News 
Market Data 
Discover
StephanieVanbryce
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Build He Won’t
Paul Krugman NOV. 21, 2016
Fred R. Conrad for The New York Times
Steve Bannon, Donald Trump’s chief strategist, is a white supremacist and purveyor of fake news. But the other day, in an interview with, um, The Hollywood Reporter, he sounded for a minute like a progressive economist. “I’m the guy pushing a trillion-dollar infrastructure plan,” he declared. “With negative interest rates throughout the world, it’s the greatest opportunity to rebuild everything.”
So is public investment an area in which progressives and the incoming Trump administration can find common ground? Some people, including Bernie Sanders, seem to think so.
But remember that we’re dealing with a president-elect whose business career is one long trail of broken promises and outright scams — someone who just paid $25 million to settle fraud charges against his “university.” Given that history, you always have to ask whether he’s offering something real or simply engaged in another con job. In fact, you should probably assume that it’s a scam until proven otherwise.
And we already know enough about his infrastructure plan to suggest, strongly, that it’s basically fraudulent, that it would enrich a few well-connected people at taxpayers’ expense while doing very little to cure our investment shortfall. Progressives should not associate themselves with this exercise in crony capitalism.
To understand what’s going on, it may be helpful to start with what we should be doing. The federal government can indeed borrow very cheaply; meanwhile, we really need to spend money on everything from sewage treatment to transit. The indicated course of action, then, is simple: borrow at those low, low rates, and use the funds raised to fix what needs fixing.
But that’s not what the Trump team is proposing. Instead, it’s calling for huge tax credits: billions of dollars in checks written to private companies that invest in approved projects, which they would end up owning. For example, imagine a private consortium building a toll road for $1 billion. Under the Trump plan, the consortium might borrow $800 billion while putting up $200 million in equity — but it would get a tax credit of 82 percent of that sum, so that its actual outlays would only be $36 million. And any future revenue from tolls would go to the people who put up that $36 million.
There are three questions you should immediately ask.
First, why do it this way? Why not just have the government do the spending, the way it did when, for example, we built the Interstate Highway System? It’s not as if the feds are having trouble borrowing. And while involving private investors may create less upfront government debt than a more straightforward scheme, the eventual burden on taxpayers will be every bit as high if not higher.
Second, how is this scheme supposed to deal with infrastructure needs that can’t be turned into profit centers? Our top priorities should include things like repairing levees and cleaning up hazardous waste; where’s the revenue stream? Maybe the government can promise to pay fees in perpetuity, in effect “renting” the repaired levee or waterworks — but that makes it even clearer that we’re basically engaged in a gratuitous handout to select investors.
Third, what reason do we have to believe that this scheme will generate new investment, as opposed to repackaging things that would have happened anyway? For example, many cities will have to replace their water systems in the years ahead, one way or another; if that replacement takes place under the Trump scheme rather than through ordinary government investment, we haven’t built additional infrastructure, we’ve just privatized what would have been public assets — and the people acquiring those assets will have paid just 18 cents on the dollar, with taxpayers picking up the rest of the tab.
Again, all of this is unnecessary. If you want to build infrastructure, build infrastructure. It’s hard to see any reason for a roundabout, indirect method that would offer a few people extremely sweet deals, and would therefore provide both the means and the motive for large-scale corruption. Or maybe I should say, it’s hard to see any reason for this scheme unless the inevitable corruption is a feature, not a bug.
Now, the Trump people could make all my suspicions look foolish by scrapping the private-investor, tax credits aspect of their proposal and offering a straightforward program of public investment. And if they were to do that, progressives should indeed work with them on that issue.
But it’s not going to happen. Cronyism and self-dealing are going to be the central theme of this administration — in fact, Mr. Trump is already meeting with foreigners to promote his business interests. And people who value their own reputations should take care to avoid any kind of association with the scams ahead.
