Trump Plans on More Pundit Hirings for Important Jobs

Donald Trump apparently thinks he can remake his battered image through hiring television pundits for important policy positions in his administration.

Meanwhile, Stormy Daniels says she can "describe his junk perfectly."

What a farce.

What's not a farce: Robert Mueller is subpoenaing Trump Org.'s Russia records.

< United Sends Dog to Japan Instead of Kansas City | Wife of Don. Jr. Files for Divorce >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Stormy and Hannity (5.00 / 2) (#10)
    by jondee on Fri Mar 16, 2018 at 01:06:59 PM EST
    should have a contest to see who can describe it more perfectly.

    My money is on Hannity,,, (none / 0) (#11)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 16, 2018 at 01:22:36 PM EST
    been slurping on it every night on Fox News, and every day on your AM dial.  Surprised his thin grim lips haven't turned orange.

    He (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by FlJoe on Mon Mar 19, 2018 at 02:16:01 PM EST
    found a new lawyer on Fox
    President Donald Trump is set to hire a former top federal prosecutor with a history of pushing conspiracy theories about the Department of Justice and the FBI on television, The New York Times reported Monday.

    and he is a doozy
    "There was a brazen plot to illegally exonerate Hillary Clinton and, if she didn't win the election, to then frame Donald Trump with a falsely created crime," diGenova told Fox News earlier this year. "Make no mistake about it: A group of FBI and DOJ people were trying to frame Donald Trump of a falsely created crime."

    DiGenova also called former FBI director James Comey, whom Trump fired last May, a "dirty cop" and "a political assassin."

    Planning a "never mind the overwhelming evidence, I was framed" defense, perhaps.

    I guess Hannity (none / 0) (#55)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Mar 19, 2018 at 02:19:30 PM EST
    Was to busy

    Stormy Daniels (2.00 / 1) (#29)
    by linea on Sun Mar 18, 2018 at 06:51:41 PM EST
    Obviously, this is in the news because is of its prurient nature but maybe it belongs in the National Enquirer rather than running 24-hours on CNN.

    I think it's entertaining and gossipy but really the (formerly) serious media looks silly running this continuously as if it were a major news item.

    Also, it is a non-issue in terms of any political consequence to the Trump administration or impact on votes in the 2020 election.

    She had an affair with Trump in 2006. Sorry to point out the obvious, but it's not like Trump had sex with an intern while in office and even then it wouldn't matter in terms of influencing voting behavior according to FiveThirtyEight:

    In a CBS News poll from 1998, 77 percent of Democrats said that then-President Bill Clinton's relationship with White House intern Monica Lewinsky was "a private matter" having to do with Clinton's "personal life." Just 16 percent of Democrats considered the affair a "public matter having to do with Bill Clinton's job as president." In contrast, 64 percent of Republicans cast the situation as a public concern, while 28 percent said it was a private matter.

    The story is not about sex. (5.00 / 6) (#46)
    by Chuck0 on Mon Mar 19, 2018 at 08:15:39 AM EST
    YOU made it about sex. The story is about a lack of ethics and morality. Bone Spurs is the titular head of the GOP. The GOP that has claimed the mantle as the party of "family values." The party to which so-called evangelical christians have flocked. The story is about the hypocrisy and lack of character of these people. The story is about possible illegal campaign contributions and from what is coming out now, intimidation by thugs. The story is about a tin pot dictator who lies and cheats without remorse. A sociopath that I do not want occupying my White House.

    Would it be less of a story if (5.00 / 2) (#52)
    by Anne on Mon Mar 19, 2018 at 10:56:16 AM EST
    Daniels was just the restaurant hostess at the golf club where the tournament was held, and whom Donald Trump paid off via a transaction designed to keep Trump out of it, and her mouth shut, while he was running for President?

    There was already a long list of women accusing him of some kind of sexual assault/harassment.  We had already heard his philosophy on grabbing women by their lady parts.  What could Daniels possibly say that would have him so spooked that he needed to pay her off - and later, allegedly threaten her physically?

    Why wouldn't he just say, "yeah, I fked her, she wasn't that good, and I already told Melania, so what's the big deal?  I'm Donald Trump - I have needs."

    But no, instead they come up with this NDA using pseudonyms, and a serpentine financial arrangement that involved setting up an LLC, and using funds from Michael Cohen's HELOC.  Had they done this before?  Why did they think they needed it in the first place?

    I don't know, maybe you don't care if the president it out there threatening people and engaging in behavior that makes him susceptible to blackmail, but the rest of us think it might be kind of a big deal - not because of the sex, but how he handled his involvement.


