fat-ass-bike wrote:
Quote:

iciromekim wrote:
Hi all,

I just moved to the neighborhood and I am looking for some new friends in the neighborhood to hang out with. I enjoy doing all types of things and very easy going. Reply back on this and we can set something up. For general information I am a 28 male.

Yvonne and Monroe are also very easy going and show tolerance and empathy to all mankind - They would love to show you the city and all its wonderful amenities and facilities ... just pm them to make a time for a chat and dinner at their place ... they are the heart and soul of JC!

SOS wrote:
It's no joke, Trump is a traitor and unfit to be POTUS.


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/05/opi ... hillary-clinton.html?_r=1


The Opinion Pages | CAMPAIGN STOPS

I Ran the C.I.A. Now I?m Endorsing Hillary Clinton.
By MICHAEL J. MORELLAUG. 5, 2016

During a 33-year career at the Central Intelligence Agency, I served presidents of both parties ? three Republicans and three Democrats. I was at President George W. Bush?s side when we were attacked on Sept. 11; as deputy director of the agency, I was with President Obama when we killed Osama bin Laden in 2011.

I am neither a registered Democrat nor a registered Republican. In my 40 years of voting, I have pulled the lever for candidates of both parties. As a government official, I have always been silent about my preference for president.

No longer. On Nov. 8, I will vote for Hillary Clinton. Between now and then, I will do everything I can to ensure that she is elected as our 45th president.

Two strongly held beliefs have brought me to this decision. First, Mrs. Clinton is highly qualified to be commander in chief. I trust she will deliver on the most important duty of a president ? keeping our nation safe. Second, Donald J. Trump is not only unqualified for the job, but he may well pose a threat to our national security.

I spent four years working with Mrs. Clinton when she was secretary of state, most often in the White House Situation Room. In these critically important meetings, I found her to be prepared, detail-oriented, thoughtful, inquisitive and willing to change her mind if presented with a compelling argument.

I also saw the secretary?s commitment to our nation?s security; her belief that America is an exceptional nation that must lead in the world for the country to remain secure and prosperous; her understanding that diplomacy can be effective only if the country is perceived as willing and able to use force if necessary; and, most important, her capacity to make the most difficult decision of all ? whether to put young American women and men in harm?s way.

Mrs. Clinton was an early advocate of the raid that brought Bin Laden to justice, in opposition to some of her most important colleagues on the National Security Council. During the early debates about how we should respond to the Syrian civil war, she was a strong proponent of a more aggressive approach, one that might have prevented the Islamic State from gaining a foothold in Syria.

I never saw her bring politics into the Situation Room. In fact, I saw the opposite. When some wanted to delay the Bin Laden raid by one day because the White House Correspondents Dinner might be disrupted, she said, ?Screw the White House Correspondents Dinner.?

In sharp contrast to Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Trump has no experience on national security. Even more important, the character traits he has exhibited during the primary season suggest he would be a poor, even dangerous, commander in chief.

These traits include his obvious need for self-aggrandizement, his overreaction to perceived slights, his tendency to make decisions based on intuition, his refusal to change his views based on new information, his routine carelessness with the facts, his unwillingness to listen to others and his lack of respect for the rule of law.

The dangers that flow from Mr. Trump?s character are not just risks that would emerge if he became president. It is already damaging our national security.

President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia was a career intelligence officer, trained to identify vulnerabilities in an individual and to exploit them. That is exactly what he did early in the primaries. Mr. Putin played upon Mr. Trump?s vulnerabilities by complimenting him. He responded just as Mr. Putin had calculated.

Mr. Putin is a great leader, Mr. Trump says, ignoring that he has killed and jailed journalists and political opponents, has invaded two of his neighbors and is driving his economy to ruin. Mr. Trump has also taken policy positions consistent with Russian, not American, interests ? endorsing Russian espionage against the United States, supporting Russia?s annexation of Crimea and giving a green light to a possible Russian invasion of the Baltic States.

