Monthly Archives: May 2017

President Donald Trump walks to the Marine One helicopter on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, DC on May 4, 2017. Jabin BotsfordThe Washington Post/Getty Images

(BRANCHBURG, N.J.) President Donald Trump urged Senate Republicans on Sunday to "not let the American people down," as the contentious debate over overhauling the U.S. health care systems shifts to Congress' upper chamber, where a vote is potentially weeks, if not months, away.

Some senators have already voiced displeasure with the health care bill that cleared the House last week, with Republicans providing all the "yes" votes in the 217-213 count. They cited concerns about potential higher costs for older people and those with pre-existing conditions, along with cuts to Medicaid.

Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, a moderate Republican whose vote will be critical to getting a bill to Trump's desk and who voiced similar concerns, said the Senate would not take up the House bill.

"The Senate is starting from scratch. We're going to draft our bill, and I'm convinced we will take the time to do it right," she said.

Mick Mulvaney, Trump's budget director, also said the version that gets to the president will likely differ from the House measure. Such a scenario would then force the House and Senate to work together to forge a compromise bill that both houses can support.

Collins also complained that the House rushed a vote before the Congressional Budget Office could complete its cost-benefit analysis.

Eager to check off a top campaign promise, Trump sought Sunday to pressure Senate Republicans on the issue.

"Republican senators will not let the American people down!" Trump tweeted from his private golf course in central New Jersey, where he has stayed since late Thursday. "ObamaCare premiums and deductibles are way up it was a lie and it is dead!"

Trump has said the current system is failing as insurers pull out of markets, forcing costs and deductibles to rise.

The White House on Sunday scoffed at Democratic claims that voters will punish the GOP in the 2018 elections for upending former President Barack Obama's law. "I think that the Republican Party will be rewarded," said Reince Priebus, Trump's chief of staff. House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California has threatened that GOP lawmakers will "glow in the dark" over their vote.

The House bill would end the health care law's fines on people who don't buy policies and erase its taxes on health industry businesses and higher earners. It would dilute consumer-friendly insurance coverage requirements, like prohibiting higher premiums for customers with pre-existing medical conditions and watering down the subsidies that help consumers afford health insurance.

Major medical and other groups, including the American Medical Association, opposed the House bill. Democrats are also refusing to participate in any effort to dismantle Obama's law, while some Republican senators Rob Portman of Ohio, Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, Cory Gardner of Colorado and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska object to cutting Medicaid, the federal-state health care program for the poor and disabled.

The ACA expanded Medicaid with extra payments to 31 states to cover more people. The House bill halts the expansion, in addition to cutting federal spending on the program, which Trump's health chief argued is flawed and dictates too much from Washington.

Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price argued that states will get more freedom to experiment with the program and make sure that people who rely on Medicaid get the care and coverage they need.

"There are no cuts to the Medicaid program," Price insisted Sunday, adding that resources are being doled out to allow states greater flexibility.

Gov. John Kasich of Ohio questioned what would happen to the mentally ill, drug addicts and people with chronic illnesses under the changes proposed for Medicaid.

"They are going to be living in the emergency rooms again," potentially driving up health care costs, Kasich predicted.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., plans to move forward under special procedures that allow legislation to pass with a simple majority vote, instead of the 60 usually required for major bills in the Senate. That means McConnell can afford to lose just two senators; Vice President Mike Pence would vote to break a 50-50 tie in his constitutional role as vice president of the Senate.

House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., appeared resigned to the legislative reality that the bill he unveiled with great fanfare, after years of Republican pledges to replace what's become known as "Obamacare," will be altered as part of a "multistage process."

"We think we need to do even more support for people who are older and also more support for people with pre-existing conditions," Ryan acknowledged. "The Senate will complete the job."

Some House lawmakers have been challenged by the public over the House vote.

Conservative Rep. Raul Labrador, R-Idaho, drew boos Friday at a public meeting for his response to a constituent who said the House bill tells people on Medicaid to "accept dying.

Labrador responded: "That line is so indefensible. Nobody dies because they don't have access to health care." The comment traveled quickly on social media.

