FRANKLY, I THINK "KUDDLES" KUDLOW IS OFF HIS ROCKER HERE …
THE DUDE SOUNDS LIKE HE HAS GONE BONKERS …
AS WELL AS QUITE PARANOID ...
MARKETWATCH
"Kudlow says White House ‘taking a look’ at regulating Google searches"
By Robert Schroeder
Published: Aug 28, 2018 4:09 p.m. ET
Larry Kudlow, President Donald Trump’s top economic adviser, said Tuesday the administration is “taking a look” at whether Google searches should be regulated, hours after Trump complained on Twitter about search results.
In a pair of morning tweets, the president said Alphabet Inc.’s Google search results for “Trump News” showed only “the viewing/reporting of Fake News Media.”
The origin of the president’s complaints appears to be an article from the right-wing blog PJ Media headlined “96 Percent of Google Search Results for ‘Trump’ News Are from Liberal Media Outlets.”
Google spokesperson Riva Sciuto said “search is not used to set a political agenda and we don’t bias our results toward any political ideology.”
In his tweets, Trump said “Illegal?” and wrote that the company is “controlling what we can & cannot see."
"This is a very serious situation—will be addressed!”
Neither Trump nor Kudlow gave specifics of how the administration would address the issue.
The White House did not immediately respond to request for comment.
“We’ll let you know,” Kudlow said in a brief appearance outside the White House.
“When Google returns search hits that you don’t like, that doesn’t make it illegal,” Professor Ari Waldman of New York Law School told MarketWatch.
Google’s Sciuto said, “every year, we issue hundreds of improvements to our algorithms to ensure they surface high-quality content in response to users’ queries."
"We continually work to improve Google Search and we never rank search results to manipulate political sentiment.”
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/kudlo ... ewer_click
THE MAGA-MAN DONALD TRUMP
Re: THE MAGA-MAN DONALD TRUMP
MARKETWATCH
"U.S. trade deficit widens in July to highest in five months"
By Greg Robb
Published: Aug 28, 2018 10:11 a.m. ET
The numbers:
An early look at trade patterns in July showed a widening in the nation’s trade deficit to the highest level in five months, perhaps a sign that growth will slow down a little in the third quarter from the torrid pace in the April-June period.
The trade gap in goods — services are excluded — rose 6.3% to $72.2 billion from a revised $67.9 billion in June, the government said Tuesday.
That’s the highest rate since February.
Economists were looking for the deficit to widen somewhat less, to $69.4 billion.
The government will release overall trade numbers next week, but the size of the deficit is tied to changes in exports and imports of goods.
Services don’t change much month to month.
An advanced look at wholesale inventories estimated a 0.7% increase in July.
And an early look at retail inventories estimated a 0.4% increase.
What happened:
There were widespread reductions in exports in July, which fell for the second month in a row.
Exports of capital goods and consumer goods help pace the month’s losses.
At the same time, the gains in imports were across the board, with the only monthly drop for consumer goods.
The big picture:
For all of President Trump’s focus on the trade deficit, it remains on a steadily widening trajectory.
The trade gap is about 7% wider year-to-date compared with the corresponding period in 2017, said Oren Klachkin, economist at Oxford Economics.
A strong U.S. economy is drawing in imports.
On the other hand, the global economy has softened after a strong start in the year.
Exports are also being held down by the rising dollar.
The U.S.-Mexico agreement reached Monday has led to hopes that the various ongoing trade disputes with China and others would devolve into trade wars.
What they are saying:
The decline in exports could also be some retaliation on U.S. goods from the Trump administration’s tough global trade negotiation stance, said Robert Brusca, chief economist at FAO Economics.
Market reaction:
Stocks were set to open higher a day after the U.S. and Mexico announced their deal.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose in early trading.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-tr ... 2018-08-28
"U.S. trade deficit widens in July to highest in five months"
By Greg Robb
Published: Aug 28, 2018 10:11 a.m. ET
The numbers:
An early look at trade patterns in July showed a widening in the nation’s trade deficit to the highest level in five months, perhaps a sign that growth will slow down a little in the third quarter from the torrid pace in the April-June period.
The trade gap in goods — services are excluded — rose 6.3% to $72.2 billion from a revised $67.9 billion in June, the government said Tuesday.
That’s the highest rate since February.
Economists were looking for the deficit to widen somewhat less, to $69.4 billion.
The government will release overall trade numbers next week, but the size of the deficit is tied to changes in exports and imports of goods.
Services don’t change much month to month.
An advanced look at wholesale inventories estimated a 0.7% increase in July.
And an early look at retail inventories estimated a 0.4% increase.
What happened:
There were widespread reductions in exports in July, which fell for the second month in a row.
Exports of capital goods and consumer goods help pace the month’s losses.
At the same time, the gains in imports were across the board, with the only monthly drop for consumer goods.
The big picture:
For all of President Trump’s focus on the trade deficit, it remains on a steadily widening trajectory.
The trade gap is about 7% wider year-to-date compared with the corresponding period in 2017, said Oren Klachkin, economist at Oxford Economics.
A strong U.S. economy is drawing in imports.
On the other hand, the global economy has softened after a strong start in the year.
Exports are also being held down by the rising dollar.
The U.S.-Mexico agreement reached Monday has led to hopes that the various ongoing trade disputes with China and others would devolve into trade wars.
What they are saying:
The decline in exports could also be some retaliation on U.S. goods from the Trump administration’s tough global trade negotiation stance, said Robert Brusca, chief economist at FAO Economics.
Market reaction:
Stocks were set to open higher a day after the U.S. and Mexico announced their deal.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose in early trading.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-tr ... 2018-08-28
Re: THE MAGA-MAN DONALD TRUMP
YOU HAVE TO BE BRAIN-DEAD TO BELIEVE ANY OF THE FAKE NEWS AND CRAP TRUMP SPEWS IN AN ENDLESS STREAM ON MINDLESS TWITTER …
And so ...
REUTERS
"Trump, without evidence, blames China for hacking Clinton emails"
29 AUGUST 2018
U.S. President Donald Trump said on Twitter early on Wednesday China hacked the emails of 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton but did not offer any evidence or further information.
"Hillary Clinton’s Emails, many of which are Classified Information, got hacked by China."
"Next move better be by the FBI & DOJ or, after all of their other missteps (Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Page, Ohr, FISA, Dirty Dossier etc.), their credibility will be forever gone!" he tweeted a little after midnight on Wednesday.
Trump said in an earlier tweet on Tuesday night: "China hacked Hillary Clinton’s private Email Server."
"Are they sure it wasn’t Russia (just kidding!)?"
"What are the odds that the FBI and DOJ are right on top of this?"
"Actually, a very big story."
"Much classified information!"
U.S. intelligence officials have said Russia orchestrated the hacking of Democratic officials to meddle with the 2016 presidential election.
A U.S. federal grand jury indicted 12 Russian intelligence officers in July on charges of hacking the computer networks of Clinton and the Democratic Party.
Special Counsel Robert Mueller is investigating Russia’s role in the 2016 election and whether the campaign of Republican candidate Trump colluded with Moscow.