In the intelligence business, we would say that Mr. Putin had recruited Mr. Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.

Sign Up for the Opinion Today Newsletter
Every weekday, get thought-provoking commentary from Op-Ed columnists, The Times editorial board and contributing writers from around the world.


Mr. Trump has also undermined security with his call for barring Muslims from entering the country. This position, which so clearly contradicts the foundational values of our nation, plays into the hands of the jihadist narrative that our fight against terrorism is a war between religions.

In fact, many Muslim Americans play critical roles in protecting our country, including the man, whom I cannot identify, who ran the C.I.A.?s Counterterrorism Center for nearly a decade and who I believe is most responsible for keeping America safe since the Sept. 11 attacks.

My training as an intelligence officer taught me to call it as I see it. This is what I did for the C.I.A. This is what I am doing now. Our nation will be much safer with Hillary Clinton as president.

Michael J. Morell was the acting director and deputy director of the Central Intelligence Agency from 2010 to 2013.

135jc wrote:
I disagree. I believe the schedule will hurt him and the debates should be rescheduled at agreed upon times by all canidates. I would not be surprised if it was intentional did you not witness the antics of the DNC? If Trump then finds a reason to back out I would have to agree with you.

Republican officials are exploring how to handle a scenario that would be unthinkable in a normal election year: What would happen if the party's presidential nominee dropped out?

ABC News has learned that senior party officials are so frustrated -- and confused by Donald Trump's erratic behavior -- that they are exploring how to replace him on the ballot if he were to drop out.

So, how would it work?

First, Trump would have to voluntarily exit the race. Officials say there is no mechanism for forcing him to withdraw his nomination. (Trump has not given any indications that he no longer wants to be his party's nominee).

Then, it would be up to the 168 members of the Republican National Committee to choose a successor, though the process is complicated.

One Republican legal expert has advised party officials that, for practical reasons, Trump would have to drop out by early September to give the party enough time to choose his replacement and get the next nominee's name on the ballot in enough states to win.

Here is what the RNC's bylaws say about filling a vacancy on a presidential ticket:

RULE NO. 9 Filling Vacancies in Nominations

(a) The Republican National Committee is hereby authorized and empowered to fill any and all vacancies which may occur by reason of death, declination, or otherwise of the Republican candidate for President of the United States or the Republican candidate for Vice President of the United States, as nominated by the national convention, or the Republican National Committee may reconvene the national convention for the purpose of filling any such vacancies.

(b) In voting under this rule, the Republican National Committee members representing any state shall be entitled to cast the same number of votes as said state was entitled to cast at the national convention.

(c) In the event that the members of the Republican National Committee from any state shall not be in agreement in the casting of votes hereunder, the votes of such state shall be divided equally, including fractional votes, among the members of the Republican National Committee present or voting by proxy.

(d) No candidate shall be chosen to fill any such vacancy except upon receiving a majority of the votes entitled to be cast in the election.

Following a week of high-profile blunders, Donald Trump?s antics have left the chair of the Republican National Committee ?apoplectic? and his own aides ?suicidal,? according to several reports.

RNC Chair Reince Priebus was reportedly ?apoplectic? over Trump?s bucking the party line by refusing to back House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) or Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) for re-election and called several of Trump?s staffers to voice his discontent, according to NBC's Katy Tur.

A longtime ally of top Trump staffer Paul Manafort also told CNBC?s John Harwood that Manafort is ?not challenging Trump anymore? and is ?mailing it in,? while the campaign staff is ?suicidal."

Top staffers "feel like they are wasting their time," on Trump's campaign, CNN reported.

NBC News? Peter Alexander tweeted that an anonymous source confirmed ?it?s all true? about Harwood?s reporting and that the situation is ?way worse than people realize.?

Jason Miller, a spokesman for the campaign, called Harwood's reporting on Manafort "completely erroneous."

