Xtra News Community 2
March 24, 2018, 06:28:28 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to Xtra News Community 2 — please also join our XNC2-BACKUP-GROUP.
   Home   Help Arcade Gallery Links BITEBACK! XNC2-BACKUP-GROUP Staff List Login Register  

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 10
 on: March 22, 2018, 02:49:03 pm 
Started by Kiwithrottlejockey - Last post by Kiwithrottlejockey

from the print edition of the Los Angeles Times....

Trump's personal scandals piling up in courts

The president's sex scandals threaten to affect the GOP's standing.

By MARK Z. BARABAK and MICHAEL FINNEGAN | Wednesday, March 21, 2018

Summer Zervos is suing in response to President Trump's denials that he tried to force himself on her. — Photograph: Irfan Khan/Los Angeles Times.
Summer Zervos is suing in response to President Trump's denials that he tried to force himself on her. — Photograph: Irfan Khan/Los Angeles Times.

PRESIDENT TRUMP faced new legal and political jeopardy on Tuesday as a former Playboy Playmate and alleged paramour sued to break a confidentiality agreement and a judge rejected his move to quash a lawsuit stemming from a charge of sexual assault.

The developments, coming on opposite coasts, promised months — if not years — of legal skirmishing, keeping Trump's personal conduct at the fore of this election season and complicating GOP efforts to protect their congressional majorities in November.

The White House and Republican leaders on Capitol Hill responded with silence.

Even as special counsel Robert S. Mueller III probes Russian interference in the 2016 campaign and investigates Trump's tangled financial dealings, the president is confronting salacious accusations from his days as a footloose — albeit married — reality TV star and man about Manhattan.

In three separate lawsuits, he is accused of sexually mauling a former contestant on “The Apprentice”, his show set in a corporate boardroom, and paying money to hush two alleged lovers, the former Playboy model, Karen McDougal, 46, and pornographic actress Stormy Daniels, 39.

In Los Angeles on Tuesday, McDougal filed a suit seeking to end the confidentiality agreement keeping her from speaking openly about her allegations of a 2006 affair with Trump, following a similar move earlier this month by Daniels. McDougal accused her former attorney of undermining her interests by secretly colluding with Trump's legal team and American Media Incorporated, publisher of the National Enquirer.

American Media paid McDougal $150,000 in 2016 for the rights to her story about a romance with Trump, a deal that prohibits her from sharing details elsewhere. The firm, led by a close friend of Trump, never published the story — a practice known in the tabloid industry as “catch and kill.”

“AMI lied to me, made empty promises, and repeatedly intimidated and manipulated me,” McDougal said in a statement. “I just want the opportunity to set the record straight and move on with my life, free from this company, its executives and its lawyers.”

In New York, meanwhile, a judge ruled that an Orange County woman who accused Trump of sexually assaulting her at the Beverly Hills Hotel in 2007 can proceed with a defamation lawsuit. The ruling opened the prospect of the president facing deeply personal questioning under oath.

Justice Jennifer G. Schecter of New York state court rejected a request by Trump's lawyers that she dismiss the case filed last year by Summer Zervos, 43, a former contestant on his show.

As the 2016 election neared, Zervos said Trump tried to force himself on her at a 2007 dinner in a bungalow at the Beverly Hills Hotel. He said Zervos and nine other women accusing him of sexual misconduct were lying; Zervos countered with the defamation suit seeking a retraction, an apology and unspecified damages. Her complaint said he “knowingly, intentionally and maliciously threw each and every one of these women under the bus, with conscious disregard of the impact that repeatedly calling them liars would have upon their lives and reputations.”

Seeking dismissal of the case, Trump's lawyers argued that the Constitution protects him from being sued in state court while president. They also said his comments dismissing accusations were “fiery rhetoric” and hyperbole protected by the 1st Amendment.

In denying their motion, Schecter said “no one is above the law” and cited a 1997 U.S. Supreme Court decision that allowed a sexual harassment case against President Clinton to move forward in federal court while he was in office. Schecter rejected arguments by Trump lawyers that the federal ruling did not apply to state courts.

“State courts can manage lawsuits against the president based on private unofficial conduct just as well as federal courts,” Schecter said. She also turned down Trump's request to halt proceedings until he left the White House, saying there was “absolutely no authority” for doing that.

The president's attorneys have the right to appeal the decision, first to a panel of judges in Manhattan and then to New York's highest court — a process that could drag out for years and extend well into Trump's 2020 campaign for re-election.

