The Los Angeles Times is publishing a series of editorials about Donald Trump. This is the first. It was published yesterday.
It was no secret during the campaign that Donald Trump was a narcissist and a demagogue who used fear and dishonesty to appeal to the worst in American voters. The Times called him unprepared and unsuited for the job he was seeking, and said his election would be a “catastrophe.”
Still, nothing prepared us for the magnitude of this train wreck. Like millions of other Americans, we clung to a slim hope that the new president would turn out to be all noise and bluster, or that the people around him in the White House would act as a check on his worst instincts, or that he would be sobered and transformed by the awesome responsibilities of office.
Instead, seventy-some days in — and with about 1,400 to go before his term is completed — it is increasingly clear that those hopes were misplaced.
In a matter of weeks, President Trump has taken dozens of real-life steps that, if they are not reversed, will rip families apart, foul rivers and pollute the air, intensify the calamitous effects of climate change and profoundly weaken the system of American public education for all.
His attempt to de-insure millions of people who had finally received healthcare coverage and, along the way, enact a massive transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich has been put on hold for the moment. But he is proceeding with his efforts to defang the government’s regulatory agencies and bloat the Pentagon’s budget even as he supposedly retreats from the global stage.
It is impossible to know where his presidency will lead or how much damage he will do to our nation.
These are immensely dangerous developments which threaten to weaken this country’s moral standing in the world, imperil the planet and reverse years of slow but steady gains by marginalized or impoverished Americans. But, chilling as they are, these radically wrongheaded policy choices are not, in fact, the most frightening aspect of the Trump presidency.
What is most worrisome about Trump is Trump himself. He is a man so unpredictable, so reckless, so petulant, so full of blind self-regard, so untethered to reality that it is impossible to know where his presidency will lead or how much damage he will do to our nation. His obsession with his own fame, wealth and success, his determination to vanquish enemies real and imagined, his craving for adulation — these traits were, of course, at the very heart of his scorched-earth outsider campaign; indeed, some of them helped get him elected. But in a real presidency in which he wields unimaginable power, they are nothing short of disastrous.
Although his policies are, for the most part, variations on classic Republican positions (many of which would have been undertaken by a President Ted Cruz or a President Marco Rubio), they become far more dangerous in the hands of this imprudent and erratic man. Many Republicans, for instance, support tighter border security and a tougher response to illegal immigration, but Trump’s cockamamie border wall, his impracticable campaign promise to deport all 11 million people living in the country illegally and his blithe disregard for the effect of such proposals on the U.S. relationship with Mexico turn a very bad policy into an appalling one.
In the days ahead, The Times editorial board will look more closely at the new president, with a special attention to three troubling traits:
1. Trump’s shocking lack of respect for those fundamental rules and institutions on which our government is based. Since Jan. 20, he has repeatedly disparaged and challenged those entities that have threatened his agenda, stoking public distrust of essential institutions in a way that undermines faith in American democracy. He has questioned the qualifications of judges and the integrity of their decisions, rather than acknowledging that even the president must submit to the rule of law. He has clashed with his own intelligence agencies, demeaned government workers and questioned the credibility of the electoral system and the Federal Reserve. He has lashed out at journalists, declaring them “enemies of the people,” rather than defending the importance of a critical, independent free press. His contempt for the rule of law and the norms of government are palpable.
2. His utter lack of regard for truth. Whether it is the easily disprovable boasts about the size of his inauguration crowd or his unsubstantiated assertion that Barack Obama bugged Trump Tower, the new president regularly muddies the waters of fact and fiction. It’s difficult to know whether he actually can’t distinguish the real from the unreal — or whether he intentionally conflates the two to befuddle voters, deflect criticism and undermine the very idea of objective truth. Whatever the explanation, he is encouraging Americans to reject facts, to disrespect science, documents, nonpartisanship and the mainstream media — and instead to simply take positions on the basis of ideology and preconceived notions. This is a recipe for a divided country in which differences grow deeper and rational compromise becomes impossible.
3. His scary willingness to repeat alt-right conspiracy theories, racist memes and crackpot, out-of-the-mainstream ideas. Again, it is not clear whether he believes them or merely uses them. But to cling to disproven “alternative” facts; to retweet racists; to make unverifiable or false statements about rigged elections and fraudulent voters; to buy into discredited conspiracy theories first floated on fringe websites and in supermarket tabloids — these are all of a piece with the Barack Obama birther claptrap that Trump was peddling years ago and which brought him to political prominence. It is deeply alarming that a president would lend the credibility of his office to ideas that have been rightly rejected by politicians from both major political parties.