"The idea that Paul Manafort is mailing it in is completely erroneous," Miller said in a statement to CNN. "Our campaign just finished up our strongest month of fundraising to date, we're adding talented and experienced staffers on a daily basis and Mr. Trump's turning out bigger, more enthusiastic crowds than Hillary Clinton ever could."

user1111 wrote:
BY REV. ALEXANDER SANTORA
GUEST COLUMNIST

There is divine justice. I knew it would soon come that someone would have the guts to take down Donald Trump. And Khizr Khan is the one. That he is a Muslim immigrant, after all the poisonous words Trump has spoken about them, makes it sweeter. What was expected to be a filler speech at the Democratic National Convention has become its most memorable. And that shows how democracy really works. The Clinton campaign may have invited the Khans for political purposes, but it turned out to be a potent civics lesson -- not only for Trump and his supporters but for the entire country.

The Khans have lived the true American dream, not the contrived Trump fantasy. Natives of Pakistan, Ghazala and Khizr settled in Boston in 1980 where Khizr obtained a master's in law from Harvard. They moved to Maryland and their oldest son, Humayun, became an Army captain. He gave his life in 2004 to save his unit. Painting Islam with a hateful brush, Trump has earned the ire of millions of first-, second- and third-generation Muslims, including many in Hudson County. In his DNC speech, Khizr delivered the most powerful line, "You have sacrificed nothing and no one." Then he went on to taunt Trump about his basic ignorance of the U.S. Constitution by offering him the one he carries with him at all times.

Khizr Khan has done what thousands of cable and TV anchors, reporters and talking heads have failed to do: expose Trump as an incompetent bigot and make it stick. His legion of spokespeople shamelessly shill for big bucks to cover for an empty head. Cable and TV networks go for ratings and play up Trump's rolling controversies and stupid statements without calling him out. The Republican leadership has sold their souls for this narcissist whose former ghost writer for "The Art of the Deal" labeled him a sociopath. And I am perplexed by his millions of followers who excuse every outright lie and insult.

Khan also has highlighted what is increasingly becoming a concern for the electorate: that Trump is in over his head and has little idea how to govern. He creates these controversies to mask his ignorance and incompetence. The American people deserve better: a real debate of ideas and policies. Now he's threatening the non-partisan presidential debates. Anything to deflect from what the Khans said that make us question if we can trust him.

"We can't solve our problems by building walls and sowing division," said Khan. "We are stronger together."

In brief, it's not about Trump or even Hillary Clinton. This election is about us -- the American people. All of us.

http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2 ... commented_opinion_article

Why are you coming out against Donald Trump?

"As someone who has worked to further the Republican Party's principles for the last 15 years I believe that we are at a moment where silence isn't an option. We are here today in part because as a party in the past we have remained silent when things have made us uncomfortable. Instead of speaking out against instances of bigotry, racism and inflammatory rhetoric whether it's been against women, immigrants or Muslims, we made a calculus that it was better to say nothing at all in the interest of politics and winning elections. For me, if our party has a future, we have to change that trajectory and lead by example.
"We have to stop thinking that winning at any cost is more important than governing principles. It should be the job of the Republican Party's nominee to set a tone worthy of being the leader of the free world and not give into our worst instincts. I don't care if it's good politics or not."

Why now? Was there a tipping point?

"I've been contemplating whether to say anything publicly for awhile. When you are used to being behind the scenes and speaking for someone else it doesn't come naturally. For me, I think that it's a culmination of watching Donald Trump purposely play to our worst instincts and fanning those flames. We can't survive as a party if we don't try to elevate the conversation and lead. If those of us who believe that Donald Trump shouldn't be President don't say anything, we are just part of the same problem."

Who will you vote for and why?

"I'm voting for Hillary Clinton in November and I'm voting for her because I don't believe it's enough to say you aren't for Donald Trump. My mom and dad were Republicans, but they didn't always vote Republican. There are times when principle trumps (no pun intended) party and we have to be okay with acknowledging that.

"I can certainly complain that the choices aren't great and I wish there were better options. But there aren't. So I can either exist in the real world and make a decision based on my actual choices or pretend I am in a fantasy. I chose the real world and I would encourage other Republicans to do the same."