Collins and Ryan appeared on ABC's "This Week," Price was on NBC's "Meet the Press" and on CNN's "State of the Union" with Kasich, while Mulvaney was interviewed on CBS' "Face the Nation." Priebus was on "Fox News Sunday."

___

Associated Press writer Hope Yen in Washington contributed to this report.

View post:

Donald Trump Urges Senate Republicans to 'Not Let the American People Down' on Health Care - TIME

Click here to sign up for a weekly newsletter aboutPresident Donald Trump to be delivered to your inbox every Friday.

DonaldTrump made it clear atthe beginning of his campaign that he wasnt going to follow the normal rules or tone of politics. Were keeping track of all the ways hispresidency veers from the norm in terms of policy and rhetoric.

See earlier updates from November,December,January,February, March, and April.

When President Donald Trump invited leaders of historically black colleges and universities to the Oval Office in February to show his commitment to the schools with an executive order, he said that funding would be an absolute priority for this White House.

So much for that. In a statement issued Friday when Trump signed Congress $1.1 trillion spending bill, which includes $20 million in funding for historically black colleges and universities, the president suggested the money might be unconstitutional.

My Administration shall treat provisions that allocate benefits on the basis of race, ethnicity, and gender, including the funding for historically black colleges and universities, in a manner consistent with the requirement to afford equal protection of the laws under the Due Process Clause of the Constitutions Fifth Amendment, the statement read.

Responding to criticism around the statement, a White House spokesperson said:

Like his predecessors, President Trump has identified certain provisions in the appropriations bill that could, in some circumstances, conflict with his constitutional authority and duties. The brief, routine signing statement simply indicates that the President will interpret those provisions consistent with the Constitution.

While Trumps statement doesnt indicate any concrete policy changes, presidents often give themselves backdoors when signing bills they think might run into legal trouble down the line. Bush used signing statements to challenge some 1,200 provisions in laws he signed; Obama did the same. But questioning the legality of federal funding for historically black colleges is a concerning move, especially for an administration thats already faced criticism for its interpretation of these institutions.

In February, Betsy Devos came under fire for saying that black colleges were pioneers when it comes to school choice. Black colleges were founded because black students were denied entry at other universities.

In a joint statement, Rep. John Conyers, Jr (D-Mich.) and Rep. Cedric Richmont (D-La.), called Trumps statement stunningly careless and divisive, according to Politico. We urge him to reconsider immediately.

Just hours after the House approved the Republican plan to kill Obamacare, Trump had a little freudian slip. During a press conference in Manhattan with Australias Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, the president praised the island nations universal healthcare.

Its going to be fantastic healthcare, Trump said, referring to the Republican American Health Care Act. I shouldnt say this to our great gentleman and my friend from Australia because you have better healthcare than we do.

Since 1984, Australias government has mostly funded its healthcare system, known as Medicare, so that everyone has coverage. Normal taxpayers pay 2 percent of their income to fund the system, while the affluent chipin more if they dont have private insurance. Considering that Trump despises Obamacare (and taxes, for that matter), its ironic hed have a kind word to say about a more socialist system.

At least Vermont Democrat Sen. Bernie Sanders got a kick out of Trumps fumble. He campaigned for president last year on a universal healthcare platform and has since introduced single-payer bills into Congress.

After watching a clip of the presidents comments on MSNBCs All In with Chris Hayes, Sanders couldnt contain his laughter.

Wait a minute! Sanders yelled, throwing his hands into the air after giggling. Oh okay. Wait a minute, wait a minute, Chris. Alright, the president has just said it. Thats great.

Sanders amusement continued with CNNs Anderson Cooper later in the evening.

Well Mr. President, youre right, in Australia and every other major country on Earth, they guarantee health care to all people. They dont throw 24 million people off health insurance, Sanders told Cooper. So maybe when we get to the Senate we should start off with looking at the Australian health care system.

President Donald Trumps first two trips to Mar-a-Lago cost taxpayers more than $1.2 million. And that was just the airfare.