Where will this end? Will Trump moderate his crazier campaign positions as time passes? Or will he provoke confrontation with Iran, North Korea or China, or disobey a judge’s order or order a soldier to violate the Constitution? Or, alternately, will the system itself — the Constitution, the courts, the permanent bureaucracy, the Congress, the Democrats, the marchers in the streets — protect us from him as he alienates more and more allies at home and abroad, steps on his own message and creates chaos at the expense of his ability to accomplish his goals? Already, Trump’s job approval rating has been hovering in the mid-30s, according to Gallup, a shockingly low level of support for a new president. And that was before his former national security advisor, Michael Flynn, offered to cooperate last week with congressional investigators looking into the connection between the Russian government and the Trump campaign.
Those who oppose the new president’s reckless and heartless agenda must make their voices heard.
On Inauguration Day, we wrote on this page that it was not yet time to declare a state of “wholesale panic” or to call for blanket “non-cooperation” with the Trump administration. Despite plenty of dispiriting signals, that is still our view. The role of the rational opposition is to stand up for the rule of law, the electoral process, the peaceful transfer of power and the role of institutions; we should not underestimate the resiliency of a system in which laws are greater than individuals and voters are as powerful as presidents. This nation survived Andrew Jackson and Richard Nixon. It survived slavery. It survived devastating wars. Most likely, it will survive again.
But if it is to do so, those who oppose the new president’s reckless and heartless agenda must make their voices heard. Protesters must raise their banners. Voters must turn out for elections. Members of Congress — including and especially Republicans — must find the political courage to stand up to Trump. Courts must safeguard the Constitution. State legislators must pass laws to protect their citizens and their policies from federal meddling. All of us who are in the business of holding leaders accountable must redouble our efforts to defend the truth from his cynical assaults.
The United States is not a perfect country, and it has a great distance to go before it fully achieves its goals of liberty and equality. But preserving what works and defending the rules and values on which democracy depends are a shared responsibility. Everybody has a role to play in this drama.

Hypothetically speaking, if anyone from another country were to read this, with no other previous knowledge of this president, they would have to say; “how did the American people ever vote for this man?
LikeLike
Two words, electoral college.
LikeLike
That is not quite true! As that 46.1% did vote for him . So explain that without using 4 letter words.
LikeLike
I hope we don’t all pay for Trump’s reckless, irresponsible policies. Now that Jarrod Kushner seems to be in charge of everything, he’s off to Iraq as a “shadow diplomat.”
On the home front Trump continues to wield his ax on the social safety nets and the arts. Trump and DeVos seem to be working on undoing existing legislation to clear the way for vouchers. Democrats vow to fight the appointment of Neil Gorshuch; yet I read that three Democrats may have already defected. Democrats need to unite when the threat from the White House is so great. This is not the time for individual statements; Dems. need to form a united front. There is so much chaos and unraveling of our history and values we are rapidly becoming the “Banana Republic of the United States.”
LikeLike
Here’s an interesting analysis of how conservatives have used language to “sell” their message. Even though some terms are false, they become part of the public’s acceptance. Progressives should learn from the conservatives to better “brand” their message. http://elisabethparker.com/politics-and-language-winning-words-for-liberals/
LikeLike
Thanks goes to LA Times editorial page writers Paul Thornton (who has lately been keeping readers focused on Trumpster’s egregious behaviors), and to Karin Klein for the education input…and their other cohorts who contributed to this series of wake up calls re Trumps devolution of the US.
I have often reported here on the negatives of the LA Times, but am now happy to be able to offer my plaudits….Otis Chandler is smiling.
LikeLike
Sorry Mr. Goldberg…forgot you. Nice to see you on MSNBC tonight and proud of the LA Times.
Anyone who does not watch Rachel Maddow and Laurence O’Donnell is missing too much accurate news and more excellent journalism.
LikeLike
This article appears in BBC this morning. Looks like Trump is now trying to bully China.
……………….
Shared from BBC News…Trump ready to ‘solve’ North Korea problem without China
“If China is not going to solve North Korea, we will. That is all I am telling you,” he said in an interview with UK newspaper the Financial Times.