Russia denies meddling in the elections, while Trump has denied any collusion.
Trump said in April 2017 China may have hacked the emails of Democratic officials to meddle with the 2016 presidential election.
He also did not provide any evidence backing his allegation at that time.
(Reporting by Brendan O'Brien in Milwaukee Editing by Paul Tait)
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... id=HPDHP17
And so ...
REUTERS
"Trump, without evidence, blames China for hacking Clinton emails"
29 AUGUST 2018
U.S. President Donald Trump said on Twitter early on Wednesday China hacked the emails of 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton but did not offer any evidence or further information.
"Hillary Clinton’s Emails, many of which are Classified Information, got hacked by China."
"Next move better be by the FBI & DOJ or, after all of their other missteps (Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Page, Ohr, FISA, Dirty Dossier etc.), their credibility will be forever gone!" he tweeted a little after midnight on Wednesday.
Trump said in an earlier tweet on Tuesday night: "China hacked Hillary Clinton’s private Email Server."
"Are they sure it wasn’t Russia (just kidding!)?"
"What are the odds that the FBI and DOJ are right on top of this?"
"Actually, a very big story."
"Much classified information!"
U.S. intelligence officials have said Russia orchestrated the hacking of Democratic officials to meddle with the 2016 presidential election.
A U.S. federal grand jury indicted 12 Russian intelligence officers in July on charges of hacking the computer networks of Clinton and the Democratic Party.
Special Counsel Robert Mueller is investigating Russia’s role in the 2016 election and whether the campaign of Republican candidate Trump colluded with Moscow.
Russia denies meddling in the elections, while Trump has denied any collusion.
Trump said in April 2017 China may have hacked the emails of Democratic officials to meddle with the 2016 presidential election.
He also did not provide any evidence backing his allegation at that time.
(Reporting by Brendan O'Brien in Milwaukee Editing by Paul Tait)
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... id=HPDHP17
Re: THE MAGA-MAN DONALD TRUMP
NBC NEWS
"FBI rebuts Trump claim about China hacking Clinton's email"
Ken Dilanian
29 AUGUST 2018
WASHINGTON — Sixteen hours after President Trump tweeted about a right-wing media story alleging that China hacked Hillary Clinton's private email server, an FBI official is refuting the report in a comment to NBC News.
"The FBI has not found any evidence the (Clinton) servers were compromised," the official said.
It's the latest example of the widening breach between a president who traffics in unverified news accounts and the law enforcement agencies he frequently maligns.
The FBI official, speaking for the bureau, also pointed to a report issued in June by the Justice Department inspector general that examined the FBI's investigation of Clinton's use of a private email server.
In the report, the IG noted that while the FBI assessed that it was "possible" that hostile actors gained access to Clinton's private email server, the bureau "acknowledged that the FBI investigation and its forensic analysis did not find evidence that Clinton's email server systems were compromised."
According to the IG report, an FBI forensics agent assigned to the case told investigators that, although he did not believe there was "any way of determining ...100%" whether Clinton's servers had been compromised, he felt "fairly confident that there wasn't an intrusion."
When asked whether a sophisticated foreign adversary was likely to be able to cover its tracks, he stated, "They could."
"Yeah."
"But I, I felt as if we coordinated with the right units at headquarters ... for those specific adversaries …"
"And the information that was returned back to me was that there was no indication of a compromise."
The FBI statement came after a right-wing media organization, the Daily Caller, published a story alleging that "a Chinese-owned company operating in the Washington, D.C., area hacked Hillary Clinton's private server throughout her term as secretary of state and obtained nearly all her emails."
The story cited two sources briefed on the matter.
The story cited a remark at a July hearing by a conservative Republican congressman, Louis Gohmert of Texas, that another inspector general — the Intelligence Community Inspector General — found that virtually all of Clinton's emails were sent to a "foreign entity."
The story said the Chinese firm "obtained Clinton's emails in real time as she sent and received communications and documents through her personal server," and that "the hacking was conducted as part of an intelligence operation."
The story appeared to prompt this tweet last night by Trump:
"Report just out: 'China hacked Hillary Clinton's private Email Server.'"
"Are they sure it wasn't Russia (just kidding!)?"
"What are the odds that the FBI and DOJ are right on top of this?"
"Actually, a very big story."
"Much classified information!"
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence declined to comment about Gohmert's allegation or the Daily Caller story.
The Justice Department IG's report noted that the FBI conducted "'intrusion analyses' on each of Clinton's devices and other evidence to determine whether any classified information had been compromised," and said the agent assigned to conduct forensic analysis "described the team's efforts in this regard as exhaustive."
"He stated that these efforts included (1) examining the servers and others devices to identify suspicious logins or other activity, and (2) searching numerous datasets to determine whether foreign adversaries or known hostile domestic actors had accessed emails that the (team) had confirmed to contain classified information."
Former FBI Director James Comey, in his July 5, 2016, press conference regarding possible cyber intrusion of Clinton's email servers, said the FBI had not found direct evidence of any intrusion into her personal email domain, but didn't rule out the possibility.
"Given the nature of the system and of the actors potentially involved, we assess that we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence."
"We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial email accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account …"
"She also used her personal email extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related emails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries."
"Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton's personal email account."
Comey's remarks were widely reported.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... id=HPDHP17
"FBI rebuts Trump claim about China hacking Clinton's email"
Ken Dilanian
29 AUGUST 2018
WASHINGTON — Sixteen hours after President Trump tweeted about a right-wing media story alleging that China hacked Hillary Clinton's private email server, an FBI official is refuting the report in a comment to NBC News.
"The FBI has not found any evidence the (Clinton) servers were compromised," the official said.
It's the latest example of the widening breach between a president who traffics in unverified news accounts and the law enforcement agencies he frequently maligns.
The FBI official, speaking for the bureau, also pointed to a report issued in June by the Justice Department inspector general that examined the FBI's investigation of Clinton's use of a private email server.
In the report, the IG noted that while the FBI assessed that it was "possible" that hostile actors gained access to Clinton's private email server, the bureau "acknowledged that the FBI investigation and its forensic analysis did not find evidence that Clinton's email server systems were compromised."
According to the IG report, an FBI forensics agent assigned to the case told investigators that, although he did not believe there was "any way of determining ...100%" whether Clinton's servers had been compromised, he felt "fairly confident that there wasn't an intrusion."
When asked whether a sophisticated foreign adversary was likely to be able to cover its tracks, he stated, "They could."
"Yeah."
"But I, I felt as if we coordinated with the right units at headquarters ... for those specific adversaries …"
"And the information that was returned back to me was that there was no indication of a compromise."
The FBI statement came after a right-wing media organization, the Daily Caller, published a story alleging that "a Chinese-owned company operating in the Washington, D.C., area hacked Hillary Clinton's private server throughout her term as secretary of state and obtained nearly all her emails."
The story cited two sources briefed on the matter.
The story cited a remark at a July hearing by a conservative Republican congressman, Louis Gohmert of Texas, that another inspector general — the Intelligence Community Inspector General — found that virtually all of Clinton's emails were sent to a "foreign entity."
