Monday Open Thread | Susan Rice on Putin’s denials of election interference: ‘Frankly, he’s lying’

Susan Rice, former President Obama’s national security adviser, on Sunday dismissed Russian President Vladimir Putin’s denials that Russia meddled in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

“Frankly, he’s lying,” Rice said on ABC’s “This Week.”

“The reality is — as all of our intelligence agencies have come together to affirm with high confidence — the Russian government at the highest levels was behind the very unprecedented effort to meddle in our 2016 presidential election.”

Rice said the country needs to understand how and why that happened.

The country also needs to find out whether there is “any evidence to suggest that there were those on the American side who facilitated that meddling,” she said, referring to allegations that members of President Trump’s campaign colluded with Moscow.

Putin last week conceded that “patriotic minded” private Russian hackers unconnected to the government could be behind major hacks that interfered in other nation’s elections.

“If they are patriotically minded, they start making their contributions — which are right, from their point of view — to the fight against those who say bad things about Russia,” Putin said at a press conference, according to the New York Times.

But the Russian president also denied that the Russian state had ever been involved in hacking.

“We don’t engage in that at the state level,” Putin said at a meeting with senior editors of leading international news agencies, according to The Associated Press.

Advertisements

About SouthernGirl2

A Native Texan who adores baby kittens, loves horses, rodeos, pomegranates, & collect Eagles. Enjoys politics, games shows, & dancing to all types of music. Loves discussing and learning about different cultures. A Phi Theta Kappa lifetime member with a passion for Social & Civil Justice.
This entry was posted in 2016 Elections, Current Events, Democracy, HACKING, News, Open Thread, Politics, Russia and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

68 Responses to Monday Open Thread | Susan Rice on Putin’s denials of election interference: ‘Frankly, he’s lying’

  1. rikyrah says:

    Like

  2. CANCEL IT! Do it for the people of the UK.

    Like

  3. rikyrah says:

    Like

  4. rikyrah says:

    Like

  5. rikyrah says:

    Like

  6. rikyrah says:

    Georgetown middle school girl called an ape, slave by fellow students
    Posted: 12:00 a.m. Saturday, June 03, 2017

    A girl at Tippit Middle School in Georgetown told an African-American girl in May that she looked like an ape and also referred to her as a slave and pretended to whip her, according to a written report from the school.

    A male student also made a racial remark to the black student, the report said.

    The father of the 12-year-old student who was harassed, Robert Ranco, said last week the school didn’t appropriately discipline the girl or other students who were involved. None of the students were suspended, said Ranco, who is a civil rights lawyer in Round Rock.

    http://www.mystatesman.com/news/local/georgetown-middle-school-girl-called-ape-slave-fellow-students/r3OVdWpibgshQNNdgv9COI/

    Like

  7. rikyrah says:

    @Green_Footballs
    Following
    More
    I see the dumb-ass Trump army has mobilized very quickly to smear Reality Winner as a Satanist. Yes, really, they are.

    Like

  8. rikyrah says:

    Like

  9. Liked by 1 person

  10. Liked by 1 person

  11. rikyrah says:

    The Democrats Should Not Concede on the Debt Ceiling
    by Martin Longman June 5, 2017 3:32 PM

    I can understand this sentiment and I might have agreed with it ten years ago. I can’t agree with it today.

    Some democrats starting to rumble about using debt ceiling vote to extract concessions. NO! Its irresponsible – whether GOP or Dems do it.

    — Kurt Eichenwald (@kurteichenwald) June 5, 2017

    It’s the job of the majority party in Congress to pass appropriations and it’s their job to pass any hike in the debt ceiling. Period. End of story. If the government shuts down, it’s 100 percent the majority’s fault. If we default on our loans and damage our credit rating and cause a global recession, that’s 100 percent the majority’s fault, too.

    This is always true, but it’s especially true when the majority in Congress is controlled by the same party that is sitting in the Oval Office. Strictly speaking, the minority party is not responsible for anything and should never be asked to provide votes for anything unless they are going to get something out of it.