Pressed on whether he thought he could succeed alone, he replied: “Totally.”
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39475178
LikeLike
If North Korea gives us any trouble, Trump should challenge Kim Jun On to a death match at Wrestlemania, and it can be broadcast on Pay Purview. It sounds like Trump’s style, and it could be a way to kill two birds with one stone, and better than getting China agitated.
LikeLike
Wow! The LA Times spoke up for public education? Who would have predicted that?
LikeLike
Dr. Ravitch thanks so much for keeping us informed. The LA Times articles are just what I needed to read. It can get depressing seeing the country go to hell.
LikeLike
I shared the link to the two completed and the two upcoming articles on Facebook just a few minutes ago. I also emailed my newspaper editor friend in Idaho and others. Great articles, cannot wait to see the other two.
LikeLike
A MUST READ LINK THAT DIANE PROVIDES. Calling Trump a Liar! LATimes editorial board signed off on this and Monday’s #2 that you must go to at LATimes website. These first 2 will cause BUZZ everywhere. Thanks Diane!
LikeLike
THIS: “He is a man so unpredictable, so reckless, so petulant, so full of blind self-regard, so untethered to reality that it is impossible to know where his presidency will lead or how much damage he will do to our nation. ”
THIS seems to paint the red cult of divination, as short on the phenomena of
clairvoyance. Maybe the rooskies are reading different goat entrails…
LikeLike
The Los Angeles Times article says it all.
LikeLike
The liberal press is against Trump. Stop the Presses!
LikeLike
The Dump presidency is going EXACTLY as planned. His backers are extremely satisfied with the way he is doing the job they expected of him, being a figurehead for the promotion of their, not his own policies and a distraction from the details of how they will affect the nation. Dump has on informed policy positions, he is just a sock puppet for the ideas of others. As payment, he has been allowed to grift and indulge in nepotism on an unprecedented scale. Just imagine the deafening howls of indignation and outrage from the Replutocrats and the talking headless of the right wing propaganda outlets had Obama done a tenth of what Dump is doing. This was the plan from the beginning of his ascendancy in the clown car of candidates we were given to be amused and appalled by.
LikeLike
I think you have missed the bigger story – Susan Rice = yes, drip, drip drip
Hillary Clinton’s problems with email servers and her callous treatment of classified information has long been known. What has most recently come to light is the State Department report that Hillary Clinton and six of her staffers continued to have access to classified information after she resigned as secretary of state.
The list of advantages Clinton was handed on the campaign trail, from prior knowledge of CNN debate questions, to the assistance of former President Barack Obama, to celebrities using their star power in her favor, to now knowing she had access to classified information after she left the State Department.
She still lost the election!
Sunday shows, Adam Schiff had to grudgingly admit yet again that there is still not one shred of evidence of any collusion between Trump and the Russians, not a shred.
This is after last week, making the announcement that there was evidence. He just couldn’t help himself. He just couldn’t contain himself. These people are living in a dreamland where they’re hoping that everything they suspect is true, just remains to be found. And he just screwed up and couldn’t help himself and went ahead and announced it when he didn’t have any evidence for it. And it’s a sign of how out of control these people are and unhinged. And I don’t use those terms lightly. I’m not just coming up with descriptive phrases. They genuinely are out of control, and they genuinely are unhinged.
Now, I don’t know if Adam Schiff was embarrassed at all. I don’t know if these people are capable of it. But it helps somebody like him when you know the media is gonna do everything they can to cover for you. But he had to admit, after all of this, folks, after all of this, we now know that Trump has been surveilled for a year. We now know that the Obama administration was responsible for the unmasking. We now know that it was Susan Rice, who lied on five Sunday shows about Benghazi, we know that it was Susan Rice who requested the unmasking of all of these Trump officials.
We now know that what I suspected all along — and I’m not alone — that was happening indeed did happen, that Russians were surveilled, and that they were talking to Americans, the transcript of the conversations was turned over to people in the Obama administration, such as Mike Flynn, and there are others, and now Susan Rice has been fingered as one of the sources who asked that these people be unmasked so that details of the conversations could be leaked.
And they were leaked. But these people were not targets of the surveillance. They are never to be identified. And we now know that it was the Obama administration — go back to the story where Obama, when he left office, proudly said not one scandal in my administration, scandal free eight years. Not so fast. So Schiff has to eat dirt.