The story said the Chinese firm "obtained Clinton's emails in real time as she sent and received communications and documents through her personal server," and that "the hacking was conducted as part of an intelligence operation."
The story appeared to prompt this tweet last night by Trump:
"Report just out: 'China hacked Hillary Clinton's private Email Server.'"
"Are they sure it wasn't Russia (just kidding!)?"
"What are the odds that the FBI and DOJ are right on top of this?"
"Actually, a very big story."
"Much classified information!"
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence declined to comment about Gohmert's allegation or the Daily Caller story.
The Justice Department IG's report noted that the FBI conducted "'intrusion analyses' on each of Clinton's devices and other evidence to determine whether any classified information had been compromised," and said the agent assigned to conduct forensic analysis "described the team's efforts in this regard as exhaustive."
"He stated that these efforts included (1) examining the servers and others devices to identify suspicious logins or other activity, and (2) searching numerous datasets to determine whether foreign adversaries or known hostile domestic actors had accessed emails that the (team) had confirmed to contain classified information."
Former FBI Director James Comey, in his July 5, 2016, press conference regarding possible cyber intrusion of Clinton's email servers, said the FBI had not found direct evidence of any intrusion into her personal email domain, but didn't rule out the possibility.
"Given the nature of the system and of the actors potentially involved, we assess that we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence."
"We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial email accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account …"
"She also used her personal email extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related emails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries."
"Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton's personal email account."
Comey's remarks were widely reported.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... id=HPDHP17
Re: THE MAGA-MAN DONALD TRUMP
BLOOMBERG
"Trump to Back $200 Billion China Tariffs as Early as Next Week, Sources Say"
Jennifer Jacobs, Shawn Donnan, Andrew Mayeda, Saleha Mohsin
Published:Aug 30 2018, 6:18 PM Last Updated:Sep 01 2018, 1:42 AM
(Bloomberg) -- President Donald Trump wants to move ahead with a plan to impose tariffs on $200 billion in Chinese imports as soon as a public-comment period concludes next week, according to six people familiar with the matter.
Asked to confirm the plan in an interview with Bloomberg News in the Oval Office on Thursday, Trump smiled and said it was “not totally wrong.”
He also criticized management of the yuan, saying China has devalued its currency in response to a recent slowdown in economic growth.
Companies and members of the public have until Sept. 6 to submit comments on the proposed duties, which cover everything from selfie sticks to semiconductors.
The president plans to impose the tariffs once that deadline passes, according to the people familiar with the matter, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the discussions aren’t public.
Broadening the tariff battle would mark the most significant move yet in a months-long trade standoff and dent China’s growth prospects.
Data released on Friday will allay some concerns over the near-term outlook as China’s official factory gauge unexpectedly strengthened this month following government measures to underpin demand.
"China is more prepared, mentally, this time than it was for the previous round of tariffs," said Gai Xinzhe, an analyst at the Bank of China’s Institute of International Finance in Beijing.
"The scale is enormous and once the tariffs materialize, they will definitely send jitters through financial markets."
Such unease was already on display Friday with Asian and European stocks declining, and and U.S. equity futures pointed to a dip at the open.
The yen held on to gains, while the Bloomberg Dollar Spot Index drifted.
The tariff news exacerbated already fragile market sentiment amid currency routs in Argentina and Turkey.
Tariffs Loom
Some of the people cautioned that Trump hasn’t made his final decision, and it’s possible the administration may enact the duties in installments.
The U.S. has so far imposed levies on $50 billion in Chinese goods, with Beijing retaliating in kind.
It’s also possible the president could announce the tariffs next week, but say they will take effect at a later date.
The Trump administration waited about three weeks after announcing in mid-June that it was imposing tariffs on $34 billion of Chinese goods before they were implemented.
The next stage of tariffs on $16 billion of goods took hold in August.
China has threatened to retaliate by slapping duties on $60 billion of U.S. goods.
The Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Commerce didn’t immediately respond to Bloomberg faxes seeking comments on Trump’s intentions.
Tensions with the U.S. may be having an effect elsewhere, helping bring Japan and China closer together.
The nations’ finance ministers agreed in Beijing on Friday that protectionist policies aren’t in anyone’s interest and they would support and promote the multilateral trading system.
The previous day, Japan’s Finance Minister Taro Aso discussed U.S. trade with China’s Vice Premier Liu He, who led a previous round of negotiations with the U.S.
The Trump administration is finalizing the list of Chinese targets and tariff rate, which could range from 10 percent to 25 percent, following six days of public hearings earlier this month.
Trump’s plan to bring down his biggest hit yet on China comes as two-way trade talks show little signs of progress.
China hawks have been on the ascendancy in the Trump administration.
One of them -- U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer -- has been responsible for one of the president’s biggest trade victories so far by forging a bilateral trade deal to replace Nafta with Mexico.
The deal was announced on Monday and Canada is now negotiating to join.
The latest China tariff decision is causing heated debate within the administration, with Lighthizer and White House trade adviser Peter Navarro pushing for quick action, and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow arguing for more time, according to people familiar with the matter.
Squeezing China
Trump cut off negotiations with China because of what he perceives as Beijing’s lack of cooperation in nuclear talks with North Korea, one of the people said.
The president wants to squeeze China, believing the U.S. has leverage over Beijing, that person said.
Trump on Wednesday accused China of pressuring North Korea not to bend in nuclear negotiations with the U.S.
But he insisted that the trade differences would be resolved.
“As for the U.S.-China trade disputes, and other differences, they will be resolved in time by President Trump and China’s great President Xi Jinping."
"Their relationship and bond remain very strong,” Trump said on Twitter.
https://www.bloombergquint.com/global-e ... gs.ziRVOzc
"Trump to Back $200 Billion China Tariffs as Early as Next Week, Sources Say"
Jennifer Jacobs, Shawn Donnan, Andrew Mayeda, Saleha Mohsin
Published:Aug 30 2018, 6:18 PM Last Updated:Sep 01 2018, 1:42 AM
(Bloomberg) -- President Donald Trump wants to move ahead with a plan to impose tariffs on $200 billion in Chinese imports as soon as a public-comment period concludes next week, according to six people familiar with the matter.
Asked to confirm the plan in an interview with Bloomberg News in the Oval Office on Thursday, Trump smiled and said it was “not totally wrong.”
He also criticized management of the yuan, saying China has devalued its currency in response to a recent slowdown in economic growth.
Companies and members of the public have until Sept. 6 to submit comments on the proposed duties, which cover everything from selfie sticks to semiconductors.
The president plans to impose the tariffs once that deadline passes, according to the people familiar with the matter, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the discussions aren’t public.
Broadening the tariff battle would mark the most significant move yet in a months-long trade standoff and dent China’s growth prospects.
Data released on Friday will allay some concerns over the near-term outlook as China’s official factory gauge unexpectedly strengthened this month following government measures to underpin demand.
"China is more prepared, mentally, this time than it was for the previous round of tariffs," said Gai Xinzhe, an analyst at the Bank of China’s Institute of International Finance in Beijing.
"The scale is enormous and once the tariffs materialize, they will definitely send jitters through financial markets."
