The Chinese people almost unanimously consider Taiwan a part of China. Even if the Chinese government wanted to bargain on the One China policy, they can't.

And the call was less about China/U.S. relations than it was about possible Taiwanese recognition. Dole's firm, who set up the call, is paid by Taiwan. There's no reason to believe this was part of some well conceived strategy to bring China to the table.

For something different, I wonder what Trump backers think of Trump hanging out and yukking it up with Kanye West? I'd imagine most Trump supporters aren't fans of West (just judging from JIMG).

Trump taps former Texas Gov. Rick Perry to head Energy Department he once vowed to abolish - The Washington Post

This was the idiot who during the 2012 Presidential Campaign blanked on the names of the three departments he planned to eliminate. Guess what one of them was? If you guessed the Department of Energy you are correct! (EDIT: The headline changed so guessing the department probably wasn't that difficult. :) )

See with Ron Paul or Rand Paul when they talk about cutting government waste or agencies they at least have a plan and know what they are talking about. You could argue the effects might not work out or disagree with the idea all together but at least they are serious. This guy is the pure definition of an empty suit politician. What a joke.

Cliven Bundy is going to head up BATF, isn't he?

Steve Bannon

Either him or Randy Weaver.

Hadn't seen it, but I'd say that's a reasonable bet ;)

It probably goes over about as well as Christie hanging out with Springsteen, but with a caveat: (having not yet seen it) we may hold out some hope that Trump is just clowning the clown.

But less about them and more about you. Aren't you delighted and tickled pink?

This isn't going to end well for the Dept. of Energy. Trump's not going to back down and this move just makes the department look like they have something to hide.

Energy Dept. rejects Trump’s request to name climate change workers, who remain worried - The Washington Post

I guess reading the names on the climate change studies produced by the DoE was too much for the transition team to be expected to do.

Well ... duh.

If they choose not to cooperate, their call (for as long as they have a job at least). However, I figure a pretty good list of suspect characters could be compiled by some enterprising folks with simply time, patience,and Google.

And expense reports could be very helpful too.

It's not just people that have been a part of studies. They want names of people that have attended meetings on climate change.

I agree with this statement. I do agree that TPP was a method to change the equation but maybe Trump wants to take a more direct, in your face approach.

I can handle a trade war and recession if it positions us better, just don't start a nuclear war is all I ask.

Trump has been against science on climate change from the beginning. Why would a department provide a list of people that have attended climate change meetings? Nothing good is coming for those people if you provide the list.

I'm guessing next he wants a list of all pro vaccination people in the department of health and human services?

It looks like both of them are just trolling us all.

Donald Trump, Kanye West Hug at Trump Tower Video - ABC News

Depends upon whether or not those being asked want to keep their jobs
between now & the departmental shutdown. They're certainly welcome to go down with the ship if that's their choice. {shrug}

As I pointed out, it doesn't seem like it'll be all that difficult to identify the first round of cuts independently with just a reasonable amount of effort. This seems more likely to have been meant to help identify the obstructionists that will be in round two.

If you provide the list and he starts firing people, you can at least play the role of martyr, go on the Sunday morning talk shows, and get private gigs with some of the climate change think tanks/organizations. That's your best bet.

If you pull what they just pulled, it's another win for Trump ('draining the swamp') and he's still going to get his way at some level.

That's not how the civil service laws work. But it is cool to imagine that they can all be fired at will just because you believe they are stupid for investigating climate change, right?

He won't be able to fire them. What he can do is shift them to other positions within the department or transfer them to another department for equal or higher pay. They do have protections so not providing the list is the smart thing to protect your employees.

We're talking semantics here. There's ways to get rid of people through budget cuts. He can get rid of some things in the name of balancing the budget (which I suspect is his plan). It's hard to argue against that given the huge deficit, especially if he finds a way to take a chunk out of it. The congressional majority will be happy to jump on that bandwagon.

Total salaries for all DoE employees is $1.5 billion. A part of a sliver of the discretionary amount of the budget ($1.3 trillion), far from a 'chunk'.

What's the point of providing the list? He can't fire them so they're waiting out budget cuts regardless.

This is an area where Trump is going heavily against the majority of Americans. 70% of Americans believe in climate change and 65% think man is playing a role in it. Attacking climate change makes us look like idiots and goes against what people actually believe. How exactly is Trump winning and draining the swamp here?

If somebody can't make you want to leave a job, they aren't trying hard enough.

Trust me.

And what this exercise provides is indications of who thinks those folks are worth "protecting".

And those are the people that don't need to be living on the taxpayer dime, they're the problem as much or more as those perpetrating the fraudulent climate change bogeyman.

At least we don't have to pretend anymore that MBBF believes in any sort of democratic norms.

All government jobs are patronage jobs!