Attorneys for both sides declined to comment on further moves.

Karen McDougal McDOUGALis also suing to end a deal to keep her story private. — Photograph: D. Kambouris/Getty Images.
Karen McDougal McDOUGALis also suing to end a deal to keep her story private. — Photograph: D. Kambouris/Getty Images.

While Schecter's ruling stuck largely to legalities and a dry recitation of facts, McDougal's lawsuit included sordid details and allegations of a double-cross by her attorney, who she says was colluding with Trump.

McDougal says she and Trump had a 10-month relationship in 2006 and 2007, including a sexual encounter at the same Lake Tahoe golf event where Trump allegedly started an extramarital affair with Daniels. His wife, Melania, had recently given birth to their son, Barron.

McDougal, Playboy's 1998 Playmate of the Year, had something else in common with Daniels: Both employed the services of Keith Davidson, a Beverly Hills entertainment lawyer.

McDougal said Davidson “assured her that the rights to publish her story were worth millions” but was secretly advancing Trump's interests while pretending to advocate on her behalf.

McDougal, now an actress and fitness model, claimed in her suit that collusion between the publishing firm, Trump's representatives and her lawyer nullified her non-disclosure agreement with AMI, allowing her to publicly discuss the relationship.

In a written statement, a spokesman for Davidson said the attorney “fulfilled his obligations and zealously advocated for Ms. McDougal to accomplish her stated goals at that time.”

American Media issued a statement saying the firm “has a valid contract with Ms. McDougal and we look forward to reaching an amicable resolution satisfactory to her and to AMI.”

Stormy Daniels argues her non-disclosure agreement is moot. — Photograph: Ethan Miller/Getty Images.
Stormy Daniels argues her non-disclosure agreement is moot. — Photograph: Ethan Miller/Getty Images.

In a suit filed earlier this month, Daniels sought to invalidate her non-disclosure deal with Trump, saying he failed to sign the document and thus rendered it moot. Trump's lawyers, in turn, say she could owe him as much as $20 million in damages for breaking the pact.

Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, was paid $130,000 in hush money by the president's personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, and has limited her public statements about Trump to broad hints and innuendo about an alleged affair from July 2006 into 2007.

Daniels surfaced during Tuesday on Twitter with a taunting message. “Technically I didn't sleep with the POTUS 12 years ago,” she wrote. “There was no sleeping (hehe). But … People DO care that he lied about it, had me bullied, broke laws to cover it up, etc.”

Daniels ended with, “I am NOT going anywhere.” Indeed, she is scheduled to appear during Sunday on CBS' “60 Minutes” in an interview taped earlier this month.


• Mark Z. Barabak Mark Z. Barabak covers state and national politics for the Los Angeles Times, based in San Francisco. A reporter for nearly 40 years, Barabak has covered campaigns and elections in 49 of the 50 states, including all or part of the last 10 presidential campaigns and dozens of mayoral, gubernatorial and U.S. Senate contests. He also reported from the White House and Capitol Hill during the George H.W. Bush and Clinton administrations.

• Michael Finnegan Michael Finnegan is a Los Angeles Times politics writer. Since joining the L.A. Times in 2000, he has covered elections for mayor, governor and president, most recently the Donald Trump campaign. In 2011, Finnegan and fellow Los Angeles Times reporter Gale Holland won the Worth Bingham Prize for Investigative Journalism for articles on rampant waste in the $6-billion rebuilding of Los Angeles community colleges. A Los Angeles native, Finnegan started newspaper work at the Hudson Dispatch in New Jersey. For seven years, he covered city and state politics at the New York Daily News. He plays piano on the side.


 on: March 22, 2018, 02:44:46 pm 
Started by Kiwithrottlejockey - Last post by Kiwithrottlejockey

from the Chicago Tribune....

Trump 2.0: Even more off the chain?

By CLARENCE PAGE | 5:15PM CDT — Tuesday, March 20, 2018

President Donald J. Trump speaks about combating the opioid crisis during a visit to Manchester Community College in Manchester, New Hampshire, on March 19, 2018. — Photograph: Mandel Ngan/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images.
President Donald J. Trump speaks about combating the opioid crisis during a visit to Manchester Community College in Manchester,
New Hampshire, on March 19, 2018. — Photograph: Mandel Ngan/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images.

WHY DOES President Donald Trump lie so much? Because people believe him.