Such unease was already on display Friday with Asian and European stocks declining, and and U.S. equity futures pointed to a dip at the open.
The yen held on to gains, while the Bloomberg Dollar Spot Index drifted.
The tariff news exacerbated already fragile market sentiment amid currency routs in Argentina and Turkey.
Tariffs Loom
Some of the people cautioned that Trump hasn’t made his final decision, and it’s possible the administration may enact the duties in installments.
The U.S. has so far imposed levies on $50 billion in Chinese goods, with Beijing retaliating in kind.
It’s also possible the president could announce the tariffs next week, but say they will take effect at a later date.
The Trump administration waited about three weeks after announcing in mid-June that it was imposing tariffs on $34 billion of Chinese goods before they were implemented.
The next stage of tariffs on $16 billion of goods took hold in August.
China has threatened to retaliate by slapping duties on $60 billion of U.S. goods.
The Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Commerce didn’t immediately respond to Bloomberg faxes seeking comments on Trump’s intentions.
Tensions with the U.S. may be having an effect elsewhere, helping bring Japan and China closer together.
The nations’ finance ministers agreed in Beijing on Friday that protectionist policies aren’t in anyone’s interest and they would support and promote the multilateral trading system.
The previous day, Japan’s Finance Minister Taro Aso discussed U.S. trade with China’s Vice Premier Liu He, who led a previous round of negotiations with the U.S.
The Trump administration is finalizing the list of Chinese targets and tariff rate, which could range from 10 percent to 25 percent, following six days of public hearings earlier this month.
Trump’s plan to bring down his biggest hit yet on China comes as two-way trade talks show little signs of progress.
China hawks have been on the ascendancy in the Trump administration.
One of them -- U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer -- has been responsible for one of the president’s biggest trade victories so far by forging a bilateral trade deal to replace Nafta with Mexico.
The deal was announced on Monday and Canada is now negotiating to join.
The latest China tariff decision is causing heated debate within the administration, with Lighthizer and White House trade adviser Peter Navarro pushing for quick action, and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow arguing for more time, according to people familiar with the matter.
Squeezing China
Trump cut off negotiations with China because of what he perceives as Beijing’s lack of cooperation in nuclear talks with North Korea, one of the people said.
The president wants to squeeze China, believing the U.S. has leverage over Beijing, that person said.
Trump on Wednesday accused China of pressuring North Korea not to bend in nuclear negotiations with the U.S.
But he insisted that the trade differences would be resolved.
“As for the U.S.-China trade disputes, and other differences, they will be resolved in time by President Trump and China’s great President Xi Jinping."
"Their relationship and bond remain very strong,” Trump said on Twitter.
https://www.bloombergquint.com/global-e ... gs.ziRVOzc
Re: THE MAGA-MAN DONALD TRUMP
MARKETWATCH
"Opinion: Trump’s exasperating ignorance on trade"
By Caroline Baum
Published: Aug 30, 2018 3:00 p.m. ET
There is nothing more infuriating than Donald Trump’s repeated insistence that the U.S. “loses over 800 Billion Dollars a year on really dumb Trade Deals.”
(The random capitalizations are Trump’s, not mine.)
One loses money to the house at a gambling casino.
One loses money selling a home below the purchase price.
One loses money when a cash-filled wallet is stolen.
And one loses money when a company goes belly up — except, of course, in the case of Donald Trump and his Atlantic City casinos.
But on a voluntary transaction between two parties, there is no “loss” unless one party misrepresents the product he is selling or delivers less than the contractual amount, in which case it falls to the courts to remedy the buyer.
Trump might want to consult the dictionary to alleviate his confusion.
Trade is defined as the activity of buying and selling goods and services, especially between countries.
A trade is the act of “exchanging one thing for another.”
Nothing there about one side “losing.”
Trade is also a verb: to buy, sell or exchange goods.
It’s hard to find any meaning of the word that comports with Trump’s definition of other countries ripping off the U.S. through long-standing trade agreements, the effect of which has been to reduce tariffs and other trade barriers over time.
(I’ll leave it to the hipper set to decipher the Urban Dictionary definition.)
So why does Trump persist in advocating something that makes him look stupid?
For someone whose policy preferences blow with the prevailing winds, Trump has been amazingly consistent in his commitment to protectionism and his insistence that trade is a zero-sum game.
He cannot, or will not, be convinced by research and statistics that trade creates more jobs than it eliminates because access to cheaper imports enables consumers to spend more on something else.
He cannot, or will not, be convinced by research and statistics that trade does not affect the total number of jobs in an economy over the long run; just the particular types of jobs, which will reflect the areas in which that nation excels.
And don’t even try to explain the notion of comparative advantage to him: the idea first proposed by David Ricardo in 1817 that a country benefits from producing items in which it specializes, or has a comparative advantage, and buying lower-cost goods from another country.
That is true even if one country excels, or has an absolute advantage, in producing all goods.
This is why the U.S. imports T-shirts and sneakers from less-developed countries and specializes in manufacturing high-tech fabrics for NASA astronauts.
And no, those jobs aren’t coming back to the U.S., which would be tantamount to putting the car into reverse.
It’s true that as wages rise in developing nations, businesses may find it advantageous to relocate to the U.S. to be closer to their biggest customers and afford themselves the legal protections offered by this country.
But in general, the goal should be to create an environment to attract new, high-tech manufacturing industries, such as the plants that were lured to Mississippi’s Golden Triangle, one of the poorest regions of the country.
All countries are losing, or will lose, manufacturing jobs to automation over time.
That’s what happened in agriculture.
The U.S. was once a nation of farmers.
In 1800, 83% of the U.S. labor force was employed in agriculture.
Today it’s about 1.7%.
Between 1948 and 2011, U.S. farm output rose 1.5% a year, according to a 2015 U.S. Department of Agriculture study.
The “extraordinary performance of the U.S. farm sector was driven mainly by productivity growth:” specifically, by total factor productivity, or the more efficient use of inputs.
Then there’s Trump’s refusal to acknowledge that there’s more to the economy than manufactured goods.
After all, the U.S. is a services economy.
Last year, private goods-producing industries accounted for 18.4% of gross domestic product.
Services? 68.9%.
(The residual, 12.7%, is government.)
So service-producing industries are responsible for more than two-thirds of U.S. economic output, but in Trump’s world, services don’t count.
The U.S. ran a $552 billion trade deficit in 2017: a goods deficit of $807 billion, partially offset by a services surplus of $255 billion.
Trump focuses solely on the goods deficit, not to mention his mistaken categorization of it as a “loss.”
During the 2016 presidential campaign, Trump fashioned himself as the second coming of Ronald Reagan.
Towards that end, he has extrapolated the message of one of Reagan’s classic remarks, only to apply it mistakenly to international trade.
Asked about his Cold War strategy, Reagan offered a terse response: “We win, they lose.”
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump ... 2018-08-30
"Opinion: Trump’s exasperating ignorance on trade"
By Caroline Baum
Published: Aug 30, 2018 3:00 p.m. ET
There is nothing more infuriating than Donald Trump’s repeated insistence that the U.S. “loses over 800 Billion Dollars a year on really dumb Trade Deals.”