    During the Obama years, the minority Democrats provided most of the votes for lifting the debt ceiling and they did it despite asking in vain for clean votes that didn’t advance Republican priorities. They did this because they wanted to protect the president who they knew would take most of the blame if the global economy blew up. But they don’t have a president to protect anymore and it’s up to the Republicans to do the responsible thing.

    If they can ram home a debt ceiling hike with 100 percent their own votes, then they can cram whatever they want into the bill. If they need Democratic votes, then this time it’s the Democrats who need to see their priorities addressed.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Ametia says:

    Will Jesus & Santa Claus remain WHITE, now that Megyn Kelly’ is on MSNBC?

    Like

  13. rikyrah says:

    Why Steve Bannon is Winning the Game of Thrones
    by Nancy LeTourneau
    June 5, 2017 11:01 AM

    Over the last couple of weeks, we’ve watched Trump alienate our NATO and G7 allies, pull out of the Paris Climate Accord and re-instate his call for a travel ban. These are all moves that come from the white nativist Bannonites in the administration.

    It wasn’t that long ago that a lot of people were consoling themselves with the idea that, while this administration seemed intent on following through with many of Trump’s nativist domestic policies, the so-called “adults” were still in charge of foreign policy. As Susan Glasser notes, that group is known as MM&T: Mattis, McMaster and Tillerson. But she writes today that, while they were consulted on his speech to NATO leaders, they were left out of the decision to alter it at the last minute to exclude language reaffirming a commitment to Article 5.

    ………………………………

    For months we read accounts of the arguments going on in the White House about whether or not to fulfill Trump’s campaign promise to pull the United States out of the Paris Climate agreement. On one side were the “adults” mentioned above, along with Ivanka and Jared Kushner. On the other side were the nativists led by Steve Bannon. Once again, the latter prevailed.

    In the wake of the London terror attack, Trump basically attacked the Mayor of London and on Twitter this morning dissed his own Justice Department.

    The Justice Dept. should have stayed with the original Travel Ban, not the watered down, politically correct version they submitted to S.C.

    — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 5, 2017

    Obviously, the “original Travel Ban” was the brainchild of the Bannonites.

    In other words, the faction in the White House that appeared to be losing the factional battles sometimes referred to as the “Game of Thrones,” is once again on the rise. It is worth noting why that happened.

    I would suggest that all of this has more to do with what I wrote about last week than it does with the persuasive powers of Steve Bannon. Donald Trump is feeling threatened and that has created a downward spiral in which he will become increasingly dangerous.

    Like

  14. rikyrah says:

    Why the Republicans Can’t Legislate
    by Martin Longman
    June 5, 2017 12:02 PM

    What I like about the following is how it lacks any moral judgment. It simply puts the facts out there and let’s you decide what you think about it. The context is the shocking lack of legislative achievement we’ve seen so far from the Trump administration. The idea is that after a legislative burst in its first two years, the Obama administration accomplished much of its agenda through executive orders and regulations, so we should expect much of Trump’s initial efforts to be non-legislative as well as he makes efforts to undo Obama’s legacy. We’re told that Trump has been more active and successful than we might imagine.

    Republicans have used the Congressional Review Act to nullify 14 rules enacted by the Obama administration. Before this year, it had only been used successfully once in 20 years. If Trump and Republicans had not reversed these rules, then companies applying for federal contracts would have had to disclose their labor violations; coal mines would have had to reduce the amount of debris dumped into streams; telecommunications companies would have had to take “reasonable measures” to protect their customers’ personal information; individuals receiving Social Security payments for disabling mental illnesses would have been added to a list of those not allowed to buy guns; states would have been limited in the drug-testing they could perform on those receiving unemployment insurance benefits; certain hunting practices would not have been allowed on national wildlife refuges in Alaska; and states could have set up retirement savings plans for those who don’t have the option at work.

    [Mark] Short [Trump’s director of legislative affairs] said the fact that Trump was able to use the Congressional Review Act more than a dozen times when it had only been used once before is “a pretty significant accomplishment” and one that he says will benefit the economy by billions of dollars each year.

