Donald John Trump: 2016 President-Elect

[KIMBERLYANN11]

13 hours ago, mythoughtis said:

They should charge that Twitter user with assault/battery. He/she did every bit as much damage as physically hitting Kurt. My son has seizures. In addition to what others have said, a person who has a seizure cannot drive for at least 6 months( varies by state)and has to have a doctor certify the seizures are prevented with medication before they CAN drive again. This is very disruptive to their work and personal life. Not everyone lives in a city large enough to have convenient 24 hour public transportation, or understanding employers.

In other news.trump tweeted that the Chinese should keep our stolen drone. Does he understand they can take it apart, learn our technology and use it against us? 

What astounds me is that this is news and I haven't seen anything about it on the mainstream media. (not that I am glued to mainstream media).  There should be outrage.  People should be demanding that the POS that did this ends up with his head on a pole (figuratively).  Yes, China is a big story, of course, but this story says volumes about the orange man's followers.  He's not president yet - he needs to keep his nose out of China for the time being.  He should be spending his time telling people that attacks like the one on Kurt are unconscionable and they need to stop immediately.  But of course he won't because he approves of it. Because he's a piece of human garbage.

9 hours ago, Kokapetl said:

This new "cuck" insult makes me laugh. The people who use it are basically telling everyone what one of their biggest fears is.  

And it sounds ridiculous.  Like a baby trying to say kaka.

[ClareWalks]

What it looks like when you are the leader of a country and you have a rally to support yourself.

[Chicken Wing]

41 minutes ago, ClareWalks said:

What it looks like when you are the leader of a country and you have a rally to support yourself.

Also, that one guard in the middle foreground makes for a very unintentionally awkward photo.

[ClareWalks]

4 minutes ago, Chicken Wing said:

Also, that one guard in the middle foreground makes for a very unintentionally awkward photo.

It's fun to speculate which member of Trump's administration that guy is :)

[Duke Silver]

So....is anyone else as worried as I am at the utter lack of Steve Bannon in the news?  I mean, it worries me because it makes me think he's extremely busy communing with the craziest right wing elements (e.g. Alex Jones & Richard Spencer-types) devising plans.  We see Priebus, the so-called "co-equal" of Bannon...but never Bannon himself since he was officially installed as senior advisor.

[sistermagpie]

1 hour ago, Duke Silver said:

Also, his meatball spokesman, Jason (??) Miller tweeted last night (I posted it here somewhere) that Trump had "done it again" or something, implying Trump had negotiated the return of the drone.  Yeah....suuuure.  Then Trump tweets that China can keep it.  What a fucking clown car.  The "best people" huh, Donald?

And trying to imply that the Tweet itself made China give it back. Which I'm sure plenty believed--and still do even after Trump Tweeted they should just keep it. 

I thought the Trump sketch on SNL was uncomfortably accurate when Putin and Tillerson start planning their how their future oil deals on a map and Trump jumps in with “And then we’re going to attack Vanity Fair, right? Terrible magazine!” So many useful idiots.

[Shannon L.]

3 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

And trying to imply that the Tweet itself made China give it back. Which I'm sure plenty believed--and still do even after Trump Tweeted they should just keep it. 

I thought the Trump sketch on SNL was uncomfortably accurate when Putin and Tillerson start planning their how their future oil deals on a map and Trump jumps in with “And then we’re going to attack Vanity Fair, right? Terrible magazine!” So many useful idiots.

Last night's SNL skit was probably the most scathing one yet. 

[Rapunzel]

23 hours ago, backformore said:

Rediculous

Busineses

Rediculous

These are all errors he's made that spellcheck would correct, but he makes them anyway!!!

The man is well and truly a moron with vocabulary and spelling skills worse than most 3rd graders. Actually, I apologize to third graders - they are far more intelligent and have more common sense and wisdom than this douchebag who proclaims to be "like, a smart person" who doesn't need intelligence briefings. He clearly would not be able to comprehend them anyway even if they were put into the "Dick and Jane" or "Spot the Dog" type picture books that were once used to help kids learn to read.

It is now extremely obvious that his Penn/Wharton degree was bought and not earned, but I don't think there was really ever any doubt about that.

Edited December 18, 2016 by Rapunzel

[candall]

19 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

...

With the Trumps, though, they use it more like a slush fund/fake charity. They I guess started out putting money into it and getting the deduction. Then they might or might not have donated the actual money to charity. Then they started getting other people to donate to it and they I guess used it to get PR . . .

Eek, this reminded me of something I had forgotten!  I saw a very weird clip from way back when the DT campaign was just getting rolling and he seemed to be a big joke instead of our own little Endtimes pizza deliveryman.

The film clip was of some charity that was honoring the people sitting on the dais for their generous zillion-dollar donations . . . and all of a sudden DT appeared out of nowhere, squeezing in for all the press photos and murmuring modestly how "it was nothing, really, no thanks necessary" blah blah blah.  Someone said, "What the hell is HE doing in there?  He didn't donate a dime!"

At the time, I thought, "Well, that's pretty fucking bizarre."  (Obviously I've now traveled a long, long way down the "bizarre" road.)

 

19 hours ago, backformore said:

so, if I paid an artist $5,000 to paint a portrait of myself, then donated the portrait to charity to auction off, I just "donated" 5k.  then when I buy the same portrait at the auction for 5K, I just donated another 5K to the charity.  I can deduct both amounts on taxes, even though the bottom line is that I paid 10K and have a portrait.  But if I  get other people to donate that 5K, then I used their money and ended up spending 5k for a portrait and can call it "charity". IF the artist can be persuaded to "donate" the portrait, even better. 

Similarly, if I donate 50K to a charity, then have the charity hold a gala in my hotel, and charge them 50K, I can write off the "donation"  even though I essentially moved money from my left pocket to my right.

Multiply that by a thousand different phony-ass deals, and you have an idea of how Trump does stuff.

So, the new "Coffee With Ivanka" scam was to sell 45 minutes of First Family Facetime for $75,000.  [That's $800,000 for an eight-hour work day.  Tax free.  Nice!]  The money goes to their own "foundation," after which they take the tax write off, deduct a percentage for "processing & handling," and maybe or maybe not pass any of the rest along. 

That's quite the racket.  They must be extremely bummed out that isn't going to be a thing.

[backformore]

[Rapunzel]

16 hours ago, Padma said:

Those 4 words work. :(  They say he's "a poor man's idea of a rich man" and he's also a "stupid person's idea of a smart man".  I guess he wasn't paying attention on Thursday (because, really, he doesn't actually CARE), when the civilians were supposed to be allowed "safe" passage on buses out of Aleppo but when they arrived to board, they were fired on from the ground and the air.