How did you react to Trump's recent comments about the parents of the Muslim-American soldier who spoke at the Democratic convention?

"I wish I could say I'm shocked, but I'm not. Donald Trump has been a demagogue this whole time, preying on people's anxieties with loose information and salacious rhetoric, drumming up fear and hatred of the 'other.' Instead of trying anything remotely like unifying the country, we have a nominee who would rather pick fights because he views it as positive news coverage. It may make him media savvy, but it doesn't make him qualified or ready to be president.

"The President of the United States is charged with making some of the toughest decisions any human being should have to confront, including sending men and women to war and potentially death. We can't have a President who doesn't understand the very human ramifications of those decisions and is unable to show humility and empathy in the face of grieving parents."

Unlike Sally Bradshaw, who is a longtime adviser to Jeb Bush who has also said he won't vote for Trump, your former boss, Gov. Chris Christie, has not only endorsed Donald Trump, but consistently defended Trump and lobbied to be his vice president. How do you think he will feel about your decision?

"I believe Chris Christie was the best person to be the nominee and unfortunately, that didn't happen. My decision is my own and I know from working with the Governor that he has the utmost respect for people expressing their own opinions."

How long have you been a Republican and what would you say to other Republicans about why you are doing this?

"I've been a Republican since I grew up listening to my parents talk politics at the kitchen table. Two people who came from working class families, never went to college and managed to send their two daughters to college as firsts in both families. They believed in a Republican Party that preaches that in this country there is opportunity for you no matter where you come from, who your parents are or what you grew up with. They believed in working hard, free trade, a government that delivers basic services well and is there when hard work alone isn't going to cut it. They didn't care what goes on inside the four walls of your home. Today, we have a nominee who doesn't represent any of those basic principles and he is just a culmination of our misdirection over the last few decades."

?Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?? Those cutting words, delivered on national television, effectively ended the career of Senator Joe McCarthy. For four years, McCarthy had enjoyed a kind of immunity as he smeared anyone he pleased while on a national witch hunt for Communist sympathizers. But in the spring of 1954, during hearings on supposed infiltrators in the U.S. Army that were broadcast on the new medium of television, McCarthy casually sought to destroy a young lawyer at the firm of Joseph Welch, counsel to the Army, an esteemed Harvard-trained lawyer and fellow Republican. When McCarthy suggested the junior attorney had Communist sympathies, the courtly Welch sank his head in despair, then looked McCarthy in the eye and excoriated him with those immortal words. Tens of millions of new American TV viewers watched in fascination and horror. The senator from Wisconsin never recovered.

Such turning points are not always evident when they happen: When does a nation reach a moment in which even a popular demagogue who has enjoyed a seeming immunity from public condemnation?no matter what he says?goes too far? History doesn?t repeat itself, and Donald Trump has defied many predictions of his downfall in the past. But it?s possible we may just have witnessed his McCarthy moment, considering the criticism that has been heaped on the GOP candidate from all sides in the past few days since Khizr and Ghazala Khan, the Pakistani-born American parents of an Army captain killed in the line of duty in Iraq in 2004, appeared at the podium of the Democratic National Convention to honor their son and make the case against Trump for president.

Khizr Khan?s short speech electrified the convention. ?If it was up to Donald Trump,? Khan said, ?[our son] never would have been in America ... Donald Trump, you're asking Americans to trust you with their future. Let me ask you: Have you even read the United States constitution? I will gladly lend you my copy. In this document, look for the words 'liberty' and 'equal protection? of law. Have you ever been to Arlington Cemetery? Go look at the graves of brave patriots who died defending the United States of America. You will see all faiths, genders and ethnicities. You have sacrificed nothing and no one.?