The issue here isn't really climate change. The issue is the large amount of taxpayer money being spent on projects which may/may not be needed or relevant. Just because people support the idea that climate change exists doesn't mean they want money just spent for the sake of climate change. I'm part of your 65% that you cite, but I'm also part of the group that thinks the bloated budgets in some of these departments are WAY out of control and deserve a once-over.

I believe that cancer (or insert your own personal cause) is a bad thing, but that doesn't mean that all the money being thrown around in the name of defeating that disease is necessarily being used in an efficient manner. You can be on both side of this issue. The two are not mutually exclusive.

Then why are they asking for just the names of those researching climate change? Sure makes it seem that that is the issue.

I know of a few countries historical where this sort of thing happened.You don´t want to be compared to those.

What´s next, a reward or an anonymous tip site for people to denunciate their co-workers ?

I believe it is anti-intellectualism and the idea that business will protect the Earth out of their own interests if left alone, which we know is not the case.

I wonder if we look back to the 80s when there was a hole in the ozone layer. I guess I was still young, but I remember the government deciding that we (as humans) had a heavy hand in the destruction of the atmosphere and if left alone it could be terrible. So they banned and limited certain things and yet, somehow, companies still figured out how to make money and the ozone is better.

If YOU truly believed that we were having an effect on the environment, would you not want money and resources devoted to more examination of this and how we can prevent it? Rather than tattling and firing on people who believed it and studied it? I mean, you seem somewhat intelligent and well versed. What would you say if he asked for the names of people at DHHS that studied the lack of link between autism and vaccines and stated that we wanted to disband that?

If you believe the goal is to "trim the fat" you are an even bigger idiot than you seem.

Or we can just subsidize AC units in the name of "saving jobs". :rolleyes:

Having worked with public sector directors who are now private, again you are misinformed and making assumptions. If you, as a manager, even accidentally make an employees life very slightly more difficult or stressful you are pulled in front of an investigative board, threatened and told to leave employee alone.

Even awful employees who sleep half the day are given the benefit of the doubt and any actions taken by a manager will generally be reviewed with the manager in the cross hairs, not the shit employee.

The private world doesn't work like the public one, it earns its reputation and is far worse than you think. Half of federal and state workforces are sleeping their days away waiting for their pension. With managers, the ones that aren't doing the same, that try and fail to fix it, go insane and join the private world.

I think you're missing some of the point here. Anybody who has backed the climate change agenda IS in the crosshairs (as I certainly believe they deserve to be).

I'm sadly aware of how hard it is to get rid of deadweight -- public or private -- I'm saying that changing that is part of the draining of the swamp. You're comments assume that the tide isn't shifting/going to shift. I'm viewing this more optimistically.

It already happened here in the 50s with Hollywood blackballing.

You clearly haven't worked in the government. I've worked in the Dept. of Heath and the Dept. of Agriculture. I'm well aware of exactly how it works. It's nothing but politics.

You're defending a system of political purges for civil service workers. That isn't about efficiency, it's about control.

And you're nuts if you think a workforce staffed entirely with patronage jobs will be more efficient than civil service employees.

I think his appointments already can end the talk about draining the swamp. Turns out that was just a campaign thing morons fell for.

The Trump transition team did back down. They are saying the questionnaire was not approved and sent in by a rogue team member that has been reprimanded.

Trump Team Disavows Request To ID Climate Staffers: 'Not Authorized'

So now some dude who was an ambassador to Uzbekistan/WikiLeaks "operative"/friend of Assange claims that hey, it wasn't Russia! It was a disgruntled DNCer who gave him the e-mails. And that American intelligence is lying. Yup, because they are obviously controlled by the Democratic machine (which doesn't hold the House, Senate, or soon Presidency).

Right. But, some people are lapping it up.

So, I guess Republicans will twist themselves into knots to explain how Flynn sharing classified information isn't as bad as Clinton not sharing classified information.

You're assuming that Republicans aren't hypocritical fucking idiots

And violating his clearance in multiple other ways.

Not sure why people continue to do this.

Yasmin Seweid teen accused of making up story of anti-Muslim harassment on NYC subway - CBS News

I don't think it was much more than a PR stunt for both. Kanye gets in the news which he likes. Trump draws attention away from the Russia stuff because the media can't help but eat this story up and shame the black guy for daring to have individual thoughts on politics.

Really good read about 'Purple America' and what they want......

http://www.wsj.com/articles/what-pur...ump-1481675070

Has anyone looked at the really poor numbers of @VanityFair Magazine. Way down, big trouble, dead! Graydon Carter, no talent, will be out!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 15, 2016

Trump freaks out on Graydon Carter after bad restaurant review | New York Post

Trump's a turd but in fairness to him, Vanity Fair has been trash for awhile now. And the writer of that piece is a complete hack with a vendetta.