Remember, James Comey testified the Russians just wanted Hillary to lose. So why would they involve Trump in their scheme? The Russians know their calls are monitored by U.S. intelligence agencies. Why would they risk their effort to defeat Hillary by colluding with Trump’s people? If that had come out before the election, she would have won for sure. In fact, everything that was known today has been known for quite a while by people in the intelligence community, by people at the FBI.
But the real scandal here — not collusion with the Russians and Trump administration since Adam Schiff had to grudgingly admit yet again after reviewing the Nunes documents – that there is still not one shred of evidence of any collusion between Trump and the Russians, not a shred, but the real bombshell – not ever to be found in the 4 exposes of the LA Times, is the story of the Obama administration weaponized politically our intelligence services against the Republicans and against Trump.
The Obama administration weaponized everything else to use against the GOP, from the IRS to NOAA to any of these agencies, EPA, involving climate change.
developing blockbuster story about the Obama White House — and it is It is not a story about Trump and the Russians. We know that the Obama Regime surveilled Trump’s transition team. We know now that the Obama White House unmasked people who were not targets of legitimate surveillance and investigation. We know now that the Obama White House illegally leaked protected information.
We know that there had to be unmasking. We know that there had to be leaking. The media proudly told us that sources who could not be identified fed them data. We know now that the media was complicit.
And here’s a little detail. Mike Cernovich reports in his story on all this today that Maggie Haberman at the New York Times has known for two days that Susan Rice was behind the unmasking and sat on it to protect President Obama. That’s an assertion made by Mike Cernovich on his web page today.
There are two stories on this — one by Eli Lake at Bloomberg, the other Mike Cernovich, and he specifically claims that Maggie Haberman of the New York Times has known it was Susan Rice for 48 hours and sat on it. Much like Newsweek sat on the story of Monica Lewinsky and Bill Clinton, and then eventually spiked the story leading the way to the Drudge Report. We know that Susan Rice lied about her knowledge of this illegal activity in an interview.
The facts are beginning to roll in, and it turns out that Trump and Devin Nunes are not the story. They are victims of abuse of power by the Obama administration and Democrat collusion with the media.
The first the Eli Lake story: “Top Obama Adviser Sought Names of Trump Associates in Intel.” Eli Lake is an intel/foreign policy expert/reporter/journalist. He’s a columnist for Bloomberg View. He was the senior national security correspondent for The Daily Beast, which is a deranged, lunatic, left-wing site started by Tina Brown.
He covered national security and intelligence for the Washington Times, the New York Sun and UPI.
His story begins thus: “White House lawyers last month…” Discovered last month! White House lawyers! This is the Office of Presidential Counsel. This is the office of Don McGann, official counselor to the president.
“White House lawyers last month discovered that the former national security adviser Susan Rice requested the identities of U.S. persons in raw intelligence reports on dozens of occasions that connect to the Donald Trump transition and campaign, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.” She requested their identities. She, in other words, demanded that they be unmasked so she could find out who they were.
Remenber the Evelyn Farkas note I sent earlier? Put this together with hwe appearance on MSNBC on March the 2nd pretty much admitting all of this, that they were gathering the evidence.
“The pattern of Rice’s requests was discovered in a National Security Council review of the government’s policy on ‘unmasking’ the identities of individuals in the U.S. who are not targets of electronic eavesdropping, but whose communications are collected incidentally.” The New York Times has also reported this back in January! They’ve used the word “wiretaps.” and the word “incidentally.”
To review briefly, here’s what happens. An intelligence agency — take your pick: CIA, NSA, DIA, you name it — survivals foreign actors, nations, individuals, spies. In this case, in this example, the Russian ambassador is survived; his phone calls are tapped. The Russian ambassador knows it. This is standard operating procedure standard. They survival us in Moscow, or try. Statecraft, it’s what happens. Nothing illegal about that. That’s what Devin Nunes meant when he said that what he had seen at the Old Executive Office Building, there was nothing illegal about it, because the surveillance was not targeting Americans. It was targeting Russians. So they’re surveilling the Russian ambassador.
Those transcribing this call are supposed to not identity the American involved, instead referring to him as “American number one.” If there’s another American in the same call, that would be called “American number two” and so on. The name is not revealed nor are the details of what the American says because the American isn’t the target.
