Doing Advance Work

News that doesn't receive the necessary attention.

Thursday, April 27, 2017

President Trump signs executive order to improve accountability and whistleblower protection at Dept. of Veterans Affairs-4/27/17

"Presidential Executive Order on Improving Accountability and Whistleblower Protection at the Department of Veterans Affairs," WhiteHouse.gov (text)

4/27/17, "President Donald J. Trump visits VA and signs executive order ‘Improving Accountability and Whistleblower Protection at the Department of Veterans Affairs’," blogs.VA.gov

"Secretary Shulkin makes key announcements to reduce red tape, fraud and improve Veteran services."

"Today President Donald J. Trump visited VA to thank Veterans for their service, and VA employees for their work helping Veterans.

4/27/17
While at VA, the president signed an executive order entitled, “Improving Accountability and Whistleblower Protection at the Department of Veterans Affairs,” and Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Dr. David Shulkin, made three new key announcements at the VA’s Central Office.

The executive order is focused on improving “accountability and whistleblower protection” at VA by creating an office dedicated to that purpose and the position of special assistant to the secretary who will report directly to the secretary and serve as executive director of the office.

The new executive director “will report directly to me as secretary so that we can identify barriers that are preventing us from removing employees and people that we have identified that should no longer be working at VA,” said Shulkin. “We want make sure that we have employees who work hard and are committed to the mission of serving our Veterans.”

The VA will establish the office and appoint the executive director within 45 days of the signing of the executive order.

The executive director will advise and assist the secretary in using all available authorities to discipline or terminate any VA manager or employee who has violated the public’s trust and failed to carry out his or her duties on behalf of Veterans. The executive director will also assist the secretary in recruiting, rewarding, and retaining high-performing employees.

At the signing ceremony for the executive order, Shulkin also announced three new key initiatives at the Department.

VA partnership with the Department of Health and Human Services

Effective today, VA is entering a partnership agreement with the Department of Health and Human Services that will allow the assignment of medical professionals from the U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps to provide direct patient care to Veterans in VA hospitals and clinics in underserved communities. 

“My priority has been to improve access to care for our nation’s heroes,” said Shulkin. “By partnering with our colleagues at HHS, we will enhance the availability of clinical care in those areas most in need.”

The initial agreement enables up to 20 officers from the Commissioned Corps to treat Veterans in VA facilities that are most in need of staffing support. The agreement also allows up to 10 more officers to help support coordination for veterans receiving non-VA community care.

New fraud, waste and abuse taskforce

The secretary announced a major new initiative to detect and prevent fraud, waste and abuse in the Department of Veterans Affairs. Effective today, this initiative has the potential to save tens of millions of taxpayer dollars currently at risk, for fraud, waste and abuse that can be redirected to better serve Veterans.

The initiative will include bringing in the leading thinkers from the private sector and other government organizations in an advisory committee to identify and leverage cutting-edge fraud detection tools and; and coordinate all fraud, waste and abuse detection and reporting activities across the department through a single office.

The department has identified potential savings in the area of improper payments to health care providers, major contracts, contracts for pharmaceuticals, and the delivery of benefits to Veterans.

“Restoring the trust of Veterans and improving system-wide accountability are among my top priorities. It’s essential to ensure that all our employees and the companies that we do business with are being good stewards of the resources available to care for our Veterans,” said Shulkin.

Removing red tape at state-owned Veteran nursing homes 

Effective today, VA is amending guidelines to allow state-owned Veteran nursing homes to follow state guidelines in the construction design of their facilities – removing red tape, while increasing access to services for Veterans.

Up to now, to qualify for federal grant funding for Veteran nursing homes in their state, Governors and state officials have had to follow federal construction design guidelines. With today’s announcement by the secretary, that is no longer the case and governors are freed up to follow their own state guidelines in the construction design of these facilities while still qualifying for the same level of federal grant funding as before.

In announcing the move, Shulkin noted that state design guidelines already are sufficient to the task of providing safe conditions for our Veterans and the department recognizes the need to move quickly to reduce unnecessary barriers to providing much needed services to our Veterans." image above from va.gov




.................

NAFTA tribunal decisions can't be challenged by US Supreme Court. NAFTA effectively changed US Constitution, rendered US court decisions subject to review by international tribunals. Per one NAFTA judge: "If Congress had known there was anything like this in NAFTA, they'd never have voted for it"-NY Times, April 2004

"The part of NAFTA that created the tribunals, known as Chapter 11, received no consideration when it was passed in 1993....''If Congress had known that there was anything like this in Nafta,'' he (Mivka) said, ''they would never have voted for it.''"...

