Sunday, August 28, 2016

The Sunday Tattler News - National Political Edition

 
Trump biographer drops a bombshell on CNN — and exposes his cocaine-dealing crony (Raw Story - link): Donald Trump biographer David Cay Johnston Saturday on CNN said that the Republican presidential candidate once protected a convicted felon who was charged with cocaine trafficking.

Donald got his personal helicopter and the one for his casinos from a convicted felon who turned out to be a major drug trafficker, and instead of cutting ties with this guy, he kept him on, he rented him an apartment under very unusual circumstances as I described in the book,” Johnston told CNN host Michael Smerconish. “He wrote a letter pleading for mercy for him, saying he was a standup guy. The guy got 18 months while the people who actually delivered the drugs for him got 20 years. And, by the way, the case came before at one point Judge Maryanne Trump Barry — Donald’s older sister.”

Johnston was referring to Joseph Weichselbaum, who was indicted for drug trafficking in 1985.

Johnston said the media should investigate Hillary Clinton’s private email server, but he complained that virtually no one had called attention to Trump’s “lifelong business dealings with Russian mobsters, con artists, violent felons, swindlers, and this big time cocaine trafficker.”

Trump campaign CEO once charged in domestic violence case (Politico - link): Stephen K. Bannon, the new CEO of the Donald Trump campaign, was charged with misdemeanor domestic violence, battery and dissuading a witness following an incident in early January 1996, though the case was ultimately dismissed, according to a police report and court documents.

The Santa Monica, Calif., police report says that Bannon’s then-wife claimed he pulled at her neck and wrist during an altercation over their finances, and an officer reported witnessing red marks on her neck and wrist to bolster her account. Bannon also reportedly smashed the phone when she tried to call the police.

While the case ended when Bannon's ex-wife did not appear in court, the incident presents a new problem for the Trump campaign following the hiring of the controversial Bannon. He went on leave from Breitbart News, where he is chairman, to take over the Trump campaign.

Bannon, through a spokeswoman, said he was never interviewed by the police about the incident. Bannon pleaded "not guilty" to the allegations and was represented by a local criminal defense attorney during the proceedings. The couple — who had twin girls — were divorced shortly after the criminal charges were dropped in August 1996.

 Bannon’s then-wife, who POLITICO is not naming, answered the door at the home looking “very upset,” according to the police report.

According to the report, she said, “Oh, thank you, you are here. How did you know to come?” and took several minutes to compose herself.

Bannon, according to the report, was less than seven months into his second marriage, though the couple had known each other for a number of years prior to their April 1995 wedding. The couple just had twin girls seven months earlier, Bannon’s ex-wife told police at the time.

There had been a history of physical altercations in their relationship, Bannon’s then-wife relayed. "In the beginning of their relationship, she said they [had] 3 or 4 argument that became physical and they had been going to counseling. There has not been any physical abuse in their arguments for about the past 4 years.

Donald Trump Uses Shooting of Dwyane Wade’s Cousin to Peddle Dangerous Stereotypes (The Daily Beat - link): Has there been a more feckless, disconnected and intellectually lazy major party nominee for president in the modern era? By any measure, the answer is no.

Donald Trump, a man known for hurling racially-charged brickbats of intolerance, spent recent days spewing vile stereotypes in a ham-fisted attempt to appear more sympathetic to African American voters and blaming Democrats for the social maladies that tend to plague many of nation’s largest cities.

But, Saturday morning, in a uniquely craven and breathtakingly vulturistic social media post, Trump proved—once again—that he knows no boundaries.

Linking the shooting death of NBA superstar Dwyane Wade’s cousin to his own recent rhetorical flourishes about so-called black-on-black crime, the former real estate developer seemed to say: I told you so.

Dwyane Wade’s cousin was just shot and killed walking her baby in Chicago,” Trump said, in a tweet he deleted, then reposted with the correct spelling of the NBA star’s name. “Just what I have been saying. African-Americans will VOTE TRUMP!”