As moving as Khan?s speech was, it?s what happened afterward that made the story explode. Trump, as is his wont whenever he is criticized, fired back at the Khans. In an interview, he oddly questioned why Ghazala Khan said nothing during the speech and implied that she may have not have been allowed to speak by her husband?a double hit on Muslims and women that only made Trump look worse when the mother later explained she simply couldn?t speak of her son Humayun without breaking down. Then Trump dug his own hole deeper. Asked by ABC?s George Stephanopoulos what sacrifices he, Trump, has made for his country, the GOP candidate appeared to compare Humayun Khan?s supreme sacrifice to ? job creation. ?I think I?ve made a lot of sacrifices. I?ve created thousands and thousands of jobs, tens of thousands of jobs,? Trump said. With some incredulity, Stephanopoulos responded: ?Those are sacrifices?? Trump casually answered: ?Oh sure, I think they?re sacrifices. I think when I can employ thousands and thousands of people, take care of their education, take care of so many things. Even in military, I mean I was very responsible, along with a group of people, for getting the Vietnam memorial in downtown Manhattan, which to this day people thank me for.?


Khizr Khan?s response was full of raw fury. Sounding very much like a latter-day Joseph Welch, he declared of Trump: "He has no decency. He has a dark heart." Like his speech at the convention, those comments went viral too.

Are these two moments in history comparable? The nature of public shaming has changed dramatically in the past 60-odd years. In June 1954, the term ?viral? had a very different meaning. And the nation appears to have become much more tolerant of outrageous speech. How much more tolerant is another question.

***

In that spring of 62 years ago, Senator Joe McCarthy, serving his second term as a Republican from Wisconsin, was arguably the most powerful political force in the United States. McCarthy had come to national prominence n 1950 when he charged that there were 200 known Communists who had infiltrated President Harry S. Truman?s State Department, and his subsequent investigations had morphed into a national hunt for Communist sympathizers. McCarthy and his committee were the leading edge of a ?Red Scare? that cast a national pall over free speech, led companies large and small to dismiss employees on even a whiff of former flirtation with left-wing politics, and fueled widespread fear that in turn deepened the Cold War. There were, of course, some genuine spies and sympathizers, but the thousands unfairly implicated far dwarfed those numbers.

In 1954, McCarthy raised the stakes dramatically, raising suspicions about the loyalties of senior officials in the U.S. Army. The Army?s chief counsel, Joseph Welch, was a deeply respected 63-year old lawyer from Boston and a partner at the most white-shoe of white-shoe firms, Hale and Dorr. The Army had hired Welch, a registered Republican, to represent the service against accusations leveled by McCarthy that the Army was soft on Communism.

What made the Army-McCarthy hearings that began in April 1954 different was television. They were the first prominent congressional hearings televised, and at a time when there were a few channels, people watched what was on. That meant that 20 million people tuned in, and by some estimates tens of millions more, which was a significant portion of the U.S. population at the time. And on June 9, they witnessed the studious Welch turn the hearings on their head.

Simply being mentioned during these hearings was enough in those years to ruin someone?s career and potentially expose them to legal action and ostracism. Welch, who had been sparring with McCarthy and his chief counsel Roy Cohn for weeks, was visibly appalled when McCarthy sought to sully the young lawyer at his firm. ?Until this moment, senator, I think I never really gauged your cruelty, or your recklessness," Welch said. "Little did I dream you could be so reckless and so cruel as to do an injury to that lad. It is, I regret to say, equally true that I fear he shall always bear a scar needlessly inflicted by you. If it were in my power to forgive you for your reckless cruelty, I would do so. I like to think I'm a gentle man, but your forgiveness will have to come from someone other than me ... You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency??

For the first time, the bully had been called out in public by someone with no skeletons in his proverbial closet, whose integrity was unquestionable, and whose motives were purely patriotic. The audience in the senate chamber burst into applause. Coverage of the event was wildly supportive of Welch, and sharply critical of McCarthy. Within weeks, he was forced to bring the hearings to a close. His speeches over the summer, once front page news, were delivered to an empty, pre-CSPAN, Senate chamber. McCarthy, who had enjoyed positive support of half the country in January 1954, saw that fall to the low 30s in subsequent polls. Within months, his one-time allies had deserted him, and in December he was overwhelming rebuked and censured by the Senate by a vote of 67-22.