April 18, 2004, "Review of U.S. Rulings by Nafta Tribunals Stirs Worries," NY Times, Adam Liptak

"After the highest court in Massachusetts ruled against a Canadian real estate company and after the United State Supreme Court declined to hear its appeal, the company's day in court was over.

Or so thought Chief Justice Margaret H. Marshall of the Massachusetts court, until she learned of yet another layer of judicial review, by an international tribunal.

''I was at a dinner party,'' Chief Justice Marshall said in a recent telephone interview. ''To say I was surprised to hear that a judgment of this court was being subjected to further review would be an understatement.''

Tribunals like the one that ruled on the Massachusetts case were created by the North American Free Trade Agreement, and they have heard two challenges to American court judgments [as of April 2004]. In the other, the tribunal declared a Mississippi court's judgment at odds with international law, leaving the United States government potentially liable for hundreds of millions of dollars.

Any Canadian or Mexican business that contends it has been treated unjustly by the American judicial system can file a similar claim. American businesses with similar complaints about Canadian or Mexican court judgments can do the same. Under the Nafta agreement the government whose court system is challenged is responsible for awards by the tribunals. 

''This is the biggest threat to United States judicial independence that no one has heard of and even fewer people understand,'' said John D. Echeverria, a law professor at Georgetown University.

In the Massachusetts case, brought by Mondev International, the Nafta tribunal decided in 2002 that the Massachusetts courts had not violated international law. 

But in a separate pending case, brought by a Canadian company challenging the largest jury verdict in Mississippi history, a different Nafta tribunal offered a harsh assessment of Mississippi justice. 

''The whole trial and its resultant verdict,'' the three-judge tribunal ruled last summer, ''were clearly improper and discreditable and cannot be squared with minimum standards of international law and equitable treatment.'' 

The Mississippi case arose from an exchange of companies between a Canadian concern, the Loewen Group, and companies owned by a Mississippi family, the O'Keefes. The O'Keefe family, contending that the Loewen Group did not live up to its obligations, sued for breach of contract and fraud. Although the tribunal found that the businesses were worth no more than $8 million, a jury in Jackson, Miss., awarded the family $500 million in 1995.

Loewen settled the case the next year, for $175 million. But, arguing that the trial had been unfair and that it had been coerced into settling by a requirement that the company post an appeal bond of $625 million, Loewen and one of its owners filed their claim in the Nafta tribunal in 1998. They asked for $725 million from the United States. 

The availability of this additional layer of review, above even the United States Supreme Court, is a significant development, legal scholars said.

''It's basically been under the radar screen,'' Peter Spiro, a law professor at Hofstra University, said. ''But it points to a fundamental reorientation of our constitutional system. You have an international tribunal essentially reviewing American court judgments.'' 

The part of Nafta that created the tribunals, known as Chapter 11, received no consideration when it was passed in 1993. 

''When we debated Nafta,'' Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, said in 2002, ''not a single word was uttered in discussing Chapter 11. Why? Because we didn't know how this provision would play out. No one really knew just how high the stakes would get.'' 

Senator Kerry spoke before the tribunal rulings concerning the Massachusetts and Mississippi judgments. He offered his comments in connection with legislation he had offered to limit the jurisdiction of the tribunals. His amendment was rejected by the Senate. 

Abner Mikva, a former chief judge of the federal appeals court in Washington and a former congressman, is one of the three Nafta judges considering the Mississippi case. He declined to discuss it but did offer his perspective on Chapter 11. 

''If Congress had known that there was anything like this in Nafta,'' he said, ''they would never have voted for it.'' 

The other judges considering the case are Anthony Mason, a former chief justice of the Australian High Court, and Michael Mustill, a former British law lord. They were selected by the parties, and their judgment cannot be appealed. 

Though the tribunal called the Mississippi trial ''a disgrace'' and ''the antithesis of due process,'' it denied the claim of the company itself last summer. The tribunal said the Loewen Group was ineligible to bring the claim because it had become an American company in the meantime. The trade agreement allows claims only by foreign investors. 

But a separate claim by Raymond L. Loewen, a former owner of the company who was and is Canadian, remains pending. He did not specify the damages he is seeking. A decision is expected soon.

Even Mr. Loewen's American lawyer, John H. Lewis Jr., expressed some discomfort with the power of the Nafta tribunals. 