Many Embedded Links
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/21/opinion/build-he-wont.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0
Rob Reiner Calls Out Jared Kushner: ‘He’s Turning His Back on His Religion and His Heritage’
The celebrated filmmaker discusses the election of Donald Trump, the alt-right, and Trump
son-in-law—and key advisor—Jared Kushner’s bizarre apathy towards anti-Semitism.
Marlow Stern
11.19.16 6:33 AM ET
In June of last year, then Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump received his first—and one of his only—endorsements from a publication. It came courtesy of The Daily Stormer, a neo-Nazi and white supremacist website. The Daily Stormer’s stated goal, according to founder Andrew Anglin, is “to ethnically cleanse White nations of non-Whites and establish an authoritarian government. Many people also believe that the Jews should be exterminated.” In the wake of Trump’s shock victory, Anglin urged his readers to troll mourning pro-Clinton liberals into committing suicide.
As if that weren’t enough, Trump also received endorsements from the American Nazi Party, whose chairman felt a Trump victory would present “a real opportunity” for the white nationalist movement, as well as the Crusader, otherwise known as the official newspaper of the KKK. And over the course of the campaign, both Trump and his eldest son, Donald Jr., shared anti-Semitic memes that originated on neo-Nazi message boards, while Don Jr. and Eric Trump gave interviews to white nationalist-affiliated outlets.
The Trump camp’s seeming embrace of the white nationalist movement, and their utter refusal to condemn any and all anti-Semitism spread in Trump’s name, is particularly puzzling when you consider the fact that Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, who Trump advisers have called his “real campaign manager,” is an Orthodox Jew. It’s even more baffling when you take into account how Trump’s own daughter, Ivanka, converted to Orthodox Judaism to marry him.
“We’re pretty observant, more than some, less than others,” Ivanka told Vogue last year. “It’s been such a great life decision for me. I am very modern, but I’m also a very traditional person, and I think that’s an interesting juxtaposition in how I was raised as well. I really find that with Judaism, it creates an amazing blueprint for family connectivity.”
Rob Reiner on a vid here - mnsbc
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/11/19/rob-reiner-calls-out-jared-kushner-he-s-turning-his-back-on-his-religion-and-his-heritage.html
This conundrum baffles Rob Reiner, the celebrated filmmaker behind the movies This Is Spinal Tap, When Harry Met Sally…, The Princess Bride, and many more.
“I don’t understand Jared Kushner at all. What is he doing? He’s turning his back on his religion and his heritage just so he can make money? I don’t get it. I just can’t wrap my mind around it,” Reiner, who is Jewish, tells The Daily Beast.
“The whole time while all those anti-Semitic memes were being passed on throughout the campaign, [Trump] certainly must have known, and his sons Eric and Don Jr. must have known they were retweeting things from anti-Semitic websites,” he adds. “Even if you want to cut them all the slack in the world, they have never to this day said, ‘This is absolutely unacceptable and abhorrent that we are being supported by these groups of people.’ They’ve never said it! So they’re completely comfortable with the idea that anti-Semitic and racist groups are supporting them.”
Reiner, a longtime Democrat, has a strange connection to Team Trump. He is the co-founder of Castle Rock Entertainment, a production company that produced many of Reiner’s films and developed a number of TV shows. Castle Rock was founded in 1987, and in 1989, they struck a deal with Westinghouse Electric to inject $48 million of equity into the company in exchange for a 15 percent ownership stake. Then, in the early ‘90s, Ted Turner wanted to buy Castle Rock, so Westinghouse hired the boutique investment bank Bannon & Co. to broker the deal for their cut of the company. In lieu of a fee, Bannon & Co. accepted a portion of Castle Rock—including profit participation in five shows, one of which was a then struggling sitcom called Seinfeld. When the show sold into syndication, Bannon & Co.—including its founder, Steve Bannon—hit the jackpot.
Bannon, who is a racist, would later achieve notoriety first as an absolutely terrible documentary filmmaker, then as the chief executive of the alt-right website Breitbart, and finally as Trump’s campaign manager turned chief strategist—making him the Karl Rove of the Trump administration. The KKK and American Nazi party celebrated the news. Reiner felt ill.
