The following video from CBS News was posted February 10, 2017:
Tag: Trump Administration
The Takeaway: The Special Relationship
The following is from the Washington Post Today’s WorldView by Ishaan Tharoor was issued February 13, 2017. Teamed with President Trump stating he wasn’t aware of this issue this past Friday, the situation is extremely concerning on multiple levels.
President Trump’s national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn, had a pretty wretched week. The Post’s reporting revealed that Flynn, contrary to his and the White House’s earlier assertions, had discussed U.S. sanctions against Russia with Moscow’s ambassador in Washington prior to Trump’s inauguration. Flynn, according to intelligence sources, likely signaled that the question of sanctions would be revisited by a more friendly Trump administration. Continue reading “The Takeaway: The Special Relationship”
Highball: Does Trump Know Where Jobs Come From?
The following column by Leah McGrath Goodman was posted on the Newsweek website February 10, 2017:
We had Trump Vodka, Trump Airlines and Trump Steaks. Now, get ready for Trump Finance—a mix of shotgun executive orders, proclamations of instant job growth from the presidential bully pulpit and Trump’s signature verbal lynchings, aimed at select corporations via Twitter.
Following an election that was, in large part, an expression of Americans’ deep unhappiness with the economy, President Donald Trump’s promise to bring back job growth and a booming stock market appear to be somewhat at odds with the policies he’s putting in place during the first 20 days of his presidency. Continue reading “Highball: Does Trump Know Where Jobs Come From?”
Deutsche Bank Remains Trump’s Biggest Conflict of Interest Despite Settlements
The following article by Jesse Eisenger was posted on the ProPubica website February 9, 2107:
If you measure President Donald Trump’s conflicts of interest by the amount of money at stake, or the variety of dicey interactions with government regulators, one dwarfs any other: his relationship with Deutsche Bank.
In recent weeks, Deutsche Bank has scrambled to reach agreements with American regulators over a host of alleged misdeeds. But because the president has not sold his company, the bank remains a central arena for potential conflicts between his family’s business interests and the actions of officials in his administration. Continue reading “Deutsche Bank Remains Trump’s Biggest Conflict of Interest Despite Settlements”
Stephen Miller: A key engineer for Trump’s ‘America first’ agenda
The following article by Rosalind Helderman was posted on the Washington Post website February 11, 2017:
As a young conservative in liberal Santa Monica, Calif., Stephen Miller clashed frequently with his high school, often calling in to a national radio show to lambaste administrators for promoting multiculturalism, allowing Spanish-language morning announcements and failing to require recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance.
Miller’s outrage did not appear to subside after he graduated. As a Duke University sophomore, Miller penned a column, titled “Santa Monica High’s Multicultural Fistfights,” in which he ripped his alma mater as a “center for political indoctrination.” Continue reading “Stephen Miller: A key engineer for Trump’s ‘America first’ agenda”
National security adviser Flynn discussed sanctions with Russian ambassador, despite denials, officials say
The following article by Greg Miller, Adam Entous and Ellen Nakashima was posted on the Washington Post website February 9, 2017:
National security adviser Michael Flynn privately discussed U.S. sanctions against Russia with that country’s ambassador to the United States during the month before President Trump took office, contrary to public assertions by Trump officials, current and former U.S. officials said. Continue reading “National security adviser Flynn discussed sanctions with Russian ambassador, despite denials, officials say”
Border Wall Will Cost Double Trump’s Estimate
The following was posted on the trumpaccountable.org website February 10, 2017:
A Department of Homeland Security report seen by Reuters apparently contains the following bad news for Donald Trump: it could cost 21.6 billion dollars to construct fences and walls that would span most – but not all – of the US-Mexico border. During the election Trump repeatedly promised that the wall would cost 8 -12 billion dollars and that Mexico would pay for it. It looks like he will not keep either promise. Continue reading “Border Wall Will Cost Double Trump’s Estimate”
Is Trump Really Running The White House?
The following article by Froma Harrop was posted on the National Memo website February 9, 2017:
Last Saturday night, Donald Trump attended the Red Cross Ball at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida. On Sunday, he watched the Super Bowl at his West Palm Beach golf course. As he left Florida on Monday, news emerged that he will probably return this weekend for golf with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.
Two questions. Does Trump think being president is a part-time job? And is Trump the one doing the job? Continue reading “Is Trump Really Running The White House?”
Trump Issues Terrifying Threat to All Who Cross His Allies During Sheriff Summit
The following article by Alexandra Rosenmann was posted on the AlterNet website February 7, 2017:
On Tuesday, President Trump held a White House meeting with sheriffs from around the country, cementing a new feud and baring his authoritarianism for all to see. Continue reading “Trump Issues Terrifying Threat to All Who Cross His Allies During Sheriff Summit”
Trump’s claim Ivanka is being ‘treated so unfairly’ by Nordstrom
The following fact check article by Michelle Ye Hee Lee was posted on the Washington Post website February 8, 2017:
“My daughter Ivanka has been treated so unfairly by @Nordstrom. She is a great person — always pushing me to do the right thing! Terrible!”