On a related note, here are 3 Professors of Psychiatry who wrote the WH expressing their concerns for the president-elect's mental health and recommending a full professional evaluation:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-greene/is-donald-trump-mentally_b_13693174.html

I just got an update on my mobile from the BBC that says:

Quote

Aleppo battle: Rebels burn Syria evacuation busses.

Several buses en route to transport the sick and injured from two government held villages in Syria's Idlib province have been burned by rebels.

It has thrown the latest efforts to evacuate besieged areas into doubt.

See the article for more details: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-38358177. How about those "safe zones" Trump? Clearly, as I mentioned in my initial post about this, they will target "safe zones" if they are targeting evacuation buses. Because it can't be said enough - He's a fucking moron.

ETA: In addition, if they are bombing the evac busses, people won't even make it to these so-called "safe zones" anyway. How is he going to solve that minor logistical issue? I'm sure he'll say that he'll come up with something "just terrific - the most fantastic solution ever" and then proceed to give no details because he has no fucking idea.

Edited December 18, 2016 by Rapunzel
Added link to article

[Lunata]

59 minutes ago, stewedsquash said:

Another slow news day. Guess Trump hasn't ended the world yet today. 

There is this. When Michelle goes low, Trump goes...soft?

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/12/17/trump-rebuts-michelle-obamas-remarks-on-the-loss-of-hope/

Larry Elder is no fan of Michelle's comments:

http://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2016/12/17/larry-elder-imagine-the-outcry-if-laura-bush-said-this-as-obama-took-office/

He also talks about tyrants:

http://twitchy.com/samj-3930/2016/12/18/tyrant-larry-elder-points-out-what-a-real-tyrant-looks-like-hint-his-name-rhymes-with-go-llama/

I think I will post some about Elder in the media thread. Fascinating man is he. I have been reading him for years. 

Larry Elder's twitter is filled with people that are haters. I just don't agree with Larry Elder's criticism of Michelle Obama.  Millions of people didn't like and still don't like a lot of Trump's comments. Michelle Obama expressed feelings of hopelessness as many millions of Americans have. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and feelings without being attacked for it.

[Rapunzel]

21 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

Trumpcast did an episode explaining this. Basically, many rich people have these foundations. When they have money they want to donate to charity they instead donate it to their personal foundation. That way they can immediately get the tax deduction. Usually it's okay because they actually do donate all the money to charity. They just get the deduction before they've decided where everything is going to go. The Clinton Foundation is an actual charity that does things itself.

With the Trumps, though, they use it more like a slush fund/fake charity. They I guess started out putting money into it and getting the deduction. Then they might or might not have donated the actual money to charity. Then they started getting other people to donate to it and they I guess used it to get PR (if the foundation donated money to cancer research, for instance, Trump would get credit for the donation even though it wasn't his money, and the cancer foundation might use his hotels because of it--Trump also makes a habit of seating himself prominently at charity things so he gets credit for donating even if he hasn't). Then they also would use money other people gave them for the foundation for personal things or charity donations that didn't meet the standards (the portrait Melania bought was at a charity auction, but since they kept the portrait and hung it in their own hotel, it's not charity).

Trump has pretty clearly violated the Self Dealings Act per the IRS regarding his charity. He has even admitted to certain things on the advice of his attorneys to try to stay in front of it in the hopes that any penalties/sanctions would be less severe.

Generally speaking, a "Disqualified Person" cannot take place in certain transactions regarding a charity. A Disqualified person is defined, in part, as:

Quote

(A) a substantial contributor to the foundation,

(B) a foundation manager (within the meaning of subsection (b)(1)),

(C) an owner of more than 20 percent of

(i) the total combined voting power of a corporation,

(ii) the profits interest of a partnership, or

(iii)the beneficial interest of a trust or unincorporated enterprise, which is a substantial contributor to the foundation,

(D) a member of the family (as defined in subsection (d)) of any individual described in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C),

(E) a corporation of which persons described in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or (D) own more than 35 percent of the total combined voting power,

(F) a partnership in which persons described in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or (D) own more than 35 percent of the profits interest,

(G) a trust or estate in which persons described in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or (D) hold more than 35 percent of the beneficial interest,

(H) only for purposes of section 4943, a private foundation:

(i) which is effectively controlled (directly or indirectly) by the same person or persons who control the private foundation in question, or

(ii) substantially all of the contributions to which were made (directly or indirectly) by the same person or persons described in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C), or members of their families who made (directly or indirectly) substantially all of the contributions to the private foundation in question

Transactions that "Disqualified Persons" cannot be involved in relation to a charity in include things such as:

A. Sale, exchange, or leasing of property

B. Lending money or other extension of credit

C. Furnishing of goods, services, or facilities (i.e. his massive portrait that is hanging in the bar and grill at one of his own golf clubs)

D. Paying compensation or paying or reimbursing expenses to a disqualified person (i.e. himself)

E. Transferring foundation income or assets to, or for the use by or benefit of, a disqualified person (i.e. payouts from the "charity" to help settle various lawsuits not involving the charity)

F. Certain agreements to make payments of money or property to government officials.

These are considered "Self Dealing Transactions" and are prohibited per the IRS. The items I've bolded are a minimum of some of the things Trump has used his foundation for, Eric's foundation for, etc. Trump cannot use Eric's foundation in this manner either as he is a family member and, likely meets the definition of being a "Disqualified Person" in relation to Eric's "charity" as well.

[KerleyQ]

1 hour ago, sistermagpie said:

And trying to imply that the Tweet itself made China give it back. Which I'm sure plenty believed--and still do even after Trump Tweeted they should just keep it. 

I thought the Trump sketch on SNL was uncomfortably accurate when Putin and Tillerson start planning their how their future oil deals on a map and Trump jumps in with “And then we’re going to attack Vanity Fair, right? Terrible magazine!” So many useful idiots.

As I was laughing at the sketch, I was also thinking "um, we all know this isn't just funny, right?  This is actually happening."  

[backformore]

43 minutes ago, candall said:

The film clip was of some charity that was honoring the people sitting on the dais for their generous zillion-dollar donations . . . and all of a sudden DT appeared out of nowhere, squeezing in for all the press photos and murmuring modestly how "it was nothing, really, no thanks necessary" blah blah blah.  Someone said, "What the hell is HE doing in there?  He didn't donate a dime!"

