“Well, I would do that and we’re sitting down, you know, I was, somebody, we had Sen. Marco Rubio and my daughter Ivanka was so impactful on that issue. It’s a very important issue. But I think when you talk about the kind of numbers that I’m talking about that because the child care is, child care is you couldn’t, you know there’s something you have to have it in this country, you have to have it. But when you talk about those numbers compared to the kind of numbers that I’m talking about by taxing foreign nations at levels that they’re not used to — but they’ll get used to it very quickly. And it’s not going to stop them from doing business with us. But they’ll have a very substantial tax when they send product into our country. Those numbers are so much bigger than any numbers that we’re talking about, including child care, that it’s going to take care — I look forward to having no deficits within a fairly short period of time. Coupled with the reductions that I told you about on waste and fraud and all of the other things that are going on in our country. Because I have to stay with child care, I want to stay with child care but those numbers are small relative to the kind of economic numbers that I’m talking about, including growth. But growth also headed up by what the plan is that I just told you about. We’re going to be taking in trillions of dollars, and as much as child care is talked about as being expensive, it’s relatively speaking not very expensive compared to the kind of numbers we’re going to be taking in. We’re going to make this into an incredible country that can afford to take care of its people, and then we’ll worry about the rest of the world. Let’s help other people. But we’re going to take care of our country first. This is about America first, it’s about ‘Make America Great Again,’ we have to do it because right now we’re a failing nation. So we’ll take care of it.”
President Donald Trump ordered a rapid withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Afghanistan and Somalia in the wake of his 2020 election loss, but senior officials never followed through on the plan, according to testimony released by the congressional January 6 committee on Thursday.
“The order was for an immediate withdrawal, and it would have been catastrophic,” said Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., one of two Republican members of the special panel. “And yet President Trump signed the order.”
Witnesses who spoke to the committee about the surprise withdrawal plan included Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Mark Milley, former national security advisor to the vice president Keith Kellogg, and several other senior officials in the Trump administration.
“She [another woman accusing him of sexual assault] said … we became very intimate,” he said, recounting her allegations, as the lawyers standing behind him began looking uncomfortable. “She said I was making out with her. And then after 15 minutes … that I grabbed her at a certain part, and that was when she had enough.”
Trump scoffed that this could have happened on a commercial flight.
“I start kissing her and making out with her. What are the chances of that happening?” he said, adding, “I know you’re going to say it’s a terrible thing to say, but it couldn’t have happened, and … she would not have been the chosen one.”
Before leaving the event and ignoring questions shouted at him by reporters, Trump blamed his legal team for failing him in his 2023 trial.
“I’m disappointed in my legal talent, to be honest with you,” he said, as some of his lawyers stood next to him. “I wanted to show up to the first trial. My lawyer, who is not up here, not with us any longer, said, ‘Sir, you should not show up.’”
HuffPost used to keep a running tally of all the women who have publicly accused Trump of sexual assault or rape. We may have lost track after the numbers surpassed two dozen.
The trial for his J6 insurrection attempt will not happen until after the election. Obviously if he wins it will go away, with him pardoning himself. I think this is all about the SC attempts to defend him, by giving him immunity for "presidential" acts , and leaving it up to Chutkin to define what is and isn't a presidential act. They thought she would push it back until after the election, but she has basically done the opposite of Merchan in NY and said the election makes no difference, he will be treated the same as anyone else. Let's not forget her quote that president's aren't king's. So she will be uncovering all the evidence of what he did and said, out in the open, ready for a trial, with full transparency, as we approach polling day .So many cases I am getting confused. I thought this had been pushed back beyond the election. . . . . but that's the new york trial.
Trump will appeal of course and though technically / legally this should not be able to have an effect, we have already seen the supreme court hand down rulings they really shouldn't. . . I bet they do again and follow the NY case line that was trotted out yesterday.
So just to spell it out, which case is being discussed here? If it’s not the January 6th thing, which is it?The trial for his J6 insurrection attempt will not happen until after the election. Obviously if he wins it will go away, with him pardoning himself. I think this is all about the SC attempts to defend him, by giving him immunity for "presidential" acts , and leaving it up to Chutkin to define what is and isn't a presidential act. They thought she would push it back until after the election, but she has basically done the opposite of Merchan in NY and said the election makes no difference, he will be treated the same as anyone else. Let's not forget her quote that president's aren't king's. So she will be uncovering all the evidence of what he did and said, out in the open, ready for a trial, with full transparency, as we approach polling day .