McCarthy served two meaningless years more in the Senate before dying of alcohol poisoning at age 48.

***

The coming days will determine whether Donald Trump has, like Joe McCarthy, crossed over some invisible line of decency that even many voters who now support him can?t stomach. In many ways the controversy is similar to past moments when Trump has attacked innocent people?like the judge in his Trump University case, Gonzalo P. Curiel, whom Trump impugned for his ?Mexican heritage??and was condemned for it, but still managed to keep his standing in the polls. This time could be different?even from when Trump insulted Sen. John McCain's war service, declaring that McCain was no hero because he was only captured, although the Arizona senator withstood torture for four years. Many predicted Trump?s downfall then too, and it didn?t happen.

But now Trump has touched a kind of ethical third rail by attacking the unimpeachable, suffering parents of a dead hero?Capt. Khan was awarded the Bronze Star for his actions?and by cheapening the very idea of sacrifice for one?s country. And with just 98 days left until the election, the GOP candidate's campaign is consumed in another unnecessary controversy?perhaps the biggest one yet?and Trump is being condemned by leading figures in both parties. Many in the military, which has given Trump a lot of support, are also questioning whether Trump is fit to be president. ?I loathe Donald Trump with every fiber of my being,? one retired Army officer wrote on Facebook as the controversy took off. A group of Gold Star families organized by VoteVets.org wrote in an open letter published Monday: "When you question a mother's pain, by implying that her religion, not her grief, kept her from addressing an arena of people, you are attacking us. When you say your job building buildings is akin to our sacrifice, you are attacking our sacrifice." Brian Duffy, head of the 1.7-million-member Veterans of Foreign Wars, joined in, saying it was unacceptable for Trump to question the right of a Gold Star family member to exercise free speech. ?There are certain sacrosanct subjects that no amount of wordsmithing can repair once crossed,? Duffy said.

McCain himself on Monday issued his harshest rebuke of the GOP candidate yet. ?While our Party has bestowed upon him the nomination, it is not accompanied by unfettered license to defame those who are the best among us," McCain said. "I'd like to say to Mr. and Mrs. Khan: thank you for immigrating to America. We're a better country because of you. And you are certainly right; your son was the best of America, and the memory of his sacrifice will make us a better nation?and he will never be forgotten." Representative Mike Coffman of Colorado, a Republican who served in combat as a Marine and represents a swing district in the Denver suburbs, told The New York Times that Trump had disrespected American troops. ?Having served in Iraq, I?m deeply offended when Donald Trump fails to honor the sacrifices of all of our brave soldiers who were lost in that war,? Coffman said. Ohio Gov. John Kasich, who battled Trump in the primaries, also suggested the candidate had abused the Khan family: ?There?s only one way to talk about Gold Star parents: with honor and respect.?

Khizr Khan, meanwhile, has not let up in his counterattack on Trump. After he raised the stakes by asking senior Republican leaders, including House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, to condemn Trump, they remained silent for a day before McConnell delivered an indirect rebuke to Trump, saying in a statement Sunday: "Captain Khan was an American hero, and like all Americans, I?m grateful for the sacrifices that selfless young men like Capt. Khan and their families have made in the war on terror. All Americans should value the patriotic service of the patriots who volunteer to selflessly defend us in the armed services.?

Trump?s campaign has desperately tried to contain the damage, issuing a statement of its own describing Humayun Khan as a ?hero.? But the candidate himself battled on unrepentantly, tweeting on Sunday: ?I was viciously attacked by Mr. Khan at the Democratic Convention. Am I not allowed to respond? Hillary voted for the Iraq War, not me!?


