27, 2017 I agree - what was with Al? And, I don't get it. 3 million people marched - the Democrats know we have their back and they are still not fighting. IMO unless they vote no on all the nominees - they are not fighting. And we all know if HRC had won, that's what the Republicans would be doing. And, if they need justification - the Republicans stole a Supreme Court seat. And everything else they did the past 8 years to obstruct. They obstructed and they won. Follow their playbook. 10 Link to comment
jjj January 27, 2017 Share January 27, 2017 Rachel said at one point last night that Bannon is hardly ever in the pictures of Trump, and she saw him off on the side for one of the edict signings, like he did not want to be seen. So many commentators are saying the Trump's advisors really need to get him focused and off the twitter and television. But I think Bannon in particular wants Donald off balance -- so that he thinks the only people he can count on are the very ones who are pushing him into crazyland. And all reports are that there is a lot of unhealthy competition among the advisors, so each one is manipulating Trump in a different way. 1 Link to comment
car54 January 27, 2017 Share January 27, 2017 I thought Franken looked like hell last night. He is a devoted public servant and I think it must be depressing as hell for a Democrat to go to work every day knowing that no matter what you do to fight, you don't have the numbers to really make a difference--like getting run over every day. I'm disturbed by the lack of a cohesive plan--I know he said they have one but from how he looked last night, it isn't a good plan, or he'd have been excited about it. 4 Link to comment
alias1 January 27, 2017 Share January 27, 2017 Oh sure, Rachel, you think we have a plan? Sure we have a plan. I'm just not going to tell you about it. But sure, we have a plan (ahem). 3 Link to comment
ScoobieDoobs January 27, 2017 Share January 27, 2017 (edited) Anyone else get the impression Rach is really angry the picks are "sailing" thru? Yup, that's the word she used -- "sailing", when she was speaking to the cam & when she was interviewing tired/worn-out Al. Franken looked completely defeated. Surprise us, Al, with your strategy. Meantime, those picks are sailing thru -- just as Rach says. And you & your colleagues ain't doing shit to stop it. Ugh, just ugh. Edited January 28, 2017 by ScoobieDoobs 3 Link to comment
ruby24 January 27, 2017 Share January 27, 2017 They seem to need to be reminded and told over and over again of one thing- don't treat him like a normal Republican president. That's what Rachel should say to them. I think they're falling into the habit of doing that. 5 Link to comment
car54 January 28, 2017 Share January 28, 2017 Here's another chapter to the Russian spy story Rachel coverend last night. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/27/mystery-death-ex-kgb-chief-linked-mi6-spys-dossier-donald-trump/?WT.mc_id=tmg_share_tw Just saw a statement by Sen McConnell that he is NOT in favor of removing the Russia sanctions. 3 Link to comment
jjj January 28, 2017 Share January 28, 2017 1 hour ago, car54 said: Here's another chapter to the Russian spy story Rachel coverend last night. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/27/mystery-death-ex-kgb-chief-linked-mi6-spys-dossier-donald-trump/?WT.mc_id=tmg_share_tw Just saw a statement by Sen McConnell that he is NOT in favor of removing the Russia sanctions. And Senator McCain issued a very strongly worded statement against lifting sanctions against Russia today. I thought Rachel reported on the unfreezing of the website/climate change/embargo of postings last night, but she is leading with that on Friday. And covering the hiring freeze at the Veterans Administration hiring freeze, which left hundreds of needed vacant positions at the VA hospital in my community. And apparently *that* freeze is also over, in a limited way. Loved that she read through the entire list of job titles now exempt from the freeze. So, constant eruptions and outrage seem to be the way that the country has a check on these insane proclamations from the White House. Trump really seems to think he is the emperor in a fairy tale, with no need to consult anyone. But dealing with a press corps and public that never appears in the fairy tales. "Pressure works" "The sample is shining!" I did like how she connected all that. 3 Link to comment
car54 January 28, 2017 Share January 28, 2017 I read about the metallic hydrogen thing earlier and cynically thought ...yes, but we have an anti-science regime in control now...but Rachel made me excited about it again with her story. 1 Link to comment