(The random capitalizations are Trump’s, not mine.)
One loses money to the house at a gambling casino.
One loses money selling a home below the purchase price.
One loses money when a cash-filled wallet is stolen.
And one loses money when a company goes belly up — except, of course, in the case of Donald Trump and his Atlantic City casinos.
But on a voluntary transaction between two parties, there is no “loss” unless one party misrepresents the product he is selling or delivers less than the contractual amount, in which case it falls to the courts to remedy the buyer.
Trump might want to consult the dictionary to alleviate his confusion.
Trade is defined as the activity of buying and selling goods and services, especially between countries.
A trade is the act of “exchanging one thing for another.”
Nothing there about one side “losing.”
Trade is also a verb: to buy, sell or exchange goods.
It’s hard to find any meaning of the word that comports with Trump’s definition of other countries ripping off the U.S. through long-standing trade agreements, the effect of which has been to reduce tariffs and other trade barriers over time.
(I’ll leave it to the hipper set to decipher the Urban Dictionary definition.)
So why does Trump persist in advocating something that makes him look stupid?
For someone whose policy preferences blow with the prevailing winds, Trump has been amazingly consistent in his commitment to protectionism and his insistence that trade is a zero-sum game.
He cannot, or will not, be convinced by research and statistics that trade creates more jobs than it eliminates because access to cheaper imports enables consumers to spend more on something else.
He cannot, or will not, be convinced by research and statistics that trade does not affect the total number of jobs in an economy over the long run; just the particular types of jobs, which will reflect the areas in which that nation excels.
And don’t even try to explain the notion of comparative advantage to him: the idea first proposed by David Ricardo in 1817 that a country benefits from producing items in which it specializes, or has a comparative advantage, and buying lower-cost goods from another country.
That is true even if one country excels, or has an absolute advantage, in producing all goods.
This is why the U.S. imports T-shirts and sneakers from less-developed countries and specializes in manufacturing high-tech fabrics for NASA astronauts.
And no, those jobs aren’t coming back to the U.S., which would be tantamount to putting the car into reverse.
It’s true that as wages rise in developing nations, businesses may find it advantageous to relocate to the U.S. to be closer to their biggest customers and afford themselves the legal protections offered by this country.
But in general, the goal should be to create an environment to attract new, high-tech manufacturing industries, such as the plants that were lured to Mississippi’s Golden Triangle, one of the poorest regions of the country.
All countries are losing, or will lose, manufacturing jobs to automation over time.
That’s what happened in agriculture.
The U.S. was once a nation of farmers.
In 1800, 83% of the U.S. labor force was employed in agriculture.
Today it’s about 1.7%.
Between 1948 and 2011, U.S. farm output rose 1.5% a year, according to a 2015 U.S. Department of Agriculture study.
The “extraordinary performance of the U.S. farm sector was driven mainly by productivity growth:” specifically, by total factor productivity, or the more efficient use of inputs.
Then there’s Trump’s refusal to acknowledge that there’s more to the economy than manufactured goods.
After all, the U.S. is a services economy.
Last year, private goods-producing industries accounted for 18.4% of gross domestic product.
Services? 68.9%.
(The residual, 12.7%, is government.)
So service-producing industries are responsible for more than two-thirds of U.S. economic output, but in Trump’s world, services don’t count.
The U.S. ran a $552 billion trade deficit in 2017: a goods deficit of $807 billion, partially offset by a services surplus of $255 billion.
Trump focuses solely on the goods deficit, not to mention his mistaken categorization of it as a “loss.”
During the 2016 presidential campaign, Trump fashioned himself as the second coming of Ronald Reagan.
Towards that end, he has extrapolated the message of one of Reagan’s classic remarks, only to apply it mistakenly to international trade.
Asked about his Cold War strategy, Reagan offered a terse response: “We win, they lose.”
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump ... 2018-08-30
Re: THE MAGA-MAN DONALD TRUMP
THE GUARDIAN
"Manafort associate paid Trump inauguration $50,000 in Ukrainian cash"
Jon Swaine
31 AUGUST 2018
A Republican political consultant linked to Paul Manafort and Cambridge Analytica has admitted to funneling $50,000 from a Ukrainian oligarch to Donald Trump’s presidential inauguration committee.
Sam Patten paid the money to an American “straw purchaser” on behalf of the unidentified oligarch, in return for four tickets to Trump’s inauguration in January 2017, according to a plea agreement made public on Friday.
The inauguration committee was not allowed to accept money from foreigners.
The disclosure came as Patten pleaded guilty to illegally lobbying in the US for pro-Russia politicians from Ukraine.
As part of his plea deal, he agreed to cooperate with Robert Mueller, the special counsel investigating links between Donald Trump’s campaign team and Russian interference in the 2016 election.
Patten, 47, admitted causing the Ukrainian funds to be paid to the inauguration committee, and to then lying to a Senate committee investigating Russian interference in an attempt to cover this up.
He was not charged for these actions.
He pleaded guilty to one count of working as an unregistered agent for the oligarch’s Ukrainian political party, Opposition Bloc, which also employed Manafort, the former chairman of Trump’s 2016 campaign.
Patten was released on bail by judge Amy Berman Jackson following a hearing in Washington.
The charge was brought by the US attorney’s office in the capital, which took over the case following a referral from Mueller’s office.
The court filings indicated that Patten had been in discussions with Mueller’s office for at least three months.
A spokesman for the US attorney’s office said the charge against Patten was a felony punishable by a maximum of five years in prison and also carried potential fines.
Stuart Sears, an attorney for Patten, declined to comment.
A spokeswoman for Thomas Barrack, the chairman of Trump’s inauguration committee, did not respond to requests for comment.
The filings recounted how Patten formed a consulting company in the US with Konstantin Kilimnik, a Russian political operative with alleged ties to intelligence services.
Kilimnik, identified as “foreigner A” in the filings, has also worked extensively with Manafort, who was a consultant to Opposition Bloc in Ukraine.
After discovering foreigners were barred from giving money to the inauguration, Patten enlisted another American to buy four tickets.
The oligarch paid $50,000 to Patten and Kilimnik’s company from an account in Cyprus.
Patten then wrote the American “straw purchaser” a $50,000 check and the American used these funds to buy the tickets the following day.
Patten then lied about this arrangement during testimony to the Senate intelligence committee in January 2018, he admitted on Friday.
He failed to provide requested documents, gave misleading evidence and then after his interview deleted files relating to his work for the Ukrainians.
In all, according to the court documents, Patten’s firm was paid about $1m for advising Opposition Bloc and lobbying US politicians on its behalf.
Patten worked to set up meetings for Kilimnik and the oligarch with state department officials and members of Congress, including senators on the foreign relations committee and House members on the foreign affairs committee.
Patten admitted that he knew he was required to register as an agent for a foreigner but failed to do so after the Ukrainian oligarch said “he did not want them to” until an unspecified future date.
Patten also drafted opinion articles for the Ukrainian oligarch and succeeded in having at least one published by a national American media outlet in February 2017.
The Ukrainian figure and media outlet were not identified in the charging documents.