    Corollary (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by MKS on Tue Mar 20, 2018 at 11:42:38 PM EST
    It is bracing to read a woman write:

    Why wouldn't he just say, "yeah, I fked her, she wasn't that good, and I already told Melania, so what's the big deal?  I'm Donald Trump - I have needs."

    Mastery of sleazy guy-talk.  


    And it's Anne (none / 0) (#69)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 23, 2018 at 07:04:31 AM EST
    Look what Donald Trump has done to Anne ;) You should hear the rest of us

    Howdy's theory (none / 0) (#60)
    by MKS on Tue Mar 20, 2018 at 05:22:25 PM EST
    about this

    Why wouldn't he just say, "yeah, I fked her, she wasn't that good, and I already told Melania, so what's the big deal?  I'm Donald Trump - I have needs."

    is that Melania's pre-nup has a penalty for infidelity.


    Another possibility (none / 0) (#62)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Mar 20, 2018 at 05:27:06 PM EST
    Supported by today's news is they fear the opening of the proverbial NDA floodgates if they do not nip this in the bud

    Both could be true


    Ahem. (none / 0) (#63)
    by Towanda on Tue Mar 20, 2018 at 08:12:53 PM EST
    But I posted that theory here a few days before.

    It wasn't really "my" theory (none / 0) (#64)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Mar 20, 2018 at 08:18:07 PM EST
    I heard it on cable news

    So, Howdy poached it? (none / 0) (#65)
    by MKS on Tue Mar 20, 2018 at 08:48:56 PM EST
    Theft of intellectual property?

    That is how I get my best ideas.....


    I was honest about it (none / 0) (#66)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Mar 20, 2018 at 09:03:35 PM EST
    Just heard why they care (none / 0) (#35)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Mar 18, 2018 at 12:19:21 PM EST
    Infidelity could effect Melanias pre nup
    Rhu rho.

    Reply to This


    It is neither a matter of (5.00 / 5) (#53)
    by KeysDan on Mon Mar 19, 2018 at 11:58:45 AM EST
    hype or hysteria.  Nor is it one of unwholesome interest.  But, it is of one with Trump's pattern of moral bankruptcy--e.g., unwelcome "tic tac" thrusts and genital assaults, disrespecting a tortured American POW, mocking the disabled, attacking gold star parents. barging into women's dressing rooms.

     And, this is overlooking failed marriages, and five children with three wives. A fact that would hardly go unnoticed for a Democratic president.  And, his sketchy business practices, such as settling a fraud case (Trump University) for $25 million.

    Republicans, in large measure, have concluded that good character is of no concern if the president is Republican. What is important to them is tax cuts for the wealthy, no regulations, repeal of Roe V Wade, and conservative judges that will hold back modernity and preserve their brand of social order.

     But, it is a Faustian bargain....to the point of co-conspiracy in the cover-up and obstruction into subversion of American democracy. At best, Republicans would rather not know if there was (is) a criminal conspiracy between the Russian government/oligarchs-the apparent-illegal quid for illegal quo.

     Character does matter in the case of a Democratic president, witness President Obama putting his feet on his desk and wearing a tan suit.  And, of course, President Clinton...articles of impeachment for obstruction/perjury and no underlying crime. Talk about hype and hysteria.


    Where the Stormy (none / 0) (#30)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Mar 18, 2018 at 07:04:34 PM EST
    problem comes in is money laundering. You are completely on the wrong track here. Obviously evangelicals are fine with porn stars now.

    I'm not aware of that (2.00 / 2) (#35)
    by linea on Sun Mar 18, 2018 at 09:49:41 PM EST
    Who is investigating Donald Trump for money laundering or illegal campaign contributions in relation to Stormy Daniels? It certainly would be news if that happened. In the meantime, people need to get a handle on separating wild media speculation from reality. It's looking like the flip-side of `lock her up' from my perspective.

    By the way, I have no idea where the spurious `evangelicals are fine with porn stars' comes from.


    Fine (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by FlJoe on Mon Mar 19, 2018 at 04:54:03 AM EST
    Christians wouldn't bear false witness,
    Tony Perkins, the president of the conservative Family Research Council, contended Tuesday that the evangelical community has given President Donald Trump a "mulligan" when it comes to his personal behavior.
    or is that commandment also null and void in the age of tRump?

    I don't know how you've managed to miss the fact (5.00 / 3) (#49)
    by CST on Mon Mar 19, 2018 at 08:57:08 AM EST
    That the potentially illegal campaign contribution angle is in fact





    I could easily have added 10 more links from a 30 second google search.