BuckeyeLou January 28, 2017 Share January 28, 2017 13 hours ago, car54 said: Here's another chapter to the Russian spy story Rachel coverend last night. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/27/mystery-death-ex-kgb-chief-linked-mi6-spys-dossier-donald-trump/?WT.mc_id=tmg_share_tw Just saw a statement by Sen McConnell that he is NOT in favor of removing the Russia sanctions. Wow....this is more & more like a spy thriller...sheesh, and Donald and his people think we can just ignore this?! Why oh Why arent Congress investigating the Russian ties?! 4 Link to comment
ScoobieDoobs January 28, 2017 Share January 28, 2017 (edited) Joy Reid just signed off her show commenting on Orange Buffoon's call today to Putin. She said -- Ah, fielding a call from the home office? We need similar snark from you, Rach! Edited January 28, 2017 by ScoobieDoobs 6 Link to comment
car54 January 29, 2017 Share January 29, 2017 (edited) Notice they announced the muslim band late Friday so nobody's talking about the call to Putin now. I hope the prime time anchors continue to put the pieces together on all of this drama like Rachel is doing. Between Chris, Lawrence, Rachel, and Joy I depend on them to pull it all together. Edited January 29, 2017 by car54 9 Link to comment
ScoobieDoobs January 29, 2017 Share January 29, 2017 I think it was one of Rach's recent guests (maybe it was Tom Perez) who predicted where the Orange Buffoon would be stopped first -- BY THE COURTS. And here we go. Don't think for a second Rach isn't all over how the Orange Buffoon is with Putin. She's talking about it every nite. But it sounded like this call wasn't much. Calm before the storm? Oh, we can be sure ole Putie is ordering Trump to lift all sanctions. Try it, Orange Buffoon. That will be his downfall. And will Paul Ryan & Jared Kushner still be grinning all the damn time? Doubt it. This is just the second week & the insanity from this lunatic never ends. Four years of this lunacy? I can't even look a week ahead, let alone 4 years. Rach sometimes seems a bit breathless covering all of the craziness from the Orange Buffoon. But thank goodness she seems very much up to the job of being on top of it. Does she ever look tired & worn-out, the way Al Franken did? Hell no! The stark contrast between them was all too apparent. 3 Link to comment
Calvada January 29, 2017 Share January 29, 2017 Sen. Franken saying oh, we have a plan, we definitely have a plan, but I can't tell you about it made me think first of the president's secret plan to fight inflation (man, I miss The West Wing) and second, the Dems have no plan, they are just dithering. Get it the fuck together, Dems, this is serious shit. If you don't, I shudder for the future of America. 10 Link to comment
M. Darcy January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 Quote Get it the fuck together, Dems, this is serious shit. And its a easy plan to come up with - do exactly what the Republicans did the past 8 years. Rachel called in to MSNBC last night. With all that was going on, they were pretty much on most of the weekend. Saturday night when everything was happening CNN actually was airing a story on the 80s. 6 Link to comment
fastiller January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 On 1/28/2017 at 10:44 PM, ScoobieDoobs said: <snip> This is just the second week & the insanity from this lunatic never ends. Four years of this lunacy? I can't even look a week ahead, let alone 4 years. Rach sometimes seems a bit breathless covering all of the craziness from the Orange Buffoon. But thank goodness she seems very much up to the job of being on top of it. Does she ever look tired & worn-out, the way Al Franken did? Hell no! The stark contrast between them was all too apparent. There's the matter that he's considerably closer to the 'front lines' than she is. Also there's the 23 year difference in their ages. 3 Link to comment
ScoobieDoobs January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, M. Darcy said: And its a easy plan to come up with - do exactly what the Republicans did the past 8 years. Rachel called in to MSNBC last night. With all that was going on, they were pretty much on most of the weekend. Saturday night when everything was happening CNN actually was airing a story on the 80s. Clearly, it's a purposeful strategy they (Trump & his Satanic clan) pull this shit over the weekend. Time off to relax on the weekends, Rach? Don't count on it anymore. Not now that Bannon is more obviously taking control. Let's just hope Rach stays focused & cool (as she always dependably is)-- and doesn't end up morphing into tired, worn-out & defeated Al Franken. Dems seem absolutely useless, lost & completely ineffective. Will Rach take notice of this? She was saying all last week it's people who can make change -- when politicians fail to or make extremely unpopular policies. She said it works SOMETIMES -- when people voice their opposition, to stop policies they are against. But she emphasized it does work. And that's what we're seeing now. Seems like every day. Man, it's exhausting. Edited January 30, 2017 by ScoobieDoobs 1 Link to comment