At the time, I thought, "Well, that's pretty fucking bizarre."  (Obviously I've now traveled a long, long way down the "bizarre" road.)

Yeah, I think I linked that on this forum a while back.  I can't find the full story now, but it was really interesting.  He came in for the photo op, took a seat reserved for a real donor, left after pictures were taken, and never donated a dime.

Here's a summary, and also a mention of the Bronx school where he had a photo op with a large check, representing a MILLION DOLLARS - the eventually donated $200:

Trump crashes charity event, leaves.

another article  about Trump and charities:

Trump promises charities, does he deliver?

Quote

The first real sign of trouble came earlier this year. In January, in the middle of a spat with Fox News, Donald Trump boycotted a debate in Iowa, instead holding a fundraiser for veterans. The Republican boasted at the time that he’d raised $6 million for vets, and he’d contributed $1 million out of his own pocket.

The story unraveled once the Washington Post started asking about the money, and some of Trump’s claims turned out to be wrong. Most notably, in May, his campaign said Trump had already made a $1 million contribution, which wasn’t true.

.................................

The Washington Post’s David Fahrenthold has done quite a bit of digging on this front and reported today that despite Trump’s promises about millions of dollars in charitable contributions, an investigation turned up less than $10,000 in donations over the last seven years.

an example of how Trump benefits from his charity work:

How trump uses charity for personal gain
 

Quote

 

For example: Trump once approached a New Jersey charity called the Charles Evans Foundation and asked them to donate to the Donald J. Trump Foundation, citing efforts to raise funds for the Palm Beach Police Foundation. “The Evans Foundation said yes,” Fahrenthold reported. “In 2009 and 2010, it gave a total of $150,000 to the Donald J. Trump Foundation, a small charity that the Republican presidential nominee founded in 1987. Then, Trump’s foundation turned around and made donations to the police group in South Florida. In those years, the Trump Foundation’s gifts totaled $150,000. Trump had effectively turned the Evans Foundation’s gifts into his own gifts, without adding any money of his own.”

How could Trump have made money on the deal? The Florida police group gave Trump an award for his giving (which was actually Trump giving them money he got from someone else). Trump dressed up in a tuxedo to accept the honor that he didn’t deserve. And “on the night that he won the Palm Tree Award for his philanthropy, Trump may have actually made money,” Fahrenthold reports. “The gala was held at his Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, and the police foundation paid to rent the room. It’s unclear how much was paid in 2010, but the police foundation reported in its tax filings that it rented Mar-a-Lago in 2014 for $276,463.”

 

So - he takes $150,000 from one group, gives it to another, then charges them $276,000 to GIVE HIM AN AWARD FOR GIVING THEM SOMEONE ELSE MONEY!

And if you can stand one more -trump charity settles suit

Trump held a golf tournament where the winner of a hole-in-one contest would get a million bucks from Trump  The winner had to fight to get the money, with Trump then claiming the markers were set to the wrong distance, so it didn't count. the end result was that the winner got $150,000 for his favorite charity - but not from Trump -  from the Trump foundation.  Big photo op where Trump awards the winner, but it was just moving $$ from one charity to another. (but not the million promised)

[Padma]

Nice to start the day reading about how Michael Forbes, joined by hundreds of others stood up to Trump in Aberdeen. Every day that someone shows him s/he can't be bought and can't be threatened and bullied into submission, is a reminder, imo, that good can triumph over evil.  (He lost on the windmills, too. Ironic since his golf course was an environment-destroying eyesore to many, but he only sees what an eyesore the windmills are, spoiling his view.)

Twitter's a tough one. On the one hand, I like to peek into to his petty, vindictive personality and a mind that clearly has no "big ideas" in it, and like the idea of his stupidity being preserved forever in his library through his tweets. 

I also like the idea of Twitter banning the president of the United States because he just doesn't meet their standards. (And it seems true--though unconfirmed by multiple sources--that he excluded the CEO of Twitter because they wouldn't let him make a "Crooked Hillary" emoji. Excluding Twitter was pretty surprising--but then again, he eventually seems to feud with everyone he depends on.)

Quote

So....is anyone else as worried as I am at the utter lack of Steve Bannon in the news?  I mean, it worries me because it makes me think he's extremely busy communing with the craziest right wing elements (e.g. Alex Jones & Richard Spencer-types) devising plans.  We see Priebus, the so-called "co-equal" of Bannon...but never Bannon himself since he was officially installed as senior advisor.

I am.  But he kept a disturbingly low profile during the campaign, too.  I still want to know how much of the anti-Hillary fake news posted to social media was actually created by Bannon. I'll bet there was a lot.  He's a dirty piece of work and I agree that he's probably been very busy getting this billionaire junta in place and making plans for the future of this administration that we don't expect and are really not going to like.

I also won't be surprised if Brietbart gets WH press credentials, assuming they don't get rid of daily press briefings altogether, which wouldn't surprise me at all.

[Rapunzel]

18 hours ago, random chance said:

You know what ... I'm just fine with that.

The problem is that Tubby doesn't care if the planes are built on the cheap or leave out key features - he will never get to use them. The lead time for an AirForce one plane is 8-10 years.

Obama has already commissioned the designs from Boeing, but Trump needs to place the order, and soon, as the current planes are over 25 years old and outdated in terms of technology. Tubby, being the selfish, ignorant POS that he is, has no motivation to place the order for the planes because they personally will not benefit him.

[Padma]

Oh, and since I had to watch the Alabama rally yesterday (read the transcript. You have never in your life imagined a POTUS with less to say. He has the delivery down, but the content? Yikes. "And then we won this state...Here are the details...The press said we won't win Florida..then we did by an incredible landslide (lie).." on and on in scattershot English, all about himself until the very very end when it was about how he was going to do all the things he'd promised.   His inability to say anything important for people to hear about ANYTHING is truly stunning. (As that graphic shows.  FDR...JFK....DJT...which one isn't like the others?)

But I was especially irritated by the camera-ready podium he chose for his "I won; You lost" tour.  The sign on it facing the camera, big letters, top line, "Merry Christmas 2016" then the rest of his info.  He made a special point to wish everyone "Merry Christmas" at the end, but it was really that sign that got me. It was so obviously purposeful, such an intended reminder that, "We're a Christian country now, losers!"  I'm sure he knows nothing about the religious beliefs of the Founding Fathers or that Jefferson would not observe Christmas as president because he believed so strongly in the separation of Church and State.