A pro-Trump article was published by US News & World Report in February 2017 under the byline of SerhiyLyovochkin, an Opposition Bloc MP who was a senior official in Ukraine’s former pro-Kremlin administration.
Enxhi Myslmi, a spokeswoman for US News & World Report, said: “To our knowledge, no one at US News has been contacted by law enforcement regarding the publication of this piece.”
Lovochkin’s office declined to say if it believed he was the oligarch described in the court documents.
In an unsigned email, it said: “Mr Lovochkin was indeed invited to the inauguration and had the honor to attend."
"At the same time, he did not pay for that.”
Earlier this month, Manafort was convicted on eight counts of bank and tax fraud arising from the Mueller investigation.
During the trial, a former colleague testified that Manafort received payments from Lyovochkin and disguised them as loans to avoid paying tax.
Kilimnik is charged alongside Manafort in a separate criminal case brought in Washington by Mueller.
Patten also carried out work for Cambridge Analytica, the now-defunct consultancy that is under scrutiny for its work on Trump’s 2016 election campaign.
A page on Patten’s website that has since been removed said he “worked with one of London’s most innovative strategic communications companies to introduce new technologies and methodologies” during the 2014 US election.
During an interview last year with a British academic researcher, Patten said: “I’ve worked in Ukraine, Iraq, I’ve worked in deeply corrupt countries, and [the American] system isn’t very different.”
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... id=HPDHP17
"Manafort associate paid Trump inauguration $50,000 in Ukrainian cash"
Jon Swaine
31 AUGUST 2018
A Republican political consultant linked to Paul Manafort and Cambridge Analytica has admitted to funneling $50,000 from a Ukrainian oligarch to Donald Trump’s presidential inauguration committee.
Sam Patten paid the money to an American “straw purchaser” on behalf of the unidentified oligarch, in return for four tickets to Trump’s inauguration in January 2017, according to a plea agreement made public on Friday.
The inauguration committee was not allowed to accept money from foreigners.
The disclosure came as Patten pleaded guilty to illegally lobbying in the US for pro-Russia politicians from Ukraine.
As part of his plea deal, he agreed to cooperate with Robert Mueller, the special counsel investigating links between Donald Trump’s campaign team and Russian interference in the 2016 election.
Patten, 47, admitted causing the Ukrainian funds to be paid to the inauguration committee, and to then lying to a Senate committee investigating Russian interference in an attempt to cover this up.
He was not charged for these actions.
He pleaded guilty to one count of working as an unregistered agent for the oligarch’s Ukrainian political party, Opposition Bloc, which also employed Manafort, the former chairman of Trump’s 2016 campaign.
Patten was released on bail by judge Amy Berman Jackson following a hearing in Washington.
The charge was brought by the US attorney’s office in the capital, which took over the case following a referral from Mueller’s office.
The court filings indicated that Patten had been in discussions with Mueller’s office for at least three months.
A spokesman for the US attorney’s office said the charge against Patten was a felony punishable by a maximum of five years in prison and also carried potential fines.
Stuart Sears, an attorney for Patten, declined to comment.
A spokeswoman for Thomas Barrack, the chairman of Trump’s inauguration committee, did not respond to requests for comment.
The filings recounted how Patten formed a consulting company in the US with Konstantin Kilimnik, a Russian political operative with alleged ties to intelligence services.
Kilimnik, identified as “foreigner A” in the filings, has also worked extensively with Manafort, who was a consultant to Opposition Bloc in Ukraine.
After discovering foreigners were barred from giving money to the inauguration, Patten enlisted another American to buy four tickets.
The oligarch paid $50,000 to Patten and Kilimnik’s company from an account in Cyprus.
Patten then wrote the American “straw purchaser” a $50,000 check and the American used these funds to buy the tickets the following day.
Patten then lied about this arrangement during testimony to the Senate intelligence committee in January 2018, he admitted on Friday.
He failed to provide requested documents, gave misleading evidence and then after his interview deleted files relating to his work for the Ukrainians.
In all, according to the court documents, Patten’s firm was paid about $1m for advising Opposition Bloc and lobbying US politicians on its behalf.
Patten worked to set up meetings for Kilimnik and the oligarch with state department officials and members of Congress, including senators on the foreign relations committee and House members on the foreign affairs committee.
Patten admitted that he knew he was required to register as an agent for a foreigner but failed to do so after the Ukrainian oligarch said “he did not want them to” until an unspecified future date.
Patten also drafted opinion articles for the Ukrainian oligarch and succeeded in having at least one published by a national American media outlet in February 2017.
The Ukrainian figure and media outlet were not identified in the charging documents.
A pro-Trump article was published by US News & World Report in February 2017 under the byline of SerhiyLyovochkin, an Opposition Bloc MP who was a senior official in Ukraine’s former pro-Kremlin administration.
Enxhi Myslmi, a spokeswoman for US News & World Report, said: “To our knowledge, no one at US News has been contacted by law enforcement regarding the publication of this piece.”
Lovochkin’s office declined to say if it believed he was the oligarch described in the court documents.
In an unsigned email, it said: “Mr Lovochkin was indeed invited to the inauguration and had the honor to attend."
"At the same time, he did not pay for that.”
Earlier this month, Manafort was convicted on eight counts of bank and tax fraud arising from the Mueller investigation.
During the trial, a former colleague testified that Manafort received payments from Lyovochkin and disguised them as loans to avoid paying tax.
Kilimnik is charged alongside Manafort in a separate criminal case brought in Washington by Mueller.
Patten also carried out work for Cambridge Analytica, the now-defunct consultancy that is under scrutiny for its work on Trump’s 2016 election campaign.
A page on Patten’s website that has since been removed said he “worked with one of London’s most innovative strategic communications companies to introduce new technologies and methodologies” during the 2014 US election.
During an interview last year with a British academic researcher, Patten said: “I’ve worked in Ukraine, Iraq, I’ve worked in deeply corrupt countries, and [the American] system isn’t very different.”
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... id=HPDHP17
Re: THE MAGA-MAN DONALD TRUMP
YOUNG ANDY CUOMO IN NEW YORK IS DOING THE SAME THING "TEDDY" SCHNEIDERMAN WAS DOING, PROMOTING HIMSELF, BY CONTINUING THIS LAWSUIT THROUGH HIS POLITICAL LACKEY BARBARA UNDERWOOD AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE ...
CHICAGO SUN-TIMES
"NY attorney general: No backing down on Trump lawsuit"
Tom McElroy | Associated Press
08/31/2018, 04:54pm
NEW YORK — Lawyers for President Donald Trump asked a judge to dismiss a lawsuit brought against his charitable foundation by New York’s attorney general, arguing that it was politically motivated.
In the motion Thursday, Trump attorney Alan S. Futerfas argued that former New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman “made it his stated mission to ‘lead the resistance’ and attack Mr. Trump whenever possible” and “used his public antipathy for Mr. Trump to solicit donations for his own re-election campaign and advance his career interests and aspirations.”
Trump very publicly announced his intention to dissolve the foundation and donate all of its remaining funds to charity, but the AG “actively stonewalled dissolution,” Futerfas wrote.