car54 January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 Ok, my show suggestion for tonight is that Rachel looks into why the Judicial Branch of our government explainer was deleted from the WH website the day after the inauguration. http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/316802-judicial-branch-explainer-missing-from-wh-website Link to comment
jjj January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 The "Judicial Branch" is back on the White House website. So Rachel can focus on the many, many other items that need attention and scrutiny. 3 hours ago, car54 said: Ok, my show suggestion for tonight is that Rachel looks into why the Judicial Branch of our government explainer was deleted from the WH website the day after the inauguration. http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/316802-judicial-branch-explainer-missing-from-wh-website 2 Link to comment
car54 January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 They heard me complaining about it!!!! Since they ignored the court order about not holding people over the muslim band, I figured that was their next target--just get rid of it. 2 Link to comment
teddysmom January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 Quote Dems seem absolutely useless, lost & completely ineffective. Will Rach take notice of this? She was saying all last week it's people who can make change -- when politicians fail to or make extremely unpopular policies. She said it works SOMETIMES -- when people voice their opposition, to stop policies they are against. But she emphasized it does work. And that's what we're seeing now. Seems like every day. Man, it's exhausting. Dems in Congress better take note or 2010 will look like a day at the beach when we get done with them. Joy Reid also pointed out that Democrats are worthless right now. It's the people that are leading while they stand there wondering what they should do. I heard them say at their retreat in West Virginia that they talked to Trump supporters to find out what to do to get people to vote for them. So, yeah I guess we're on our own. 5 Link to comment
jjj January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 Oh, my: this on Rachel's Thursday opening, which was à la John le Carré in its depiction of Russian spywork: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/norman-solomon/is-rachel-maddow-becoming_b_14489912.html 1 Link to comment
car54 January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 Malcolm Nance was on both CNN and MSNBC and said the same things about the Russia story as Rachel did, and he's most definitely not woo woo. 3 Link to comment
BuckeyeLou January 31, 2017 Share January 31, 2017 Rachel is now following up her show tonight with an appearance on Lawrence's show...discussing the firing of the Acting Attorney General, reminds everyone of Nixon's "Saturday Night Massacre". Now we have a Judicial Crisis...what is next?! 3 Link to comment
izabella January 31, 2017 Share January 31, 2017 (edited) 19 minutes ago, BuckeyeLou said: Now we have a Judicial Crisis...what is next?! They'll toss out something for the Pence group, so an attack on abortion or LGBTQ rights seem likely. That will be part of the Court debate. Meanwhile, what is he distracting us from? Lifting sanctions on Russia? Investigations into his campaign's ties to Russia? Edited January 31, 2017 by izabella 3 Link to comment
jjj January 31, 2017 Share January 31, 2017 The truest sign of the idiocy of this administration is that it would release a major announcement like firing the acting AG *during* The Rachel Maddow Show. You know the Friday Night Dump? They will catch on soon, and start an 11:30 PM dump. This from the Twitter account of Laurence Tribe (Harvard Law): "Rachel Maddow suddenly called me at home 30 mins ago to talk to her on live TV about the breaking news of Trump's Monday Night Massacre." Glad he picked up on that call. ALERT: Rachel is going back on the air live at midnight; 9:00 PM Pacific time. 6 Link to comment
attica January 31, 2017 Share January 31, 2017 I appreciated seeing that clip of Sheldon Whitehouse's town meeting. You could see his spine stiffening right in front of the crowd. 'Oh, my constituents WANT me to be hardline. Um, um, okay!' I hope more Dems get the same treatment, with the same result. 6 Link to comment
izabella January 31, 2017 Share January 31, 2017 8 minutes ago, attica said: I appreciated seeing that clip of Sheldon Whitehouse's town meeting. You could see his spine stiffening right in front of the crowd. 'Oh, my constituents WANT me to be hardline. Um, um, okay!' I hope more Dems get the same treatment, with the same result. That was really great to see. I think the Dems are realizing that there is a lot more support out there for the Dem platform than they think, and more opposition to Trumputin and his unqualified Cabinet picks than they think. Just because the EC elected Trumputin doesn't mean the majority of Americans did, nor does it mean the majority of Americans support Trumputin, especially their constituents. The people are speaking, loud and clear, and I hope the Dems realize that we will back them if they Resist! 8 Link to comment
