Trump Seeks Network Prime Time to Promote Border Wall

Donald Trump has asked the major networks to allow him to address the nation tomorrow night on the importance of the border wall. No answer yet.

I hope they turn him down. Let him hold his talk on his Facebook page where his fans can watch and listen.

He's also going to visit the border. Why, and who cares?

Democrats need to stay firm in their opposition to this needless and wasteful expense Trump is trying to impose on taxpayers.

< Sunday TV : Golden Globe Awards | Trump's Border Speech >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    2 (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 07, 2019 at 06:40:16 PM EST
    Just back to the office from a hearing (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Peter G on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 11:05:21 AM EST
    in federal court. The prosecutors were very frustrated -- one had his two week Christmas vacation involuntarily converted to a "furlough" (unpaid) while he was out at home. The other said they were being asked to take one day a week "voluntarily" as a "furlough" and told they could "apply for unemployment." (Sure, they can "apply," but they're not eligible!). As I left the building to return to my car, there was a rally underway of AFSCME unionized federal workers, between the (closed) Liberty Bell pavilion and the (closed) Independence Hall, angrily protesting the shutdown. The anger was clearly being directed principally at the White House, not at Congress.

    This is blowing up in their faces (none / 0) (#18)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 11:14:45 AM EST

    There is a WSJ editorial today proposing Trump can not afford to lose this.  He is losing.  Republicans are running for the exits and are expected to vote in droves for opening the government in the house which will increase the pressure on the Senate.

    I think the possibility of a crazy emergency declaration is growing


    POLITICO (none / 0) (#26)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 03:50:14 PM EST
    "I think that if Pence and Nielsen come in and do a hypothetical walk-through to members about how the process would work, and we could re-open the government by the end of the week, even tonight, so that paychecks weren't affected, I think members would take that," said a GOP leadership aide. "This emergency declaration could be an out for everybody."

    worth a read


    Coming soon (none / 0) (#19)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 11:56:08 AM EST
    The U.S. Supreme Court is set to review a filing in the Mueller probe that might reveal the mystery company--linked to a foreign government--that reportedly failed to comply with a subpoena, Bloomberg reports.

    Previously, an appeals court ruling upheld fines against the company.

    According to the docket, the identity of the company might soon be made public.

    "So far as we know, the Court has never had a sealed argument before all nine Justices," Supreme Court analyst Steve Vladeck told CNN.

    "They can keep parts of the record and briefing sealed, and often do, such as in cases implicating trade secrets. But there's no procedure in the court's rules for having the whole case briefed, argued and decided under seal. The only times I'm aware of in which parties tried it, the court denied certiorari," or the review of the case.

    Supreme Court Gets New Filing in Case Seen Linked to Mueller


    Already denied the stay (Tuesday afternoon) (5.00 / 3) (#24)
    by Peter G on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 03:18:17 PM EST
    without any noted dissent.The corporation is now in active contempt of the grand jury (daily fines being levied, apparently). Still no clue who is involved!

    CNN reporting that one of the law firms (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by Peter G on Wed Jan 09, 2019 at 09:03:26 PM EST
    representing the "foreign corporation" has a past history of representing Russian interests. And WaPo reports, according to the same CNN story, that their sources say the corporation is a financial institution (a state-owned bank, perhaps).

    Could (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by FlJoe on Thu Jan 10, 2019 at 05:42:56 AM EST
    it be a sovereign wealth fund? Erik Prince's infamous meeting was with the head of the Russian SWF.

    Well, yes (none / 0) (#49)
    by Peter G on Thu Jan 10, 2019 at 07:00:03 PM EST
    I suppose it could. Why not?

    The Reporters Committee for Freedom (5.00 / 2) (#46)
    by Peter G on Wed Jan 09, 2019 at 09:50:13 PM EST
    of the Press has filed motions to try to pry open the proceedings, at least to a greater extent.

    It seems that all (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Chuck0 on Mon Jan 07, 2019 at 07:19:08 PM EST
    the networks are getting on their knees and fe11ating the grifter. He will be on all networks begging for his folly. Thank goodness for Netflix and Amazon Prime.

    I thought (none / 0) (#1)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 07, 2019 at 05:06:41 PM EST
    He might use it to announce a state of emergency.

    They say that's not the plan.  It will just be a string of lies.

    They should demand to hear it first.  