— President Trump, post on Twitter, Feb. 8
“I think there’s clearly a targeting of her brand, and it’s her name still out there. So she’s not directly running the company, it’s still her name on it. And there’s clearly efforts to undermine that name based on her father’s positions on particular policies that he’s taken. This is a direct attack on his policies and her name.”
— White House press secretary Sean Spicer, news briefing, Feb. 8
President Trump took to Twitter to bash Nordstrom over the retailer’s decision to stop carrying Ivanka Trump products. Trump even retweeted himself using the official presidential @POTUS Twitter account. In a news briefing, Spicer defended Trump’s tweets, saying the president had a right to stand up for his family. Ivanka is being “maligned” because Nordstrom has “a problem with his policies,” he added.
There’s no question the president has the right to defend his family. In 1950, President Harry S. Truman blasted The Washington Post’s music critic, Paul Hume, for a negative review of his daughter Margaret’s singing performance.
“I’ve just read your lousy review of Margaret’s concert. I’ve come to the conclusion that you are an ‘eight ulcer man on four ulcer pay,’” Truman wrote. “Some day I hope to meet you. When that happens you’ll need a new nose, a lot of beefsteak for black eyes, and perhaps a supporter below!”
But Truman didn’t charge that Hume’s review was politically motivated. In contrast, Trump and his White House claim the president’s daughter was treated unfairly and maligned because of politics. Is that the case?
The Facts
A national “Grab Your Wallet” boycott of retailers carrying products by Trump and his family began in October, in the wake of The Washington Post’s report of a 2005 “Access Hollywood” video that captured Trump making lewd comments about women.
In a Nov. 21 internal email obtained by Fortune Magazine, the company’s co-president, Pete Nordstrom, said the company planned to carry the brand as long as sales were profitable. He wrote that the company “strive[s] to be agnostic about politics and to treat all our customers with respect.” The company confirmed the legitimacy of the email to the Fact Checker.
Excerpts from the email:
“We’ve heard from customers, including some who are long time loyal customers, threatening a boycott of Nordstrom if we continue to carry the line. Similarly, we’ve heard from customers who say they will boycott Nordstrom if we stop carrying the brand. This is a sharply divisive subject. No matter what we do, we are going to end up disappointing some of our customers.”
“Every single brand we offer is evaluated on their results — if people don’t buy it, we won’t sell it,” and the Ivanka Trump brand “has grown to be a sizable and successful business.”
Fortune Magazine reported that the company’s neutral stance may end up divisive for its employees, who want the company to take a political stand.
The company had already ordered the spring collection of Ivanka Trump clothing. The spring order probably was placed in late summer or early fall, before the Grab Your Wallet boycott began in October or the November election, according to Racked.com.
On Feb. 2, Nordstrom announced it will stop carrying Ivanka Trump, due to poor sales. The company said it evaluates sales each season. Racked.com found there was a dramatic decline in Ivanka Trump products on the retailer’s website from Dec. 2 to Dec. 27. The company said on Feb. 2:
“We’ve got thousands of brands — more than 2,000 offered on the site alone. Reviewing their merit and making edits is part of the regular rhythm of our business. Each year we cut about 10 percent and refresh our assortment with about the same amount. In this case, based on the brand’s performance we’ve decided not to buy it for this season.”
The White House did not respond to our request for evidence that Nordstrom’s move was politically motivated. In response to Trump’s tweet and Spicer’s comment, Nordstrom said on Feb. 8:
“To reiterate what we’ve already shared when asked, we made this decision based on performance. Over the past year, and particularly in the last half of 2016, sales of the brand have steadily declined to the point where it didn’t make good business sense for us to continue with the line for now. We’ve had a great relationship with the Ivanka Trump team. We’ve had open conversations with them over the past year to share what we’ve seen and Ivanka was personally informed of our decision in early January.”
Ivanka Trump herself announced she would leave her eponymous brand, after her husband was appointed senior adviser to the White House. The Ivanka Trump brand did not respond to our inquiry, but issued a statement on Feb. 3 that read, in part: “We believe that the strength of a brand is measured not only by the profits it generates, but the integrity it maintains.”
The Pinocchio Test
While Trump and Spicer paint this issue as a political move targeting Ivanka Trump and the president’s policies, the company has maintained for months that it will base its decisions on sales performance.
The Nov. 21 internal email shows the company faced threats of boycotts from both sides of the issue. Customers were sharply divided, the email said: Some wanted Nordstrom to continue selling Ivanka Trump apparel, others wanted the company to discontinue sales. Nordstrom told its employees it would be “agnostic about politics and to treat all our customers with respect,” and it anticipated that whatever decision it made would be based on sales, and would disappoint some of its customers.
Somewhere between the end of November and end of January, the company decided it would no longer carry Ivanka Trump apparel next season. Based on the information at hand, Nordstrom consistently has said its decisions are made based on sales performance. It has not taken a stance for or against Trump’s policies, the president’s daughter or her brand. (For instance, an internal email on the immigration executive order took no specific stand.) The evidence is stacked against Trump and Spicer, and we award them Four Pinocchios.
Four Pinocchios
View the original post here.