“If you read the stuff that’s posted on Breitbart, it’s more than a dog whistle to white supremacists—it’s a dog bullhorn,” Reiner says of the racist and sexist site. “They print all this crap on there, then Trump takes this idea on and rides it all the way to the presidency.”
“If you read the stuff that’s posted on Breitbart, it’s more than a dog whistle to white supremacists—it’s a dog bullhorn,” Reiner says of the racist and sexist site. “They print all this crap on there, then Trump takes this idea on and rides it all the way to the presidency.”
Reiner had been fairly visible this election season, touting Hillary on the HBO program Real Time with Bill Maher and embarrassing the hosts of MSNBC’s Morning Joe for toadying to Trump. The filmmaker is angry with the media for the way they balanced Trump’s endless array of transgressions with Hillary’s emails.
“You look at the media and the way it covered things and think, what is going on here? How are we giving this man who’s a pathological liar, a misogynist, a racist, and a fraud—how are we letting him have a free pass and we’re holding her up to emails like there’s some sort of goddamn false equivalency?” he exclaims.
“And Trump’s appearance on Jimmy Fallon was disgraceful. Jimmy Fallon messing up his hair was absolutely disgraceful,” adds Reiner. “This man is a racist misogynist who should be called out at every turn. He’s not a nice guy. There’s no ‘regular guy’ here. And if you don’t call him out, you’re basically giving him a free pass.”
Nobody has seemed more stunned by the election results than President-elect Trump, who was so convinced he was going to lose he didn’t have any transition plan in place (by comparison, Mitt Romney had hundreds of pages of federal policy transitions written out—as well as an entire transition website—back in 2012). Like many Americans, Reiner isn’t sure why Trump fought so hard for a job he doesn’t even seem to want.
“Trump knows how to promote himself and I think that’s done out of a sheer desperation for wanting to be liked,” says Reiner. “It seems to me like this guy’s got a big hole in his heart and he’s doing whatever he can to try to fill it. I don’t think even the presidency is going to do that for him, and I think that’s what he’s going to discover.”
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/11/19/rob-reiner-calls-out-jared-kushner-he-s-turning-his-back-on-his-religion-and-his-heritage.html
And isn’t this sweet! Here’s Jeff Sessions leading a parade
COMMENTS! read the COMMENTS .. . some are really good well most are ..
Helmut Monotreme says:
November 18, 2016 at 3:02 pm
Hey now, just because he uses racist slurs, just because he has nothing bad to say about the Klan, just because he acts and speaks like a caricature stereotypical asshole racist, is no reason to call him racist.
Log in to Reply
Warren Terra says:
November 18, 2016 at 3:06 pm
It’s not true that he has nothing bad to say about the Klan; he stands ready to criticize their soft stance on marijuana.
Log in to Reply
NeonTrotsky says:
November 18, 2016 at 3:14 pm
Does the Klan actually condone marijuana use?
Log in to Reply
BiloSagdiyev says:
November 18, 2016 at 5:20 pm
Generally, no. Making Sessions little tee-hee quip even more disingenous and more of a dog whistle.
Log in to Reply
efgoldman says:
November 18, 2016 at 10:39 pm
Making Sessions little tee-hee quip even more disingenous and more of a dog whistle.
Dog whistle? You deaf? That’s a fucking Mack truck air horn.
Log in to Reply
nemdam says:
November 18, 2016 at 3:44 pm
If there’s one thing I’ve learned since Trump became President (I’ll never get used to saying that), it’s that no matter how many racist things one says, does, or supports, no one is actually a racist.
Has anyone come out and said the Klan isn’t racist? I think this is a serious question because it wouldn’t surprise me if one of Trump’s goons said this.
Here’s Sessions’ agenda as Attorney General
Here’s an early Sessions campaign poster.
