Conservative Musings

Our goal is to have intelligent discussion of the topics of the day. We realize everyone has their opinion and they should be allowed to express it in a discussion forum without calling each other names. We learn from discussion and not from name calling or argument.We use cookies to personalise content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners. See details

Showing posts with label rose garden. Show all posts

Friday, May 4, 2018

CNN Is Becomiing The Porn Star's Advertising Unit

CNN Reporter Disrupts White House Prayer Event with Stormy Daniels Segment

CNN Reporter Disrupts White House Prayer Event With Stormy Daniels Segment

By Randy DeSoto
May 3, 2018 at 1:05pm

During a White House event Thursday commemorating the National Day of Prayer, CNN went live to a reporter who proceeded to discuss the latest developments regarding payments received by adult film star Stormy Daniels from President Donald Trump’s attorney.

“CNN’s Kaitlan Collins is at the White House where the president is about to take part in an event to mark the National Day of Prayer,” anchor Kate Bolduan said at the start of the segment. “Kaitlan, there’s a lot to pray about today. What are you hearing from the White House?”

The Washington Examiner reported Collins spoke so loudly that some members of the audience turned around to see the source of the noise.

Andrew Beatty, a White House reporter for AFP, tweeted that the CNN reporter was disruptive.

“Slightly awkward moment in the Rose Garden as National Day of Prayer reception guests await the president,” he wrote. “All quiet except for the sound a CNN reporter doing piece to camera about Stormy Daniels. Some giggles some questioning glances.”

Collins tweeted after the event that a White House guest found her reporting “pitiful and disgusting.”

As was true of her live shot, the reporter’s tweet glossed over the fact that Trump did not admit to reimbursing his personal attorney Michael Cohen $130,000 for his payment to Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford. Rather, Trump indicated Cohen was repaid through the $35,000 monthly retainer fee he received as the then-businessman/reality television star’s lawyer.

Do you think CNN is dedicating too much time to the Stormy Daniels coverage?

He tweeted that non-disclosure agreements, like the one Cohen entered into with Clifford on Trump’s behalf, are “very common among celebrities and people of wealth” and said the purpose was “to stop the false and extortionist accusations by her about an affair” just weeks before the November 2016 election.

Collins predicted that reporters would shout out questions at Trump about the Daniel’s payment at some point during Trump’s appearance at the prayer event, which in fact happened.

Just as Trump was leaving, an unidentified reporter shouted, “What about Stormy Daniels?” which prompted a “shame on you” from an attendee, according to The Daily Caller’s Saagar Enjeti.

NewsBusters reported that CNN has dedicated an inordinate amount of coverage to the Daniels controversy, including having the porn star’s attorney Michael Avenatti on the network nearly 60 times.

“In less than two months (from March 7 to April 30), Avenatti has been a guest on CNN a total of 59 times — an average of more than once per day,” according to the media watchdog group.

In March, the MRC had already concluded that “CNN has a porn problem.”

The MRC reported at that time, “CNN took it to another level … devoting roughly 41 minutes to (Daniels’) … performance at a Florida strip club.”

What do you think?

Thursday, June 1, 2017

Trump Does The Right Thing

Trump Withdraws US From Paris Climate Accord

June 1, 2017 3:40 PM

Filed Under: Climate Change, Donald Trump

By Kevin Liptak and Jim Acosta

WASHINGTON (CNN/CBS) — President Donald Trump announced from the White House Rose Garden Thursday that the United States is withdrawing from the Paris climate accord, a major step that fulfills a campaign promise while sparking global outcry.

“Therefore, in order to fulfill my solemn duty to protect America and its citizens, the United States will withdraw from the Paris climate accord,” Trump said.

The president said that he will begin negotiations to re-enter the Paris accord or an entirely new transaction “with terms that are fair to the United States.”

Trump called the agreement “draconian.”

“This agreement is less about the climate and more about other countries gaining a financial advantage over the U.S.,” Trump said.

Trump Urging World Leaders To Call Him Directly On Cell Phone

Following Trump’s speech, Germany, Italy and France said in a joint statement that the accord will not be renegotiated.

ADVERTISING

The White House began informing members of Congress Thursday afternoon that Trump planned to pull out of the U.S. from the landmark agreement, according to a congressional source.

In talking points delivered to Trump’s allies, the White House characterized the Paris agreement as a job killer that placed undue burdens on American taxpayers.

“The Paris Accord is a BAD deal for Americans, and the President’s action today is keeping his campaign promise to put American workers first,” the talking points read. “The accord was negotiated poorly by the Obama administration and signed out of desperation. It frontloads costs on the American people to the detriment of our economy.”

Trump and Vice President Mike Pence were calling lawmakers, including House and Senate leaders, in the hours leading up to the announcement to get input on his climate decision, a Republican source said.

In triggering the official withdrawal process, Trump will spark a lengthy process that won’t conclude until November 2020 — the same month he’s up for re-election.