The fact that the one-time reality television personality originally misspelled Wade’s first name, did not mention Nykea Aldridge by name and failed to extend condolences to the family was largely greeted with derision. As the nation grapples with meaningful solutions to some of our most pressing dilemmas—including how to stem the tide of gun violence—and a family was dealing with a tragic loss, Trump was taking a victory lap.

Trump, who appears to get his sketchy public policy ideas from tooling around fringe websites, immediately pounced on the horrific incident as proof that he deserves more support from black voters.  In recent days, Trump has attempted to parlay his feigned benevolence for social disparities in predominantly non-white, inner city neighborhoods into political gains among white suburbanites.

His ripped-from-the-headlines message may have won Trump a fractured Republican primary. But, over time, his off-the-cuff and sometimes scripted remarks have proven costly—to both himself and the broader GOP. Party insiders see him as a wrecking ball, concerned more with his own cheering crowds of true believers than building the kind of broad coalition of support that could win him the presidency and help down-ticket candidates.

Trump campaign donor linked to mafia, Putin loyalists (This Week - link): Last month, Felix Sater, a businessman with ties to the mafia and "loyalists of Russian President Vladimir Putin," paid Donald Trump a visit at Trump Tower for "confidential" reasons, Politico reported Friday. That same month, Sater gave the Trump campaign $5,400 — the maximum contribution allowed.

Sater and Trump's ties go way back; the two once co-developed a Trump project and Trump briefly hired Sater. However, Trump has long maintained that his relationship with Sater is "distant" and stated under oath that he "would not recognize Sater if the two were sitting in the same room," Politico reported.

Whether or not Trump recognizes Sater, the Russian-born businessman's reappearance in Trump's circle comes at an inconvenient time for his campaign, Politico says:

Around 1999, Sater joined Bayrock, a real estate firm that had offices in Trump Tower and pursued business ventures with Trump. Bayrock is now being rocked by allegations made in a lawsuit brought by a former executive of unexplained cash infusions from Russia and Kazakhstan and receiving financing from a firm used by Russians "in favor with" Putin. Around 2010, Sater went to work for Trump directly, carrying a Trump Organization business card that described him as a "senior advisor to Donald Trump."

The revelation of Sater's contribution and recent Trump Tower visit come at a time when Trump's pro-Russian stances, his relationship with former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, and his campaign's role in softening the Republican Party's support for Ukrainian resistance to Russian incursions in its territory have all brought the New York billionaire's ties to Russia under intense scrutiny.

Saudi prince says he twice saved Trump from bankruptcy (Middle East Monitor - link): Saudi billionaire Prince Al-Waleed Bin Talal said he twice saved US presidential candidate Donald Trump from bankruptcy, describing him as a “bad and ungrateful person”.

In an interview with Turkey’s Hurriyet newspaper, the prince said he bought Trump’s hotels after they were acquired by the banks which demanded he repay his debts.

The yacht he used to come to Antalya, southwest of Turkey, is one he bought from Trump when he was threatened with bankruptcy.

Earlier, the Saudi prince called on Trump to immediately withdraw from the presidential race describing him as a disgrace to the Republican Party and America.

Trump’s Favorite Poll Just Delivered A Devastating One-Two Punch To The Republican Party (Politics USA.com - link): A new Quinnipiac University poll contained the bad news that not only is Hillary Clinton leading by double-digits, but the vast majority of voters have made up their minds.

According to the Quinnipiac University Poll:

In the battle of the unloved presidential candidates, Democrat Hillary Clinton tops the magical 50 percent mark among American likely voters, leading Republican Donald Trump 51 – 41 percent, according to a Quinnipiac University National poll released today.

When third party candidates are added to the mix, Clinton gets 45 percent with Trump at 38 percent, Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson at 10 percent and Green Party candidate Jill Stein at 4 percent, the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University Poll finds. This survey of likely voters can not be compared with results of earlier surveys of registered voters.

Women and non-white voters propel Clinton in the head-to-head matchup. Women back her 60 – 36 percent. Men back Trump 48 – 42 percent. White voters back Trump 52 – 41 percent. Non-white voters back Clinton 77 – 15 percent.