    There is this guy named Mueller (none / 0) (#38)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Mar 18, 2018 at 10:15:26 PM EST

    The payment to porn star Stormy Daniels to buy silence about an alleged sexual encounter with Donald Trump may have been an illegal campaign contribution to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election, according to a complaint filed Monday by a government watchdog group.

    The group, Common Cause, said the Department of Justice and the Federal Election Commission should investigate the $130,000 payment to Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, in October 2016 by Trump's personal attorney, Michael Cohen. It said the payment may have been an in-kind contribution, which would violate several campaign finance laws.

    Because the payment reportedly was made about a month before voters headed to the polls, it could be seen as a campaign "expenditure" that affected the election's outcome in Trump's favor, according to the complaint.

    Oh wow!! (1.00 / 2) (#40)
    by linea on Sun Mar 18, 2018 at 11:26:26 PM EST
    A liberal group thinks the DOJ should investigate Michael Cohen because his payment may have been an illegal campaign contribution?

    Kinda missing my whole point. At this stage it's media hype and everyone here is behaving no differently than hysterical `lock her up' Republicans.

    By the way, it's been two days going on three since `For the first time in US history The country NEEDS a coup' was posted and I am still the single voice of opposition. I'm apparently the only person on TalkLeft who isn't totally fine with someone advocating a coup to overthrow the democratically elected Republican candidate because the Democratic Party candidate didn't win. Either you are all little more than bratty petulant children or you are all completely devoid of any ethical understanding of democracy. It's pathetic. My opinion.


    Your last two sentences (5.00 / 2) (#48)
    by Yman on Mon Mar 19, 2018 at 08:19:52 AM EST
    ... were reversed.

    Project much?


    No one's missing your point - they are (4.80 / 5) (#50)
    by Anne on Mon Mar 19, 2018 at 09:54:20 AM EST
    more or less dumbfounded that you are trying to pass it off as credible, and are disagreeing with it.  

    If there wasn't massive pushback on the whole coup thing, it's because most of us who read it understood where it was coming from.  Most of us who read it have serious concerns with the motives and intent of this president and his minions.  This president and many of his advisors, Cabinet Secretaries, and others, have shown total disregard for the law, are systematically working to deconstruct the government, are actively engaged in grift and corruption, actively working to suppress the vote, may be happily willing to allow the Russians to interfere in the voting process, are  actively working to turn back the progress we've made on civil and human rights - among other things.  The sum total of this is a serious undermining of the democracy, and with no signs that the Republicans in Congress have any intention of checking this behavior and agenda, where and how do you see it ending?

    Oh, we have mid-terms coming up, with a chance to change the dynamic and balance of power in the Congress - but when faced with a president and a party that has shown they can and will do whatever they want, how does this help things?  When faced with a president and a party that doesn't think election tampering is necessarily a bad thing, if it keeps them in power, what is the answer to that?

    Can we really get to November, 2020 without a total collapse of the institutional integrity of this nation?  Do you not understand why people are worried about this, and not just willing to dismiss everything as being no big deal?

    For what it's worth, no one particularly gives a rat's a$$ that the president, as a private citizen, sees marital infidelity as a quaint-but-outdated tradition he is under no obligation to observe, marriage vows notwithstanding.  That isn't the point.  The point, linea, is we have a president whose risky personal behavior, that allegedly included threats of physical harm, made him susceptible to blackmail.  Being a sexual predator is blackmail material.  

    The point is that the payoffs may have violated campaign finance laws.  Yeah, that really is a thing, and it's not a small thing.  It may actually be just the tip of the iceberg where violations may be concerned.

    Here's the thing, linea: there are a lot of people here at TL who have been on this planet a lot longer than you have, who have seen a lot more than you have, who have worked in politics and elections, who have been on the front lines of activism, and it's at once laughable and offensive for you to march yourself in here posing as some kind of expert and deem us  as "bratty, petulant children" who are "completely devoid of any ethical understanding of democracy."  

    I'd suggest you might want to voice those opinions in front of a mirror.


    Saying this morning (none / 0) (#51)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Mar 19, 2018 at 10:35:08 AM EST
    The threats happened while Trump was president.

    That's a big problem.


    SITE VIOLATOR (none / 0) (#41)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Mar 18, 2018 at 11:49:02 PM EST
    I stand by that statement. (none / 0) (#45)
    by Chuck0 on Mon Mar 19, 2018 at 08:10:34 AM EST
    And it's NOT because the Democrat didn't win. I never made such a statement during either Bush administration or Reagan (were you even alive during the Reagan administration). I made that statement because I believe the current occupant of 1600 PA Ave, is a danger to the republic. A danger to world peace, and danger to the safety and security of the country of my birth. He is a repugnant, vindictive, venal, piece of slime that needs to be removed. By any means necessary.