ScoobieDoobs January 31, 2017 Share January 31, 2017 Rach is not confrontational with her guests. That's not her style. But she isn't afraid to ask tough questions. Anyone notice she threw a jab at Al Franken for voting thru Mattis? She showed Mattis standing over Trump while he signed the Muslim ban & snarkily asked -- This was supposedly one of the "good picks"? Now, will Franken be back & would she ask him about this further? Hmmmm. Well, if DeVos gets in, then all of these horrors are gonna get in. But at least Dems will have put up a fight -- and clearly shown the public the unqualified corrupt bunch they are, before they wreak havoc on the various departments they are supposed to be overseeing. So public pressure on Dems has not been wasted. Rach's support is really appreciated as well. What Rach can also do is continue to emphasize what Bannon has said in the past -- that his goal is to DISRUPT & DESTROY THE GOVERNMENT. After the election he said this was not his goal anymore. Liar! With these horrific picks, one more nightmarish than the next, that is definitely still his intention. Hopefully Rach will be spotlighting Bannon. He is the one running things now. Interesting how Flynn has been shoved aside. Next is Kushner. Rach was right to note the importance of Yates being fired & its historical importance. But today is another day in the madness of Trumpworld. Will this story be forgotten or will Rach tie in Yates' relevance to a bigger picture? I enjoy watching Rach connect the dots. 3 Link to comment
jjj January 31, 2017 Share January 31, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, ScoobieDoobs said: Rach is not confrontational with her guests. That's not her style. But she isn't afraid to ask tough questions. ... She showed Mattis standing over Trump while he signed the Muslim ban & snarkily asked -- This was supposedly one of the "good picks"? Now, will Franken be back & would she ask him about this further? Hmmmm. I trust the people I know who have worked with Mattis, and when I saw Rachel point to him standing next to Trump while signing that order, I really wondered if Mattis even knew what was being signed. And today we learned that he did not know what was in that order, and that he is more pissed than any of the other Cabinet members who should have been part of the discussion. As they said on "Morning Joe" this morning-- what is in Mattis' past that made him untrustworthy? Like informing him would lead to a flood of last-minute immigrants. I have no sympathy for any part of this shitshow (the Morning Joe term for this), but Mattis was deliberately not told what was in that document. I do not expect Rachel to clarify, but that was a wrong conclusion she jumped to. Did you all see that the staff working on this had to sign non-disclosure agreements? I talked with a former Congressional staffer this morning, and he said he would have been fired immediately if he had signed that and kept his boss in the dark. (He was not asked to sign this -- already had left his staffer position.) Morning Joe said they all should be fired, and if any one of them had been his staffer, he would have "thrown their shit out the door" called the capitol police to put them in handcuffs if they dared show up the next day. Edited January 31, 2017 by jjj 3 Link to comment
teddysmom January 31, 2017 Share January 31, 2017 9 minutes ago, jjj said: I have no sympathy for any part of this shitshow (also a Morning Joe term for this), but Mattis was deliberately not told what was in that document. I do not expect Rachel to clarify, but that was a wrong conclusion she jumped to. Did you all see that the staff working on this had to sign non-disclosure agreements? I talked with a former Congressional staffer this morning, and he said he would have been fired immediately if he had signed that and kept his boss in the dark. (He was not asked to sign this -- already had left his staffer position.) Morning Joe said they all should be fired, and if any one of them had been his staffer, he would have "thrown their shit out the door" called the capitol police to put them in handcuffs if they dared show up the next day. First time in a long time I've agreed with Joe Scarborough. Members of Congress that find out it was their staff should come forward and announce they found out their staff worked on this and they've been fired. 4 Link to comment
ScoobieDoobs January 31, 2017 Share January 31, 2017 Guess NDA's are gonna be a given with this lunatic & his evil henchmen ruling over us. Joy Reid said on her show over the weekend, this is clearly the "leakiest" administration in recent years. Get on it, Rach! 2 Link to comment