    His head would explode

    I think I (none / 0) (#4)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Jan 07, 2019 at 07:35:20 PM EST
    Picked a good week to visit my sister and stay very busy. I will not be watching an idiotic border wall word salad

    It's impossible to speak with a Trump person. (none / 0) (#5)
    by fishcamp on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 08:35:49 AM EST
    Yesterday, at the gym the old Marine friend and I were telling stories about our old guy health problems and it went to Medicare and then the wall.  I explained that basically no wall in the history of mankind has ever kept people either in or out.  I cited the Great Wall of China where Genghis Khan blew through like it was tissue paper, the Berlin wall, the Maginot line, and others.  I said more than half a million people are not getting paychecks due to Trumps obsession with the border wall.  He said they didn't need to work at those jobs since we don't need those services.  He maintained the wall was more important.  I just left him on his treadmill.  Very frustrating.

    Sorry fishcamp (none / 0) (#6)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 09:35:06 AM EST
    I don't get much exposure to that mindset anymore. Can't say I miss it. Didn't Nixon have more support than Trump does when he resigned?

    I think it's important to remember that ... (none / 0) (#21)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 02:36:21 PM EST
    ... when the House Judiciary committee voted to pass articles of impeachment out of committee to the full House in July 1974, 11 of that committee's 17 Republicans voted against them. The ridiculous notion repeatedly offered by MSNBC's Brian Williams that "Republicans were the real heroes of Watergate" is simply not borne out by the actual facts.

    Sen. Howard Baker -- the guy who asked the famous question, "What did the president know and when did he know it?" -- was known to have been a conduit of confidential information leaked from the Senate Select Committee investigating the Watergate scandal to the Nixon White House. To his credit, Baker stopped meeting with White House aides when the full extent of White House criminality began to emerge from that investigation.

    Richard Nixon always retained a hardcore 30% base level of support in the country, and not unlike Donald Trump today, he enjoyed the steadfast loyalty of a solid majority of Republicans. But not all of them. What ultimately proved to be Nixon's political undoing for a number of congressional Republicans was the early August 1974 revelation of the infamous White House "smoking gun" audiotape, which was recorded in the Oval Office on the morning of June 23, 1972, only six days after the Watergate break-in and arrests.

    On that recording, President Nixon is clearly heard committing felony obstruct of justice by ordering the CIA to shut down the FBI's investigation of the break-in, which obviously contradicted all his previous denials of any knowledge about what he had publicly misrepresented as a rogue political operation.

    In fact, Nixon himself had gone rogue. It was this recording that finally prompted diehard GOP stalwart Sen. Barry Goldwater to go the White House and urge Nixon to resign his office, rather than further subject the country to what was certain to be his impeachment and removal. "You have less than 20 votes in the Senate," Goldwater told the president, "and I'm not one of them."

    Whether or not the bottom similarly drops out of Trump's support amongst Republicans on Capitol Hill remains to be seen. None of the many revelations thus far seems to have moved them. But there are likely many more shoes still to drop, and the party's wipeout in the 2018 midterms have to be weighing heavily on their minds.



    Recession (none / 0) (#25)
    by BGinCA on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 03:43:29 PM EST
    Probably most important factor of all was the 1973 recession. I'm afraid until we begin to reap the bitter fruits of Individual 1's disastrous economic policies we will be stuck with him.

    It wasn't the 1973 recession that ... (5.00 / 2) (#27)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 04:20:31 PM EST
    ... caused Nixon's downfall. Rather, it was his own innate paranoia, which led him to engage his political opposition in an openly hostile manner that devolved into blatant criminal conduct. The economic recession of that period likely got worse because Nixon's attention was diverted from affairs of state to his own political survival.

    As bad as Trump is, he's a clown who's starring in his own perpetual sideshow and seeking to enrich himself at the country's expense. Whereas Nixon was anything but that; the guy was running a political racketeering operation out of the White House, the focal point of which was always about power and not money. Trump is a menace because he's ignorant, self-absorbed and greedy. Nixon was dangerous because he was intelligent, ruthless and power-hungry.



    recession (none / 0) (#29)
    by BGinCA on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 06:08:35 PM EST
    My point is not that the recession brought Nixon down. Lord knows there have been many Presidents to survive recessions. Reagan for example. However I do not thing that the Republican leadership would have abandoned Nixonif there had been an expanding economy. Nor will the Republicans of our time abandon Trump. Unless there is an economic crisis and his popularity sinks to his 33% floor.