Hillary Clinton leading by ten is very bad news for the Republican nominee, but what is even worse is that 90% of those polled have already made up their minds. Only 9% of respondents said that they are open to changing their minds. This means that even if Trump got all of the people who could change their minds to support him, he would still be losing to Clinton.

The Quinnipiac results if they maintain and are replicated in other polls will suggest that Donald Trump has entered the territory of being completely unelectable. Trump’s new campaign team doesn’t matter. Trump’s changes in policy don’t matter. The presidential debates might not matter.

The polling suggests that Trump reacted too late to his slide. Voters say that they have made up their minds.

sierramadretattler.blogspot.com

69 comments:

  1. I think Trump has single handily taken down the Republican party. Makes one wonder if that was his goal, this man can't be that stupid. Maybe the Russians don't like the Republicans and this was their way of supporting the Democrats. A lot of things don't add up, thank you Tattler for providing all the above information for us to ponder.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree 5:47! It's all been just too weird. Like somebody dragged a mannequin with a sneer into the race and said, here, vote for this.

      Delete
  2. For years the GOP has courted the vote of dangerous lunatics. Something they were very successful at. Unfortunately for them however, the dangerous lunatics decided to nominate one of their own. Now the Senate, Congress and Presidency will now be under the control of the Democrats.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh, that would be just dandy. Last time they had total control, we got OBAMACARE!!! Just think how much better things would be this time around. They've had plenty of time to dream up new experiments for us. Can't wait for Pelosi to ascend the throne again.

      Delete
    2. What useless dribble written by a hysterical nut

      Delete
  3. 6:57 gave a typical Democrat response : CONTROL.
    Good that the Moderator is taking the day off and giving a run on old news.
    I hope there won't be burn out by the time the Sierra Madre Council reconvene. I do appreciate the Tattlers insight.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maintaining control of the Congress and Senate has become the top priority for the GOP leadership. So much so that they are pulling money back from Trump and giving it to down ballot candidates.

      Delete
  4. Steyer: With Trump as an asset, Democratic voter registration surges
    http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_30294373/steyer-trump-an-asset-democratic-voter-registration-surges

    ReplyDelete
  5. Woodstock sign is indicative of how a certain party views immigrants. "Jobs" Americans won't do. Someone please explain why this certain party enjoys the attitudes of Americans are better than you "immigrants". Certain jobs; even in this difficult economy, "we" won't do. "We"have have this better than you attitude (as many Europeans feel), you are less than a person.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The debates have yet to play out. Trump has plenty opportunity to win.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course. And any of us could win the lottery as well.

      Delete
    2. Contemptuous belligerence versus wit....I wonder how that will go.

      Delete
    3. 8:37 here- I'm not voting for trump but am serious. He dominated all those primary opponents... Some were veterans. Gore lost to Bush in the debates. Even though was clearly better prepared and spoke meanignfully.

      Trump has plenty opportunity still

      Delete
    4. The Clintons will beat him like a red headed stepchild. The debates should be billed as a comedy show.

      Delete
    5. is there more than one clinton running?

      Delete
    6. Ask your parents to explain it to you, Poindexter.

      Delete
    7. If Donald builds the wall, where is he going to find the cheap help he needs to maintain his chintzy hotels?

      Delete
    8. Trump's hotels are gauche.

      Delete
  7. Gary Johnson; on the issue ch.11, just gave interview. Sounded an awful lot like he supports the same policy on immigration as does Trump.
    Only Hillary says she will open the border with out background checks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Gary Johnson has made his opposition to Trump's immigration policies known many times. You sure that was a television set you saw?

      Delete
    2. Actually Trump said Hillary would open the border without background checks,She never said that.You really have poor choices of where you get your info.

      Delete
    3. Which immigration policy of the Donald does Gary Johnson support? Todays,tomorrows last weeks,or last years?

      Delete
    4. Der Trumpenfuhrer's wall wishes are often subject to his mood swings.

      Delete
    5. I don't care about background checks.

      Delete
  8. An example of why the left has the "I am better than you attitude" , they put forward "their" personal interpretation of what has been said: "you all focus on process, not the message".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Whine, whine, whine. Your low self-esteem is nobody's fault but your own. Seek help.