So says Billy Bush, who is on his own rehabilitation mission after losing his sweet NBCToday” show co-host job after his “Access Hollywood” tape fiasco with Trump in late 2016.

Appearing on HBO's “Real Time With Bill Maher” on Friday, Bush recalled how Trump exaggerated ratings of his “Celebrity Apprentice” shows when they faltered later in the show’s run.

“He'd been saying it's No.1 forever and finally, I'd had enough,” Bush recalled to Maher. “I told him, ‘Wait a minute, you haven't been No.1 for like five years — not in any category, not in any demo’. He goes, ‘Did you see last Thursday? Last Thursday, (age group) 18-49, the last five minutes’.”

But later, when the cameras were turned off, Bush said, Trump was more candid. “Billy, look,” Trump said, “you just tell them and they believe it. That's it: You just tell them and they believe. They just do.”

Right. They just do.

Or as P.T. Barnum is said to have said, “There's a sucker born every minute.”

This is the sort of cynical attitude that is seldom expressed openly by politicians.

Bush's story sounds not only credible but highly likely, if you've been following our president's breathtakingly cavalier attitude toward inconvenient facts.

Among other tallies that have kept fact-checkers busy, The Washington Post reports that his average of 4.9 false or misleading statements per day has soared up to an average of six a day.

Yet, just two nights before Bush's interview, the president achieved a new level of arrogance about the topic. He boasted in a private fundraising speech that he had made up information in a meeting with the leader of our nation's closest ally, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

In a dispute over trade between Canada and the United States, according to audio obtained by The Post, Trump confessed to making up information to insist that the U.S. has a trade deficit with Canada, even though, as he confessed in the fundraiser speech, he really didn’t know.

Actually it was less of a confession than a boast.

“I said, ‘Wrong, Justin’. I didn't even know … I had no idea. I just said, ‘You're wrong’.”

When caught in the lie, Trump did what Trump does: repeated the lie, louder, stronger and more stridently.

After the lie was reported, Trump tweeted his insistence that we do have a trade deficit with Canada. Yet, as PolitiFact reports:

“In 2017, the United States had a $23.2 billion deficit with Canada in goods. In other words, the United States in 2017 bought more goods from Canada than Canada bought from the United States.

“However, the United States had a $25.9 billion surplus with Canada in services — and that was enough to overcome that deficit and turn the overall balance of trade into a $2.8 billion surplus for the United States in 2017. The same pattern occurred in 2016.”

What makes this particular Trump lie so breathtaking is his nod-nod-wink-wink candor about the little scam, even at the expense of embarrassing an important ally. Why did he do it? Because he can.

We have become accustomed to audacious, unsupported Trump claims, such as the notion that his inauguration drew record crowds, despite photographic evidence to the contrary.

Yet what makes Trump's trade claim audacious enough to be ominous is its timing. It comes at a moment when the president is reported to be feeling a new level of comfort with his job and more confidence in his instincts than in his own in-house experts.

For example, his legal advisers urged him to avoid provoking or even mentioning the name of special counsel Robert Mueller, who is investigating the Trump campaign's Russia contacts.

But his decision over the weekend to ignore that advice in a Twitter storm, wrote The New York Times' Maggie Haberman, “was the decision of a president who ultimately trusts only his own instincts, and now believes he has settled into the job enough to rely on them rather than the people who advise him.”

Welcome to Trump 2.0: Trump off the chain. He thinks he knows the ropes and he's cleaning house, doing things in his own special way and getting rid of people who want to say something to him besides “yes.”

Sure, we should not assume that all of his decisions are going to be wrong. But, considering the recent turbulence in his White House personnel (including the departure of close adviser Hope Hicks, who acknowledged telling “white lies” on her boss's behalf), it brings little comfort to know that he would rather rely on his instincts than more experienced experts.

On the bright side, he offers plenty to keep journalists — and fact-checkers — busy.


• Clarence Page is a syndicated columnist and Washington-based member of the Chicago Tribune's editorial board. Among other awards, he won the Pulitzer Prize for Commentary in 1989 and lifetime achievement awards from the Chicago Headline Club, the National Society of Newspaper Columnists and the National Association of Black Journalists. An aspiring bass player, Page also enjoys entering stand-up comedy contests, which he tends to lose.


 on: March 22, 2018, 01:45:58 pm 
Started by Kiwithrottlejockey - Last post by Kiwithrottlejockey

from the print edition of the Los Angeles Times....

California's unexceptional resistance

President Trump's war against the Golden State is a war against the nation.

