TRUMP.

[Joel]

[Joel]

[freedomforall]

I have no sympathy for this woman whatsoever. If she was so smart. why didn't she check out the claims behind Trump's program (course) and see if it fit her needs? A good share of people that take these type of courses for either MLM purposes or to just make money...fail because they either do not follow the instructions fully, or they do not put enough time and effort into what it takes to succeed.
I know a man that grew up poor and is now a millionaire as a representative of an MLM program. I have personally met others that are making thousands of dollars each month doing the same thing. How? Application, work and steady effort.
If I were to try to do the same MLM and fail, am I supposed to sue the head man for my failure, claiming the learning materials were poor and with no substance? Do I sue because I didn't put enough time and effort into it? Wouldn't I be wise and go to the head man and ask questions or offer advice? She, on the other hand, let pride and greed get in the way.
Do I sue because I may be a Democrat? Do I sue because I may be a Republican?

I think we all can see what she is really up to. $$$

[freedomforall]

[youtube][/youtube]

Did Obama care? I must have missed the memo. :))

[Joel]

[freedomforall]

IS it true that Trump is replacing FBI Director James Comey with Trey Gowdy? Is Comey fired?

[Joel]

[Joel]

Judge rejects Trump’s free speech defense in lawsuit accusing him of inciting violence

LOUISVILLE, Ky. — A federal judge has rejected President Donald Trump’s free speech defense against a lawsuit accusing him of inciting violence against protesters at a campaign rally.

Trump’s lawyers sought to dismiss the lawsuit by three protesters who say they were roughed up by his supporters at a March 1, 2016 rally in Louisville, Kentucky. They argued that Trump didn’t intend for his supporters to use force.

Two women and a man say they were shoved and punched by audience members at Trump’s command. Much of it was captured on video and widely broadcast during the campaign, showing Trump pointing at the protesters and repeating “get them out.”

Judge David J. Hale in Louisville ruled Friday that the suit against Trump, his campaign and three of his supporters can proceed. Hale found ample facts supporting allegations that the protesters’ injuries were a “direct and proximate result” of Trump’s actions, and noted that the Supreme Court has ruled out constitutional protections for speech that incites violence.

“It is plausible that Trump’s direction to ‘get ’em out of here’ advocated the use of force,” the judge wrote. “It was an order, an instruction, a command.”

Plaintiffs Kashiya Nwanguma, Molly Shah and Henry Brousseau allege that they were physically attacked by several members of the audience, including Matthew Heimbach, Alvin Bamberger and an unnamed defendant they have yet to be able to identify.

Bamberger later apologized to the Korean War Veterans Association, whose uniform he wore at the rally. He wrote that he “physically pushed a young woman down the aisle toward the exit” after “Trump kept saying ‘get them out, get them out,” according to the lawsuit.

Heimbach, for his part, sought to dismiss the lawsuit’s discussion of his association with a white nationalist group and of statements he made about how Trump could advance the group’s interests. The judge declined, saying such information could be important context when determining punitive damages.

The judge also declined to remove allegations that Nwanguma, an African-American, was the victim of racial, ethnic and sexist slurs from the crowd at the rally. This context may support the plaintiffs’ claims of negligence and incitement by Trump and his campaign, the judge said.

“While the words themselves are repulsive, they are relevant to show the atmosphere in which the alleged events occurred,” Hale wrote.

Lawyers for Trump and his campaign also argued that they cannot be held liable because they had no duty to the plaintiffs, who assumed the risk of injury when they decided to protest at the rally. The judge countered that under the law, every person has a duty to every other person to use care to prevent foreseeable injury.

“In sum, the Court finds that Plaintiffs have adequately alleged that their harm was foreseeable and that the Trump Defendants had a duty to prevent it,” the judge ruled, referring the case to a federal magistrate, Judge H. Brent Brennenstuhl, to handle preliminary litigation, discovery and settlement efforts.

[freedomforall]

Why is it that Trump gets sued left and right over little things, yet Obama and Clinton get a free pass on every darn thing they did wrong. From shoving protestors on one hand, to treason, coverups and mysterious deaths on the other? There is something wrong with this picture!