The rapturous look on the faces of the people behind him (mostly 20-30s white men) and their energy seemed very reminiscent of other rallies of other leaders in the 1930s. We are lucky to be such a divided country, where only 25% of eligible voters actually chose Trump. It is not hard to imagine a different scenario. 

39 minutes ago, Rapunzel said:

The problem is that Tubby doesn't care if the planes are built on the cheap or leave out key features - he will never get to use them. The lead time for an AirForce one plane is 8-10 years.

Obama has already commissioned the designs from Boeing, but Trump needs to place the order, and soon, as the current planes are over 25 years old and outdated in terms of technology. Tubby, being the selfish, ignorant POS that he is, has no motivation to place the order for the planes because they personally will not benefit him.

Yes, and what does he care about the safety of a future president a decade from now? Certainly not compared with an opportunity to grandstand. 

I especially loved at the rally when he talked about the new AF1s and said, "Unfortunately, we've come in at the end of this, and Boeing has had a lot of cost overruns, but they're going to find a way to make it right for us and it's not going to be so expensive. Do we like that?" Or some such garbage.  Of course, as we know, nothing has been built at all so far.  But he's a master of "The Big Lie" combined with "Always CYA". 

Why all these people thought being a big businessman (conning people for half a century for his own profit) would naturally mean that he was more honest than a life-long public servant beats me.

[Rapunzel]

6 hours ago, stormy said:

I wish Twitter would ban him.  Hell, he didn't invite him to his big important tech meeting last week.

Payback, Twitter.  Please.

My Tech company was invited, but we didn't go. One of our Senior Execs publically denounced Trump and expressed concerns even before the election - and he's not even a US citizen though we are US Company and have been around long before "Silicon Valley" ever existed (we are based in Silicon Valley, but have offices all over the world in multiple countries). Most Silicon Valley companies seem to have the same attitude towards Trump. He can try to sanction us all he wants, if he does that, that will only help ensure that the US economy ends up in the toilet.

Trump clearly does not understand supply chains and how they work. My company manufactures some things in the US, some things in Asia-Pacific, some things in the Middle East, things in South America, and also some things in Europe, where labor is actually more expensive in the countries  that we manufacture in there than it is even in the US. Several Products we make have multiple manufacturing locations - all over the world - as this helps with other logistical issues, such as lead time, the ability to get a Customer up and running again quickly, shipping costs, etc.  It depends entirely on the product, where your supply base is, how your supply chain is structured, etc. It is not a black and white issue and you can't say that you must manufacture everything in the US or else. Even if the ultimate finished product is made here, several components come from other places - and not just cheaper locations. We pay a premium for certain components coming out of Japan, Europe, etc. Some components are highly customized and are made by one source only. Sole source items mean you don't have another option. If you try to develop your own in house, you're looking at increasing R&D, engineering, administrative and other overhead costs and it can also take years.

For someone who supposedly went to Wharton, he doesn't even understand basic business principals. The decisions are not purely cost based - as I mentioned, we often pay more for key things or to have a world wide manufacturing base to better serve our Customers. This is part of being a global company.

Edited December 18, 2016 by Rapunzel

[sistermagpie]

9 minutes ago, Padma said:

But I was especially irritated by the camera-ready podium he chose for his "I won; You lost" tour.  The sign on it facing the camera, big letters, top line, "Merry Christmas 2016" then the rest of his info.  He made a special point to wish everyone "Merry Christmas" at the end, but it was really that sign that got me. It was so obviously purposeful, such an intended reminder that, "We're a Christian country now, losers!"  I'm sure he knows nothing about the religious beliefs of the Founding Fathers or that Jefferson would not observe Christmas as president because he believed so strongly in the separation of Church and State.

It's amazing how the right has managed to change the meaning of "Merry Christmas" to "Fuck you" or "Fuck them" depending on who you're talking to. That's literally what they're saying and celebrating. While pretending they haven't been saying it for 8 years.

[rcc]

Those damn thank you rallys need to end. The first president elect in history to dream up such a bogus excuse for getting love from his faithful. How small, how ungracious, how childish he is with all that wealth he is nothing more than a spoiled, entitled little boy. He needs to hear applause and to put down women to make himself feel like a man. 

[zxy556575]

I ran across this quote yesterday. Seems so quaint:

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." 

~Senator Pat Moynihan (c. 1993)

Edited December 18, 2016 by lordonia

[KerleyQ]

23 minutes ago, Padma said:

Oh, and since I had to watch the Alabama rally yesterday (read the transcript. You have never in your life imagined a POTUS with less to say. He has the delivery down, but the content? Yikes. "And then we won this state...Here are the details...The press said we won't win Florida..then we did by an incredible landslide (lie).." on and on in scattershot English, all about himself until the very very end when it was about how he was going to do all the things he'd promised.   His inability to say anything important for people to hear about ANYTHING is truly stunning. (As that graphic shows.  FDR...JFK....DJT...which one isn't like the others?)

But I was especially irritated by the camera-ready podium he chose for his "I won; You lost" tour.  The sign on it facing the camera, big letters, top line, "Merry Christmas 2016" then the rest of his info.  He made a special point to wish everyone "Merry Christmas" at the end, but it was really that sign that got me. It was so obviously purposeful, such an intended reminder that, "We're a Christian country now, losers!"  I'm sure he knows nothing about the religious beliefs of the Founding Fathers or that Jefferson would not observe Christmas as president because he believed so strongly in the separation of Church and State.

The rapturous look on the faces of the people behind him (mostly 20-30s white men) and their energy seemed very reminiscent of other rallies of other leaders in the 1930s. We are lucky to be such a divided country, where only 25% of eligible voters actually chose Trump. It is not hard to imagine a different scenario. 

I will fully admit that I am exactly petty enough to deliberately say "Happy Holidays" for the next four years.  I'll say "Merry Christmas to my close family and friends on the holiday (or when we gather to celebrate it together), but in terms of general greetings in public situations or postings on social media?  Happy Holidays, folks.  And if anyone dares to pull the "say Merry Christmas!" bullshit on me?  They'll get a wide-eyed look accompanied by "I can't imagine why you are offended by me offering you a happy greeting.  Do you need a safe space?"  

[izabella]

6 minutes ago, Rapunzel said:

Most Silicon Valley companies seem to have the same attitude towards Trump. He can try to sanction us all he wants, if he does that, that will only help ensure that the US economy ends up in the toilet.

I'm not convinced this is true.  Because there sure were a lot of tech company giants meeting with Trumputin and his children, and Bill Gates is busy comparing him to JFK and talking about how they can do great things together.  Also, Safra Catz, Oracle co-CEO, has just joined Trumputin's transition team.