“At the same time, the NYAG turned a blind eye to serious and significant allegations of misconduct involving the Clinton Foundation, including claims that it, and its subsidiaries, violated New York law by failing to disclose $225 million in donations from foreign governments,” Futerfas wrote.
Schneiderman began investigating the Trump Foundation in 2016 following Washington Post reports that its spending personally benefited the presidential candidate.
Schneiderman ordered the foundation to stop fundraising in New York.
Schneiderman resigned in May after allegations that he physically abused women he had dated; he denied the claims.
His successor, Democratic Attorney General Barbara Underwood, filed the lawsuit in June, claiming the Trump Foundation “was little more than a checkbook for payments from Mr. Trump or his businesses to nonprofits, regardless of their purpose or legality.”
The suit seeks $2.8 million in restitution and the foundation’s disbandment.
The filing said Underwood continued the “inflammatory rhetoric, stating publicly that she considers her battles with the President ‘the most important work (she) has ever done’ and has vowed that such ‘work will continue.'”
Trump’s lawyers also argued that several impermissible donations by the foundation were due to clerical errors and were all corrected when brought to the attention of foundation officials.
In a statement Thursday, the attorney general’s office said it won’t back down from “holding Trump and his associates accountable for their flagrant violations of New York law.”
“As our lawsuit detailed, the Trump Foundation functioned as a personal piggy bank to serve Trump’s business and political interests,” the statement said.
https://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/d ... n-lawsuit/
CHICAGO SUN-TIMES
"NY attorney general: No backing down on Trump lawsuit"
Tom McElroy | Associated Press
08/31/2018, 04:54pm
NEW YORK — Lawyers for President Donald Trump asked a judge to dismiss a lawsuit brought against his charitable foundation by New York’s attorney general, arguing that it was politically motivated.
In the motion Thursday, Trump attorney Alan S. Futerfas argued that former New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman “made it his stated mission to ‘lead the resistance’ and attack Mr. Trump whenever possible” and “used his public antipathy for Mr. Trump to solicit donations for his own re-election campaign and advance his career interests and aspirations.”
Trump very publicly announced his intention to dissolve the foundation and donate all of its remaining funds to charity, but the AG “actively stonewalled dissolution,” Futerfas wrote.
“At the same time, the NYAG turned a blind eye to serious and significant allegations of misconduct involving the Clinton Foundation, including claims that it, and its subsidiaries, violated New York law by failing to disclose $225 million in donations from foreign governments,” Futerfas wrote.
Schneiderman began investigating the Trump Foundation in 2016 following Washington Post reports that its spending personally benefited the presidential candidate.
Schneiderman ordered the foundation to stop fundraising in New York.
Schneiderman resigned in May after allegations that he physically abused women he had dated; he denied the claims.
His successor, Democratic Attorney General Barbara Underwood, filed the lawsuit in June, claiming the Trump Foundation “was little more than a checkbook for payments from Mr. Trump or his businesses to nonprofits, regardless of their purpose or legality.”
The suit seeks $2.8 million in restitution and the foundation’s disbandment.
The filing said Underwood continued the “inflammatory rhetoric, stating publicly that she considers her battles with the President ‘the most important work (she) has ever done’ and has vowed that such ‘work will continue.'”
Trump’s lawyers also argued that several impermissible donations by the foundation were due to clerical errors and were all corrected when brought to the attention of foundation officials.
In a statement Thursday, the attorney general’s office said it won’t back down from “holding Trump and his associates accountable for their flagrant violations of New York law.”
“As our lawsuit detailed, the Trump Foundation functioned as a personal piggy bank to serve Trump’s business and political interests,” the statement said.
https://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/d ... n-lawsuit/
Re: THE MAGA-MAN DONALD TRUMP
THE HILL
"Tourism officials boost marketing efforts in Va. town after Huckabee Sanders restaurant incident"
Brett Samuels
3 SEPTEMBER 2018
A Virginia regional tourism board is reshaping its marketing efforts after protesters were drawn to the area because of controversy at The Red Hen restaurant.
The Roanoke Times reported Sunday that Rockbridge Regional Tourism - comprised of members from Lexington, Va., Buena Vista, Va., and Rockbridge County - decided to spend an additional $5,000 per month from July through September to try and attract more visitors.
The tourism office dipped into its emergency funds for the boost, which localities reportedly decided was necessary after negative coverage from an incident at The Red Hen restaurant involving White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders.
The restaurant, located in Lexington, Va., made national headlines after the owner refused to serve Sanders and her family.
"For a town our size, it was a significant impact," Director of Marketing Patty Williams told The Roanoke Times.
Williams said the tourism office received thousands of emails and phone calls after the Red Hen controversy, including from some visitors who vowed never to come back to the region, The Roanoke Times reported.
In addition to the funding, the tourism group is reportedly pulling together a survey to poll travelers on whether they recall The Red Hen incident and whether it would impact their decision to travel to the area in the future.
Red Hen owner Stephanie Wilkinson told The Washington Post following the June incident that she asked Sanders to leave because the restaurant employs several LGBT employees, and Sanders's defense of President Trump's call to bar transgender people from the military was antithetical to her beliefs.
Sanders later tweeted about the episode from her government Twitter account, saying that she was asked to leave because she worked for Trump and that she departed the restaurant "politely."
President Trump then lashed out at the restaurant via Twitter, calling the establishment "filthy."
Protesters gathered outside the establishment in the days that followed, and some Republicans called for a boycott of the restaurant.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/touris ... id=HPDHP17
"Tourism officials boost marketing efforts in Va. town after Huckabee Sanders restaurant incident"
Brett Samuels
3 SEPTEMBER 2018
A Virginia regional tourism board is reshaping its marketing efforts after protesters were drawn to the area because of controversy at The Red Hen restaurant.
The Roanoke Times reported Sunday that Rockbridge Regional Tourism - comprised of members from Lexington, Va., Buena Vista, Va., and Rockbridge County - decided to spend an additional $5,000 per month from July through September to try and attract more visitors.
The tourism office dipped into its emergency funds for the boost, which localities reportedly decided was necessary after negative coverage from an incident at The Red Hen restaurant involving White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders.
The restaurant, located in Lexington, Va., made national headlines after the owner refused to serve Sanders and her family.
"For a town our size, it was a significant impact," Director of Marketing Patty Williams told The Roanoke Times.
Williams said the tourism office received thousands of emails and phone calls after the Red Hen controversy, including from some visitors who vowed never to come back to the region, The Roanoke Times reported.
In addition to the funding, the tourism group is reportedly pulling together a survey to poll travelers on whether they recall The Red Hen incident and whether it would impact their decision to travel to the area in the future.
Red Hen owner Stephanie Wilkinson told The Washington Post following the June incident that she asked Sanders to leave because the restaurant employs several LGBT employees, and Sanders's defense of President Trump's call to bar transgender people from the military was antithetical to her beliefs.
Sanders later tweeted about the episode from her government Twitter account, saying that she was asked to leave because she worked for Trump and that she departed the restaurant "politely."
President Trump then lashed out at the restaurant via Twitter, calling the establishment "filthy."