The president campaigned against the climate agreement as a candidate, and those close to him suggest he’s ready to fulfill those promises to remove the U.S. from the 195-country deal. The move would isolate the U.S. in a global effort to curb the warming of the planet, and leave an opening for countries like China to fill the leadership void.

The U.S. is now one of three countries that are not taking part in the deal. The other two are Syria and Nicaragua.

Pressure to remain in the Paris accord has been intense, however, including from some of Trump’s closest aides.

But a person familiar with Trump’s thinking said the president was convinced he needed to withdraw from the pact, and there was little chance of talking his out of it.

Trump, a former reality star himself, advertised the announcement in a tweet late Wednesday. Earlier in the day, he told reporters he was “hearing from a lot of people both ways.”

Social Media Having Fun Trying To Define Trump’s ‘Covfefe’

On Thursday morning, senior administration officials would not reveal the precise mechanism the U.S. would utilize to execute the decision.

Trump would have several options, including triggering a years-long withdrawal process or taking the more drastic step of removing the U.S. from the United Nations climate treaty. He could also declare the Paris agreement a treaty that requires Senate approval, which isn’t likely to come from the Republican-controlled body.

Lawyers and other administration aides have planned a withdrawal announcement, but recognize Trump has changed his mind at the last minute previously on important decisions where outside forces are pressuring him to moderate his position.

As news emerged Wednesday that Trump planned to quit the Paris deal, business leaders and foreign heads-of-state began castigating the decision as a woeful abandonment of US leadership. Elon Musk, the chief executive of Tesla, said he would resign from White House business councils if Trump followed through.

Apple CEO Tim Cook also urged Trump to reconsider.

Inside the West Wing, attempts to sway Trump’s thinking also continued apace. Trump’s daughter and senior adviser, Ivanka, has worked to ensure her father heard pro-Paris voices over the last several months, and has continued to press for a decision short of a full withdrawal.

Ivanka Trump and her allies, including Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Trump’s chief economist Gary Cohn, have pressed Trump to alter the U.S. commitments to the Paris agreement without fully pulling out of the accord.

A Republican familiar with Trump’s decision-making said the expected announcement could include some attempts to satisfy his daughter’s point of view, but didn’t specify what that might include.

Kathy Griffin Releases Photo Holding A Severed Trump Head

But anti-Paris voices, led by chief strategist Steve Bannon and EPA administrator Scott Pruitt, have appeared to won out. In conversations with his advisers, Trump has cited the affect a withdrawal would have on the states where he won by the largest margins, including in the Rust Belt and the western plains.

That’s a reflection of Trump’s “America First” governing policy, which he’s sought to bolster since taking office. Trump was pressured heavily by his foreign counterparts during last week’s G7 meetings in Sicily to remain in the deal, but his advisers say he felt little obligation to concede to that point of view.

On Wednesday, global figures began reiterating their own commitment to the Paris deal as Trump prepared to withdraw. Chinese premier Li Keqiang, visiting Germany, said his country would remain committed to combating climate change, despite US moves.

And European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker declared Europe was ready to act as a global climate leader in the US absence.

“The vacuum that would be created has to be filled, and Europe has aspirations for a natural leadership in this whole process,” he said in Berlin.

Tuesday, June 17, 2014

Bergdahl Exchange--A Major Error On Obama's Part. Americans Totally Against Trade.

U.S. PUBLIC ERUPTS OVER OBAMA'S BERGDAHL SWAP

'There is evidence that president has put the country at risk'

Published: 12 hours ago

BOB UNRUH About | Email | Archive

Text smaller
Text bigger

Editor’s note: This is another in a series of “WND/WENZEL POLLS” conducted exclusively for WND by the public-opinion research and media consulting company Wenzel Strategies.

Fifty-four percent of Americans say Barack Obama’s deal to swap five Taliban leaders for a detained U.S. soldier in the Middle East amounts to providing aid to terrorists – a violation of federal law – according to a new poll.

That result is just one of the factors that reveals a deep outrage across America over the deal through which Obama freed five terrorists who had been confined at Guantanamo Bay as too dangerous to release in exchange for Bowe Bergdahl, whose platoon-mates say he actually deserted his Army post before being taken by the Taliban.

The results are from a national survey of registered voters by Wenzel Strategies. It was conducted June 12-14 and has a margin of error of 3.95 percentage points.

“The country’s disapproval of the Obama prisoner exchange likely stems from the fact that they feel the national security of the U.S. should always trump the health and safety of one soldier,” said Fritz Wenzel, of Wenzel Strategies.

He continued, “And there is evidence in the survey data that Obama has put the country at risk with this trade.

“We offered respondents two chances to answer this question with a slight change in nuance. In one question, we posed it as Sgt. Bergdahl simply being held as a hostage, and in the second instance, we added language that highlighted his walking away from his post prior to his being taken captive, but respondents didn’t seem to care. In both instances, they said the security of the nation should take preeminence over the life of one soldier.”

The results had 78 percent of respondents stating that the security of the nation was more important than Bergdahl’s security, with not even 22 percent taking the opposite stance. Even 65 percent of Democrats held that majority position.