[Joel]

[freedomforall]

Why is Trump always in the bottom of the proverbial barrel?

[Silver]

Joel, why are you, Trump and el-Sisi all doing the same thing with your hands?

[Silver]

Why is Trump always in the bottom of the proverbial barrel?

Helaman 8:
26 Yea, even at this time ye are ripening, because of your murders and your fornication and wickedness, for everlasting destruction; yea, and except ye repent it will come unto you soon.

27 Yea, behold it is now even at your doors; yea, go ye in unto the judgment-seat, and search; and behold, your judge is murdered, and he lieth in his blood; and he hath been murdered by his brother, who seeketh to sit in the judgment-seat.

28 And behold, they both belong to your secret band, whose author is Gadianton and the evil one who seeketh to destroy the souls of men.

[Joel]

[Joel]

USA Today Reporter Files Lawsuit for FBI Trump Surveillance Records

Tuesday morning, USA Today reporter Brad Heath filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice, seeking any records of FBI surveillance of President Donald Trump or his aides during the presidential campaign. The lawsuit came after the DOJ had “no substantive response” to a FOIA request Heath made on March 6, two days after President Trump tweeted an accusation of President Barack Obama having his phones tapped.

The James Madison Project, a self-described non-partisan organization that promotes government accountability, is suing the DOJ along with Heath.

The complaint aims to resolve “whether there was an order issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (“FISC”) authorizing surveillance of and/or collection of information implicating President Donald J. Trump,” his campaign, and his transition team. The lawsuit references various comments by Trump and White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer regarding the allegations of surveillance, and says they “constitute prior official disclosure of the existence of surveillance orders.” Therefore, Heath argues, the records he’s seeking should not be withheld under the exemption for classified information. The lawsuit says there is “no legal basis” for the FBI to deny access to the information.

LawNewz.com reached out to the DOJ for comment, and will update upon receiving a response

Brad Heath v DOJ

[Joel]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... rough.html

[Joel]

[Joel]

Donald Trump’s Pick to Oversee Big Pharma Is Addicted to Opioid-Industry Cash

NEWLY-RELEASED FINANCIAL disclosure documents show that Dr. Scott Gottlieb, President Trump’s nominee to the lead the Food and Drug Administration, has received significant payments from the opioid industry — while attacking attempts to deter the explosion of opioid pill mills.

The FDA has some of the most significant authority in the federal government to oversee manufacturers of prescription painkillers. Gottlieb is set to appear for his confirmation hearing before the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee at 10 a.m. tomorrow.

Gottlieb’s disclosure statements, required under federal law, show that since the beginning of 2016 he has received almost $45,000 in speaking fees from firms involved in the manufacture and distribution of opioids.

“Our country is in desperate need of an FDA commissioner who will take on the opioid lobby, not one who has a track record of working for it,” said Dr. Andrew Kolodny, the co-director of Opioid Policy Research at Brandeis University, reacting to this information.

Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, the maker of a highly addictive generic oxycodone pill, paid Gottlieb $22,500 for a speech in London last November shortly after the U.S. presidential election. Prosecutors have charged that the firm ignored red flags and supplied as many as 500 million suspicious orders in Florida for its oxycodone product between 2008 and 2012. Mallinckrodt reached a tentative settlement this week, agreeing to pay $35 million while admitting no wrongdoing.

The Healthcare Distributors Alliance, a trade group for the largest opioid wholesale distributors in America, also retained Gottlieb as a speaker last September.

Among the distributors represented on the HDA executive committee are AmerisourceBergen Drug Corp., McKesson Corporation and Cardinal Health. Cardinal’s CEO, Jon Giacomin, is chairman of HDA.

A 2016 investigation by the Charleston Gazette-Mail found that these three companies supplied unusually large shipments of prescription painkillers in West Virginia, and provided the bulk of 780 million prescription pills sent to pharmacies in the state, a key factor in the fatal overdose epidemic.
Cardinal Health also temporarily lost its license to distribute opioids from its Florida warehouse in 2012 after the Drug Enforcement Administration found that the firm supplied several pharmacies known to act as so-called pill mills that routinely filled inappropriate prescriptions for oxycodone.