    “We look at that as one of the biggest accomplishments,” he said.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. rikyrah says:

    A Potential Nightmare Scenario This Summer
    by Nancy LeTourneau
    June 5, 2017 2:25 PM

    The Associated Press opened their fact-check on recent statements from Donald Trump with a dire statement that just so happens to be true.

    President Donald Trump can’t be counted on to give accurate information to Americans when violent acts are unfolding abroad.

    But as many have been asking for months now, what happens when the topic du jour turns from “violent acts abroad” to crises here at home?

    It’s hard to read Trump’s tweets this morning and not think that we’re one domestic attack away from the most dangerous version of this guy

    — Jon Favreau (@jonfavs) June 4, 2017

    Beyond terrorism, the weather outside (even up here in what I call the “tundra”) is also reminding us that, while summer doesn’t officially start for a couple of weeks, most of us are already there temperature-wise. That means that it is time to be aware of some things, including this prediction:

    What happens when we have to start relying on this administration for information about hurricanes and/or other dangerous weather-related events? Here are some numbers to keep in mind from the Obama years:

    Over the past eight years, Fugate [FEMA Director from 2009-2017] has dealt with 910 disaster declarations, far more than any FEMA director in history. In 2011 alone, FEMA responded to a record-shattering 242 disasters (the previous record had been 158 in 1996). He battled big storms made bigger by climate change, managed to earn praise from both parties in Congress, and restored public faith in the federal government’s ability to respond to natural disasters, taking it from 33 percent after Katrina to 75 percent after Sandy, according to Gallup.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. rikyrah says:

    Just a reminder: The latest from Shonda Rhimes: Still Star Crossed on ABC at 10 pm EST. Check it out!!
    Period drama…costumes…wonderful sets and scenery….

    Like

  17. Like

  18. rikyrah says:

    Trump struggles with the meaning of ‘obstructionism’
    06/05/17 12:30 PM—UPDATED 06/05/17 12:35 PM
    By Steve Benen

    For a while, Donald Trump argued that many of the vacancies in key posts throughout his administration were part of a deliberate strategy. “[I]n many cases, we don’t want to fill those jobs,” the president said in February. “A lot of those jobs, I don’t want to appoint, because they’re unnecessary to have…. Many of those jobs, I don’t want to fill.”

    By April, Trump decided to take the opposite position, saying the problem has “nothing to do with” him and everything to do with Democratic “obstructionists” in the Senate.

    The Republican president, apparently referencing something he saw on Fox News, continued to push this line earlier today:

    “Dems are taking forever to approve my people, including Ambassadors. They are nothing but OBSTRUCTIONISTS! Want approvals.”

    We may need to consider the possibility that Trump doesn’t know what “obstructionist” means.

    Liked by 1 person

  19. rikyrah says:

    Former Trump surrogate makes his debut as a pundit
    06/05/17 10:40 AM—UPDATED 06/05/17 01:31 PM
    By Steve Benen

    We learned last week that Boris Epshteyn, a former special assistant to Donald Trump, received a request for information from the House Intelligence Committee, as part of the panel’s investigation into the Russia scandal. The news came just two months after Epshteyn, who helped oversee Team Trump’s TV surrogate operation, left the White House for reasons that were never fully explained.

    Over the weekend, however, many Americans watched their local news and saw a new on-air segment called “Bottom Line with Boris,” featuring the former Trump aide with a combative reputation. The two-minute segment featured Epshteyn criticizing the White House press corps.

    And why, pray tell, was this former White House official making his debut as a pundit? After his departure from Trump World, Epshteyn was apparently hired by Sinclair Broadcasting as a commentator.

    The segment was a reminder that reports like this one from the Washington Post a month ago was probably more important than widely recognized.

    Donald Trump the businessman prided himself on making winning business deals. Now, Donald Trump the president appears to be a winner in a deal he didn’t even negotiate.

    The Sinclair Broadcast Group, already the nation’s largest owner of local television stations, is adding 42 more in a $3.9 billion acquisition of Tribune Media. The result could be slightly friendlier coverage for the president in the nation’s largest media markets, as well as in cities such as Cleveland, Greensboro, N.C., and Des Moines that represent key centers in battleground states.