Operating Air Force One costs just over $142,000 per hour, and the trips to the Florida resort took a total of about nine hours, Judicial Watch said Thursday. But those estimates dont factor in the cost of Secret Service protection or Department of Defense vehicles that travel with the president. (Back in March, the Secret Service requested an extra $60 million in funding, in part to deal with the unique challenges in protecting the Trump family. The agency didnt get it.)

Last year, Judicial Watch found that Barack Obama spent about $96 million on travel over eight years of his presidency. As of early April, Trump had spent six weekends at his Winter White House in Palm Beach which is not just a resort but a private club that charges its members $200,000 annually at a cost of about $21.6 million, CNN reported. In other words, Trump is on his way to outspending the vacation costs of Obamas entire presidency in just one year.

President Trumps latest hire has been accused of sexual assault not once, not twice, but five times, according to ProPublica. And the allegations has been reported back in 2012,raising serious questions about the Trump administrations vetting process.

Steven Munoz, a staffer on Trumps campaign and his Inaugural Committee, will now serve as assistant chief of visits for the State Department, a role that includes arranging for foreign heads of states visits to the U.S to meet with the president.

While Munoz was studying at The Citadel military college in 2010, an underclassman accused him of sexual assault. A year after he graduated, in 2011, four other students came forward. All five accusers said they were willing to press charges, and The Citadel turned the case over to police. After reviewing the case, however, the local prosecutor declined to seek an indictment.

Munoz accusers said he used his status as an upperclassman, class president, and head of the campus Republican Society to forcibly fondle them.

Munoz coerced, threatened, and convinced me to allow inappropriate touching, grabbing, and kissing by leading me to believe it was what I needed to do to gain acceptance in the corps of cadets, one accuser said in their statement. He threatened to call my upperclassmen who would be upset if I did not comply with him.

Though an investigation by The Citadel later found that certain assaults likely occurred, the school only issued Munoz a warning and gave him an award for leadership, sound character, and service to others upon graduating in 2011.

The Trump administration is no stranger to allegations of assault. Aside from his grab em by the pussy comment, the president himself has been formerly accused of sexual assault in court. In the 1980s, Trumps former pick for secretary of labor, Andrew Puzder ,was accused of domestic abuse, and Steve Bannon was charged with misdemeanor assault and battery in 2001, although the case was later dropped.

Until this week, President Donald Trump and his daughter and senior adviser Ivanka were the faces of another Trump Tower in the Philippines. And the CEO of the development firm handling construction is the countrys special envoy to the U.S.

The website for the new $150 million real estate venture which is set to open near the capital, Manila, later this year featured a video of Trump saying the building would be something very, very special, like nobodys seen before, The Washington Post reported. Ivanka also made an appearance in the promotional video, calling the building a milestone in Philippine real estate history.

The material is no longer available online as of Monday, according to the Post.

Though filmed before Trump was elected, the video shines a fresh light on the conflicts of interest between the business investments of the Trump Organization, the use of the Trump name as a moneymaker, and the international diplomatic strategy of the White House especially with his children, with business ties of their own, as members of the administration

Philippines president Rodrigo Duterte appointed the chief executive of the new buildings development firm, Jose E.B Antonio, to serve as a special envoy to the United States last October. Additionally, Antonio told Bloomberg News back in November that he visited Trump Tower in New York just days after the U.S. presidential elections.

Jared Kushner and wife Ivanka Trump are no strangers to business arrangements that present ethics complications for their jobs as top advisers to Donald Trump. The latest snag: Kushner failed to disclose his stake in the real estate startup Cadre, which ispartly owned by George Soros, Peter Thiel, Goldman Sachs, and other investors.

The trouble with this, of course, is that big banks like Goldman Sachs and investors like Soros are exactly who the federal government is supposed to regulate without conflicts of interest.

Kushners lawyer told the Wall Street Journal that Kushner previously disclosed his stake in Cadres parent company and that he has resigned from Cadres board, assigned his voting rights, and reduced his ownership share.