These are the people who were at the tech meeting with Trump and his family - these people OWN us, and not just every bit and byte of data they have on every move we make via our computers and cell phones - all of our data, all of it.  These people also enable our corporations, financial institutions, and government institutions..

http://qz.com/863437/who-was-at-donald-trumps-tech-meeting/

Quote

 

Ivanka Trump -Trump’s daughter

Eric Trump -Trump’s son

Brad Smith -Microsoft president

Jeff Bezos - Amazon CEO

Larry Page - Alphabet CEO (parent company of GOOGLE)

Sheryl Sandberg - Facebook COO

Mike Pence - Gov of Indiana

Donald Trump - President-elect

Peter Thiel - Paypal founder, Facebook board member

Tim Cook - Apple CEO

Safra Catz - Oracle co-chief executive  (and new Trump transition team member)

Elon Musk - Tesla CEO

Gary Cohn - Goldman Sachs president/COO

Wilbur Ross - Secretary of Commerce nominee

Stephen Miller - Trump senior adviser

Satya Nadella - Microsoft CEO

Ginni Rommety - IBM CEO

Chuck Robbins - Cisco CEO

Jared Kushner - Trump’s son-in-law

Reince Preibus - RNC chairman

Steve Bannon - Trump campaign CEO

Eric Schmidt - Alphabet executive chairman (parent company of GOOGLE)

Alex Karp - Palantir CEO  (Peter Thiel is Palantir's biggest "shareholder" (they are a $20B private company).  Big data services company that does a lot of counter-terrorism, fraud, and cyber analysis work for the government, as well as software for a lot of banks, hedge funds, and financial services companies.)

Brian Krzanich - Intel CEO

Don Jr. - Trump’s son

 

and then there is this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/14/technology/trump-tech-summit.html

Quote

Hours before Mr. Trump’s meeting with tech leaders, the president-elect announced that Mr. Musk and Travis Kalanick, Uber’s chief executive, would be among those joining his Strategic and Policy Forum, which is already stacked with businesspeople from finance and other industries. Ginni Rometty, the chief executive of IBM, had previously joined the forum.

So, I'm not convinced they're worried about sanctions.  I think they're all about their bottom line, and will also end up bowing to Trumputin and his demands, as they're already starting to.

[Padma]

If he can co-opt the tech leaders with, as you say, all that reach and data, it is very scary.

McCain was on with Tapper this a.m. about the Russian hacking and blasted Obama's handling of it.  I have to agree. He was completely weak and ineffectual when it mattered most--and according to HuffPo report today, the DNC was hacked right up to Election Day. So, clearly, none of these supposed "covert retaliations" had taken place yet--if they ever will.

Obama's fear of looking like a bad guy, a president who was using his knowledge of Russian hacking to influence the election for Hillary, is kind of sickening.  Here's what McCain said, and he's calling for a special committee in the Senate (an independent, bipartisan one like the 9/11 Commission would be better, but it definitely shouldn't just be swept under the rug. In many ways, Obama's mild temperament has served the country well, but it annoys me that he seems incapable of outrage, even when it is so warranted.  I imagine even if he found out Manafort and Trump were collaborating with Putin to turn the election, he still wouldn't be angry enough to use the bully pulpit and try to turn public opinion.)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/john-mccain-obama-russia-hacks_us_5856a250e4b08debb7899129

Re: Jefferson. Yes. I was thinking of how he didn't issue the Thanksgiving proclamation during his presidency because of its use of the word "God". 

The Founding Fathers, especially Jefferson ("Dec of Independence" and The Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom") and Madison (Constitution/Bill of Rights) had no intention of this being or becoming a Christian country. 

Edited December 18, 2016 by Padma

[Rapunzel]

1 hour ago, izabella said:

I'm not convinced this is true.  Because there sure were a lot of tech company giants meeting with Trumputin and his children, and Bill Gates is busy comparing him to JFK and talking about how they can do great things together.  Also, Safra Catz, Oracle co-CEO, has just joined Trumputin's transition team.

Oracle has a horrible reputation in the tech industry. Their former CEO was a womanizer of epic proportions and his biggest claim to fame was that, at least at one time, he owned the biggest yacht in the world. I've met the man personally, and he's also a wanker of epic proportions. He hired Mark Hurd, who was fired from his previous company officially for misusing his expense account. He actually used that expense account to hire "marketing associates" who were believed to be escorts and soft-core porn stars (there is video of at least one of them). This is another man who I have met personally.

Oracle is an outcast and not well respected at all by other companies. Just because tech companies showed up at Oompa Loompa's little gathering does not mean they support him. They are trying to find out what is happening. More interesting than what companies are on the list are those that are not on the list and those who did not attend. Many of those who did not attend, such as my own, are in the Fortune top 50 and hold a fair amount of power. I've been an attorney in tech for a while now, and I've had meetings and negotiations with many other tech companies, some of which did attend Trump's meeting and have actually met some of the people in attendance, but no one can just arbitrarily assume that just because someone attended a meeting that it means they or their company support him.

ETA: Larry Ellison, Oracle's former CEO, also had multiple secretaries and support staff quit due to sexual harassment and he had a number of lawsuits filed against him. This is the only reason he was the only tech company around that would go near Mark Hurd after he was ousted as President and CEO of HP. Hurd actually had to take a fairly decent demotion to go work for Ellison.

Edited December 18, 2016 by Rapunzel

[KerleyQ]

One theory I've seen about President Obama's response is that he has to wait until he has a "kill shot" so to speak.  He has to make sure that he has verifiable backup for making any allegations towards the incoming POTUS, no matter how much of an asshat that incoming POTUS is.  So, it's possible that he's sitting back and waiting until he knows he has all those ducks in a row before he says something definitive.  Part of the problem with that is that he needs to find the best way to do this without compromising intelligence assets, or, at minimum, giving a chance for those who would unavoidably be compromised to be safe first.  It would feel great for all of us to see him up there railing on Trump and company about this egregious violation of our electoral process.  However, he has to be above reacting on emotion (unlike Twitler).  He has made it clear that he has evidence to support his belief that Putin interfered in our election.  He has stated that it needs to be fully investigated to determine how far this plot has gone, and who is involved.  That's what he's supposed to do at this point in time, as much as it might make us all feel better to see more.  

[candall]

43 minutes ago, backformore said:

Yeah, I think I linked that on this forum a while back.  I can't find the full story now, but it was really interesting.  He came in for the photo op, took a seat reserved for a real donor, left after pictures were taken, and never donated a dime.