    Like

  20. rikyrah says:

    Trump stumbles while looking for a new FBI director
    06/05/17 10:00 AM—UPDATED 06/05/17 10:41 AM
    By Steve Benen

    As part of his deeply unfortunate response to the latest terror attack in London, Donald Trump declared his intention to “get down to the business of security for our people.” He then went golfing for a few hours.

    Before hitting the links, the president didn’t specify what getting down to business would entail, exactly, but if Trump had a director of the FBI, it’d be a helpful step in the right direction.

    It’s been nearly a month since the president fired then-FBI Director James Comey because of Trump’s concerns about the counter-espionage investigation Comey was leading, and as is too often the case, the White House hadn’t lined up a successor before making the move.

    Four days after the firing, Trump pledged to move quickly to nominate a new director. A few days after that, the president said he was “very close” to announcing Comey’s replacement.

    And yet, here were are, more than two weeks later, waiting for an announcement. Reuters reported the other day that the process of finding a new director isn’t going especially well in part because of the president’s role.

    President Donald Trump is still looking for a new FBI director more than three weeks after he fired James Comey, and sources familiar with the recruiting process say it has been chaotic and that job interviews led by Trump have been brief. […]

    Those conversations, which followed initial interviews at the Justice Department, have been light on questions about substantive issues facing the agency, the three associates said.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Liked by 1 person

  22. rikyrah says:

    The Kabuki presidency

    Liberal Librarian
    June 5, 2017

    This morning Idiot-in-Chief Donald Trump signed a bill to privatize our air traffic control system.

    Wait, no, he didn’t. He signed… something or other which set out principles to privatize our air traffic control system. Because actually privatizing it requires pushing through legislation, something at which he seems particularly unadept.

    So his staff put something in front of him to which he could sign his scrawl of a signature, and he got to beat his chest about what a great job he’s doing.

    All politics has some degree of theater to it. However, Donald Trump is nothing but a carnival barker, living solely on smoke and mirrors.

    The sad truth is that neither he nor his inner circle know the first thing about governing. Much like Bernie Sanders and his “millions of people will march on Washington to enact my agenda,” Trump believes that by getting adulation from his mouth breathers he’s doing the job of president.

    Liked by 1 person

  23. Liked by 2 people

    • yahtzeebutterfly says:

      Horrible. He should have been fired, but at least he resigned.

      Liked by 1 person

    • majiir says:

      What really got to me and irritated me about the b*st*rd was that after he said Flint’s problems are caused by “N!99ers not paying their water bills”, he went on to say that he has blah friends. That he used the word n!99ers in the first place informs me that that’s how he thinks of his alleged blah friends and associates.

      Like

  24. Liza says:

    Trump Announces Plan To Privatize Air Traffic Control
    June 5, 201712:06 PM ET

    President Trump announced Monday a plan to privatize the nation’s air traffic control system — a move that would remove the job of tracking and guiding airplanes from the purview of the Federal Aviation Administration.

    Privatization of air traffic control is an idea long supported by most of the commercial airlines. Executives from those companies joined the president at the White House to announce the plan.

    Guided by legislation that has been proposed in the past by House Transportation Committee chairman Bill Shuster, a private, nonprofit corporation would be created to operate, manage and control air traffic control nationwide, similar to what Canada does. The FAA would still have some oversight capacity, but a board made up mostly of representatives of the major airlines would govern this corporation.

    The FAA says it has modernized in recent years by updating its computers and other systems. Administrator Michael Huerta told an industry conference in March that the agency has made “tremendous progress,” per The Associated Press.

    But some groups have been critical of efforts to privatize air traffic control operations, saying it gives the airlines too much control over the system for their own benefit.

    The group Flyers’ Rights calls it the “creation of an airline controlled corporate monopoly.” It also says privatizing air traffic control amounts to “handing the airlines (for free) control over a core public asset, and providing them nearly unbridled power to extract new fees and increased taxes from passengers.”