The Trump Era Is Already a Disaster for Civil Rights
Why Jeff Sessions is a terrible pick to lead the Justice Department.
By Scott Lemieux
November 18, 2016
In 1986, Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III was—correctly!—deemed by a Republican Senate to be too racist to serve on the U.S. District Court. This was a highly uncommon step: Sessions at the time was the second federal judicial nominee in 50 years to be rejected by the Senate Judiciary Committee. However, the bipartisan consensus that open racism is unacceptable is, alas, now completely shattered. In the logical culmination of the Republican Party’s transformation from the party of Abraham Lincoln to the party of John Calhoun, President-elect Donald Trump has nominated Sessions to be the top law enforcement office in the United States.
It is hard to overstate what a calamity this is. The Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act are just paper without active federal enforcement. The Civil Rights Division in the Department of Justice, for example, has to decide what kinds of cases to prosecute, what kinds of problems need to be prioritized, and how the law should be interpreted and applied. Under both Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch—the first African-American man and woman, respectively, to serve as attorney general—President Barack Obama’s DOJ had a strong record of advancing the rights of African-Americans, women, LBGT people, and the disabled. Obama’s DOJ was also especially active on behalf of voting rights.
The DOJ is about to change course, hurtling back towards Jim Crow. When he was a U.S. Attorney, Donald Trump’s nominee for attorney general declared that “I wish I could decline on all” civil rights cases. Sessions called the NAACP and the ACLU “un-American” and “communist-inspired” organizations. He joked that he used to think the Ku Klux Klan were “ok” until he found out they were “pot smokers.” He once called a black former assistant U.S. Attorney “boy.”
And his actual record is arguably even worse. “Jeff Sessions got his start prosecuting voting rights activists in Alabama on bogus voter fraud charges,” notes Sam Bagnestos, a professor at the University of Michigan Law School and the number two official in the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division under Holder. “Throughout his career, he has shown hostility to the historically important work of the Civil Rights Division. The damage he can do to civil rights enforcement as attorney general is incalculable.” Nothing about his subsequent history suggests that he’s changed.
The consequences of this will be dire. States will likely be able to pass discriminatory vote-suppression legislation with impunity. It will be much harder for workers facing racial and gender discrimination to get the remedies to which they’re legally entitled. Sessions—who has been nominated in part because of FBI director James Comey’s unconscionable decision to violate Justice Department rules and intervene in the election—will be a disaster for victims of unjustified police violence.
Sessions was the first sitting U.S. senator to endorse Donald Trump, not least because of Trump’s anti-immigration demagoguery. Sessions has “opposed nearly every immigration bill that has come before the Senate the past two decades that has included a path to citizenship for immigrants in the country illegally,” according to The Washington Post. Given the potential for civil liberties and civil rights violations inherent in Trump’s mass deportation scheme, having Sessions in charge of the Department of Justice is frightening indeed.
And, of course, Sessions is just part of a trend. Sessions is exactly the kind of attorney general you’d expect from a president-elect who made a white nationalist his top adviser and strategist. And you can’t say that Trump’s agenda was hidden. He became prominent within the Republican Party by repeatedly asserting that Barack Obama was not born in the United Sates. Trump kicked off his campaign by calling Mexican immigrants, as a class, “rapists.” He called on the judge presiding over the lawsuit over Trump’s fraudulent “university” to recuse himself because of his Mexican heritage. He called for a blanket ban on Muslims entering the United States. At the height of the campaign, he called for punishing five innocent African-American men.
You would think that an overt racist running for a major party nomination would have been the story of the 2016 campaign. But it wasn’t even close. The media devoted far more coverage to Hillary Clinton’s email server management practices than to Trump’s many racist actions. Trump’s call for black people to be punished for crimes for which they had been exonerated by DNA evidence received scant coverage, while Comey’s letter indicating that he may or may not have had new information about a trivial pseudo-scandal was covered like the Kardashian sisters had landed on Mars. This bizarrely skewed coverage played a crucial role in normalizing Trump, making his racism just one more scandal not really different than a Clinton Foundation donor asking for favors and not getting them.