And 25% were over counted in 2 counties that went for Trump, so...

Trump couldn't be less tactful in some of these situations, but the piece he's complaining about is so poorly done, it's really hard to not agree with his annoyance about it.

Great, so we can agree the entire damn state can't count. What's your point? It was a Detroit paper writing about Detroit news.

No need to play dumb, its quite obvious why you posted the article, which included the numbers I cited in TFA.

So maybe state wide recounts are a good idea and Jill Stein was on to something?

I'd say a statewide check on how votes are cast/counted would be much more fruitful in the long run. Bad data in, bad data out as far as recounts go.

So why did I post it?

I refuse to believe Jill Stein has ever been on to anything.

(Shh... just play along)

Not sure if you're being sarcastic or naive.

Good. I am hoping that stuff like this coming out will make the confirmation hearings difficult and might lead to other choices in the long run.

One way to ease Trump off the crazy would be if the GOP controlled Congress still forced him to compromise on some of his weirder decisions.

I don't know if they can force him to compromise. GOP voters are much more pro-Russia/Putin these days. Imagine if Reagan were still alive to see this.

The ultimate result that the ends justify the means if it helps you win. There's very little in regards to a conclusion that you can come to otherwise. The rise of the controlling neo-conferderate is complete.

Ah, it's "Liberals get angry because the Electoral College doesn't flip to Hillary" Day!

Not really.

I would say that the vast majority of Americans are willing to proceed, however they do want to know what the fuck happened and how did we get here. They also want the Congressmen who spent 8 years undermining one presidency to shut the fuck up about suddenly getting slammed with the very same tactics they themselves rationalized. Furthermore, they'd really like it if it didn't look like we were intentionally covering up something that's massive implications go beyond the actual hacked emails, but drive to something much bigger.

Trump will be in the crosshairs for the next 4 years at least. He will be subject to scrutiny, ridicule and outright opposition. Get used to it. Just like my own Dad said, "this anger you have is how we felt for 8 years," well suck it up buttercup, you're about to endure the shoe on the other foot. Being the target instead of the rock is a completely different experience.

I would like to see how the people whining about the popular vote would have responded to the first 9 presidential elections in US history.

I fully expect Trump to be a train wreck of Warren G. Harding proportions, but I have no problem with how he got there.

What exactly is your definition of "how he got there?"

The electoral process? The actual outcome of the vote on Nov 8?

I would like to see how people against slavery would have responded to the first eighty years of the USA.

Russia's ambassador to Turkey was shot and wounded. The Russian reaction will be worth watching.

Except we're not all that inclined to take it with much patience after enduring the destruction & damage of the past eight years.

The shoe IS on the other foot ... and I hope & pray it squashes a whole lot of fucking cockroaches.

The electoral process. I have no problem with someone losing the popular vote but winning the electoral college, even if he was a boorish, lying oaf the entire time.

Update: Russian ambassador killed.

Take it all the way back to the times when there was a quiet, repressed, conciliatory, underpaid, workforce, and a single, authoritarian leader who was responsible to make all the choices for the good of himself and those others who were worthy, such as himself? Because, the ones he was responsible for weren't (insert whatever here, smart, wealthy, genetically significant) enough? I mean, after all, they should know better.

I still wonder exactly what it was that was destroyed over the past eight years. Not generalities like "good sense" or "common reason," but specific examples.

Unbelievable media photo of the moment just before the shooter was gunned down.

Video of the assassination itself.

Footage of the Russian Ambassador getting show, gunman clearly shouting "Allahu Akbar" - YouTube

That's nuts. He was the only one behind him. He was either part of the museum security detail or the ambassador's security detail. No other way he's in that spot, is there?

Archduke Ferdinand unavailable for comment.

I just read he was off duty, he flashed his badge to get in, and the ambassador's detail was not with him.

No social media from Trump yet. I'm a bit surprised to be honest.

Supposedly the translation of his comments makes it clear he was taking action in response to the Russian abuses in Aleppo.

Something along the lines of "You kill us in Aleppo, we kill you here. God is great."

It's not illegal if the President or his kids do it.

Putin hasn't gotten in touch to tell him what to say.

Not much on "the wall" that I've read. Wonder what is going on there, looking forward to see how Trump plans to execute this?

Great article in the Washington Post talking about the potential future of the US, based on similar politics in Poland.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...=.5181106ceb73


So yeah, lots of familiarity and things to fear there. I'm not even touching on the rollbacks of equal rights for LGBT groups, the normalizing of state religion, and and state approved discrimination against other racial and sex-identity groups.

Gen. Flynn apparently has been meeting with the leader of the Austrian Freedom party, a white supremacist party founded by honest to God Nazis.

The same one that just signed a cooperation agreement with Russia? Shocking.