    Trump has been critical in the past of the FAA and air traffic control, saying his personal pilot has complained about how out of date and inefficient the agency is.

    This plan is part of Trump’s broader infrastructure vision. He may also talk more broadly Monday about what he has called “third world airports” in particular, as he launches what the White House is calling the president’s “infrastructure week.”

    http://www.npr.org/2017/06/05/531574945/trump-announces-plan-to-privatize-air-traffic-control

    Liked by 1 person

  25. Like

  26. Liked by 1 person

  27. Like

  28. Liked by 1 person

  29. Liza says:

    This is not what people generally do, but it is truly awesome.

    NJ Family Who Won $429,000,000 Lottery Jackpot Launch Grant-Making Fund to Give Back to Their Hometown https://t.co/JZ5zvnjXNQ— deray mckesson (@deray) June 5, 2017

    //platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Liked by 2 people

  30. rikyrah says:

    It’s time to bust the myth: Most Trump voters were not working class.
    By Nicholas Carnes and Noam Lupu
    June 5 at 6:00 AM

    Media coverage of the 2016 election often emphasized Donald Trump’s appeal to the working class. The Atlantic said that “the billionaire developer is building a blue-collar foundation.” The Associated Press wondered what “Trump’s success in attracting white, working-class voters” would mean for his general election strategy. On Nov. 9, the New York Times front-page article about Trump’s victory characterized it as “a decisive demonstration of power by a largely overlooked coalition of mostly blue-collar white and working-class voters.”

    There’s just one problem: this account is wrong. Trump voters were not mostly working-class people.

    Liked by 1 person

  31. rikyrah says:

    Kushners Hunting Hard for a Loan to Pay Back Chinese Investors
    by Sarah Mulholland and Caleb Melby
    June 5, 2017, 4:00 AM CDT

    The Kushner family real estate company is seeking a $250 million loan to pay back Chinese investors in a New Jersey luxury tower but finding some major U.S. banks wary of the controversies around its White House links and the visa program used to attract the investors.

    Liked by 1 person

  32. I can’t believe this is actually happening…

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ametia says:

      The problem is that you, #45 should have gone through EXTREME VETTING. But the fact that you’re an orange POS, that was lifted and given a platform via our MSM, along with the GOP and greedy rich, racists supporters They let you into the White House.

      Like

  33. Liked by 1 person

  34. rikyrah says:

    THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 6/2/17
    Trump attacks birth control amid scandal circus distraction
    Ari Melber points out how Donald Trump is set to offer employers a ‘moral convictions’ loophole to offering health care, a move that could affect the birth control coverage of hundreds of thousands of women.

    Like

  35. rikyrah says:

    THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 6/2/17
    Mueller’s broadening Trump investigation could gain resources
    Rachel Maddow reacts to news that Special Counsel Robert Mueller is expanding his investigation to include Mike Flynn’s dealings with Turkey and could include Jeff Sessions and Rod Rosenstein, and will also take over the Paul Manafort investigation.

    Like

  36. rikyrah says:

    THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 6/2/17
    Trump blabbing would hurt executive privilege claim over Comey
    Barbara McQuade, former U.S. attorney, talks about Donald Trump would have a hard time asserting executive privilege to prevent former FBI Director James Comey from testifying.

    Liked by 1 person

  37. rikyrah says:

    THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 6/2/17
    Obstruction case could target Trump aides over Comey firing
    Nicker Akerman, former Watergate special prosecutor, talks about the scope of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation and who could be a target in an obstruction case surrounding the firing of James Comey.

    Like

  38. rikyrah says:

    THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 6/2/17
    Mueller inquiry could include Sessions’ role in Comey firing: AP
    Eric Tucker, Justice Department reporter for the Associated Press, talk about new reporting that according to Deputy A.G. Rod Rosenstein, the scope of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation could include Jeff Sessions.