Here's a summary, and also a mention of the Bronx school where he had a photo op with a large check, representing a MILLION DOLLARS - the eventually donated $200:

Trump crashes charity event, leaves.

another article  about Trump and charities:

Trump promises charities, does he deliver?

an example of how Trump benefits from his charity work:

How trump uses charity for personal gain
 

So - he takes $150,000 from one group, gives it to another, then charges them $276,000 to GIVE HIM AN AWARD FOR GIVING THEM SOMEONE ELSE MONEY!

And if you can stand one more -trump charity settles suit

Trump held a golf tournament where the winner of a hole-in-one contest would get a million bucks from Trump  The winner had to fight to get the money, with Trump then claiming the markers were set to the wrong distance, so it didn't count. the end result was that the winner got $150,000 for his favorite charity - but not from Trump -  from the Trump foundation.  Big photo op where Trump awards the winner, but it was just moving $$ from one charity to another. (but not the million promised)

OH!  Seeing you compile all these links in a matter of minutes makes me so furious. 

 

I wonder, if television news anchors had substituted one of THESE stories for, oh, say, 30% of the relentless "Hillary's emails" stories, things would be different?

Each of these (outrageous) incidents was a microscopic little *tink* on the public radar, if that--blink and you miss it.  And now, nothing at all.  Poof, evaporated.  MSM, I hope you have 20/20 hindsight visions that hurt your eyes like a bright light. 

 

Mr. Obama, it makes sense, I suppose, that you believed you and President-Elect HRC would have time to put your heads together and agree on suitable sanctions for Russia sticking its cyberfingers into the election.  That's not nearly as stupid as Bill Clinton jaunting across the tarmac to say hi to Loretta Lynch, but if both men are wracked with some serious regret they didn't choose to behave otherwise, I say:  Good.

[Duke Silver]

[PatsyandEddie]

More like " lap dancer" to me.........

It's so obvious why he's making these appointments that it hurts. 

[Lunata]

SNL

One of the electors gets a surprise visit from Hillary Clinton before the electoral college voting tomorrow. It's one of the best skits I've seen.

Edited December 19, 2016 by Lunata

[Bastet]

Quote

I ran across this quote yesterday. Seems so quaint:

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." 

I’ve spent half my life saying this to my aunt, who is impervious to any facts that contradict her opinions and just bald-faced denies them to be true.  There is nothing else to say to her, because it’s simply impossible to have an actual conversation with someone like that.  She used to be a crazy outlier.  Imagine her joy when FOX News came along.  If she was online more, she'd be happier than a pig in shit these days.

Quote

I wish Twitter would ban him.  Hell, he didn't invite him to his big important tech meeting last week.

Quote

(And it seems true--though unconfirmed by multiple sources--that he excluded the CEO of Twitter because they wouldn't let him make a "Crooked Hillary" emoji. Excluding Twitter was pretty surprising--but then again, he eventually seems to feud with everyone he depends on.)

I'm not sure of the exact timing, but it was before that meeting:  According to Democracy for America, a reporter from The Intercept posed a question to Twitter, Facebook, Google, Apple, Microsoft, etc. asking: If Trump attempts to fulfill his campaign pledge to create a registry of Muslims in the U.S. and asks your company for any of the huge amounts of data it has amassed on its users, would you refuse to hand over data to be used to create such a database?  Only Twitter responded, saying yes, it would refuse.  After several human rights groups sent a letter to the silent tech companies, imploring them to follow Twitter’s lead, Facebook and Microsoft announced they, too, would refuse to help Trump build a registry of Muslims.  But the initial response came only from Twitter.  So that may be at play in the exclusion, too.

Edited December 18, 2016 by Bastet

[Padma]

22 minutes ago, Duke Silver said:

That is such a great point. (And I think "puppet" works just fine.)  One of the MSNBC hosts made a good point about Exxon and how it really is not a "U.S" company, it is a nation and law unto itself that will "outlast any particular government anywhere in the world". It even as its own intelligence agency.

While all other U.S. officials are expressing anger and concern about Putin's obvious interference, Trump is defending him and saying "never happened".  While others are talking about reprisals, Trump is rewarding Putin for interfering by appointing Putin's good buddy to the Cabinet's most powerful and prestigious position.

How is this okay?  If it were reversed, I have no doubt that Republicans would be calling Hillary a collaborator, who was probably paying Putin back with the appointment (AND who probably had been using Manafort all along to arrange it--as Stone's comment about Podesta early on would support).

I don't understand why no one is voicing these concerns that Trump COULD have coordinated this with Putin through Manafort. Seems quite plausible to me--and his insistence "nothing to see here" just makes him look even more guilty.

[Lunata]

4 minutes ago, Bastet said:

I’ve spent half my life saying this to my aunt, who is impervious to any facts that contradict her opinions and just bald-faced denies them to be true.  There is nothing else to say to her, because it’s simply impossible to have an actual conversation with someone like that.  She used to be a crazy outlier.  Imagine her joy when FOX News came along.  If she was online more, she'd be happier than a pig in shit these days.

A reporter from The Intercept posed a question to Twitter, Facebook, Google, Apple, Microsoft, etc. asking: If Trump attempts to fulfill his campaign pledge to create a registry of Muslims in the U.S. and asks your company for any of the huge amounts of data it has amassed on its users, would you refuse to hand over data to be used to create such a database?  Only Twitter responded, saying yes, it would refuse.  After several human rights groups sent a letter to the silent tech companies, imploring them to follow Twitter’s lead, Facebook and Microsoft announced they, too, would refuse to help Trump build a registry of Muslims.  But the initial response came only from Twitter.  So that may be at play, too.

Donald held court had a summit meeting with the top CEO's of the largest tech companies on Wednesday. Those attending the meeting, held at Trump Tower in Manhattan, included:

■ Elon Musk of Tesla
■ Larry Page and Eric E. Schmidt of Alphabet, Google’s parent
■ Timothy D. Cook of Apple
■ Satya Nadella of Microsoft
■ Jeff Bezos of Amazon
■ Sheryl Sandberg of Facebook
■ Safra A. Catz of Oracle
■ Brian M. Krzanich of Intel
■ Chuck Robbins of Cisco
■ Ginni Rometty of IBM

Twitter was among the non invited. Whether it was payback for the failed emoji deal or not, one commentator remarked that Twitter CEO didn't feel slighted because  "even Frankenstein didn't enjoy facing his own monster".