    I think republicans will (none / 0) (#30)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 06:21:27 PM EST
    abandon Trump as soon as they can.  A recession would probably make that easier but I also think other things could

    I think the primary reason we are in shutdown-staring-at-emergency mode is distraction

    The walls are closing in on Trump.  Mueller is closing in.  SDNY and the NY AG are closing in.  A dozen House committees are closing in.

    There is news in the Russia story.  Today we learn the Russian "lawyer" at the Trump Tower meeting is in fact a Russian agent.  Meaning whatever was offered at that meeting was coming straight from Putin.

    Anyway, my point is, yes a recession might start the turn but there are other things that also could.


    "The walls are losing in" (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 06:22:30 PM EST
    I made a funny

    on the "russian agent" (none / 0) (#40)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 11:36:31 PM EST
    she's entitled to the presumption of innocence. She's not charged with anything remotely connected to the Trump Tower meeting.

    I tend to agree with the comment about the recession and economics being the key to Trump's base leaving him.


    Fair (none / 0) (#42)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jan 09, 2019 at 07:40:27 AM EST
    And true enough

    Crooks & Liars (none / 0) (#43)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jan 09, 2019 at 11:04:34 AM EST
    Please see what I already wrote above. (none / 0) (#44)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jan 09, 2019 at 04:43:10 PM EST
    Republican leadership never abandoned Nixon. What ultimately did him in was the revelations of the "smoking gun" audiotape, which made it perfectly clear to everyone that the president not only knew about the Watergate break-in but was the instigator of the attempted cover-up, despite the president's assurances otherwise.

    We need to remember that by July 1974, Congress was under enormous public pressure to act on the matter of impeachment. At that point, with the fall midterms looming on the immediate horizon, a fair number of rank-and-file Republicans -- nowhere near the majority of them, mind you, but still a substantial amount of them -- saw the sinking public opinion polls and therefore decided that they had had enough of President Richard Milhous Nixon.

    The then-struggling state of the U.S. economy really had nothing to do with it. Simply put, in the turbulent wake of Vietnam, a bipartisan majority of Americans were no longer in the mood to grant Nixon any more mulligans for his political chicanery. And for many Republicans such as Barry Goldwater, any further association with that president was now a painfully obvious political liability.



    Until he does need those services (none / 0) (#7)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 09:36:14 AM EST
    When he will raise help if they are not Johnny on the spot.

    I've seen this so much any more I know where it's going to come from and I don't even engage.

    You are entirely correct.  It's impossible.  I would add pointless.

    Excuse me for speaking harshly about your friend, I am also speaking about family members, they are simply going to have to die off.


    They are on rapture/suicide missions (none / 0) (#8)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 09:43:33 AM EST
    There is something important (none / 0) (#9)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 10:00:24 AM EST
    To understand here tho.  

    Again, sorry fish, I know you have way more tolerance for this stuff than I do, but the ones I know, my brother and other close family members, they are not being "fooled".

    You would probably say your friend is not stupid.  Neither is my brother.  He has multiple advanced degrees, as if that means anything.  The point is these people, way to many of them, are not ignorant "low information" lost lambs.

    They know every word Trump says is a lie.  Trump, at least acts like - IMO in that sense they are being manipulated - he hates the same people they do.  I don't think Trump has enough of a core to hate anything.  He is just a user and manipulator  

    They see Trump doing and saying anything he needs to.  And they love it.  

    They hate the cultural changes sweeping past them.  I really think they are often not truly racists.  They are just terrified old men, and women, who see a new world they don't understand.  Trump has figured out how to use this in a way that can only be described as brilliant.


    his supporters are not all old (none / 0) (#38)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 11:12:39 PM EST
    by any means. I also don't think it's culture but greed that motivates them. The wealthy business owners think he'll be good for their interests. The not so well off and under-informed think he'll better their lives economically -- they also fear losing economic opportunities to foreigners. Trump feeds their bigotry.

    That leaves law enforcement. Trump is willing to give them more power and award them "G-d" status, as if real life were an episode of Law and Order. When his buddies get arrested, like Flynn and Manafort, and Cohen until he flipped, he touts the presumption of innocence. For everyone else, he wants greater punishment.

    There is no way to convince these diehards like Fishcamp describe. Anymore than convincing Trump he's wavering between stone cold ignorance and lunacy.