Kushnerand Ivanka remain enmeshed in their estimated $740 million real estate and finance business empire, which includes a stake in the Trump International Hotel in Washington, loans from banks currently under investigation by the U.S. government, and a troubled Manhattan real estate venture that was the subject of recently concluded talks with a group of Chinese investors.

Donald Trump, perhaps feeling left out of the weekend deal struck in Congress to keep funding the federal government through September, tweeted on Tuesday morning that the country needs a good shutdown in September.

Without an agreement, the government will partially shut down, which has historically dealt the most damage to federal workers, veterans, and others who rely on checks and aid from the federal government.

Congress has been the burial ground for some of Trumps biggest initiatives, including his failed repeal of Obamacare. While changing Senate rules to require just a simply majority to pass a budget might satisfy Trumps short-term goals, Republicans and Democrats both quickly pooh-poohed any shutdown talk.

The Trump administrations idea of dinner and a show apparently includes a missile launch: On Monday, Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross called last months strike on Syria after-dinner entertainment.

Speaking at the Milken Institutes Global Conference in California, Ross described how a Mar-a-Lago dinner between President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping ended with an unexpected announcement. Just as dessert was being served, the president explained to Mr. Xi he had something he wanted to tell him, which was the launching of 59 missiles into Syria, Ross said, according to Variety. It was in lieu of after-dinner entertainment.

The thing was, it didnt cost the president anything to have that entertainment, he added, apparently forgetting that each Tomahawk missile used in the strike reportedly costs about $1 million each to replace, and that Syrian officials said that the strike claimed up to 15 lives.

In any credible administration, this kind of comment would be Rosss last official act, tweeted David Rothkopf, a leading foreign policy scholar and the editor-in-chief of the FP Group, which publishes Foreign Policy magazine.

But this isnt the first time a Trump official has spoken casually about military maneuvers. While discussing the strike last month in an interview with Fox Business,Trump himself first mistakenly said that the strike was headed toward Iraq, not Syria. But he did clearlyrecall what he ate while ordering the strike:

We had the most beautiful piece of chocolate cake you had ever seen, Trump said, and President Xi was enjoying it.

The spending bill headed to President Trumps desk includes an eye-popping number: $120 million in additional funding to protect the first family, including Trumps adult jet-setting kids and at least three residences, according to the New York Times.

The bill sets aside almost $60 million for the Secret Service to protect the president as he travels between the White House and Trump Tower in New York City, where the first lady and their son live full-time, at least for now. The other half of the money will go toward reimbursing local jurisdictions in New York City and Palm Beach for costs theyve incurred protecting Trump Tower and Mar-a-Lago, respectively.

These costs in addition to the travel expenses of Trumps sons Eric and Don Jr., who run the Trump Organization, to places like Dubai, Uruguay, and Aspen virtually guarantee the American taxpayer will spend more on travel for the Trumps in one year than in all eight years of the Obama administration. Trump spent $20 million in just his first 80 days as president, according to CNN.

Just days after President Donald Trump ruffled feathers by publicly saying South Korea would cough up $1 billion to fund the U.S. missile defense system, national security adviser Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster calmly corrected his boss and confirmed the U.S. would, in fact, front the bill, according to a statement released by the South Korean government.

The system, also known as Terminal High-Altitude Defense or THAAD, is being deployed in South Korea in an effort to reduce nuclear threats from North Korea. The location incited controversy including fierce protests in South Korea and a statement from Chinas foreign ministry over health concerns as well as its potential to destabilize the region.

According to the statement, McMaster assured his South Korean counterpart in a telephone call that the two countries alliance was at the top of his priority list and that the U.S. planned to shoulder the cost of THAAD, at least for awhile.

Trumps comments about THAAD are the latest confusing directive to come from the president that a high-level official later needed to walk back. In mid-April, Trump said hedsent an armada to North Korea, but the Navy released a photograph showing the U.S.S. Carl Vinson and its strike group heading away from the Korean Peninsula and toward Australia, where it was scheduled for training.

Donald Trump is curious why the North and the South didnt just talk out the Civil War.