I thought and still think the Trump presidency will be a disaster (not a country destroying disaster but probably one that will make the W. Bush presidency look like a success) but the one positive is how worked up the board's resident liberals get about every single thing in the news. Oh my God racism, Russia!, oh jeez racism, the Russians, oh no racism!!!! It's like the idiots on the other side back in 2008 complaining all the time about Jeremiah Wright, the black panthers supposedly changing the elections, the end of America as we know it, Benghazi...

You screwed over a huge portion of your base with the super-delegates in the primary and then ran a shitty candidate who lost... get over it.

There is a difference between complaining about things that happened versus things that didn't happen.

The New Black Panthers didn't achieve anything. The Russians really did influence the election. That's not hard to figure out.

I'm amazed that conservatives who idolized Reagan are fine with the Russians basically pulling the strings now.

It's now an inarguable fact they influenced the election and without their meddling Clinton would have won the election? People thought Hillary Clinton was an honest upstanding clean politician until Wikileaks (aka in CNN speak "The Russians") showed she wasn't? Give me a break. Again same garbage assuming non-liberals are incapable of making decisions without Russian meddling and/or racism. Maybe this mindset is what lost the election?

I thought Clinton was a better candidate than Trump for sure but nothing realeased in the hacked emails was the least bit surprising or shocking.

The Russians are now pulling the strings? Maybe the Democrats just had a crappy candidate who lost the election. A liberal loss doesn't always have to be because of something unfair happening.

If Russians didn't think that wikileaks of DNC emails wouldn't hurt the Clinton campaign why would they release them? I mean this is just Occam's razor now.

And considering how CLOSE Trump ended up winning (100,000 votes over 3 states), I think one can say that without Russian meddling there is a good chance it could have been vastly different.

Uh... yeah. Look who is the nominee for SecState. Look what the President-elect's policy for Syria seems to be. Look what the President-elect's policy towards Russian sanctions is. What is the President-elect's policy on NATO? Russia is getting everything it wants on the international stage.

I'm amazed at how many liberals are clinging to this idea that Clinton was a slam-dunk without the e-mail release. She was unlikable long before that.

Personally, I don't see the problem in it. She should have released all those e-mails when they were requested. If she had, no one would have ended up leaking them at such a crucial time in her campaign. Mrs. Clinton has no one to blame but herself. Do it the right way and she had a fighting chance.

People do realize that Clinton's emails from her own server weren't leaked right?

Freedoms that go away, like say, the freedom of press, the normalization of not releasing income tax records, the idea that the president isn't beholden to the US population in location, statements, or actions is nearly impossible to get back once it's gone.

If we allow the the highest office in the land, the most powerful person in the world, to now be allowed the freedom to operate behind the walls, or through others, while maintaining a distinct line between himself and the people. To allow him to control press by shutting down opposing voices, or by simply ignoring the voices he doesn't agree with, and allowing him the freedom to communicate through a medium that affords him protection from immediate consequences then we've lost more in that than anything that's happened in the last 40 years.

We will have created the Wizard of Oz, knowing full well who he is, but choosing to accept it anyway. He will insulate and continue to insulate himself by surrounding himself with so many people that he can scapegoat that he'll never do anything wrong, because there will always be someone to blame.

Building metaphorical walls will only create barriers to achievement. Trump has his twitter wall where he is free to speak whatever he feels. Everyone else argues about what he means, and what the consequences of it are, but he never has to face the music. We have walls on this board, reddit, facebook, twitter. The age of impersonal, human interactions, where we can insulate from having to actually feel empathy for anyone else is here.

That is no way to conduct foreign policy. It's no way to maintain peace with allies and it sure as hell isn't the way to avoid conflict. Trump spouts off as being an isolationist where the world needs to leave us alone, but then weighs in on every single thing happening as if he's right there feeding the flames on one side or another.

He's simply not smart enough to realize what the fuck he's doing, and I fear we will all pay the price, one way or another.

I am not a Trump supporter in the least. However it's amazing you have analyzed his unsuccessful presidency after him being in office for 0 days. I thought the conservatives were fast in declaring Obama's failure about a month into his term but I will give you credit for being even faster.

And that ladies and gentleman is the crux for the majority of Americans who think that they were totally related. Holy shit.

Dude, look around. He's not the first person who's ever approached world politics in this way. He's not a trailblazer. He's not setting out to change things. This is based off of his actions, his beliefs, his speeches. The way he runs his companies, his lawsuits. There's nothing here that should be shocking to anyone if you're paying attention.

I sure as shit am claiming he's going to be assassinated, nor calling for it, like many did when Obama was elected. I'm not putting words or actions to him that he hasn't already done in one way or another. I'm saying that if he continues to operate that way that he always has, that this will be the result.