Trump has brought to the forefront of our national debate a range of real issues that any president and any who are drawn to public service will need to grapple with: economic insecurity, the challenge of terrorism, the miasma of immigration law, the frayed state of race relations, and disgust with political and financial elites who have promised the moon and delivered most to themselves and little to the rest. Those issues demand attention. But Donald Trump has churned up a great deal of darkness, and his moment may just have passed. Or not.

TheBigGuy wrote:
Why do I have to keep repeating the most important questions you conveniently ignore... Please explain to the readers why your candidate HRC who according to Obama is the most qualified presidential candidate EVER, or some such nonsense, is not dominating Trump? Hmmm, can't play the race card here... sexism, of course. Guys, can we add Sexism and variations to our Drink Game words Racism, Hitler/Nazi and Fascists. DRINK!!!

This week, Donald Trump joined hands with Kremlin trolls to excuse Vladimir Putin for interfering in our election. The ultimate establishmentarian, RNC Chairman Reince Priebus, threw his own wrong answer into the hat. Donald Trump?s GOP is willing to abet Putin tarnishing our elections, our most fundamental institution, for the sake of defeating Hillary Clinton.

This is how a political party loses its soul.

There was a presidential way to handle this. The minute those emails leaked

Trump should have used his outdoor voice to denounce Putin interfering in our elections. ?Hillary may be a crook but she?s my crook. This is my election. Stay out, Vlad.? Our gormless Secretary of State even happened to be with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov Wednesday as things unfolded. Sec. Kerry did not stand up for the country but radiated weakness (shocking). Obama, Kerry and Clinton, herself, own the blame for this. The moment groaned for criticism. Yet, instead of taking a shot at the easy target, Trump defended the virulently anti-American tin pot authoritarian Putin, saying: "The new joke in town is that Russia leaked the disastrous DNC e-mails, which should never have been written (stupid), because Putin likes me."

I have held off my criticism in the expectation (hope?) that the GOP would reverse course, criticize President Obama and Hillary Clinton for cracking the door to Putin ? and tell Putin to butt out. Instead, Trump doubled down. ?Russia, if you?re listening, I hope you?re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.? Hear any complaints from the GOP establishment about a presidential candidate inviting a foreign power to meddle in our elections? How about the self-aggrandizing foreign policy expert and recent Trump endorser, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla. who once called Putin a ?gangster?? Me neither.

This is not the first time a presidential candidate turned to Moscow for help unseating an opponent. In 1982 Sen. Teddy Kennedy approached Soviet Premier Yuri Andropov for help defeating Ronald Reagan. Unlike Trump, Kennedy had enough shame to keep his approach secret. Unfortunately for him, the Soviet Union ended and Western researchers found the memo.

The GOP establishment wants all aboard the Trump train even if it means selling American democracy down the river.

Until this week, Kennedy owned the most shameful act of servitude in modern U.S. politics. Yet Trump, like Kennedy, put himself above the Constitution. Trump, like Kennedy, did not believe he could alone convince the American voters of his message? so he begged Moscow for help. Trump does not even know enough about the Constitution to know he has done a bad thing? but the (silent) GOP leaders do. Or at least they did.

During Trump?s first serious speech on foreign policy he quoted Alexander Hamilton (incorrectly) on trade. As noted by John Avalon, Hamilton also wrote George Washington?s Farewell Address. In it Washington explicitly warns, that ?foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.? If our first president understood this point how is it that someone vying to become the 45th does not? The answer is Hillary Clinton.

The GOP has now cast everything aside to beat Hillary Clinton. Everything. Don?t get me wrong; she deserves opprobrium. But my dislike of Hillary does not trump core principles, to say nothing about core defense of the Constitution. What good is it if, in our desire to cast her aside, we put forward a bozo who thinks there are 12 articles in the Constitution? True, Trump brings together traditional RINOs and crackpot conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones to fight Clinton but to what end? The GOP establishment wants all aboard the Trump train even if it means selling American democracy down the river.