Gottlieb swiftly condemned the DEA’s action at the time, writing in the Wall Street Journal that the agency had overstepped its bounds, and that it should lose its authority to police the opioid market.

Gottlieb argued that the DEA should not treat corporate pharmaceutical firms like street drug dealers. “So Cardinal isn’t a Colombian drug ring. Its CEO isn’t Pablo Escobar. Like other large distributors, Cardinal has invested heavily in systems to track unusual narcotics-sales patterns,” said Gottlieb.

Gottlieb was also paid as a speaker by Johnson & Johnson, which owns a subsidiary that produces the opioid painkiller Nucynta, in January of last year. The federal drug payment disclosure database shows that Gottlieb received payments from Pfizer, the manufacturer of several opioid products, in 2015.

On a call with reporters on Tuesday, Sens. Ed. Markey, D-Mass., and Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, announced their opposition to Gottlieb’s nomination, citing his opioid industry ties.

“People die because of the opioid epidemic,” said Brown. “We need all hands on deck to fight this crisis, including and especially the FDA. Unfortunately Dr. Gottlieb’s record indicates that as commissioner he wouldn’t take the epidemic and the FDA’s authority to rein in prescription painkillers and other drugs seriously enough.”

Markey, who opposed President Barack Obama’s last FDA commissioner, Dr. Robert Califf, on grounds that the agency was moving too fast to approve dangerous new prescription painkillers, voiced similar concerns over Trump’s nominee.

“Dr. Gottlieb has also said he wants the FDA approval process to move faster, and that FDA has too high of a standard for safety. I strongly disagree with that,” said Markey during the call.

The opioid crisis claims more than 16,000 lives from overdose deaths every year. The crisis stems in large part to the over-prescribing phenomenon, which has been fueled by deceptive marketing practices and efforts by industry to court doctors. As we’ve reported, Americans consume about 81 percent of the global supply of oxycodone products (the active ingredient in OxyContin) and almost 100 percent of hydrocodone (the active ingredient used in brands such as Vicodin).

The painkiller crisis is closely linked to heroin addiction, with many heroin users embracing the drug after first using opioids that were prescribed to them.

Gottlieb’s financial disclosure form further shows that he made more than $3 million throughout 2016 and the first three months of this year, through a combination of speaking fees, consulting arrangements with drug companies in general, board memberships, and his work at several healthcare-focused investment firms. Gottlieb is well-known as a critic of the FDA approval process and regulations, and has called for revamping agency rules to bring new drugs to market. In sharp contrast to Trump’s rhetoric on the campaign trail, Gottlieb has also criticized a range of proposals to bring down drug costs through government intervention in the market.

[Elizabeth]

http://www.westernjournalism.com/trump- ... urce=Email

"President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump honored America’s Wounded Warriors Thursday during a White House ceremony.

The ceremony was part of the Wounded Warrior Project Soldier Ride, a four-day motorcycle event that united veterans from across the country.

It's an honor to stand here among real heroes, says Pres Trump at event honouring Wounded Warrior Project Soldier Ride participants."

[Silver]

http://www.westernjournalism.com/trump- ... urce=Email

"President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump honored America’s Wounded Warriors Thursday during a White House ceremony.

The ceremony was part of the Wounded Warrior Project Soldier Ride, a four-day motorcycle event that united veterans from across the country.

It's an honor to stand here among real heroes, says Pres Trump at event honouring Wounded Warrior Project Soldier Ride participants."

Trump doesn't honor wounded veterans. He does a fake patriotic appearance so stupid Americans will beat on their swollen chests like ignorant apes. Then Trump, the Marmalade Traitor, sends more soldiers to their deaths or to avoidable injuries that will haunt them for the rest of their lives, if they don't commit suicide.

Pray for justice.