People dont realize, you know, the Civil War, you think about it: Why? People dont ask that question, but why was there the Civil War? Why could that one not be worked out? Trump inquired during an interview with The Washington Examiners Salena Zito on Sirius XM radio.

Despite irreconcilable differences over the morality of slavery and the role it played in the economy of the agricultural South, Trump believes one man a man who Trump has been compared to, in fact could have sorted out the whole situation: Andrew Jackson.

He [Jackson] was really angry when he saw what was happening with regard to the Civil War. He said, Theres no reason for this, said Trump, who also described the seventh president of the United States as a tough person with a big heart.

Never mind that Jackson died more than a decade before the start of the Civil War, and largely made his wealth from a 1,000-acre plantation in Tennessee called The Hermitage, which relied on the labor ofslaves. Its unclear if the150people enslaved there at the time of Jacksons death would agree with Trumps characterization of him.

OK, its enough.

Thats how President Donald Trump reacted to a question about his still unsubstantiated wiretapping claims during an interview on CBS Face the Nation.

During a prerecorded interview that broadcast Monday, Face the Nation host John Dickerson asked the president about his bombshell tweet from early March that accused his predecessor, Barack Obama, of wiretapping him in Trump Tower.

You dont have to ask me, Trump interjected before Dickerson could finish his sentence. Because I have my own opinions. You can have your own opinions.

And with that, Trump ended the interview.

Morgan Conley, Alex Lubben, Noah Kulwin, Louisa Oreskes, and Christina Sterbenz contributed to these reports.

Read the original post:

Donald Trump's highly abnormal presidency: a running guide for May - VICE News

Cillizza: Polling suggests this is Macron's to lose. Is there any sense he might? And if he does, why is that?

Bell: A word on polls, first of all. The polling in France has proved much more accurate than the polling in either the British referendum or the US presidential election. French pollsters had explained to me in the run-up to the first round of voting that they did not believe they were likely to get caught out in the same way. They explained that France has long had a far right and a far left vote and that they are far more used to weighting their results than Anglo-Saxon pollsters.

The "vote that dare not speak its name" is something that they are better equipped to hear because they are more used to factoring it in. And so it proved. In the first round of voting on April 23, the pollsters were very close to the final result. There is no reason to think that this won't also be true in the second.

The concern has been that some external factor might come and disrupt the process ahead of the run-off. France's two-round system gives the French the luxury of voting with their hearts in the first round and their minds in the second. Or, as the French sometimes put it, of voting in favor of someone in the first and then against someone in the second. Which means that there has been little doubt in the minds of many people that even though Le Pen got through the first round, she would be less likely to get past the second.

France is taking the leaks very seriously, threatening legal action against any who might try to share the contents of the leaked documents. The blackout period in which we find ourselves means that the French will not know what is in the leaked documents and, therefore, whether they are merely embarrassing or more damaging than that. And so they will go to the polls with this confusion hanging over them. Having said that, I do not believe that this could in any way allow a Le Pen victory. It might cause her score to be slightly above what it might have been but probably marginally.

Cillizza: Le Pen was all the buzz in the first vote. But it feels like there has been less interest in her since. Why?

Bell: The "entre-deux-tours," which began on April 23 and ends tomorrow morning, really marked a new phase of the campaign. And one during which Le Pen was considered to have started strong. The first week following the first round really saw her dominate the headlines and the campaign. She made a number of television appearances in which she seemed more gracious and presidential than she had in the past. She seemed to have the upper hand and many people began to wonder if perhaps she had been underestimated.

But then the big "entre-deux-tours" debate put an end to that. Rather than continue what had appeared a winning strategy and looking to win the election rather than the debate, she went on the attack from the very first minute of the live broadcast, setting the tone for what became a brutal two-and-a-half-hour war of words between the two candidates. She came off far worse, weak on the economy and Europe, and generally out of her depth. From then on in, it all went downhill, with protesters turning up at her events and images of her fleeing dominating the headlines.

Cillizza: We hear a lot about terrorism and immigration as issues in the race. Are they the dominant ones French people are voting on? Or is there other stuff that we don't hear about in the states?