Civil rights activists need to fight hard against Sessions, and no Democratic senator should remotely consider voting to confirm him. But he’s a symptom of a much broader problem. His nomination is not an accident—Sessions is a reflection of Trump’s values. As decades of progress on civil rights become undone, perhaps it’s time for many of the nation’s editors and journalists to reflect on the trivia they considered important when covering the election that put Trump in the White House.
Scott Lemieux is a Guardian U.S. contributing opinion writer, a professor of political science at the College of Saint Rose, and a blogger at Lawyers, Guns and Money.
\https://newrepublic.com/article/138854/trump-era-already-disaster-civil-rights
Why I Had to Eat a Bug on CNN
By SAM WANG NOV. 18, 2016
The reaction to results on election night at the Javits Center, where Hillary Clinton supporters had gathered.
Credit Todd Heisler/The New York Times
LAST weekend I ate a cricket on national television. Based on my statistical analysis of presidential polls, I made a bet that if Donald J. Trump won more than 240 Electoral College votes, I would chow down. Like millions of voters in both parties, I was surprised by the outcome. As a consolation, I’d like to learn what went wrong — and to figure out how pollsters might do better when they puzzle over our polarized electorate.
Data-based websites, from Facebook on down, have a responsibility to convey accurate information. In this regard, I owe an apology to readers of the Princeton Election Consortium, which I publish. My primary purpose was to show people where to put their campaigning energies by revealing which races were on a razor’s edge. I advised my readers to focus on close Senate races in states where the presidential race was also close. But I also reported an extremely high probability that Hillary Clinton would win, which was published by The New York Times alongside its own model.
Did we lull voters and the news media into a sense of complacency about the election? In hindsight, it would have been better to express Mrs. Clinton’s polling margin as equivalent to a 2.2 percentage point lead — and that the true margin could be higher or lower by several points. That would have better conveyed the race’s uncertainty.
Poll aggregation is built on the idea that pollsters are more accurate as a group than they are individually. During the primaries, I used state polls to argue that Mr. Trump was the strong favorite to win the nomination. However, general-election polls did less well, and so did I. State polls underestimated the Republican-versus-Democrat margin by four percentage points, the largest error in decades. This presidential-level polling error was echoed in the national House popular vote and Senate polls, which were also both off by a median of four percentage points. As Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight has pointed out, errors are often correlated. A warped ruler is flawed no matter how many measurements are averaged.
The pattern of polling errors provides a clue to why Mr. Trump’s victory came as a surprise. In states that Mr. Trump won, his actual margins against Mrs. Clinton were a median of six percentage points better than the last available polls. In contrast, in states won by Mrs. Clinton, the gap between polls and outcomes was 0.2 of a percentage point. Mr. Trump’s hidden strength in the states he won suggests that some fraction of Republican voters were struggling between party loyalty and difficulty with accepting Mr. Trump. In the end, their loyalty won out.
Leading up to Election Day, Mr. Trump was kept afloat in polls by a sturdy partisan floor of support of 41 percent to 43 percent. With votes still being counted, projections indicate that he will end up winning around 46.5 percent of the final vote. Mrs. Clinton’s support ranged from 45 to 48 points and she will most likely end up with 48.5 percent of the vote. This contradicts my pre-election assumption that undecided and minor-party voters, unusually abundant this year, would not break strongly in either direction.
The outcome may have also been swayed by the letter that James Comey, the director of the F.B.I., sent to Congress on Oct. 28 about Mrs. Clinton’s emails, after which national and state polls swung toward Mr. Trump, perhaps decisively.
I suggest that we retire the concept of the “undecided” voter. Based on cognitive science, so-called undecided voters might be mentally committed to a choice, but either can’t verbalize it or want to keep it to themselves. We humans are like this in all kinds of domains, from what to have for lunch to whom to marry.