By DAVID L. ULIN | Wednesday, March 21, 2018

THE EVENING BEFORE the 2016 presidential election, Governor Jerry Brown joked at a political dinner in Sacramento: “If Trump were ever elected, we'd have to build a wall around California to defend ourselves from the rest of this country.”

At the time, it seemed a safe-ish bit of humor because, of course, Hillary Clinton would win. When she didn't, I came to imagine Brown's remark as the opening volley establishing California as the state of resistance — unique, independent, distinct from the rest of the United States.

Since the president and his minions descended on Southern California like a late winter storm earlier this month, I've found myself reckoning with a new realization: It's the other way around. California is not the resistance so much as it is the mainstream. We don't need to defend ourselves against the rest of the country, because we represent it.

Don't get me wrong; I realize that California's politics don't prevail in Washington, let alone many state-houses. I understand that resistance is essential. Indeed, I am drawn to the whole idea of it, with its whisper — I won't call it a promise, exactly — of the people rising up.

(I was born in the early 1960s and came of age in the backwash of the counterculture. I went to my first demonstration in 1977 when I was 15; we were protesting Kent State University's plan to build a gym annex on the site where, seven years earlier, the Ohio National Guard had gunned down four students. We lost.)

I am drawn, as well, to the idea of California as a free state. Like the governor, I've done my share of cracking wise about the need for a “big, beautiful wall,” but one that runs north from the Gulf of California, not east from the Pacific Ocean — a barrier to keep “the Americans” out.

We Californians, after all, like to think of ourselves as the vanguard, as special in nearly every sense. We take pride in living at the cutting edge of art and culture, technology and social change. These days, we see in the multicultural landscapes of our cities a vision of what America could, and should, become.

We sometimes call this sensibility California exceptionalism. The phrase derives from Carey McWilliams' book, “California: The Great Exception”, which was published in 1949. It's one of the cliches of the state, a corollary to the myth of West Coast reinvention, the faith that life here lends itself to re-creation, to a smarter, richer, better way of life.

That this is self-serving, smug even, is obvious. We know California has its own complex and less-than-progressive history, (See Proposition 187, the racial divisions that led to the 1992 uprising and the Watts riots a quarter-century earlier, the ongoing disaster of Proposition 13). We're beset with intractable contemporary problems (homelessness, economic inequality). And yet, we cling to a vision of ourselves as exceptional.

The truth is that California is more an exaggeration, an apotheosis, of America than an anomaly. We are less distinct, less separate than we would like to believe. At our best, we share with the rest of the nation a halting, if generally forward, movement toward what the Constitution calls “a more perfect union.”

Californians are, and should be, proud that the rule of law has expanded civil rights. So are the majority of Americans. Like nearly 70% of our fellow citizens, we understand that climate change is real. Most of us want to establish a path to legalization not just for “Dreamers,” but for their parents, as do the vast majority — nearly 90% — of people in the United States.

When the president and U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions came West in early March, they did so with the intent of accelerating what our governor is calling a “war against the state of California.” The main target of their displeasure (and the target of a federal lawsuit) are three immigration statutes, including the California Values Act, all of which limit cooperation by state authorities with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

But “California values” is a misnomer for these laws; it is American values we're talking about.

To wrap our minds around what that means, we can return to McWilliams and his notion of California exceptionalism. In the nearly 70 years since his book appeared, his intentions have been widely misunderstood. California, he wrote, “is the great catch-all, the vortex at the continent's end into which elements of America's diverse population have been drawn, whirled around.” And Californians “are more like the Americans than the Americans themselves.”

During his election eve remarks in 2016, Brown added this: “We don't like walls, we like bridges.” Another volley, and he wasn't speaking only for the Golden State.


• David L. Ulin is a contributing writer to Opinion at the Los Angeles Times.


 on: March 22, 2018, 01:45:41 pm 
Started by Kiwithrottlejockey - Last post by Kiwithrottlejockey

Warning the population about impending fascist raids is neither illegal, nor treasonous.

It is being patriotic and standing up against the stupid fuckwit currently residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington D.C.

 on: March 21, 2018, 10:41:11 pm 
Started by Kiwithrottlejockey - Last post by Kiwithrottlejockey

 on: March 21, 2018, 10:31:32 pm 
Started by Kiwithrottlejockey - Last post by Kiwithrottlejockey

from The Washington Post....

