How I Came To My Opinion On Donald Trump

http://danaloeschradio.com ^ | February 19, 2016 | Dana Loesch

[inpajamas]

The level of hatred for those who oppose Trump has reached fever pitch. Trump has become a cult leader of frothing fanatics, many of whose hatred matches that of the Nazi Youth against Jews, Communist, and those who opposed Hitler. The Communists Party also was filled with such True Believers for their ideology. And now it finally has come to America disguised as patriotism. America is being torn apart by its own version of Communists on one side and Nazis on the other with true Americans in the middle being hit by both.

[PhiloBedo]

I used to like Dana, before she signed on with Glenn Beck. Now, her radio show sucks and she’s Glenn’s bitch.

[nathanbedford]

Trump and Felix Sater:

Though he touts his outstanding memory, when Donald Trump was asked under oath about his dealings with a twice-convicted Russian émigré who served prison time and had documented mafia connections, the real estate mogul was at a loss.

Even though the man, Felix Sater, had played a role in a number of high-profile Trump-branded projects across the country.

[...]

... Donald Trump has also been seeking to minimize his past business ties with Sater, the Russian émigré who appeared in photos with Trump, and carried a Trump Organization business card with the title “Senior Advisor to Donald Trump.”

More:

After Sater’s criminal history and past ties to organized crime came to light in 2007, Trump distanced himself from Sater.

Less than three years later, however, Trump tapped Sater for a business development role that came with the title of senior adviser to Donald Trump. Sater received Trump Organization business cards and was given an office within the Trump Organization’s headquarters, on the same floor as Trump’s own.

[tumblindice]

You forgot to mention that his better half is very easy on the eyes.
No more watching Chewbacca’s caboose chugging up stairs while slender babes from other countries skip up the stairs.

Now I suppose I’ll get called a lust hog or something by one of the Reverend Cruz’s congregation,

[freedomjusticeruleoflaw]

If Loesch was honest she would admit that her boss hates Trump sooo...

[nopardons]

You are correct re Obama's EOs.

A president doesn't need Congress to do that; it is the SCOTUS he has to get to allow it on an EO by EO case.

[digger48]

You must have studied Godwins Law in school

[catnipman]

How I came to my opinion on Ted Cruz:

A few weeks ago, my household bought into the St. Cruz mythology of the brilliant Harvard lawyer, the genius debater, the anti-establishment thorn-in-the-side, fighter for the little guy, the straight shooter, the non-politician.

But then:

All the dirty campaign tricks and dirty, lying campaign ads is what changed our mind about Cruz. The first issue was the secret, undeclared bridge loan his wife, who's a managing partner at Goldman Sachs, obtained for him early in his Texas Senate campaign,where said loan was not declared on the Federal FEC campaign financial disclosure forms while at the same time Cruz was railing against the "big banks".

Then there was shameful piece of nastiness in IOWA:

Then Cruz nukes Carson by lying that Carson had withdrawn from the race.

And then come to find out that Cruz PACs get more money from Wall Street than Hillary or any GOP candidate except Bush:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/these-are-wall-street-s-new-favorite-candidates-183653260.html

And now we see 24 hour attack ads by Cruz instead of Cruz touting his own virtues.

In other words, you add this all up, and Saint Cruz is just another slimy politician, albeit one piously claiming he's really a good guy and a champion of the people.

[Repeal The 17th]

[20yearsofinternet]

I’m done trusting people who make their living off the radio.

Part of me wonders if Glenn Beck and his surrogates didn’t just get on board with Cruz hoping that he will lose and Trump will win so that Glenn Beck and his paid lunacy can have 4 more years of some demon to go to town on every day for $49.99 a month, or whatever they claim your owe them for “the truth”.

I seriously dislike all these people who seem terrified that an outsider might disrupt their gravy train.

I’m early voting for Trump on 2/29 in Florida and then I’m turning the internet off entirely until the convention.

[nopardons]

Not to mention that she got knocked up and THEN, AFTER HAVING THE CHILD, she got married and hasn't been a "conservative" since after 9/11 !

What makes her "conservative" at all? Because her husband and his family are all GOPers and 9/11 shook her up?

[Kartographer]

My dislike for Trump alone will require you to vote for him multiple times. You might start perusing the local grave year for vote registration material.

[SubMareener]

Executive orders, like other rules issued by the federal government, are subject to judicial review. A significant example of the Supreme Court striking down a president’s executive order came about in 1952. In Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, the court held struck down Executive Order 10340, issued by President Harry Truman, which ordered Secretary of Commerce Charles Sawyer to seize control of a majority of the nation’s steel mills in anticipation of a steelworker strike during the Korean War. The court held that President Truman lacked the constitutional or statutory power to seize private property.

Following Truman’s presidency, the Supreme Court did not invalidate any executive orders for several decades. In Dames & Moore v. Regan, the Court reviewed several executive orders issued by President Reagan which nullified holds on Iranian assets and removed claims against Iran from US courts following the resolution of the Iranian Hostage Crisis. The court took a deferential approach to their review and allowed President Reagan’s executive orders to stand. Judicial deference in cases concerning executive orders has largely continued, although a number of executive orders have come under review in district courts.

On July 30, 2014, the US House of Representatives approved a resolution that allowed Speaker John Boehner to sue President Barack Obama over an executive order the president issued altering the timing requirements for implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The order delayed implementation of certain aspects of the ACA, notably a mandate on employers who did not provide health care coverage. The suit claimed that President Obama’s executive powers did not authorize the changing of such a provision. To date, however, the Supreme Court is yet to hear a challenge to any executive order made by President Obama.

http://jurist.org/feature/2014/10/executive-orders-and-the-supreme-court.php

Don’t see anything in here about W attempts to cancel EOs being stopped. It appears SCOTUS only reviews if a case is brought to them from one of the parties. Do you have additional information on this?

[inpajamas]

No. it is call history. The samething keeps repeating over and again throughout history and well before anyone thought Nazi. Nazis and Communists are merely the most profound examples relative to our age. All that matters is if it is true, regardless if it is given a name as do to dismiss it.

Here we go again, it only happens if most people do not realize it. That is how it always happened and it was not seen until those who came after looked back in hindsight shocked that it could have happened. Relatively few ever see it coming.

[nopardons]

I keep explaining that to them, but they are too far gone, to be able to see/accept reality. Perhaps tomorrow night will wake some up.

[Kickass Conservative]

Allow me to admit my Ignorance on this EO Business.

I have heard BOTH Cruz and Trump say they would be cancelling Obama’s EO’s the first day they are in Office.

I can understand Trump being ignorant of the details involved, but if what you said is factually correct, how could Cruz with his vast Constitutional knowledge also be ignorant of it?

I thought a new President could cancel the EO’s issued by his predecessor. Great, another thing to worry about.

Now I would think the new President would be forced to issue their own EO to override the one they want ended.

One thing about FR, you can always learn something new here.

[digger48]

No. It’s called attacking others because they don’t hate Trump like you do.

[nopardons]

It's from my memory; it was all over FR at the time. IIRC, one that was denied was about the "clean coal" thing that Clinton had pulled, making where it was situated into a national park, or some such thing.

It has stuck in my mind, because it was a Clinton payoff to a HUGE foreign donor in Thailand or some country in that area.

[Outlaw76]

If you do big businesses in New Jersey and New York, you do business with the Mob.

It's kind of like giving money to democrats. It's part of doing business.

Doing business and doing it well means you don't have principles or convictions.

That is what so very many on this forum are telling us.

It's okay though, his mafia ties will help him build that wall!