    Ha (none / 0) (#31)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Mar 18, 2018 at 08:29:17 PM EST
    You fell for



    The Stormy Daniels story ... (none / 0) (#32)
    by Yman on Sun Mar 18, 2018 at 09:19:22 PM EST
    ... isn't about an extra-marital affair.  It's about potentially illegal campaign contributions and physically threatening a woman.

    But the Clinton thing was pretty funny.  Any excuse to let your CDS fly and (falsely) claim hypocrisy.


    When was CNN (none / 0) (#33)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Mar 18, 2018 at 09:26:47 PM EST

    Plus (none / 0) (#34)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Mar 18, 2018 at 09:36:45 PM EST
    We don't really know what it's about but one week from right now we may know more.

    Today I heard the best explanation yet of why they are so freaked.  That proof of infidelity could invalidate Melanias prenuptial.  

    What ever Donald actually has she could get half.  


    That's an interesting theory (none / 0) (#36)
    by Yman on Sun Mar 18, 2018 at 09:51:44 PM EST
    Not unusual to have an infidelity clause in a prenup, but hard to imagine Trump signing off on that.  Our being dumb enough to allow photos or video to be taken.  Then again, he's no ticket surgeon.

    You know what I'm curious about?  The amount of the payment to Clifford.  It's an odd amount.


    Ticket Surgeon (5.00 / 2) (#44)
    by jmacWA on Mon Mar 19, 2018 at 05:46:26 AM EST
    ticket surgeon n, the guy who rips your ticket in half at the door

    Whoops (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by Yman on Mon Mar 19, 2018 at 08:18:08 AM EST
     "Rocket surgeon"

    Darn phone autofill.


    It is (none / 0) (#37)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Mar 18, 2018 at 10:12:25 PM EST
    As far as him signing off (none / 0) (#39)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Mar 18, 2018 at 10:19:23 PM EST
    He's probably done it before.  If he was not president, and as we know he never expected to be, it would be working like it always has.

    I'm sure the threats came from Cohen.  That's basically his job.

    I'm sure he thought he could bully and sue any one who had reall evidence


    linea, did you (none / 0) (#61)
    by MKS on Tue Mar 20, 2018 at 05:24:06 PM EST
    miss the physical threats part?



    For the first time in US history (none / 0) (#1)
    by Chuck0 on Fri Mar 16, 2018 at 09:37:49 AM EST
    The country NEEDS a coup.

    No. (none / 0) (#18)
    by linea on Fri Mar 16, 2018 at 08:24:08 PM EST
    President Dennison's only friends.. (none / 0) (#2)
    by desertswine on Fri Mar 16, 2018 at 10:08:14 AM EST
    are the ones that he sees on tv.

    I have suggestions (none / 0) (#3)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Mar 16, 2018 at 10:27:39 AM EST
    Carrie Mathison for SOS

    Deneris Targarian for Defense

    Selena Meyer for VP


    Something tells me (none / 0) (#4)
    by CST on Fri Mar 16, 2018 at 10:36:40 AM EST
    Trump would be more of a Cersei guy then a Denaeris guy.  He'd probably call her a "fake Targaryan".

    Also that list has way too many women on it.


    You noticed that (none / 0) (#5)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Mar 16, 2018 at 10:37:18 AM EST
    Service Ilyn Payne (none / 0) (#6)
    by Yman on Fri Mar 16, 2018 at 11:05:41 AM EST
    Gonna need a new Press Secretary at some point.

    What about Stormy? (none / 0) (#7)
    by KeysDan on Fri Mar 16, 2018 at 11:06:08 AM EST
    There has got to be a place for her in the administration---Trump has, no doubt, seen her on video. And, she looks good on TV. Perhaps, liaison to the Evangelical Christians.  Or, a replacement for Johnny McEntee, as bodywoman.  

    Secretary of awsum (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Mar 16, 2018 at 11:11:38 AM EST
    Secretary of Commerce (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by Towanda on Fri Mar 16, 2018 at 01:43:04 PM EST
    since, unlike the president, she runs a business that is doing well, with never a bankruptcy.

    "Commerce?" (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 16, 2018 at 01:52:05 PM EST
    Perfect.  She knows how to sell.

    I don't fault her at all.  The thug stuff about alleged physical threats against her is way over the line. But who would be surprised by this?


    She might be fun as press secretary. (none / 0) (#9)
    by Anne on Fri Mar 16, 2018 at 12:46:53 PM EST
    Seriously, could she be worse than Sarah Sanders?

    The Stormy show (none / 0) (#15)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Mar 16, 2018 at 06:50:30 PM EST
    As the post says is of course a farce.  But so was Monica.