[Rapunzel]

2 hours ago, Padma said:

Nice to start the day reading about how Michael Forbes, joined by hundreds of others stood up to Trump in Aberdeen. Every day that someone shows him s/he can't be bought and can't be threatened and bullied into submission, is a reminder, imo, that good can triumph over evil.  (He lost on the windmills, too. Ironic since his golf course was an environment-destroying eyesore to many, but he only sees what an eyesore the windmills are, spoiling his view.)

My husband and I arrived at our home in London yesterday to visit his family and whatnot for the holidays. I've now suggested that we head up to Aberdeen and go to the local pub near the golf course and buy all of those people a round. They certainly deserve it for standing up to Trump and holding on to their rights. No one in Europe that I've come across so far likes the man and they are all worried about the global impact he can have. Everyone should look at the golf course situation as an example. Even if some consider it a small thing, saying "no" to Tubby, even when he's tried to buy some of them off, is a wonderful example and tells him that not everything or everyone can be bought or bullied into doing whatever he wants. Besides, even though he's offered money in some cases, I think a lot of people have caught on to the fact that getting a dime from this extraordinary, cash poor, cheapskate who has filed multiple bankruptcies, hasn't paid taxes in close to 20 years, abuses his "charity," etc. is pretty unlikely.

[Duke Silver]

14 minutes ago, Padma said:

That is such a great point. (And I think "puppet" works just fine.)  One of the MSNBC hosts made a good point about Exxon and how it really is not a "U.S" company, it is a nation and law unto itself that will "outlast any particular government anywhere in the world". It even as its own intelligence agency.

While all other U.S. officials are expressing anger and concern about Putin's obvious interference, Trump is defending him and saying "never happened".  While others are talking about reprisals, Trump is rewarding Putin for interfering by appointing Putin's good buddy to the Cabinet's most powerful and prestigious position.

How is this okay?  If it were reversed, I have no doubt that Republicans would be calling Hillary a collaborator, who was probably paying Putin back with the appointment (AND who probably had been using Manafort all along to arrange it--as Stone's comment about Podesta early on would support).

I don't understand why no one is voicing these concerns that Trump COULD have coordinated this with Putin through Manafort. Seems quite plausible to me--and his insistence "nothing to see here" just makes him look even more guilty.

My girlfriend has distilled this down to hashtags (hey, we're millennials...what can I say?) she's been using on social media the past couple weeks:

#HesWithRUS & #TrumPutin

[random chance]

3 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

It's amazing how the right has managed to change the meaning of "Merry Christmas" to "Fuck you"

Which is why I will no longer wish someone a Merry Christmas, in case that's how it's interpreted. So that one backfired on them.

[ClareWalks]

It's true, I've noticed this year when lots of people say "have a Merry Christmas," they get kind of a pointed, bitchy tone to their voices. It kind of negates the warm fuzzies. I don't give a shit if someone says "have a satanic winter solstice," as long as they are genuine and friendly about it.

[callmebetty]

12 minutes ago, random chance said:

Which is why I will no longer wish someone a Merry Christmas, in case that's how it's interpreted. So that one backfired on them.

I know! I usually mix it up between Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays. But I don't want Merry Christmas to be taken for some secret handshake and wink wink.

[AntiBeeSpray]

19 hours ago, KerleyQ said:

OK, see, Twitler, shit like this is why I prefer to call you our Presidon't-Elect.  Jesus.  

Exactly. When I saw that China Twitter debacle on the news this morning, I facepalmed.

[parisprincess]

The Scots aren't the only ones dealing with Trump wanting to build walls around his golf courses. In County Clare, Ireland, he's trying to do the same thing because there has been erosion due to the "climate change" that he doesn't believe in. There is a group there who are hoping he gets to build his wall because they're hoping to get the contracts. Most people (including friends of mine) in County Clare don't want it though and, so far, fatass hasn't been able to get permission for it. If he does eventually get to build his god damn wall, I hope those workers who are backing him do get the contracts and end up getting screwed over big time. It'll serve them right for not bothering to do a little research to find out what a con artist he is. 

[KerleyQ]

2 hours ago, Rapunzel said:

My husband and I arrived at our home in London yesterday to visit his family and whatnot for the holidays. I've now suggested that we head up to Aberdeen and go to the local pub near the golf course and buy all of those people a round. They certainly deserve it for standing up to Trump and holding on to their rights. No one in Europe that I've come across so far likes the man and they are all worried about the global impact he can have. Everyone should look at the golf course situation as an example. Even if some consider it a small thing, saying "no" to Tubby, even when he's tried to buy some of them off, is a wonderful example and tells him that not everything or everyone can be bought or bullied into doing whatever he wants. Besides, even though he's offered money in some cases, I think a lot of people have caught on to the fact that getting a dime from this extraordinary, cash poor, cheapskate who has filed multiple bankruptcies, hasn't paid taxes in close to 20 years, abuses his "charity," etc. is pretty unlikely.

I would imagine that most people around the globe are rather frightened by all of this.  I know the Trump crowd is all about the nationalism and all, but what they fail to realize is that the reason we can have our nation is because of complex global relations.  Us electing an idiot who is willing to let Putin do whatever he wants because Putin knew the right buttons (flattery and financial influence) to push with him is a potential disaster for the entire global community.  And I know the Trump crowd's attitude to whether our European allies are comfy with this is "don't care, as long as he makes America great again!"  However, they fail to understand that there is no hope for us to be great if Putin goes forward unchecked.  Sure, we won't be first on his shopping list, but, make no mistake about it, we're on that list.  But, in the mean time, all of our existing allies are screwed when Trump decides to sit back and let his new BFF do whatever the hell he wants to do.  The complete inability to understand global politics on the part of Trump and his supporters is wildly dangerous to all of us, world wide.  

It's like Trump's thing with NATO - "we'll keep our promises if they pay their share."  It hasn't occurred to him that there's a reason we are in this alliance, and that there's a reason that we take on the costs that those smaller nations cannot afford to shoulder - that the stability of that region is far more important to our national security than the costs we incur in protecting those smaller nations.  

1 hour ago, ClareWalks said:

It's true, I've noticed this year when lots of people say "have a Merry Christmas," they get kind of a pointed, bitchy tone to their voices. It kind of negates the warm fuzzies. I don't give a shit if someone says "have a satanic winter solstice," as long as they are genuine and friendly about it.