Playmate, porn star and reality TV contestant in court over Trump

After weeks of reports about Stormy Daniels, former playmate Karen McDougal filed
a lawsuit to break her silence on her alleged affair with Trump and a judge allowed
a defamation case bought by reality tv contestant Summer Zervos to proceed.


Former “Apprentice” contestant Summer Zervos with her attorney Gloria Allred, left, outside a New York court in December. — Photograph: Kena Betancur/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images.
Former “Apprentice” contestant Summer Zervos with her attorney Gloria Allred, left, outside a New York court in December.
 — Photograph: Kena Betancur/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images.

A JUDGE ruled on Tuesday that a former “Apprentice” contestant's defamation lawsuit against President Trump may proceed, potentially allowing her lawyers to begin collecting evidence to support her claim that he forcibly kissed and groped her years ago.

The decision in the case brought by Summer Zervos came on the same day a former Playboy playmate, Karen McDougal, sued the publisher of the National Enquirer for the right to break her silence about the 10-month affair she says she had with Trump more than a decade ago.

The nearly simultaneous developments added to the political and legal challenges for the president, who has faced weeks of reports about his alleged affair with another woman, porn star Stormy Daniels, and his attorney's effort to buy her silence.

All three women are now seeking to tell their stories on their own terms. McDougal is scheduled to give an interview on Thursday to CNN's Anderson Cooper, while “60 Minutes” is scheduled to air an interview with Daniels on Sunday.

As she rejected Trump's effort to block Zervos's lawsuit from proceeding, New York Supreme Court Justice Jennifer G. Schecter cited precedent from the Paula Jones case against President Bill Clinton, which led to his impeachment in 1998.

“No one is above the law,” Schecter wrote. “It is settled that the President of the United States has no immunity and is ‘subject to the laws’ for purely private acts.”

Zervos has said that Trump kissed her against her will when she visited him at Trump Tower in December 2007, after she had left his show, and that he kissed her, groped her breast and “began to press his genitals against her” when they met for dinner later that month in a bungalow at the Beverly Hills Hotel.

She first spoke publicly in October 2016 at a news conference with other women accusing Trump of misconduct. She filed the defamation suit the following January, after Trump called the women “liars” and vowed to sue them.

Zervos's attorneys have said that, in the legal process known as discovery, they would seek a deposition from Trump. It is likely, though, that Trump's attorneys will appeal Schecter's ruling, and a deposition, if there ever is one, could be months or years away.

“We are grateful for the opportunity to prove that the Defendant falsely branded Ms. Zervos a phony for telling the truth about his unwanted sexual groping,” Mariann Meier Wang, co-counsel for Zervos with Gloria Allred, wrote in an email.

Marc Kasowitz and Michael Cohen, two of Trump's personal attorneys, did not respond to requests for comment. The White House also did not respond to a request for comment.

Trump's attorneys had argued that the president cannot be sued in state court and also that his comments were political opinion and, as a result, “squarely protected by the First Amendment.” Schecter dismissed those arguments.

McDougal's lawsuit is against American Media Incorporated, the publisher of the National Enquirer, which she says paid her $150,000 in exchange for her silence.

McDougal is asking the court to declare her contract with AMI void, saying her story about the president “is core political speech entitled to the highest protection under the law.”

AMI did not respond to a request for comment.

The lawsuit, in Los Angeles Superior Court, comes two weeks after Daniels sued Trump to invalidate her own confidentiality agreement. Daniels's deal was with Cohen, who has said he “facilitated” a payment of $130,000 using his own money. Cohen has sought to keep Daniels quiet through private arbitration, alleging in a court filing that she could owe as much as $20 million for violating the agreement.

In an effort to build anticipation for the interview, her attorney, Michael Avenatti, on Tuesday released a 2011 report on the results of a polygraph test that Daniels took as part of a magazine interview about the alleged affair. The report says Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, was being “truthful” in saying she and Trump had unprotected sex.

In an interview, Avenatti said he recently paid $25,000 for video footage of the polygraph exam “in order to avoid one or more third parties from obtaining the information and destroying it or using it for nefarious means.”

He posted an image from the video on Twitter of Daniels sitting in a chair and strapped to a polygraph machine.

Stormy Daniels takes a polygraph exam in this screenshot from a 2011 video, which was obtained by her lawyer, Michael Avenatti. — Photograph: Courtesy of Michael J. Avenatti.
Stormy Daniels takes a polygraph exam in this screenshot from a
2011 video, which was obtained by her lawyer, Michael Avenatti.
 — Photograph: Courtesy of Michael J. Avenatti.