Wenzel also noted a powerful sentiment against Obama’s decision to take the action without notifying Congress, which also is required by the law.

“There is considerably anger over the flouting of U.S. law in Obama’s not notifying Congress about this deal-making before the trade took place,” he said. “Nearly two-thirds – 64 percent – said they disagree with the White House’s decision to go it alone on making the deal.

“Disagreement with Obama on this point is intense, as 54 percent said they ‘strongly disagree’ with the White House’s decision to keep Congress in the dark. This after almost two weeks in which the White House has executed a campaign to discredit the trustworthiness of Congress on such sensitive matters, a factor that leads one to conclude that Americans are not buying what the White House is selling,” he said.

“What is more is that a majority of Americans – 54 percent – said they think the Obama hostage deal amounts to Obama’s providing aid to a terrorist organization – the Taliban – by making the exchange. And on this point, even a majority of Democrats agree, as 50 percent said they agreed the trade did aid the Taliban, compared to 40 percent of Democrats who disagreed with that sentiment,” Wenzel said.

“Among Republicans, 62 percent said they agreed Obama had provided aid to terrorists. Gender differences are interesting on this question, as 57 percent of men said Obama had aided terrorists, while just 50 percent of women said the same thing. More blacks agreed (44 percent) with the sentiment than disagreed with it (35 percent), with the balance undecided on the question.”

He explained that the White House undoubtedly “expected this Bergdahl exchange to get the VA scandal off the front pages, and it has certainly done that, but not in the way the White House probably expected. Instead of being a bright and shining example of Obama’s skill on the world stage, the WND/Wenzel poll shows it is seen by a majority of Americans as a significant mistake – 60 percent of all registered voters nationally disagreed with Obama’s five-to-one trade to get the soldier back.

“As has been the case since the start of his second term, independent voters are strongly against the trade, as 65 percent said they oppose it. It is not surprising that just 14 percent of Republicans supported the exchange. Among Democrats, 64 percent said they agreed with the White House deal with the Taliban.”

The public has come to see the situation as an “ill-advised capitulation to a terrorist group,” he said.

“What the White House failed to do here, based on these poll findings, is to control this story from the outset. There is no way that, once having launched this story into the mainstream consciousness with its own Rose Garden ceremony, they could have stopped the media from covering the subsequent fallout,” he said.

There’s not a good outcome for the Obama administration, he suggested.

“The die has largely been cast on this as a serious foreign policy blunder, reinforced by the thought that these five Taliban leaders may well come back to haunt the U.S. much the way Obama’s walkaway from Iraq is also now blooming into a disaster of epic proportions.

“For a man who came into office promising to unite the world and heal old wounds, the meltdown in the Middle East must be disturbing to even Obama’s staunchest supporters. This survey shows the American public has lost all confidence in his leadership abroad, and that they are growing less and less likely to trust his judgment – if not his version of the facts.”

See detailed results of survey questions:

The return of U.S. soldier Bowe Bergdahl in exchange for the release and return to the Middle East of five high-level leaders of the Taliban has triggered a great deal of controversy across the country. How familiar are you with this news story that has developed over the past week or so?

Do you agree or disagree with President Obama’s decision to release the five high-level Taliban leaders in exchange for Army Sergeant Bergdahl?

If you HAD TO CHOOSE, which do you think is more important for the president to be concerned about – the health and safety of one U.S. soldier held as a hostage in Afghanistan, or the national security of the country?

If you HAD TO CHOOSE, which do you think is more important for the president to be concerned about – the health and safety of one U.S. soldier who walked away from his post and was subsequently kidnapped in Afghanistan, or the national security of the country?

President Obama did not consult with Congress before ordering the release of the Taliban leaders – as required by U.S. law – because, the president said, he was fearful for the health and safety of Sergeant Bergdahl. Knowing this about why Obama took the action he did, do you agree or disagree that Obama was justified in ignoring the law and bypassing Congress in releasing the Taliban leaders?

There is another federal law that prohibits any U.S. citizen from providing aid to a terrorist organization. The U.S. government has classified the Taliban as a terrorist organization. Knowing this, do you agree or disagree that Obama’s action to return five high-level Taliban leaders to the Middle East amounts to his providing aid to a terrorist organization?

Members of his own unit say Sergeant Bergdahl had expressed disgust for the United States mission in Afghanistan, had written of wanting to renounce his U.S. citizenship, and had walked away from his post in Afghanistan before he was captured by enemy forces and held for five years. Knowing this, are you more or less likely to support Obama’s decision to release the five high-level Taliban leaders in exchange for Army Sergeant Bergdahl?

Do you believe that President Obama knew about the allegations from his own unit members that Sergeant Bergdahl walked away from his post and of his desire to renounce his U.S. citizenship BEFORE he decided to release five high-level Taliban leaders in exchange for Bergdahl’s freedom?

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/u-s-public-erupts-over-obamas-bergdahl-swap/#P3iYhX3sjdJHkJxW.99