That’s where the Obama administration steps in. Susan Rice asked for the American in these calls to be unmasked so that she and Obama and Valerie Jarrett and probably the whole admin would know who was saying what was said on these calls. The interesting thing is the backtrack. And there’s a tape of this call between the Russian ambassador and Flynn.
If Flynn had indeed promised anything about lifting sanctions once Trump was inaugurated, they would have reported that by now. It is clear that Flynn did not do anything actionable because all they’ve been able to do is leak supposition and create mystery about it. But they’ve known all along that nothing happened! So the leaks have been intended to create suspicion rather than allay it.
The Eli Lake piece: “The pattern of” the requests made by Susan Rice of the Obama administration to unmask all of these Americans in this treasure trove of wiretapped intelligence and retrieved intelligence “was discovered in a National Security Council review of the government’s policy on ‘unmasking’ the identities of individuals in the U.S. who are not targets of electronic eavesdropping, but whose communications are collected incidentally.”
Immediately there were people who were distrustful of it because the NSA and the FBI and the CIA are all perceived to be part of the Obama deep state, where a number of Obama embeds and holdovers remain attempting to sabotage both the Trump transition and the Trump presidency.
But it turns out that the NSA did have a bombshell. Somebody there revealed that it was Susan Rice who was requesting that all of these Americans incidentally caught up in foreign surveillance be unmasked, and it has to be agents of the Obama administration who were leaking all of this to the media. But it gets even better.
We are in the middle of a blockbuster piece of news that the mainstream still sits on. They still have not reported this.
“The news about Rice also sheds light on the strange behavior of Nunes in the last two weeks.” Now, remember how his behavior’s been characterized by the media: treasonous, unfair, cheating, that Devin Nunes secretly snuck into the White House grounds to take a look at intelligence that only he saw, and he didn’t share it with his counterpart, Adam Schiff, on the Intelligence Committee.
And this is unseemly, and he should recuse himself, and he should resign from the committee, and he maybe should even leave his office as a member of the House of Representatives. At the time, he said he needed to go to the White House because reports were only on a database for the executive branch. I covered this last week. The National Security Council is in the Executive Office Building on the fourth floor, and nothing leaves there because it’s securely maintained there.
It now appears that Nunes needed to view computer systems within the National Security Council that would include the logs of Rice’s requests to unmask Americans.
That is what led to him alluding to the fact that the president was correct that he had been surveilled. Obama administration chose surveillance targets knowing that they would be talking to specific Americans, wanting to see what those specific Americans were talking about. So while they couldn’t get a FISA warrant to target Americans, they purposely targeted for surveillance foreign actors that they knew Trump transition people would be talking to and learned what they were saying that way. And that’s why Rice was requesting that these people be unmasked so that she and Obama and whoever else in this operation would understand who was being talked about and who was saying what.
The scandal here is not Trump. The scandal is not Trump and the Russians. The scandal is the Obama administration and these embeds in the deep state surveilling targets with the express purpose of hoping to capture Americans as part of the surveillance.
From State of the Union on CNN Sunday morning. Jake Tapper: Congressman , “The big issue is whether or not there was collusion among members of the Trump campaign or Trump advisers.
“Can you definitely say that there was collusion, that there were people affiliated with the Trump campaign who were working with the Russians to time the release of damaging information about Hillary Clinton that had been hacked either from John Podesta or the DNC?” That’s the entire Democrat case right there. That’s what this lunatic Tom Perez, the new chairman of the DNC, said at a rally in Newark over the weekend, “Trump didn’t win the presidencThe Democrats are portraying themselves as weak, ineffective, and incompetent as they attempt to make the case that Russian collusion with Trump stole the election from them. So here is Schiff answering that question from Jake Tapper. (summarized) “Do you have any evidence of any collusion between the Trump campaign, Trump advisers and Russia? Can you definitively say there was collusion? Can you say that this resulted in Hillary losing the election?”
SCHIFF: I — I don’t think we can say anything definitively at this point. Uh, we are still it he very early stage of the investigation. The only thing I can say that it would be irresponsible for us not to get to the bottom of this.
The bombshell today, Susan Rice, who lied on five different Sunday shows about Benghazi, as video being responsible for it, is the Obama official who asked that those Americans be identified — i.e., unmasked — and those names were then made public and information in those phone calls that had been surveilled were leaked, and that’s how we get the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN stories all through November, December, and January.
Trump! Was! Right! When he threw that grenade back at them, it blew up in their faces. They’re not used to people fighting back against the media onslaught like this. They’re used to people resigning. Adam Housley was not finished.