It does get confusing with all of his lega! cases, but Glenn Kirschner, in the vid, is a highly experienced federal prosecutor who worked in D.C. for many years and has faced Chutkin as a defender before she was a judge. He regards her highly as no nonsense, and not scared easily, so I love to see when he is happy about developments. He is so all in about justice being served, that it was sad to see his shoulders drop somewhat with all the breaks the orange fucker kept getting, that to see him happy and optimistic about a turn of events is a joy.
so was criticizing Cannon for the separate classified documents rulings, and as i recall Cannon's actions are still being appealed by Jack Smith the prosecutor who's trying to get her taken off the case.Donald Trump’s federal election interference case is finally back in the trial court, where U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan held a hearing Thursday mainly to discuss how to proceed after the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling. But the hearing also gave Chutkan an opportunity to criticize U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon’s dismissal of Trump’s classified documents case on the grounds that special counsel Jack Smith was unlawfully appointed.
I fear that all this in-bubble news will make no difference and that trump will win in November.
The J6 one. Chutkin is over that in DC, Loose Cannon is the Docs one in Florida. The confusion may be to some, that Jack Smith is prosecuting both cases.So just to spell it out, which case is being discussed here? If it’s not the January 6th thing, which is it?
Ok well I got confused when you said “The trial for his J6 insurrection attempt will not happen until after the election“ and yet you seemed to also be mentioning that this trial with judge Chutkin will go ahead before the election. Maybe you have been referring to two different things and I’ve taken it to the same one thing?The J6 one. Chutkin is over that in DC, Loose Cannon is the Docs one in Florida. The confusion may be to some, that Jack Smith is prosecuting both cases.
The trial will be after the election, but the decision of what evidence can go forward, with regards to what he is immune from, is what the judge is looking at now. At least, that is how I deciphered it. Sorry if I wasn't clear.Ok well I got confused when you said “The trial for his J6 insurrection attempt will not happen until after the election“ and yet you seemed to also be mentioning that this trial with judge Chutkin will go ahead before the election. Maybe you have been referring to two different things and I’ve taken it to the same one thing?
The trial will be after the election, but the decision of what evidence can go forward, with regards to what he is immune from, is what the judge is looking at now. At least, that is how I deciphered it. Sorry if I wasn't clear.
Ok, I’m sure what you wrote was clear enough but like you said, so many trials going on it’s easy to get confused. Thanks for clarifying. It will indeed be entertaining to see the evidence brought to light in the run up to the Nov pollThe trial will be after the election, but the decision of what evidence can go forward, with regards to what he is immune from, is what the judge is looking at now. At least, that is how I deciphered it. Sorry if I wasn't clear.
Those poor walls at Mardy Lardo. I fear they are in for a deluge of ketchup .Ok, I’m sure what you wrote was clear enough but like you said, so many trials going on it’s easy to get confused. Thanks for clarifying. It will indeed be entertaining to see the evidence brought to light in the run up to the Nov poll
eta: that's actually from Analysis: Trump’s incomprehensible child care comments appear to have broken a dam
which is quite a good piece saying that media in the US is sanitizing Trump's comments by describing them and that they should really be quoting what he actually says.
“Here’s my challenge to journalists over the next two months: quote Trump in full,” Max Kennerly, a lawyer and legal commentator, wrote on X on Thursday, alongside a video posted by the Harris campaign of Trump’s comments. “Don’t clean him up, don’t reinterpret what he says in a more sensible way, don’t secretly editorialize. Just quote him. Let the voters see how this man’s mind doesn’t work.”
This is the bit I don't get either. People voting for (e.g.) a Theresa May Conservative party - I disagree with but understand those who vote along party lines on the simplistic model of 'free-market vs state intervention', there wasn't anything about May screaming "red flag, red flag" in her outward appearance of sensible and intelligent. In a similar way, I disagree entirely with but understand those who would have voted McCain or Romney vs Obama.It's just insane that the race is this close. I don't understand how or why so many people are backing him.
It's absolutely crackers from where I am standing.
I fear that the electoral college might swing things in his favour for a win.
America is really fucked up.
The J6 one. Chutkin is over that in DC, Loose Cannon is the Docs one in Florida. The confusion may be to some, that Jack Smith is prosecuting both cases.
It's just insane that the race is this close. I don't understand how or why so many people are backing him.
Regarding him announcing a socialist programme and getting away with it, I find that highly doubtful. Don't forget he tried a moderate row-back of his abortion position and got panned so hard by his special interest backers that he overnight fell into line. As long as the evils he promotes are "the right kind" of evils, he's ok, otherwise he gets whipped into submission just as rapidly as the other spineless fucks that populate that dumpster fire of a political party...
I'm more inclined to believe him going more libertarian right than left... Him tacking to the left of a 'left' opponent was just business as usual bullshit politicking.
"Donald Trump, now the oldest candidate to run for president, is facing intense scrutiny over his age and mental sharpness — and his biographer thinks Trump is “hyper-aware” that he is cognitively slipping and trying to make up for it with “convoluted explanations,” according to a report.
President Joe Biden dropped out of the 2024 race after a fumbled debate performance that had voters questioning his mental acuity. Now Trump is facing similar questions and is trying to provide explanations for his frequent mentions of Hannibal Lecter, garbled words, incomplete thoughts, conflating the names of prominent figures, and his penchant for rambling ..."