Indirect approaches like web search data might provide new ways to predict voter behavior. In one particularly interesting example, during the Republican primary season a reader of my website who goes by the initial N. used Google Correlate, a tool that allowed her to find web search terms that showed the same pattern as state polling data. Using those search terms, N. predicted the outcome in unpolled states more accurately than demographic models of the Republican electorate. Social media may also help gauge voter enthusiasm, especially in midterm elections, when turnout is lower and polls are less accurate.
Unstated preferences can also be revealed by partisan straight-ticket voting, which has reached record highs. On average, partisan Senate and House preferences tracked the presidential race percentage point for percentage point. Such intense party loyalty provides a way to investigate a preference for Mr. Trump without using the word “Trump.” In Wisconsin, the Democrat Russ Feingold sought to regain his Senate seat from Ron Johnson. Mr. Feingold’s lead slipped from a median of nine percentage points in August to a median of one point in October — and in the end, Mr. Johnson won.
This provided a clue that Mr. Trump was strong in Rust Belt states, where white non-college voters are abundant. As many have noted, if 55,000 Trump supporters had instead cast votes for Mrs. Clinton in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, we would be looking at a narrow Clinton victory. Hampered by inadequate data, her campaign grasped the danger to her supremacy in these states too late. Mrs. Clinton did not even visit Wisconsin after the Democratic convention.
As a scientist, I am committed to learning from my mistakes. Despite this year’s failure, data is still our best resource for predicting events, but it is important to get good data in the first place. This will be on my mind in the spring, when I am teaching a seminar on the application of statistics to public affairs. A key topic will be partisan gerrymandering, which lends itself much better to hard facts like final vote totals, and not prediction. This year’s election will remind me to add a heavy dose of humility to the proceedings.
________________________
Sam Wang is a professor of neuroscience at Princeton and a founder of the Princeton Election Consortium.
I guess ... Lots of embedded links in this article TONS!
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/19/opinion/why-i-had-to-eat-a-bug-on-cnn.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module
Neil deGrasse Tyson Says He Might Grab Donald Trump "By the Crotch" When They Meet
— Neil deGrasse Tyson (@neiltyson) November 18, 2016
Afterward, the two men can talk science, says the renowned astrophysicist.
Neil deGrasse Tyson will be taking a direct approach when he first meets President-elect Donald Trump.
On Friday, the Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey host said over Twitter that he may "first grab [Trump's] crotch — to get his attention — then discuss Science with him."
The renowned astrophysicist sent the message to his more than 6 million followers, who spread it like wildfire.
The message is likely Tyson's response to Trump's cabinet picks being void of anyone who believes in climate change.
The grabbing of Trump by the genitals is a reference to Trump's own lewd comments about women, which he made while talking to Billy Bush in 2005. The tape surfaced during the campaign, but did not stop Trump from achieving election victory.
When I meet President Trump, I may first grab his crotch -- to get his attention -- then discuss Science with him.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/cosmos-host-neil-degrasse-tyson-might-grab-donald-trump-by-crotch-948790
still needing jobs Black and White Working people? . .WELL, there are these openings .. Go For It!
How to get a top national security job in Trump's administration: be afraid of Muslims
by Jennifer Williams
Nov 16, 2016, 9:20am EST
/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/51855161/Giuliani.0.jpeg)
http://www.vox.com/world/2016/11/16/13638606/trump-secretary-state-defense-giuliani-bolton-islam-terrorism
Donald Trump Building Team of Racists
Could NOT get 'flynn' in the photo, I tried
big vomit! maybe go to the hospital
Steve Bannon, Jeff Sessions, Michael Flynn.Photo: Getty Images
By Jonathan Chait
November 18, 2016 9:53 a.m.
snip~
Michael Flynn, Trump’s new national security adviser, would be disqualified from a normal administration on multiple grounds. He is paid by authoritarian regimes in Turkey and Russia, as well as Russia’s propaganda apparatus. Multiple figures who worked with him in the military describe him as “unhinged,” a highly negative quality for a primary foreign-policy adviser.