''I agree with the principle that that people should not short-circuit or second-guess the American legal system,'' he said. ''But this case was so extreme that hopefully it will never happen again.'' 

About a score of cases have been filed against the three countries that are parties to the trade agreement, mostly in connection with environmental and other regulations. The United States has yet to lose one, but Canada and Mexico have had to pay damages to American investors.

In the Mississippi case, the tribunal had faulted Judge James E. Graves Jr. of Circuit Court in Jackson for allowing lawyers for a Mississippi businessman to make ''prejudicial and extravagant'' statements to the jury about the Canadian defendants' wealth and nationality.... 

Similar tribunals existed in other trade agreements even before Nafta. 

''Bilateral investment treaties went both ways,'' said Todd Weiler, a Nafta expert at the University of Windsor Law School in Canada, ''but in practice there weren't that many Barbadians or Nicaraguans investing in the U.S.''

But there is substantial Canadian and Mexican investment here. That means, judges and legal scholars said, that the tribunals have the potential to upset the settled American constitutional order. 

''There are grave implications here,'' Chief Justice Ronald M. George of the California Supreme Court said in an interview. ''It's rather shocking that the highest courts of the state and federal governments could have their judgments circumvented by these tribunals.''"




..................




George Soros, darling of EU leaders, has ruined lives of millions of Europeans says Hungary PM Orban. Soros uses his billions and enormous determination to force illegal immigration into Hungary and other countries-Breitbart, Williams

4/27/17, "George Soros ‘Has Ruined the Lives of Millions of Europeans’ Says Hungarian Prime Minister," Breitbart, Thomas D. Williams, PhD

"Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán delivered a stinging speech in the European Parliament Wednesday, asserting Hungary’s right to self-governance and defending its actions regarding immigration and against American financial speculator George Soros.

“I know that the power, size and weight of Hungary is much smaller than that of the financial speculator, George Soros, who is now attacking Hungary,” Orbán said.

Despite ruining the lives of millions of European with his financial speculations, being penalized in Hungary for speculations, and who is an openly admitted enemy of the euro, he is so highly praised that he is received by the EU’s top leaders,” he said.

The Prime Minister’s address built upon comments he made in an Easter interview (April 15, 2017) with Magyar Idők, in which he stated the motives behind Hungary’s diffidence toward George Soros.

“There can be no special privileges, and no one may stand above the law – not even George Soros’s people,” he said.

Through his organisations in Hungary, and hidden from the public gaze, Orbán said, “George Soros is spending endless amounts of money to support illegal immigration.

“To pursue his interests he pays a number of lobbying organisations operating in the guise of civil society. He maintains a regular network, with its own promoters, its own media, hundreds of people, and its own university.”

“I believe that George Soros must not be underestimated: he is a powerful billionaire of enormous determination who, when it comes to his interests, respects neither God nor man,” he said.

In his address before Parliament Wednesday, Orbán said that the basic stance of the government is contrary to the intentions of the European Commission regarding immigration.

Our position is clear: we do not want, and do not think it is in accordance with the founding treaties of the Union, to settle migrants in our country in a mandatory way,he said. “The decision on who we live with can only be made by the Hungarian citizens.”

The Prime Minister said it is important to note that “George Soros and his NGOs want to transport one million migrants to the EU per year. He has personally, publicly announced this programme and provides a financial loan for it. You could read this yourselves.” 

“We reject this,” Orbán said. “We do not want to lose the right of national ratemaking for public utilities, because we fear that this would increase the burdens of the people and once again lead to drastic price increases, from which Hungarian families have suffered enough.

Regarding the regulation of non-governmental organisations (NGOs), Orbán said that the Hungarian proposal “follows the American example.”

The “complicated question,” he said, is “how we can make the operations of financially strong foreign external lobbies, willing to influence democratic decision-making, transparent to everyone.” 

“The Hungarian legislation builds on the principal of clarity and transparency. We want nothing else but to be able to know of NGOs what kind of money and what kind of interests are behind them. 

This does not undermine their constitutional rights to have their voices heard, represent their interests and be able to organise themselves freely,” he said. 

Orbán said that Hungarians are in favor of “straight talk” and reject attempts to beat around the bush or hide behind diplomatic language when discussing important issues.

“We talk clearly and unambiguously, so everyone can understand, even if we know that this may not appeal to everyone,” he said. 

“We on the other hand are irritated by the restrained political language, unable to name things for what they are, that has become widespread in European public life nowadays.”"