[Joel]

Trump Owned Stock in The Company He Just Helped Make a Billion Overnight by Bombing Syria

Each one of the 59 Tomahawk missiles fired by the US Navy, by order of Trump, at the Syrian air base in Homs cost somewhere between $800,000 and $1.4 million — per missile. This obviously expensive surge in US military spending subsequently sent the manufacturer’s stock soaring. It also sent the Free Thought Project on an investigation into the types of stocks in which President Trump invests. What we found is shocking, but sadly, typical.

Tomahawk missiles are manufactured by a company, with whom most people are familiar, Raytheon.

According to Raytheon’s website: “Today’s Tomahawk Block IV cruise missile can circle for hours, shift course instantly on command and beam a picture of its target to controllers halfway around the world before striking with pinpoint accuracy. Tomahawk can be launched from a ship or submarine and can fly into heavily defended airspace more than 1,000 miles away to conduct precise strikes on high-value targets with minimal collateral damage. Launching the weapon from such a long distance helps to keep sailors out of harm’s way.”

However, some may not be familiar with the fact that according to the President’s most recent FEC disclosure, the Trumps actual own or have owned stock in Raytheon. That’s right, the 59 missiles, that Trump hurled at Syria — which cost taxpayers somewhere between $47 million and $82 million — could’ve actually turned a profit for the president.

The report showed that Trump also owns or has owned stock in many well-known companies including Apple, Nike, Whole Foods, Google, Philip Morris, McDonald’s, Facebook, and Morgan Stanley, among many others — including many other defense contractors who stand to make billions off Trump’s aggression.

It is important to note that in December of 2016, Trump spokesman, Jason Miller told The Post that Trump liquidated all of his assets. However, we’ve yet to see any proof of this and will not see any proof until at least 2018.

“We need to know, has he put them in conflict free assets … or has he bought other stocks or assets that would create new conflicts?” Norm Eisen, who served as ethics counselor to President Obama asked. “It’s all the more reason that we need a prompt and full financial disclosure. If he did liquidate all his stocks, what did he do with the money? What bank is the money in? What did he buy? It’s a lot of money.”

According to Business Insider, shares of Raytheon gained 3.54 points, a roughly 2.3 percent increase, in pre-market trading following Thursday night’s strike.

Of course, 2.3 percent doesn’t sound like a whole lot, however, if we take into account the effect it has on Raytheon’s total market value, it is definitely significant. On Thursday, Raytheon closed at $150.75 and on Friday morning, it opened at $154.62. This shot the company’s market value up from $44.1 billion to $45.4 billion — nearly one and a half billion — in a day.

Lockheed Martin and Boeing saw similar gains.

Also, according to Open Secrets, Trump wasn’t just giving to Raytheon but they were also giving to him.

According to Trump’s most recent Financial Disclosure Report, his stock holdings were held in accounts with Barclays, Oppenheimer, JPMorgan, and Deutsche Bank. However, the way that the disclosure from the FEC is structured only requires presidential candidates to list their holdings in broad ranges. So, we don’t know how large of a stake he had in these companies.

Trump’s situation, however shocking, is nothing new. Consequently, the last time there was talk of military action in Syria, in 2013, Raytheon’s stock soared to an all-time high.

According to US officials, arms manufacturers have added shifts and hired workers, but they warn that this may not be enough to keep up with the world’s demand for weapons of mass destruction.

As the US sends tens of thousands of warheads to Saudi Arabia so they can bomb schools and hospitals in Yemen, they are dropping hundreds of bombs in Iraq and Syria.

Instead of realizing that the bombs and US foreign policy are the actual sources of terrorism, war monger politicians like Bush, Obama, and now Trump use fear to steal your tax dollars to feed this machine.

Thanks to the invasive and murderous US foreign policy, there is no shortage of ‘Islamic Extremism’ to attack in the Middle East. Not only is Saudi Arabia receiving US arms, but so are many of the other Gulf states as well as Syrian ‘rebels.’

After his retirement from the Marine Corps, Major General Smedley D. Butler made a nationwide tour in the early 1930s giving his speech “War is a Racket,” which sums this scenario up quite well.

What separates Butler from other historical military figures is that he is one of only 19 people in history to win the Medal of Honor, twice. So, when a highly decorated, two-star general takes to the stage to assert that war is a racket, people listen — most people, anyway.