Exactly.  It's not a sincere wish for happiness, it's a weapon to beat people over the head with.  "You will acknowledge my religious holiday and ONLY my religious holiday!"  I've seen people in check out lines during this time of year, if a cashier says "happy holidays" to them, angrily respond "MERRY CHRISTMAS!" in a clear rebuke.  The tone of voice makes it clear that they're angry at the cashier.  I just can't understand being angry over someone wishing you a happy holiday season.  I'm Catholic, and I'm a Christmas nut, but I wouldn't even blink if someone wished me, say, a Happy Hanukkah.  I'd simply say "thanks, you too," and go on my way, grateful that someone thought to wish me well.  And, when it comes to cashiers or other customer service people out there this time of year, they have no way of knowing, on sight, what holiday you celebrate.  It's a practical solution to say "happy holidays," as it covers the whole range and doesn't exclude whichever specific holiday(s) you do celebrate.  And, if a customer initiates the exchange, with a "Merry Christmas," I've never seen a cashier refuse to return that sentiment (and I sincerely doubt that is happening on any kind of scale, save a few isolated incidents).  

I really think that there are people out there who just cannot handle the idea that not everyone is exactly like them, and any reminders push them over the edge.  

[sistermagpie]

7 minutes ago, KerleyQ said:

I just can't understand being angry over someone wishing you a happy holiday season.  I'm Catholic, and I'm a Christmas nut, but I wouldn't even blink if someone wished me, say, a Happy Hanukkah.  I'd simply say "thanks, you too," and go on my way, grateful that someone thought to wish me well.

In my experience, the anti-Happy Holidays crowd like to claim they'd be happy with that too--though of course they never have to deal with it because how often do Jewish people assume people are that holiday? Anyway, they're fine with that, they say, because Happy Holidays is the one that's anti-Christmas because it's not saying "anything." It's the political correctness and acknowledgement of a multi-cultural society that's the problem.

Of course if people made "Happy Hanukkah" that standard greeting of course they'd be mad because they're demanding everyone say Merry Christmas. And if anybody started greeting everyone by wishing them a happy Muslim holiday well, we know where that leads!

[Padma]

That may be generally true.  But at this time of year, Trump's podium in Alabama with its big "Merry Christmas" sign had a real "white Christian supremacist" feeling to it for me.  We are not a "Christian country" and the president (elect) embracing the idea that we are was like a giant "F-U" on his "unity tour" (if by "unity" you mean, as he does, "those who want to join our movement". The rest of the country? Yep, a giant "F-U" to them all.)

[sistermagpie]

14 minutes ago, Padma said:

That may be generally true.  But at this time of year, Trump's podium in Alabama with its big "Merry Christmas" sign had a real "white Christian supremacist" feeling to it for me.  We are not a "Christian country" and the president (elect) embracing the idea that we are was like a giant "F-U" on his "unity tour" (if by "unity" you mean, as he does, "those who want to join our movement". The rest of the country? Yep, a giant "F-U" to them all.)

Oh, that's definitely what it means. The "I wouldn't be offended if someone wished me Happy Hanukkah" is a fake way of trying to sound otherwise. You can’t demand that the default greeting be only your religion and then pretend you’re not making everyone acknowledge it as superior or dominant. If you don’t feel that way “Happy Holidays” isn’t threatening.

This, btw, is why I love the Satanists who make a point of challenging this kind of religious stuff. Like if people put up a Christian symbol on a government building and claim they’re not privileging Christianity they test it by demanding a Satanic symbol.

[ruby24]

Michelle Obama always means what she says and she's absolutely correct. There is no hope anymore.

There is no happy new year. All these people who are kissing 2016 goodbye because it sucked? Why bother? Nothing is going to get better, it's all just going to get worse. It's horrific. There's nothing to celebrate, nothing to hope for.

I feel despair for humanity.

I came across something that Putin of all people said in 2014- he said the electoral college is proof that there is no true democracy in the United States.

He was right.

Edited December 19, 2016 by ruby24

[KerleyQ]

1 hour ago, sistermagpie said:

In my experience, the anti-Happy Holidays crowd like to claim they'd be happy with that too--though of course they never have to deal with it because how often do Jewish people assume people are that holiday? Anyway, they're fine with that, they say, because Happy Holidays is the one that's anti-Christmas because it's not saying "anything." It's the political correctness and acknowledgement of a multi-cultural society that's the problem.

Of course if people made "Happy Hanukkah" that standard greeting of course they'd be mad because they're demanding everyone say Merry Christmas. And if anybody started greeting everyone by wishing them a happy Muslim holiday well, we know where that leads!

Yep.  I think it's a somewhat common tactic of people who are trying to get their way to try to appear "reasonable" by offering up an alternative that they know won't really be taken.  In this case, they know that it's not likely that people are going to default to "Happy Hanukkah," so they feel completely confident saying "Oh, I'd have no problem with it if everyone said that."  It's just a way to "team up" to defeat their real gripe, while not having any intention of honoring their "team up."  

[candall]

50 minutes ago, Rapunzel said:

. . . but no one can just arbitrarily assume that just because someone attended a meeting that it means they or their company supports him.

I don't think the assumption is arbitrary, since declining the invitation--as your company did--was an option and much less likely to be misconstrued.

I find  ___________'s young daughter, whose marching band turned down the fun of a memorable trip to DC so their position would be unmistakable, more admirable than these Titans o'Tech. 

[KIMBERLYANN11]

43 minutes ago, candall said:

I don't think the assumption is arbitrary, since declining the invitation--as your company did--was an option and much less likely to be misconstrued.

I find  ___________'s young daughter, whose marching band turned down the fun of a memorable trip to DC so their position would be unmistakable, more admirable than these Titans o'Tech. 

That would be my girl DD.  Truth be told, just four days before band camp she ripped two and a half of the three tendons in her right ankle.  That required surgery, three weeks no weight bearing and ongoing physical therapy.  So... no marching band this year.  She went to band camp and the first week of marching band not being able to march, because we thought she might be able to march the last few games, but once the surgeon got in there he said no way.  We're hoping next year.  She loves marching band.

However, she still has her band friends.  They took a vote on whether they wanted to accept the invitation to march at the  inauguration and it was an overwhelming no.  This is not a liberal college at all either (We have buildings with the DeVos name on them) - just kids with a whole lot of integrity. And these kids live for trips. 

Edited December 19, 2016 by KIMBERLYANN11
removed daughters name and replaced with DD

[theredhead77]

I wonder if there is any truth to the SNL Weekend Update bit that America's Got Talent 2010 runner up is going to be singing the National Anthem at the inauguration. I did Google and can't find any sources I'd consider reputable.