car54 January 31, 2017 Share January 31, 2017 So evidently there is news that DeVos may have plagarized the answers to some of her questions. How helpful. Also, Bannon may need to have Senate approval to be on the NSC, so that forces him out of the darkness. That news cheered me right up today. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/3021 Glad Rachel gets to do the post-Rose ceremony play by play after the SC announcement. I hope they have all the evening anchors on together. 1 Link to comment
ScoobieDoobs February 1, 2017 Share February 1, 2017 Good show tonite, Rach! At least it was hopeful that Dems finally have the chance to block Trump & the Rethugs. Glad Rach read Elizabeth Warren's very eloquent & sharp statement on why Gorsuch is an awful pick for SCOTUS. ANY Dem senator who doesn't oppose this nomination should be spotlighted by Rachel. Oppose this nom, Dems! Oppose, oppose, oppose! And no, it's not just about pulling the same shit that Rethugs pulled with the Garland nom. As her guest, Senator Merkley said, this is nom who has shown many, many times over he cares much more about the welfare of corporations rather than individuals. This a shitty nom. Prove to us Dem senators you aren't spineless & useless! Oppose this shit nom unanimously! 6 Link to comment
ScoobieDoobs February 1, 2017 Share February 1, 2017 While I'm glad Rach & Merkley struck a hopeful tone, how Dems could block this nom, it seemed misleading to me. Why no mention that Rethugs have the votes "to simply eliminate the use of the filibuster against Supreme Court nominees" (quoted from editorial in NY Times)? Could this nom go thru no matter what Dems do? Still think they should fight & oppose. Gosh, this is soooo Rachel's style for a snarky story to report on- https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/01/opinion/where-is-jared-kushner.html Poor Jared. Wasn't it just a few days ago -- when anyone would be challenged to find a pic of him where he wasn't grinning, grinning, grinning? Ah well, his last shit-eating grin was in that unfortunate "Let 'em eat cake" tweet from Ivanka -- with him in a tux & Ivanka also widely grinning in her Reynolds Wrap dress worth 5 thou. And that was posted on Saturday nite. Er, bad timing much? Looks like Jared ain't smiling anymore. Oh Rach, please, please, please cover this one. Jared was supposed to be our savior from the evilness of Bannon, right? The Trump whisperer? Looks like that's gone off the rails pretty quickly. Mmmm, kay. Btw, also add in Trump speaking about the Holocaust, while pointedly & purposely NEVER mentioning Jews. So between the fact that Jared's grandparents are Holocaust survivors, & Republican Jews have spoken out STRONGLY against Trump doing this, I'd say Jared has plenty of reasons NOT to smile now. 4 Link to comment
Keepitmoving February 1, 2017 Share February 1, 2017 (edited) Quote I trust the people I know who have worked with Mattis, and when I saw Rachel point to him standing next to Trump while signing that order, I really wondered if Mattis even knew what was being signed. And today we learned that he did not know what was in that order, and that he is more pissed than any of the other Cabinet members who should have been part of the discussion. As they said on "Morning Joe" this morning-- what is in Mattis' past that made him untrustworthy? Like informing him would lead to a flood of last-minute immigrants. This is baffling to me. If he didn't read it and stood by while that horrible excuse for a human being signed it, then that's on Mattis. He should have read it, voiced his decent like the Deputy Attorney General did who was just fired, and risk being fired himself for refusing to stand along side Trump as he signed it. He's pissed? Yeah right. I mean it's one thing if he wasn't around at all when they had meetings and if he weren't invited to stand by that thing while cameras were rolling. But that wasn't the case, he wasn't presented as missing in action. He was presented to be standing right next to the thing even if he wasn't invited to the meetings and that makes him standing there beside it, look even worse, he looks like fucking fool. I mean knowing the likes of that thing in the Oval Office, there is no way that I would stand beside it, while it signs executive orders that I haven't read, hell no. And I'm supposed to be the one with the experience in government, I'm supposed to be the one the establishment was kinda OK with because I could be a check on that thing. Although, "maddog" and putting a check on insane behavior?....um, yeah. But no, I'm just going to stand beside him with a shit eating grin and watch him sign a document of which I do not know the details of, really? Then I'm going to have people float it out there that I'm pissed, right. There is no alternative, WE. ARE. AT. WAR. I know it, the democratic base knows it, and so does this columnist Leonhardt. I want to see democrats come on these political shows with one objective, to be asked questions about republicans just so they can answer with a "NO" every time, LOL. Before the interviewer even gets the damn question completely out of their mouths, as soon as they hear republican in the question, they should cut it off with the word "NO." That's what I want to hear and it also makes for a great SNL skit. Edited February 1, 2017 by Keepitmoving 12 Link to comment