In one of his speeches, Butler decried war and pointed out how so many people died just to benefit a very small ‘inside’ group. The speech read in part,

WAR IS A RACKET. IT ALWAYS HAS BEEN.
IT IS POSSIBLY THE OLDEST, EASILY THE MOST PROFITABLE, SURELY THE MOST VICIOUS. IT IS THE ONLY ONE INTERNATIONAL IN SCOPE. IT IS THE ONLY ONE IN WHICH THE PROFITS ARE RECKONED IN DOLLARS AND THE LOSSES IN LIVES.

Sadly, very few people inside this detached and brutal government ever come to realize the true nature of war. As the threat of World War III looms across the planet, the American taxpayers are being fleeced to build the weapons with which this world war will be carried out — all the while, the commander and chief is reaping the benefits.

[Joel]

[Joel]

[Joel]

[Joel]

Sounds Like Trump Literally Stole His Legal Justification for Syria Attack… From Obama

After arguing for years that America should not intervene in Syria (and thoroughly criticizing Obama along the way), President Donald Trump reversed course and okayed the launch of missile airstrikes against Syria’s government last week. Trump’s Press Secretary Sean Spicer has stated that the attacks were a “justified and proportional” response to the Assad regime attacks that left dozens of his own people dead. However, we have yet to hear the administration’s legal justification for such attacks — until now.

After all, as many have pointed out from both sides of the political aisle, the Constitution requires that Congress give approval before a President engages in an act of war. President Trump did not get approval from Congress. As I wrote about previously, Presidents have strayed from this concept over the last 70 years, but the bottom line is they all have relied on some kind of legal justification for unilaterally using military force without the consent of Congress. So what is Trump’s legal justification and is it constitutional?

Just Security, a well-respected national security blog run by several law professors and experts in the field, have obtained a memo that reportedly was developed by the Trump administration as talking points and purports to state Trump’s legal justification for Syria. And guess what? Looks like his attorneys stole the legal justification for the attack on Syria right out of the Obama playbook. Obama’s legal reasoning for intervening in Libya and Trump’s justification couldn’t be more similar.

The Trump memo states that the United States has a strong “national interest” in preserving regional stability in an area full of terrorist groups and the use of force would help prevent bad actors from obtaining weapons that could be used against the United States.

Sound familiar? It should, the words are pretty similar to what Obama’s lawyers wrote in a 2011 Office of Legal Counsel’s Memorandum justifying that use of military force in Libya without congressional approval.

Like Trump, Obama said he met with various congressional leaders before making his decision to use military force in Libya. And like Trump, Obama claimed that the intervention would promote the United States’ national interests.

“So while I will never minimize the costs involved in military action, I am convinced that a failure to act in Libya would have carried a far greater price for America,” Obama said back in 2011. He also stated that the America’s national interests would be promoted by keeping stability in the region. On Thursday, Trump harped on those themes as well and also stated, “It is in this vital national security interest of the United States to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons.” Trump repeated a similar line in a a letter that he sent to Congress saying promoting the United States’ national interests was within the constitutional scope of his authority. The key words for both Obama and Trump are national security interest.

The Obama Libya memo indicated that military intervention was okay — because congress indicated, through passing the War Powers Act of 1973, that they only consider congressional authorization most critical for major prolonged hostilities not more limited engagements. Trump’s surrogates have been publicly stating this same reasoning on various news program when questioned about the attacks. (Mind you, this comes after Trump tweeted the below this back in 2013)



If those similarities are not clear enough, the Trump memo then goes on to state, “the domestic law basis is very similar to the authority for the use force in Libya in 2011, as set forth in an April 2011 opinion by the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel. Consistent with the War Powers Resolution, the President will notify Congress of the use of force.” Seems pretty obvious. Trump stole the the legal justification for Syria from Obama.

As for whether this is constitutional? There is much debate about that with many legal experts believing that both Obama and Trump have crossed the legal line by usurping the authority of Congress to promote an interventionist agenda. With that said, it has been done before.