-------------

With Ivanka in the White House, the election of her father is effectively nullifed. She sounds quite like George Soros talking about Syrian refugees and how Americans must solve the "global humanitarian crisis." The open borders and vast financial aid she seeks to dispense globally aren't hers to dispense. We didn't vote for George Soros-Ivanka on NBC's Today, 4/26/17, Breitbart (Ivanka, it's great that you want to help the globe. First, resign from your job in the White House)

4/26/17, "Ivanka Trump: Opening Border to Syrian Refugees ‘Has To Be Part of the Discussion,’ Won’t Be Enough By Itself," Breitbart, Ian Hatchett 

"During a portion of an interview broadcast on Wednesday’s edition of NBC’s “Today,” Ivanka Trump said that opening the border to Syrian refugees “has to be part of the discussion, but that’s not going to be enough in and of itself.

Ivanka said, “I think there is a global humanitarian crisis that’s happening, and we have to come together, and we have to solve it, and –.”
 
She was then asked, “Does that include opening the borders to Syrian refugees in –?”

Ivanka responded, That has to be part of the discussion, but that’s not going to be enough in and of itself.”"





................

Wednesday, April 26, 2017

Another blood drenched Neocon is back in the limelight thrilled by Trump bombing Syria and wanting more, this time Paul Wolfowitz who emails Neocon pals appointed by Trump, McMaster and Mattis-Mike Krieger, Liberty Blitzkrieg (Neocons are a money laundering operation. They exist only via unlimited access US taxpayer dollars)

4/26/17, "Iraq War Architect, Paul Wolfowitz, Is Becoming Optimistic On Trump," Zero Hedge, Authored by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog 

"I spent the last 50 minutes listening to an interview of neocon Iraq war architect Paul Wolfowitz, a truly unfortunate experience [interview via Politico (click the link to hear the whole thing)] which felt like a tomahawk missile attack against my cerebrum. Regrettably, we still live in a world where you have to listen to the musings of such war criminals, as they continue to have considerable influence in certain circles of American power, and quite possibly within the Trump administration itself.

There were four main takeaways from the man’s monstrous, deluded ramblings. First, he hates being called a neocon, so make sure you continue to do so — publicly and with as much vigor as possible. Second, he’s learned absolutely zero lessons from the spectacular, historic failures that resulted from his neocon policies. This makes perfect sense, because...mentally deranged people in leadership positions who blow up the world suffer no consequences for their actions. Indeed, they are often rewarded handsomely for their failures (a similar thing happens in corporate America, see Wall Street). When failure is rewarded, you get a lot more of it, which pretty much summarizes the U.S. experience in the 21st century. Third, he didn’t vote for Hillary or Trump in the 2016 election. He considered voting for Hillary, but what gave him pause was the fact she wasn’t hawkish enough on Russia.

Given the above, you’d think such a man would have little to no influence within the Trump administration. Unfortunately, this is not the case, which brings us to the final takeaway. Not only has Wolfowitz become more optimistic about Trump (we all know how much bombing and destruction turns him on), but he may have his neocon tentacles deep within the Trump camp via his relationship with both General McMaster and General Mattis.

Here are a few highlights from the interview via Politico (click the link to hear the whole thing):

"Iraq might descend into “chaotic violence” - or worse. The broader Middle East could “go to hell” all over again. 

If the United States doesn’t step up under President Donald Trump, Paul Wolfowitz warns in a new interview for The Global POLITICO, our weekly podcast on world affairs in the Trump era, it would represent an “opportunity” blown, a missed chance that would result in “lost American influence” and a win for “hostile actors.” 

Oh so things are going swimmingly in the Middle East. Who knew.

"Yet Wolfowitz has not entirely given up on the idea that the United States is essential to stability in a region that has seen very little of it. Without American involvement, for instance, he fears Iraq could splinter apart entirely. “The alternative is to let a very important, critical part of the world go to hell literally and lose American influence,” he says. “We may not like to talk about oil, but this is the engine of the world economy and if it’s dominated by the wrong people, the consequences here in the United States are very serious.” 

The guy has some nerve, but at least he doesn’t pretend U.S. interventions are driven by “human rights” concerns.

"To liberals and other critics, Wolfowitz would be the last person they want Trump to listen to. Long a lightning rod because of the havoc unleashed by the Iraq invasion, Wolfowitz has never apologized for advocating the war, although he has said—and repeated in our conversation—that it was not carried out as he would have wanted it to be. In recent days he‘s jumped right back into the public debate, nudging President Trump from the pages of the Wall Street Journal to follow up his bombing strike in neighboring Syria with more aggressive action—and, he tells me, privately emailing with Trump Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and national security advisor H.R. McMaster, both longtime contacts since his Bush days, in hopes they will pursue a U.S. strategy of stepped-up engagement in the Middle East." 