    This too shall pass.


    We move in Different circles (none / 0) (#41)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jan 09, 2019 at 07:39:59 AM EST
    I don't meet many motivAted by greed.  I meet many motivated by culture.

    And while it's true they are not all old Trumps real base is hugely over 65.


    Do you think the younger (none / 0) (#48)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jan 10, 2019 at 06:28:27 AM EST
    Generation in the South can really evolve out of this? I know the culture you speak of, and it is deeply entrenched in Southern Alabama and the Florida panhandle.  

    They are raised in that mindset, it is coaxed, conned, and beaten into them every day. I'm starting to doubt the olds dying off will fix anything.


    It will be fixed (none / 0) (#50)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jan 12, 2019 at 08:53:12 PM EST
    but it is going to take a long time. Yes, the older ones pass the hate to the younger ones but it doesn't always take these days like it did decades ago. Now people associate with people of different races and find out that what their parents told them was not true. So in my experience it has been changing but a lot slower than in the rest of the country. Like 30 years ago the south was probably 90% pro segregation. Now I would say it is 50-60% prosegregation.

    The (none / 0) (#10)
    by FlJoe on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 10:05:32 AM EST
    pain is already being felt but of course the lesson isn't being learned
    "I voted for him, and he's the one who's doing this," she said of Mr. Trump. "I thought he was going to do good things. He's not hurting the people he needs to be hurting."
    Throw some more brown babies into cages and all will be forgiven I suppose.

    The tax return thing (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 10:14:58 AM EST
    Really has them spooked.  They can issue all the orders to the IRS they want but the 12% working ain't gonna do it.

    The wall Israel built (none / 0) (#12)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 10:10:09 AM EST
    Seems to work pretty well. 100% effective, no.  But substantially effective, yes.

    That may be the stupidest thing (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 10:13:40 AM EST
    You have ever said here.

    I will not waste bandwidth explaining it since I don't think you are stupid.


    ... was the longstanding sympathy and empathy of most of the Western world, not to mention the skewering of the country's own national conscience. The biggest threat to that country's security right now is its own militant right-wing.

    The only reason Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Likud are still in power is the obvious fracturing of the political opposition, marked by its failure to coalesce around a single candidate to oppose him.

    As it stands, Likud only received 29% of the overall vote in the last national election which, as political pluralities go, is an awfully weak position to hold. And there's no reason to believe that the party's prospective showing in March will fare any better. If the opposition ever rallies together in a united front, Likud will be toast.



    let's stay on topic (none / 0) (#39)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 11:13:53 PM EST
    It's the wall at the southern border, not in Israel.

    He won't get an audience. (none / 0) (#11)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 10:07:45 AM EST
    Everyone died from the repeal of net neutrality.

    Little Finger lives! (none / 0) (#17)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 11:10:12 AM EST

    Live coverage has an immediacy... (none / 0) (#20)
    by Jack E Lope on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 01:01:58 PM EST
    He's also going to visit the border. Why, and who cares?

    That may be the best way to stage an event which looks like the "crisis" which Drumpf/Huckabee-Sanders/Conway have been claiming - or something that appears to be the "emergency" they need as an excuse to commandeer federal funds.

    It looks like that's the plan (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 04:34:39 PM EST
    Kick it off tonight.  Follow up with the border visit while dispatching the minions to talk it up.

    Seems really likely to me.  Even people who oppose it say he has the right.  Chuck Terd just gleefully related that we are currently under 31  various national emergencies declared by various presidents.  3 by Trump.  11 from Obama.  10 from W.  6 from Clinton and 1 from Carter.

    We know how much he likes unilateral action.  I don't think he cares at all if it's stopped in the courts.  Just gives him another applause line.

    By Friday.  I'm thinkin


    I'm convinced ! (none / 0) (#32)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 07:59:38 PM EST
    Why didn't I see it before?

    It's for the children!!! (none / 0) (#33)
    by Chuck0 on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 08:02:14 PM EST
    Thank god (none / 0) (#34)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 08:09:29 PM EST
    Chuck left his nose glasses in his pocket

    He was looking rather (none / 0) (#35)
    by Chuck0 on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 08:20:48 PM EST
    ghoulish to me. Very weird.

    Trump looks like a rotting melon. (none / 0) (#37)
    by desertswine on Tue Jan 08, 2019 at 10:43:49 PM EST