“I am not going anywhere,” Daniels wrote on Twitter on Tuesday.

McDougal's lawsuit in some respects echoes a complaint made to the Federal Election Commission by the government watchdog group Common Cause alleging that AMI coordinated with the Trump campaign when it negotiated a “catch and kill” agreement to ensure McDougal's story was quashed. The complaint says the payments were intended to influence the election and should have been reported as in-kind campaign donations.

“Her complaint today reinforces what we alleged in our complaint,” Paul S. Ryan, a Common Cause vice president, said of McDougal's lawsuit.

McDougal's 10-month relationship with Trump remained a secret until May 2016, the lawsuit says, when another Playboy playmate alluded to the affair on Twitter, prompting McDougal to explore how she might tell her story about the Republican presidential nominee.

McDougal hired Keith Davidson, a Los Angeles lawyer. Over a dinner involving “multiple bottles of wine,” the suit says, Davidson told her that AMI had put $500,000 in an escrow account and that a seven-figure publishing deal awaited her.

He later acknowledged that there had been no such escrow payment, according to the complaint. The lawsuit alleges that Davidson was working with AMI executives to fool McDougal into signing a contract that was not in her interest, falsely allowing her to believe the tabloid would publish regular fitness columns under her name. It also alleges that Cohen was briefed on the deal.

“We are confident that the so-called contract will be invalidated, and are eager for Ms. McDougal to be able to move forward with her life with the privacy she deserves,” said McDougal’s lawyer, Peter K. Stris.

In a statement on Tuesday, Davidson said he “fulfilled his obligations and zealously advocated for Ms. McDougal to accomplish her stated goals at that time.”

AMI's offer to buy her story for $150,000 was not to publish it but to bury it. By then, McDougal had “cold feet” about telling the story publicly, the lawsuit says. Davidson also told her that the deal meant she would appear on two magazine covers and she would write dozens of fitness columns for AMI's print and online magazines, the suit says.

But the agreement did not actually guarantee that AMI would publish her columns, according to the complaint.

Still, the company was swift to threaten McDougal with legal action should she speak about the agreement, the suit says, as it did after she gave an interview to the New Yorker last month. AMI's general counsel emailed McDougal's attorney to threaten her with “considerable monetary damages” if she said anything more.

“Ms. McDougal thought (naively) that such a deal could give her the best of all worlds — her private story could stay private, she could make money, and she could revitalize her career,” the suit says. “What she did not realize was that she would end up treated as a puppet by powerful men colluding to achieve their own financial and political ends.”

In a statement on Tuesday, McDougal said, “I just want the opportunity to set the record straight and move on with my life, free from this company, its executives, and its lawyers.”


• Beth Reinhard is a reporter on the investigative team at The Washington Post. She previously worked at The Wall Street Journal, National Journal, the Miami Herald and the Palm Beach Post.

• Emma Brown is a reporter on the investigative team who joined The Washington Post in 2009. Previously, she wrote obituaries and covered local and national education.

• Frances Stead Sellers is a senior writer at The Washington Post. She covers national politics. She has served as a senior writer for the Sunday Magazine, editor of Style and deputy editor of Outlook.

• Mark Berman covers national news for The Washington Post. He also anchors Post Nation, a destination for breaking news and stories from around the country. He has been at The Post since 2007 and previously covered transportation and local news.


 on: March 21, 2018, 08:43:57 pm 
Started by Kiwithrottlejockey - Last post by Kiwithrottlejockey

 on: March 21, 2018, 08:38:58 pm 
Started by Kiwithrottlejockey - Last post by Kiwithrottlejockey

Donald J. Trump being interviewed/questioned by Robert S. Mueller III....

 on: March 21, 2018, 05:18:01 am 
Started by Kiwithrottlejockey - Last post by Kiwithrottlejockey

Donald Trump isn't even fit enough to lick the shit from Barak Obama's arsehole, 'cause he is so crooked he would corrupt the shit.

 on: March 20, 2018, 11:46:30 pm 
Started by Kiwithrottlejockey - Last post by Im2Sexy4MyPants
she is a law breaker they can take her to court and lock her up
if she wants to declare war on the elected american government
they can send in the troops arrest her for treason and try her in a military court

it has happened before

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 10
Powered by EzPortal
Open XNC2 Smileys
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum

Buy traffic for your forum/website
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Page created in 0.109 seconds with 14 queries.