There’s that relationship I alluded to earlier, but there’s more. Specifically, Mattis was Wolfowitz’s senior military assistant when he first came to the Pentagon in 2001.

Moving along…

"Like many other hawkish Republicans—“do me a favor,” he says, and don’t call him a “neocon,” which he believes is a charged word wielded by criticsWolfowitz adamantly opposed candidate Trump in 2016, put off by his “America First” rhetoric, his rejection of the Iraq war as a disastrous mistake and his praise for Russian President Vladimir Putin and other autocratic leader.

Indeed, Wolfowitz tells me that he did not vote for Trump because he feared he would be “Obama on steroids” given Trump’s campaign-trail reluctance to project American power and leadership in the Middle East and elsewhere—and that he decided not to vote for Hillary Clinton either because he was not sure she would pursue tougher policies and thought she had joined Obama in misjudging Putin with their failed Russia “reset” policy. 

When I ask about Trump, Wolfowitz waxes surprisingly optimistic about his chances in a region that has humbled many an American president before him. “Look, he’s said a lot of things. He’s changed a lot of things,” he says. “I don’t think anyone would deny that he’s opportunistic, and I don’t think anyone would deny that he would like to be ‘the greatest president in modern times’ or ‘huge’ or you pick your adjective. And I think to achieve a Dayton-like peace settlement in Syria would not only be something that would be widely acclaimed, it would be hugely in the interest of the United States.”

It’s a reminder of what a head-spinning few weeks it’s been for anyone paying attention to American foreign policy, with Wolfowitz and others who openly proclaimed Trump unfit for the presidency now contemplating the opportunity his presidency presents to advance their policy agenda, and even those who were Trump’s harshest critics within the Republican Party only a few weeks ago now praising him. 

I am like the happiest dude in America right now,” Senator Lindsey Graham said the other day, citing Trump’s Syria strike as well as his tough rhetoric against Iran and nuclear-armed North Korea; this winter, Graham and his close ally Senator John McCain were issuing near-daily warnings about Trump’s foreign policy. Now, he says, “we have got a president and a national security team that I’ve been dreaming of for eight years.” 

Now 73, good-humored and gray, Wolfowitz has returned to the conservative American Enterprise Institute as a scholar since his time in Bush’s Pentagon and a short, rocky tenure as president of the World Bank. When we meet in a studio at AEI’s grandly renovated new headquarters on Massachusetts Avenue, he picks up on the phrase making the rounds in Washington that Trump’s critics take him literally but not seriously, whereas his supporters take him seriously but not literally."

Comforting to see that a notorious war criminal is not only “good humored,” but also a “scholar” at an American think tank after destroying Iraq and creating ISIS. But hey, that’s how the American Empire rolls."




................

What a surprise: Big Fraud Donald Trump sells out to globalists, reverses on another major issue he campaigned on, will likely agree to stay in so-called Paris climate agreement 'with caveats'-AFP. (Mr. Trump, you can take your 'caveats' and go to hell. You're abetting what is obviously the greatest fraud against humanity in history. I suggest you resign)

4/26/17, "US may stay in Paris climate accord, with caveats," AFP, Jean-Louis Santini, with Kerry Sheridan in Miami

"Signs are mounting that US President Donald Trump's administration may stay in the landmark Paris climate change accord of 2015, under pressure from big business and public support for the agreement.


But the final decision, expected next month, is anything but certain, and staying at the table could come with significant caveats, like a weakening of US commitments to curbing greenhouse gas emissions."...






............ 

Comment: I don't care what the excuse is for Trump selling out. He should resign.

Not Building the Wall IS a Government Shutdown. You can't promise to build a wall at every campaign rally for 18 months, then back off at the first chance. Government's No. 1 job is to stop drugs, gang members, diseases, and terrorists from pouring across our border-Ann Coulter

4/26/17, "Not Building the Wall IS a Government Shutdown," Ann Coulter 

"Fake News' question of the week: Will Trump risk a government shutdown over the wall? 

The media flip back and forth on who's to blame for a government shutdown depending on which branch is controlled by Republicans. But the "shutdown" hypothetical in this case is a trick question.

A failure to build the wall IS a government shutdown.

Of course it would be unfortunate if schoolchildren couldn't visit national parks and welfare checks didn't get mailed on time. But arranging White House tours isn't the primary function of the government.