    Liked by 1 person

  39. rikyrah says:

    Following London attack, Trump flunks latest leadership test
    06/05/17 08:00 AM—UPDATED 06/05/17 08:43 AM
    By Steve Benen

    Soon after Saturday night’s terrorist attack in London, where seven were killed and nearly 50 were injured, U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis was asked for his reaction to the deadly incident. “I don’t know enough about it yet,” the Pentagon chief said, adding, “I like learning about something before I talk. So let me look into it.”

    His boss adopted a very different kind of posture.

    Donald Trump, who has unlimited access to expansive amounts of intelligence, initially responded to the attack by retweeting an item from the Drudge Report. Soon after, the American president declared, “We need to be smart, vigilant and tough. We need the courts to give us back our rights. We need the Travel Ban as an extra level of safety!”

    What does the White House’s proposed Muslim ban have to do with the attack? I don’t know; Trump didn’t say. What “rights” have we lost that Trump wants courts to restore? I don’t know; Trump didn’t explain that, either.

    Liked by 1 person

  40. rikyrah says:

    Trump campaign’s ‘Pittsburgh, not Paris’ rally draws ‘dozens’
    06/05/17 09:20 AM
    By Steve Benen

    In his White House speech on Thursday afternoon, Donald Trump delivered a soundbite that conservatives quickly embraced: “I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris.” The phrase, which drew quick applause from the president’s supporters, did not, however, make any sense: the international climate accord was agreed to in Paris, but it was intended to benefit everyone, not just Parisians.

    Nevertheless, this Politico report, published the day after Trump’s speech, didn’t come as too big a surprise to anyone.

    President Donald Trump’s campaign announced a “Pittsburgh, not Paris” rally across from the White House on Saturday to celebrate the United States’ withdrawal from a global climate agreement.

    The Fairfax County Republican Committee and the Republican Party of Virginia are sponsoring the rally in Lafayette Square, which is scheduled to begin at 10 a.m. Saturday, according to an announcement from the Trump campaign.

    Liked by 1 person

  41. rikyrah says:

    Trump’s Plan to Make Government Older, More Expensive, and More Dysfunctional
    Slashing federal employees doesn’t save money. It just makes the government more dependent on private contractors and more prone to colossal screw-ups.

    by Gilad Edelman

    As you know, Donald Trump won remarkably few policy victories in the first six months of his presidency. The courts have blocked his Muslim ban. Obamacare repeal and replace is on life support in the Senate. Tax reform seems a distant prospect. Funding for a border wall remains hypothetical.

    One item on his agenda, however, is moving right along: cutting the size of the federal workforce. You don’t hear as much about this one, in part because Trump himself doesn’t talk much about it. But it’s clearly a priority—one the administration has billed as a way for Trump to make good on his promise to “drain the swamp.” His “Contract with the American Voter,” released a couple of weeks before last November’s election, began with “Six measures to clean up the corruption and special interest collusion in Washington, DC.” Item number two was a hiring freeze “to reduce the federal workforce through attrition.”

    Trump instituted the hiring freeze in one of his first acts as president. In March, his administration put out a budget outline that called for a $54 billion increase in defense-related spending offset by major reductions at other agencies—a budget that, if enacted, could result in a net cut of as much as 9 percent of the federal workforce, according to estimates by the chief economist of Moody’s Analytics, Mark Zandi. In April, Trump lifted the hiring freeze, but his budget director, Mick Mulvaney, circulated a memo—titled “Comprehensive Plan for Reforming the Federal Government and Reducing the Federal Civilian Workforce”—asking every government agency to develop a plan by September to cut staff in line with Trump’s budget objectives.

    Liked by 1 person

  42. rikyrah says:

    Will Democrats Allow the Perfect to Be the Enemy of the Good in 2020?
    by D.R. Tucker June 4, 2017 3:00 PM

    Do you get the sense that it won’t be enough?

    Do you get the sense that after all of Donald Trump’s outrages, his deceptions, his lies, his depravity, his chicanery, it still won’t be enough?

    Do you get the sense that three years from now, the Democratic Party will still be divided along “establishment” vs. “progressive” lines, and won’t be able to focus on removing Trump from the White House?