      Delete
  9. I love it when the bantering turns to the less educated "hits". That justification implies the blogger has no real argument and exposes their ignorance.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I call these "Seinfeld posts." They're about nothing.

      Delete
  10. I call these posts Make America great, again. The true insight is that ignorance is curable, stupidity is permanent.
    The FBI basically said Hillary committed a "stupid" move with her "private" server.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I get it. Trust me. The actual stupidity here being you think that crap means something in the big boy world. Trump could talk about real issues, but he is too damned stupid to understand them. So instead the looney toons that support him parrot a lot of meaningless no brain cable news bullcrap. Keep it up. It is doing wonders for you.

      Delete
    2. Condi and Colin used their own private email, too. Are you calling them stupid for that or is it just guilt by association with W?

      Delete
    3. Please elaborate on why you think America is not Great, 11:02. I'm sure puppet master Vlad will appreciate your help.

      Delete
    4. America is great. That is why Trump is losing.

      Delete
    5. "The FBI basically said Hillary committed a "stupid" move with her "private" server". Why don't you say exactly what the FBI said not "basically"? Doesn't fit your agenda maybe?

      Delete
  11. Associated Press releases article addressing the impropriety of Hillary and Bill's Foundation. Her honesty continues to make headlines.
    Arranged meetings and appointments to committees are in alignment with financial donations made to the Foundation; while also indicating the individuals have zero background for the appointment. Pay to play.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Utter nonsense. No such article exists. Where's the link?

      Delete
  12. 10:07, I think "hits" are borne out of the frustration of trying to reason with someone who either ignores or does not bother to learn facts.

    Part of it has to do with education, whether formal or informal. A large percentage of Trump supporters have college degrees, but did their educations includes a robust immersion in critical thinking skills? Doubtful.

    Take, for example, 8:46's claim that "Only Hillary says she will open the border with out background checks." The problem is that Clinton never made such a statement or anything like it, and such a policy is not even close to the mainstream Democrat platform. (Sure there may be some on the fringe who would like it, but they hold no sway.)

    No doubt, either Trump, someone in his camp, and/or a pundit may have attributed "open borders" to Clinton, but that doesn't make it so. The problem then is that many Trump supporters, upon hearing something that either they wanted to hear or fits within their political mindset, do not even bother to think critically about that claim. Perhaps it doesn't even dawn on many Trumpsters that such a claim is suspect. (Of course, if they do believe it suspect and repeat it without verification, that then calls into question their honesty, which we can only hope is not the issue.)

    So it's not difficult to understand the frustration that critical thinkers feel when trying to have a good faith discussion with otherwise educated people who do not properly integrate facts into their worldview.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They might just be lying, you know. I think some of them think posting BS is actually a clever thing to do.

      Delete
    2. True enough, 12:01, but they would be doing so because they're aligned with Trump, something that can be explained only as a result of an acute dearth in critical thinking skills.

      Delete
    3. Media Matters: "The State Department found that emails handled on private email accounts associated with Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice contain "information classified at the Secret or Confidential levels.'" Former Secretary Powell responded that those identified emails were not marked "'Confidential at the time and they were sent as unclassified,'" seemingly underscoring Secretary Clinton's defense that "the State Department is classifying documents too aggressively" ...."

      http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/03/07/state-dept-concludes-past-secretaries-of-state/209044

      Delete
  13. This blog has become like so many others. One sided info, and derisive posts. The fact is we have no decent candidate for president. All of them have major problems to overcome. It was bad enough on here during the UUT campaign, now this! There is nothing new to learn here today. Just cut and paste articles with no real research by the mod.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You shouldn't read something that you do not like. Go elsewhere.

      Delete
    2. 1:11P Is that you Mr. Mod?

      Delete
  14. The "critical" thinker is showing sighs of ADD! Stop self medicating with your grandiose statements.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah, 12:09, a diagnosis without observing the patient, a criticism without substance, a fact free existence. Talk about grandiose!