Wednesday, the controversy turned to whether Trump is Putin?s plant. Give me a break. Putin is no mastermind. Trump is Putin?s useful idiot and this episode is nothing but an attempt to make hash of our elections. Because Trump is stuck in character we need someone else to speak in defense of the Constitution. The party that claims to be the protector of the Constitution should brim with people who can make this point. Apparently not today.

Wednesday, House Speaker Paul Ryan put out a tepid statemtent. Embarrassing. Priebus whined, ?The Russians didn't write the emails.? Non Sequitur. Indiana Governor Mike Pence, Trump?s running mate, mealy mouthed, "If it is Russia and they are interfering in our elections? they would face consequences. C?mon. No serious person questions that the Russians did this.

Gov. Pence, if you really doubt it, you can follow the rabbit down the hole here, here, here, here, here, here. Either that, or Google it.

Trump typically thunders that Obama?s America does get respect abroad. True. Obama is weak. But how much respect does Trump think he will get as president after undermining his own Constitution for the sake of beating a candidate that nobody likes? Trump tells everyone who listens that he wants a good relationship with Putin. That sounds vaguely familiar. Presidents Bush and Obama learned the hard way that flattery gets you nowhere with Putin. Donald Trump believes himself to be awesome. He has fooled a great many people. I can assure you Vladimir Putin is not one of them.

TheBigGuy wrote:
Try to focus... the democrats say that Treasonous Trump is colluding with the Russians.... where is the EVIDENCE. If it exists, wouldn't the arrests start in the Trump campaign???

Please cite your measurable sources that HRC has recaptured the Bernie Vote?

And no comment about a white southern male as VP?

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
If Russia is trying to influence a Presidential election, that is concerning. But not nearly as concerning as a Presidential candidate trying to do the same.

SOS wrote:
One of the most compelling speeches at the DNC wasn't prime time...

bill wrote:
The Republican party is already changing. Those old white men are being replaced by Latinos and Asians. This will accelerate as current liberal social issues become mainstream. Once the left embraces the next step of identity and sex (trans species and I'm not sure which will gain traction but it may be bestiality, incest, pedophilia, necrophilia) it will accelerate.

stillinjc wrote:
Quote:

T-Bird wrote:
Quote:

iGreg wrote:
Think ppl are going to need to grasp the reality that Trump will be the next US Prez.

As most would scoff at the idea of voting for him in public, what happens once the curtain is pulled is a very different story.

Huh. Someone who actually has been a republican president seems to disagree with you:

George W. Bush: "I'm worried that I may be the last Republican President"

I have exactly the same concern. As should most Americans. If liberals get a free run at it, EU will look like paradise compared to the US.

T-Bird wrote:
Quote:

iGreg wrote:
Think ppl are going to need to grasp the reality that Trump will be the next US Prez.

As most would scoff at the idea of voting for him in public, what happens once the curtain is pulled is a very different story.

Huh. Someone who actually has been a republican president seems to disagree with you:

George W. Bush: "I'm worried that I may be the last Republican President"

Donald Trump?s vice presidential pick received praise from an unwelcome place Thursday: the White House.

President Obama?s chief spokesman Josh Earnest lauded Indiana Gov. Mike Pence (R) for deciding to expand Medicaid in his state under ObamaCare.

?I know that Gov. Pence did do some important work with the administration to expand Medicaid in his state,? Earnest told reporters when asked what Obama thinks of the governor. ?That?s something President Obama has been encouraging Democratic and Republican governors across the country to do.?

The spokesman added, however, he would ?leave it to the individual candidates to determine who they believe would best complement their skills and could lead their party.?

Earnest?s comments came just after reports emerged that Trump was poised to choose Pence as his vice presidential nominee.

Pence is likely to face scrutiny over his decision to accept federal dollars to provide health insurance coverage to low-income families.

In January of last year, the Indiana governor became the ninth GOP governor to reach a deal with the administration to expand Medicaid.

But Pence put a conservative twist on the expansion by making participants pay a monthly premium to offset costs. The plan, known as Healthy Indiana Plan 2.0, has earned praise from some Republicans.