Protesters gathered outside the establishment in the days that followed, and some Republicans called for a boycott of the restaurant.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/touris ... id=HPDHP17
Re: THE MAGA-MAN DONALD TRUMP
AND HERE COMES YET ANOTHER FRIVOLOUS LAWSUIT AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE AS YOUNG ANDY CUOMO, THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST GOVERNOR OF CORRUPT NEW YORK STATE, USES TAXPAYER FUNDS TO BUY HIS WAY INTO THE WHITE HOUSE IN 2020 ...
AND THIS IS THE SAME CUOMO ADMINISTRATION THAT ITSELF ROUTINELY VIOLATES THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS OF EQUAL PROTECTION UNDER THE LAW OF THOSE OF US WHO ARE AMERICAN CITIZENS LIVING IN UPSTATE NEW YORK …
AS TO THE CONSTITUTION IN THE CASE OF PUERTO RICO, IT IS ENTIRELY SILENT AS TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES BEING DUTY-BOUND TO DO ANYTHING FOR PUERTO RICO AFTER A HURRICANE …
And so ...
CBS NEWS
"Cuomo to help families sue Trump over Hurricane Maria response"
Peter Martinez
3 SEPTEMBER 2018
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo told a congregation Sunday that he would help families sue President Trump and his administration for failing to provide adequate assistance to those affected by Hurricane Maria.
Cuomo said the Trump administration violated Puerto Ricans' Constitutional rights of equal protection under the law.
He said that New York stands committed to helping victims of Puerto Rico rebuild after the deadly storm walloped the island in September 2017.
"President Trump never tried to help Puerto Rico."
"Florida got attention, Texas got attention, and Puerto Rico got the short end of the stick."
"That is not just wrong and unethical and despicable, it is also illegal," Cuomo said Sunday at the Heavenly Vision Christian Center in the Bronx, New York.
Cuomo's press statement laid out five disparities between the federal government's response to and treatment of citizens in the wake of Hurricane Harvey, which primarily struck Texas, and Hurricane Maria -- which devastated the Puerto Rican island:
1. A three week wait
2. Lack of funding
3. Lack of food and water
4. Sparse resources
5. Unacceptable relief
"We're going to hold 'King' Trump to the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution said equal protection under the law."
"Puerto Rico did not receive equal protection under the law," Cuomo said.
"New York is standing with Puerto Rico the way we said we would."
"We are going to fight back and we're going to show this president that the law is the law."
There were no immediate details released about Cuomo's plan nor did he take any questions at Sunday's event.
Cuomo, who is a seeking a third term as governor, also took swipes at Mr. Trump's border wall and how the president reacted to the aftermath of a white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last year.
"Somebody has to stand up to this president."
"He is a bully," Cuomo said.
Cuomo's speech Sunday comes on the heels of a report out last week that said Hurricane Maria is now considered the most deadly U.S. natural disaster in the last century.
Puerto Rico's government requested an independent review by George Washington University, which found Maria killed an estimated 2,975 people – more than 46 times the original official death toll of 64.
For months, there's been speculation the death toll was much higher than what the government was reporting.
San Juan's mayor, Carmen Cruz, called the new report "painful and shameful," and told CBS News' David Begnaud the governor should take more responsibility.
"When I saw people dying I opted to shout it."
"I opted to ask for help."
"When others saw people dying they opted to shut up," Cruz said.
Puerto Rico Gov. Ricardo Rosselló acknowledged Tuesday that he made mistakes.
"The focus shouldn't be, you know, hey, let's blame all these folks."
"The focus should be who's going to be accountable and who's going to take the action so this doesn't happen again," Rosselló said.
Researchers found the government and hospitals were inadequately prepared for the Category 4 storm.
They also found the risk of death was 45 percent higher for those living in low-income areas on the island, and elderly men were at the greatest risk of dying.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... id=HPDHP17
AND THIS IS THE SAME CUOMO ADMINISTRATION THAT ITSELF ROUTINELY VIOLATES THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS OF EQUAL PROTECTION UNDER THE LAW OF THOSE OF US WHO ARE AMERICAN CITIZENS LIVING IN UPSTATE NEW YORK …
AS TO THE CONSTITUTION IN THE CASE OF PUERTO RICO, IT IS ENTIRELY SILENT AS TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES BEING DUTY-BOUND TO DO ANYTHING FOR PUERTO RICO AFTER A HURRICANE …
And so ...
CBS NEWS
"Cuomo to help families sue Trump over Hurricane Maria response"
Peter Martinez
3 SEPTEMBER 2018
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo told a congregation Sunday that he would help families sue President Trump and his administration for failing to provide adequate assistance to those affected by Hurricane Maria.
Cuomo said the Trump administration violated Puerto Ricans' Constitutional rights of equal protection under the law.
He said that New York stands committed to helping victims of Puerto Rico rebuild after the deadly storm walloped the island in September 2017.
"President Trump never tried to help Puerto Rico."
"Florida got attention, Texas got attention, and Puerto Rico got the short end of the stick."
"That is not just wrong and unethical and despicable, it is also illegal," Cuomo said Sunday at the Heavenly Vision Christian Center in the Bronx, New York.
Cuomo's press statement laid out five disparities between the federal government's response to and treatment of citizens in the wake of Hurricane Harvey, which primarily struck Texas, and Hurricane Maria -- which devastated the Puerto Rican island:
1. A three week wait
2. Lack of funding
3. Lack of food and water
4. Sparse resources
5. Unacceptable relief
"We're going to hold 'King' Trump to the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution said equal protection under the law."
"Puerto Rico did not receive equal protection under the law," Cuomo said.
"New York is standing with Puerto Rico the way we said we would."
"We are going to fight back and we're going to show this president that the law is the law."
There were no immediate details released about Cuomo's plan nor did he take any questions at Sunday's event.
Cuomo, who is a seeking a third term as governor, also took swipes at Mr. Trump's border wall and how the president reacted to the aftermath of a white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last year.
"Somebody has to stand up to this president."
"He is a bully," Cuomo said.
Cuomo's speech Sunday comes on the heels of a report out last week that said Hurricane Maria is now considered the most deadly U.S. natural disaster in the last century.
Puerto Rico's government requested an independent review by George Washington University, which found Maria killed an estimated 2,975 people – more than 46 times the original official death toll of 64.
For months, there's been speculation the death toll was much higher than what the government was reporting.
San Juan's mayor, Carmen Cruz, called the new report "painful and shameful," and told CBS News' David Begnaud the governor should take more responsibility.
"When I saw people dying I opted to shout it."
"I opted to ask for help."
"When others saw people dying they opted to shut up," Cruz said.
Puerto Rico Gov. Ricardo Rosselló acknowledged Tuesday that he made mistakes.
"The focus shouldn't be, you know, hey, let's blame all these folks."
"The focus should be who's going to be accountable and who's going to take the action so this doesn't happen again," Rosselló said.
Researchers found the government and hospitals were inadequately prepared for the Category 4 storm.
They also found the risk of death was 45 percent higher for those living in low-income areas on the island, and elderly men were at the greatest risk of dying.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... id=HPDHP17