      Delete
  15. Lets have some fun with this on going war of words.
    Yesterday in the blog the name of Baba Vanga was mentioned ; anyone check her out?may the conspiracy begin......

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello to Poindexter, the Clintons; plural is due to Hillary admitting "if i am elected Bill will be helping me out". She openly admitted as to not being capable of the Oval office.
      Could you imagine if Melania said that on National television.
      Please; no two are better than one comments .

      Delete
    2. The person is a soothsayef. I followed you link and found the content boring.

      Delete
    3. 12:56 - Comparing Bill Clinton to Melania Trump is a bit of a stretch. But as long as we are on the tooic of Mel, you know she is doing Putin, right?

      Delete
    4. As soon as it came out Melania was a plagiarist they disappeared her

      Delete
  16. I'm not a Hillary supporter, not because of all the allegations against her, mostly fabricated or unsubstantiated, but because by helping Bill triangulate she helped move the right so far right that it's no longer composed of relatively benign conservatives with a reactionary undercurrent but reactionaries with an undercurrent of "I don't care if it burns down" anarchism. Hillary is not centrist or left of center as many believe--she's actually right of the circa 1992 center. And she's a hawk to boot.

    So while Trump was supporting her and Bill, she and Bill helped create Trump.

    But really, what choice is there?

    Since 12:01 complains that everything is one sided, presumably against Trump, and since many are unhappy with both of the two main choices, let's list the cons and select the one with the fewest. Demonstrable facts only. I'll start with Trump:

    TRUMP:

    Knows virtually nothing about the issues.
    In business with Russian oligarchs.
    Speaks favorably about Putin.
    Invited Russia to cyber-spy on U.S. Presidential candidate.
    Knows virtually nothing about the Constitution.
    Thinks he knows a lot about the first seven words of Article I, Section 8, Clause 4, but doesn't. (Immigration)
    Knows far, far more about and has a great deal of experience with the last 12 words of Article I, Section 8, Clause 4. (Bankruptcy)
    Makes grandiose statements of "trust me" regarding policies.
    Flip-flops constantly.
    Narcissistic personality disorder.
    Has stiffed thousands of workers and contractors.
    Has had over 4,000 lawsuits filed against him and his companies.
    Has filed for bankruptcy many times, escaping from paying his debts.
    Uses bankruptcy laws as a business tool.
    Doesn't pay taxes (at least in some years.)
    Won't release his tax returns.

    That's just a start. Anyone want to add on? Let's not forget cons against Hillary. Demonstrable facts only.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. She proves money can't buy good taste in clothes. Lmao

      Delete
  17. Trump will win and I love it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He'll win what? The Miss Universe contest?

      Delete
    2. Well, 1:53, the request was for "cons" so if what you desire comes true, that will be the biggest con.

      Delete
    3. After his win Donald will become a leading spokesman for mens hair care products.

      Delete
    4. Comb over to my house, Ivanka.

      Delete
  18. Hillary the 60'stime are over; put those Nehru jackets and double wide pant suits back in mothballs.
    I've stooped to "your" level of personal best at attacking a persons physicality.
    It makes me feel so "Hillary"; as she too was the first one to sling mud. Her minions erect a wall of hate because they share the "feelings" of entitlement and false superiority.
    If elected, Hillary will be written into history as the great deceiver.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Trump never slings mud. Just ask Little Marco or Low Energy Jeb. Did you know Ted Cruz's dad was in on the Kennedy assassination?

      Delete
    2. Um Hillary was 12 yo in 1960? Nehru jackets and double wide pant suits are in vogue are you living in the 20th century? Do you know what the 20th century is? Just in case 1900-1999.

      Delete
    3. What kind of man criticizes a woman's clothing?

      Delete
    4. Guy who's probably wearing a t-shirt, jeans and tennis shoes and lame goatee

      Delete
  19. Sounds like 1:53 will be applying to be the local political commissar in Putin's United Annexed-Confederate States of Trumpistan. Where will he place dissidents for needed reeducation?

    ReplyDelete
  20. I remember when Republicans fought to tear down walls, not build new ones.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Or at least they said they did to win votes

      Delete