ScoobieDoobs February 2, 2017 Share February 2, 2017 Rach is doing a great job of covering the local protests in front of the offices of Senators. Hopefully this will happen to everyone in Congress. Love the protests in front of Schumer's home. 4 Link to comment
Keepitmoving February 2, 2017 Share February 2, 2017 (edited) That Chuck Schumer report card poster was priceless, a C- Work Needs Improvement, just priceless. Edited February 2, 2017 by Keepitmoving 7 Link to comment
car54 February 2, 2017 Share February 2, 2017 One of the shows reported today that although Mattis is travelling, that he had some input to soften what Flynn said when he walked into Spicer's daily briefing. 1 Link to comment
M. Darcy February 2, 2017 Share February 2, 2017 The beginning of Rachel's show made me cry - but happy tears. Heh, that line by the Rabbi - a lot of space for a small amount of Jews (or something like that). And the total difference in Muslim Day in Texas. That that many people showed up in support is wonderful. 6 Link to comment
teddysmom February 2, 2017 Share February 2, 2017 I can't wait to see Rachel's head explode tonight while covering what Trump said during the prayer breakfast. The Oval Office is basically All Bannon All The Time. All this religious stuff doesn't mean shit to Trump, I'm surprised he doesn't burst into flames when he walks in a church. 9 Link to comment
ScoobieDoobs February 3, 2017 Share February 3, 2017 (edited) And just where does Jared Kushner fit in with the push on all this church stuff? Latest pics of Jared? He's lookin' like Munch's The Scream. So hoping Rach will be spotlighting Bannon & Kushner. Rach looked really worried about how badly Trump is fucking up dealing with just about EVERY nation. Me too, Rach, me too. Guess it's gonna be, who's he gonna piss off today? Spicer is a moron. Thanks for the giggle, Rach, that he couldn't get PDB right & stupidly called it PBD & might as well have called it a BLT. What an idiot. Are Trump & Bannon gonna get us into a world war? Is it only a matter of time? Edited February 3, 2017 by ScoobieDoobs 5 Link to comment
stormy February 3, 2017 Share February 3, 2017 Well to be fair, we're going to go to war with Chicago and UC Berkeley too. 2 Link to comment
ScoobieDoobs February 3, 2017 Share February 3, 2017 Wow, lead story now outta Politico is Jared & Ivanka pushed hard for Trump to NOT destroy all the LGBT protections Obama put in place. Surely this goes right up against what Bannon wants. Wow, wow, wow. Bannon might be able out maneuver Jared, but will he win against Ivanka? Oh, Rach, ya gotta be all over this. 2 Link to comment
sistermagpie February 3, 2017 Share February 3, 2017 27 minutes ago, ScoobieDoobs said: Wow, lead story now outta Politico is Jared & Ivanka pushed hard for Trump to NOT destroy all the LGBT protections Obama put in place. Surely this goes right up against what Bannon wants. Wow, wow, wow. Bannon might be able out maneuver Jared, but will he win against Ivanka? I read some comment on this where the person said they thought this was about J&I trying to get some good press for themselves since they've been getting the Marie Antoinette reading. Would be interesting. It reminds me of those scenes in the movie The Queen where you get the sense of the Royal Family sort of throwing each other under the bus in the press. 4 Link to comment
ScoobieDoobs February 3, 2017 Share February 3, 2017 (edited) I don't trust Ivanka or Jared for a second. They sure enjoy their luxury lifestyle. And they're both greedy as hell & extremely calculating. Jared is clearly willing to publicly ignore Bannon's well-known anti-Semitism. It's not known why he's doing this. We can be sure he has his reasons & his own agenda. Is he motivated by power, greed & influence? Ya think? And Ivanka? She has her own reasons for pushing against slashing LGBT rights. If Daddy Dearest does this, as we know Bannon & Pence will push hard, hard, hard for him to do, poor widdle Ivanka can kiss her fashion brand buh-bye. I've heard Joy Reid say specifically she's not thrilled with Ivanka. Almost nobody criticizes Ivanka. The "Let 'em eat cake tweet" was the first time Ivanka actually got some flack -- almost on the level of what Smellyanne gets every day. Never heard Rach get snarky about Ivanka. I'd be surprised & disappointed if she isn't on this tonite. Edited February 4, 2017 by ScoobieDoobs 9 Link to comment
ruby24 February 3, 2017 Share February 3, 2017 They just want to get back into New York's social scene. 2 Link to comment
Recommended Posts