    The creepiest aspect of Trump’s tawdriness is the prospect that he could well get away with it if the Democratic Party doesn’t have its act together. Recent history has proven that when the Democratic Party is divided, years of chaos–and irreversible damage to the country and world–follow. What if the lessons of history are ignored again?

    Two weeks ago, I speculated that perhaps the only way the Democratic Party could avoid a divisive 2020 primary was by unifying behind a candidate who could appeal to both the “establishment” and “progressive” wings of the party; I suggested that Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown might fit the bill. Let’s say Brown and other progressives run, but fail to secure the Democratic nomination. (When’s the last time someone considered an undisputed progressive won the Democratic presidential nomination, anyway?) Furthermore, let’s say that the nomination is won by a Democrat who has been lambasted by some members of the party’s base as “not progressive enough”–New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, perhaps, or New Jersey Senator Cory Booker, or former Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick (who was considered an undisputed progressive when he ran for the Bay State governorship in 2006, but who is now seen in certain circles as a “corporatist”). Will Democrats unify around that less-than-ideal Democratic nominee? Or will some Democrats listen to the siren song of a progressive third-party challenger?

    Like

    • Liza says:

      “Do you get the sense that three years from now, the Democratic Party will still be divided along “establishment” vs. “progressive” lines, and won’t be able to focus on removing Trump from the White House?”

      No, I don’t think this will happen. The establishment vs. progressive argument seems to be diminishing as people are forced to move on past the devastating 2016 loss to Donald Trump and deal with the crises imposed by his occupation of the Oval Office.

      We are less than five months into this horror. Assuming Trump is still in the WH in 2020, how could we NOT be united? Same is true for Pence.

      Liked by 1 person

  43. rikyrah says:

    Spread the Word: The Survival of Lawrence O’Donnell
    by D.R. Tucker June 4, 2017 11:00 AM

    And you thought “It’s hard to keep a good man down” was just a cliche.

    The news that MSNBC has decided to change its mind about axing Lawrence O’Donnell is a relief for those of us who feared that yet another voice for justice and integrity would be chased off the airwaves. NBC News President Andrew Lack may still harbor thoughts of becoming the next Roger Ailes, but the voices of O’Donnell’s supporters were apparently able to drown him out.

    The continued presence of O’Donnell on cable television must drive Trump even further into insanity. O’Donnell has called out Trump for years, declaring in 2011 that the former Celebrity Apprentice host should have been kicked off NBC for peddling the racist hoax that President Obama was born in Kenya. O’Donnell is peerless in his ability to highlight the hubris of Trump, his Cabinet and his supporters–and fearless in his fight against those who would drag this country into a political and cultural wasteland.

    I’ve previously noted that O’Donnell was one of the few cable-news figures willing to comprehensively cover the Dakota Access Pipeline controversy. Of course, other folks were paying attention to that controversy for different reasons:

    Liked by 1 person

    • Liza says:

      I noticed MSNBC has gone all out to advance the career of Megyn Kelly. How anyone from Fox News could be considered a serious journalist is beyond me. MSNBC just keeps sinking to new lows, IMO.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Ametia says:

        And they put the blonde Barbie Doll in front of Putin, to spew his lies & propaganda.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Liza says:

        And afterwards all the other MSNBC “journalists” had to keep referring to Megyn Kelly’s Putin interview and play clips, etc…MSNBC must think that all her old Fox News fans are following her to MSNBC so their ratings are going to skyrocket.

        I watched the Putin interview for maybe five minutes and wondered why he’s on our TVs. He shouldn’t be.

        Like

  44. Like

  45. Liked by 1 person

  46. Liked by 2 people

    • Ametia says:

      LOL the one occasion where dude could put his feet up in a Barclay, sip a brewskie, and let mother nature do her thing, but naw…

      Some folks just be like. I’m CRUSIN’ FOR A BRUSIN’!

      Liked by 1 person

  47. Liked by 3 people

  48. Liked by 1 person

  49. Just look a this…

    Liked by 1 person

  50. Like

  51. rikyrah says:

    Tell that truth, Dr. Rice!

    Like

  52. rikyrah says:

    Good Morning, Everyone 😐😐😐

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s