    The more I hear about this lawyer the more I think he is Trump's worst nightmare.  He seems to be Trump's equal in using media to his advantage.

    I'll tell you one thing The Stormy Show on 60 minutes a week from Sunday is going to have a Superbowl audience


    A lot can happen in a week... (none / 0) (#16)
    by Anne on Fri Mar 16, 2018 at 07:54:20 PM EST
    but I'll be watching, for sure.

    I just heard (none / 0) (#17)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Mar 16, 2018 at 08:16:30 PM EST
    That in the papers filed by Trump today to move the case to federal court his attourey was listed as Charles Harder.

    That would be the guy who sued GAWKER into the grave and got millions for Melania for a couple of stories that said she was not a model but a high end escort.

    Getting interesting.


    Is Charles Harder the lawyer's real name (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Peter G on Fri Mar 16, 2018 at 09:59:25 PM EST
    or just his p*rn screen name? (Or was his screen name perhaps Richard ('Dick') Harder?)

    Ha (none / 0) (#20)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Mar 16, 2018 at 10:02:36 PM EST
    real name

    Interestingly in the papers he used both the Presidents name and his alias, David Dennison.


    Is he any relation to Eva De Struction? (none / 0) (#42)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Mar 19, 2018 at 01:42:33 AM EST

    That sounds more like (none / 0) (#58)
    by Peter G on Tue Mar 20, 2018 at 03:14:07 PM EST
    a transvestite nightclub performer name than a p*rn name.

    His billboard ad (I am fantasizing) (none / 0) (#59)
    by Peter G on Tue Mar 20, 2018 at 03:15:51 PM EST
    "Need a new lawyer? Try Harder."

    I wonder if evil fairy Peter Thiel (none / 0) (#22)
    by jondee on Sat Mar 17, 2018 at 07:34:37 AM EST
    is bankrolling this one the way he did the Gawker case.

    I'm betting so.


    Trump (none / 0) (#14)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Mar 16, 2018 at 04:01:52 PM EST
    Is not leaving town this weekend.

    Rhu rho

    Course not - he needed to stick around (5.00 / 3) (#21)
    by Anne on Fri Mar 16, 2018 at 10:02:52 PM EST
    to watch Sessions fire Andrew McCabe.

    This makes me sick.


    but (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by KeysDan on Sat Mar 17, 2018 at 12:47:53 PM EST
    He lacked candor. Even under oath. Sessions just will not have it

    Yeah, I don't think he's done (none / 0) (#24)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Mar 17, 2018 at 01:22:48 PM EST
    I expect another shoe to clock me in the head before the weekend is over.

    The White House staff (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by KeysDan on Sun Mar 18, 2018 at 01:17:35 PM EST
    got him out to play golf, somewhat cool, but the twitter stormy was getting dangerous.

    Can you imagine trying to manage (none / 0) (#56)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Mar 19, 2018 at 02:44:40 PM EST
    Someone like this? Having to whisk him away to golf before he instead plays with the nuclear football for distraction?

    I would (none / 0) (#26)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Mar 18, 2018 at 08:35:12 AM EST
    have thought that but the blowback on the McCabe firing has been so huge it seems to have taken him by surprise.

    Did you see the photo of the Marine standing (none / 0) (#25)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Mar 17, 2018 at 01:26:21 PM EST
    Outside the West wing after 5:00 pm last night? Indicating that Trump was still in there?

    Who knows everything that has been cooked up for the weekend?


    Need to get Trump's (none / 0) (#28)
    by KeysDan on Sun Mar 18, 2018 at 01:50:16 PM EST
    mind off of Mueller and eyes off of Stormy, and concentrate on governing.  My suggestion would be to prepare for a trip to Moscow to celebrate his boss, Putin's,  election to his fourth term as president.

     And, Putin won the popular vote, which no doubt stings, 73.9 percent by exit polls; those who did not indicate a vote for Putin in the exit polls, all exited....thanks to a complimentary brunch screwing driver.....orange juice and polonium.  

    Maybe, I (none / 0) (#57)
    by KeysDan on Tue Mar 20, 2018 at 12:50:44 PM EST
    can be Trump's Secretary of State, or, even higher up, an assistant to Ivanka.  "Trump congratulates Putin on his election victory, and talks about another meeting with Polonium Putin."

    There is all this (none / 0) (#68)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Mar 21, 2018 at 08:29:28 PM EST
    Hysteria about who leaked this.  It is pretty amazing that someone in that very small circle would drop the dime about the phone call

    Kelly is said to be "furious"

    I think it was Kelly who leaked it.