The government's No. 1 job is to protect the nation.

This has always been true, but it's especially important at this moment in history, when we have drugs, gang members, diseases and terrorists pouring across our border. The failure of the government to close our border is the definition of a government shutdown.

This isn't like other shutdowns. Democrats can't wail about Republicans cutting Social Security or school lunches. They are willing to shut the government down because they don't want borders. Take that to the country!

As commander in chief, Trump doesn't need Congress to build a wall. The Constitution charges him with defending the nation. Contrary to what you may have heard from various warmongers on TV and in Trump's Cabinet, that means defending our borders -- not Ukraine's borders.

Building a wall is not only Trump's constitutional duty, but it's also massively popular.

Although Trump doesn't need congressional approval for a wall, it was smart for him to demand a vote. Let the Democrats run for re-election on opposing the wall.

Let Sen. Claire McCaskill explain to the parents of kids killed by illegals that she thought a wall was inhumane. 

Let Sen. Angus King say to the people of Maine that instead of a wall that would block heroin from pouring into our country, he thought a better plan was to sponsor a bunch of treatment centers for after your kid is already addicted.

Let Sen. Chuck Schumer tell us why it's OK for Israel to have a wall, but not us.

Let open borders Republicans like Sen. Marco Rubio tell African-Americans that it's more important to help illegal aliens than to help black American teenagers, currently suffering a crippling unemployment rate.

Republicans are both corrupt and stupid, so it's hard to tell which one animates their opposition to the wall. But the Democrats are bluffing. They're trying to get the GOP to fold before they show us their pair of threes.

Now that Trump has capitulated on even asking for funding for a wall,
the Democrats are on their knees saying, "Thank you, God! Thank you, God!"

No politician wants to have to explain a vote against the wall. What the Democrats want is for Trump to be stuck explaining why he didn't build the wall.

Then it will be a bloodbath. Not only Trump, but also the entire GOP, is dead if he doesn't build a wall. Republicans will be wiped out in the midterms, Democrats will have a 300-seat House majority, and Trump will have to come up with an excuse for why he's not running for re-election.

The New York Times and MSNBC are not going to say, "We are so impressed with his growth in office, we're going to drop all that nonsense about Russia and endorse the Republican ticket!"

No, at that point, Trump will be the worst of everything.

No one voted for Trump because of the "Access Hollywood" tape. They voted for him because of his issues; most prominently, his promise to build "a big beautiful wall." And who's going to pay for it? MEXICO!

You can't say that at every campaign rally for 18 months and then not build a wall. 

Do not imagine that a Trump double-cross on the wall will not destroy the Republican Party. Oh, we'll get them back. No, you won't. Trump wasn't a distraction: He was the last chance to save the GOP.

Millions of Americans who hadn't voted in 30 years came out in 2016 to vote for Trump. If he betrays them, they'll say, "You see? I told you. They're all crooks."

No excuses will work. No fiery denunciations of the courts, the Democrats or La Raza will win them back, even if Trump comes up with demeaning Twitter names for them.

It would be an epic betrayal -- worse than Bush betraying voters on "no new taxes." Worse than LBJ escalating the Vietnam War. There would be nothing like it in the history of politics.

He's the commander in chief! He said he'd build a wall. If he can't do that, Trump is finished, the Republican Party is finished, and the country is finished."

......................
.......................

Added: Senior Republicans laugh out loud at idea the Wall will ever be built, say, "Don't worry, it's not going to happen"-Laura Ingraham 

4/26/17, "LAURA INGRAHAM: GOP Senior Senators “Laughed Out Loud” At Building Border Wall…”Actively Working Against” Trump," 100percentfedup.com

"Laura Ingraham reported to Sean Hannity that Republican leaders don’t want the border wall built and are actively working against President Trump  

"One thing I know for sure, Sean, is that we have way too many people on Capitol Hill who are not on the president’s side of this. I’m talking Republicans. 

So I have no doubt in my mind that Donald Trump wants this wall to be built. Congress has to appropriate the money. I heard over two months ago that GOP leadership, the most senior senators on Capitol Hill, and I heard it from someone who was in the room with them, they were laughing at an idea a wall would ever get built. Out loud laughing. They were recently telling that source of mine, “Don’t worry, it’s not going to happen.”" [video at link]... 




............ 

Followers

Blog Archive

About Me

My photo
I'm the daughter of an Eagle Scout (fan of the Brooklyn Dodgers and Mets) and a Beauty Queen.