Embedded Links in the above paragraph"
Donald Trump To Bring Adviser With Russia Ties To Classified Briefing
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/michael-flynn-trump-classified-briefing_us_57b3939fe4b0edfa80da28ca
Trump adviser linked to Turkish lobbying
A company tied to Erdogan's government hired retired general Michael Flynn's lobbying firm.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/donald-trump-turkey-lobbying-231354
Trump adviser Michael T. Flynn on his dinner with Putin and why Russia Today is just like CNN
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/08/15/trump-adviser-michael-t-flynn-on-his-dinner-with-putin-and-why-russia-today-is-just-like-cnn/
Michael Flynn, Trump’s new national security adviser, loves Russia as much as his boss does
http://www.vox.com/2016/11/17/13673280/mike-flynn-trump-new-national-security-adviser-russia-isis-obama-clinton-turkey
Please go read this one article by Chait, lots of info .. this is required, AND there is much MUCH MORE! about all sorts of things .. ;)
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/11/donald-trump-building-team-of-racists.html
‘490 False Things’: Newspaper catalogs mountain of Trump’s ‘ridiculous, obvious’ lies
Thanks so much Borealis
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=126345624
AND
Fact Checkers Prove That 91% of the Things Donald Trump Says Are False
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=126331737
Of course you will come up with some globity gluuk to soothe
yourself that make his lies the truth .. just as you are
plotting to do right now on a very current one ....
This is just a few more - The Lies Trump Told
David Leonhardt SEPT. 27, 2016
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/27/opinion/campaign-stops/the-lies-trump-told.html
LIAR in CHIEF
Rotf..he's still at the lying____Donald Trump Takes Credit for Helping to Save a Ford Plant That Wasn’t Closing
By BINYAMIN APPELBAUM NOV. 18, 2016
The Lincoln MKC on the assembly line at a Ford factory in Louisville, Ky., in 2014. Ford said it now planned to keep production of the vehicle at the plant. Credit John Sommers/European Pressphoto Agency, He's been blabbing about this for the past week, and people told him that was a lie! did he care? NO!
WASHINGTON — President-elect Donald J. Trump claimed credit on Thursday night for persuading Ford to keep an automaking plant in Kentucky rather than moving it to Mexico. The only wrinkle: Ford was not actually planning to move the plant.
Mr. Trump wrote on Twitter shortly after 9 p.m. that Ford’s chairman, William Clay Ford Jr., had just told him that Ford “will be keeping the Lincoln plant in Kentucky — no Mexico.”
Minutes later, Mr. Trump wrote in a second post: “I worked hard with Bill Ford to keep the Lincoln plant in Kentucky. I owed it to the great State of Kentucky for their confidence in me!” Mr. Trump won 62.5 percent of the state’s popular vote in the presidential election.
During the campaign, he repeatedly criticized Ford for moving production to Mexico, and he threatened to impose a 35 percent tariff on vehicles made there.
Ford makes the Lincoln MKC, a sport utility vehicle, at a factory in Louisville. Last week, Ford said it planned to move production of the vehicle elsewhere. On Thursday night, after Mr. Trump’s Twitter messages, the company said that Mexico had been the intended destination and that it would now keep MKC production in Kentucky.
But Ford had not planned to close the Louisville factory. Instead, it had planned to expand production of another vehicle made in Louisville, the Ford Escape. And the change had not been expected to result in any job losses.
“Whatever happens in Louisville, it will not lose employment,” Jimmy Settles, a union official, told The Detroit Free Press. “They cannot make enough Escapes.”
Now, thanks to Mr. Trump, the plant will make fewer Escapes — and more MKCs.
“We are encouraged that President-elect Trump and the new Congress will pursue policies that will improve U.S. competitiveness and make it possible to keep production of this vehicle here in the United States,” Ford said in a statement.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/18/us/politics/donald-trump-takes-credit-for-helping-to-save-a-ford-plant-that-wasnt-closing.html
AI