HOUSLEY: This unmasked information — these names of Americans who had done nothing wrong — was disseminated to all the NSC, some at DOD, Clapper, Brennan, basically the people at the top. They also say, I’m told, that Rice knew about this possibly as well. Now, I know some reports are out there that she was the one that reported this. We do not know who reported this, because we have not spoken to Devin Nunes about it. So we don’t know what papers he saw. Our sources don’t know what papers he saw. They just tell me the information about unmasking names from Donald Trump and his team and his family was disseminated to a very select few at the top and was done so for a significant amount of time — and that is blockbuster, guys.
RUSH: Right, and those are the intel they took to the media. Now, let’s bring Nunes back into this. Nunes goes to the White House. He goes to the Executive Office Building, fourth floor, National Security Council. They have up there all of this. He looks at it. He then calls a press conference and announces what he’s seen and tells he’s taking it up and explaining it to Trump. And essentially it’s this: There was legal surveillances, and it had nothing to do with Russia.
There was legal surveillance of Russians and other foreign actors, and what he learned was that the Americans — those Russians and others surveilled people were talking to, those Americans — were asked to be identified by the Obama administration.
They were unmasked for political purposes
The story is the surveillance that the Obama administration was engaging in of Trump and who knows who else and the unmasking is a felony – more to come if you can peel yourself away from the LA TIMES. BTW none of the main stream “journalists” are picking this up as of yet….hmmm
LikeLike
Jscheidell,
I feel sorry for you having to defend Trump. Keep saying Hillary over and over and maybe we will forget all the curious links between the Trump campaign and Putin.
LikeLike
Diane
I think you missed the story of susan rice and unmasking americans during obama regime which is a felony in collection of survellance info
But as usual still no putin collusion
Keep your hopes up
Drip drip drip
Trump doesnt need me to watch his back the media will do it for him
LikeLike
jscheidell- Your example doesn’t begin to compare with the treasonous act of exposing Valerie Plaine, allegedly at the doorstep of V.P. Frankenstein Cheney.
LikeLike
This long self serving diatribe of jscheidel is the product of a shallow thinking idealogue who loves to be a Trumpster and worry more about who leaked what than that so many of Trump’s appointees should be indicted for lying to Congress and claiming then NEVER spoke to any Russians during the campaign. This continued TROLL obfuscation does not fool those with true critical thinking skills.
Con meister tRump has taught his sycophants how to distort the real facts and supplant them with ‘alternative facts’…LIES, that is.
LikeLike
Beyond lies is the purposeful strategy of deflecting and changing the subject. So, the way to deflect yattention from the numerous contacts between campaign officials and Russian agents is to complain about leaks.
Follow the logic: it’s fake news! But don’t leak it!
LikeLike
Deflection – Changing the subject – yup – spending 4 issues of the left wing rag from LA is a demonstration of Democrats spewing unproven allegation and demonstrating that they are good at creating phantasmagorical pseudo-scandals that eat up lots of investigative energy and leave a vague impression of impropriety without proving much.
The felony of unmasking is one issue – although it might have been within legal bounds to do so – Im not a lawyer – but the release or leaking the names is the issue –
LikeLike
The issue is not leaking. Trump leaks every day. The issue is Trump’s character, integrity, and greed.
LikeLike
I think you forgot or missed this article.
………………………….
The FBI cannot tell us what we need to know about Trump’s contacts with Russia. Why? Because doing so would jeopardize a long-running, ultra-sensitive operation targeting mobsters tied to Putin — and to Trump. But the Feds’ stonewalling risks something far more dangerous: Failing to resolve a crisis of trust in America’s president. WhoWhatWhy provides the details of a two-month investigation in this 6,500-word exposé. Read here:
http://whowhatwhy.org/2017/03/27/fbi-cant-tell-trump-russia/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=SocialWarfare
LikeLike
Diane…Is the jscheidell really Rudy? Wonder how much this troll is being paid for his long long boring recitals?
LikeLike
Not a dime! And its worth every penny!
LikeLike
The 4 Democratic senators voting with Rethugs, for Gorsuch, are charter-loving Manchin (W.Va. -father of Epipen CEO) and Bennett (Colo.) and, the other two are, Donnelly (Ind, friend of Corey Booker) and Heidi Heitkamp (N.D.)
LikeLike