Bell: Immigration and terrorism have been put center stage by the far right and have, as result, been central. But Le Pen's message goes further than that; it is really that she wants to make France great again by making it French again. In a sense immigration and dealing with terrorism are just the first stage in what she seeks.

She has really ramped up the nationalist rhetoric of late. Shes also adopted an economic program that is very left wing. She wants to beef up Frances already-substantial welfare state, leave the European Union and introduce economically protectionist measures to help boost the economy. There is a lot of President Trump in what she sells. And she has regularly said that she believes that his victory merely foreshadowed her own.

Cillizza: If Macron wins, having started a totally new party, what does that tell us about the state of the French political system? What about if Le Pen wins?

Bell: It tells us several things. That the French were really ready for change because this is quite revolutionary. Macron wants to get rid of the party career politicians that have dominated French politics for decades and who tend to be recycled not for years but for decades. He wants to choose his ministers and the MPs that he will be putting forward in Junes parliamentary elections from civil society. He has already redrawn Frances political map by pushing out of the first round the two candidates of the parties that have shared power in France since 1958. In that perhaps France has managed where Britain and the US had failed: To find a progressive answer to the need for change and to stop the populist wave.

If Le Pen wins, it tells us that once again the anger of a part of the electorate that we have trouble hearing has proved far stronger than anyone had imagined. But this time with far more serious consequences since a French president has far more unchecked power in his (or her) hands on a national level than an American one. And the changes she is promising including the withdrawal from the Euro, could shake global markets for years to come.

Cillizza: Finish this sentence: "If Macron wins, his relationship with President Trump will be ________." Now, explain.

Bell: "Complicated." Emmanuel Macron represents all that Donald Trump is not. He represents the world order that Trump has kicked against: Consensus based on the idea of shared values rather than the single-minded pursuit of individual interests. He is pro-European and pro-globalization. He will represent a boost to the camp of world leaders who worry about populists and want them contained.

Go here to read the rest:

Why Emmanuel Macron is the anti-Donald Trump - CNN

EXCLUSIVE

Donald Trump's star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame is now the gold standard for vandalism -- it got hit again ... this time with a toilet.

A golden toilet was placed right next to Trump's star at some point between Saturday and Sunday, which was filled with ... something wet and gross. It also looks like someone broke the toilet tank, which originally read "Take A Trump."

Law enforcement sources tell us no one has reported the vandalism, and they're not yet investigating the toilet prank. We've reached out to the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce as well, which oversees the stars' maintenance ... so far, no word back.

This is the latest attempt to deface Trump's star on Hollywood Blvd., and they don't seem to be slowing down anytime soon. Someone scribbled "F*** Trump" on his star just last month ... and, of course, James Otis took a pick ax to the thing in October.

It's clean up duty again for someone.

See more here:

Donald Trump's Star Gets the Toilet Treatment ... Wanna 'Take a Trump?' - TMZ.com

President Donald Trumps first 100 days were devoid of any promised dealmaking triumphs, and was followed by a budget deal in which Democrats won almost everything they wanted, and Trump got nothing but a tiny fig-leaf hologram funding for border security that he tried in vain to pretend was initial funding for his wall.Trumps initial record of non-accomplishment was striking enough to start raising questions about his self-branding as a consummate dealmaker.

Which is why getting Obamacare repeal through the House was a very big deal even though it may well put the GOP House majority at risk, despite epic levels of gerrymandering.

Cook Political Report immediately shifted its ratings of 20 GOP seats the day after the vote, saying, House Republicans willingness to spend political capital on a proposal that garnered the support of just 17 percent of the public in a March Quinnipiac poll is consistent with past scenarios that have generated a midterm wave.

Details like that are not Trumps problem, however. They never are in the deals he cuts. He needed the House repeal vote to restore his get-things-done image. He needed a big win, and the fake news media he loves to hate has already helped him on that score. But thats not what comes out of a closer side-by-side look at his budget-deal failure and the Trumpcare success.

In big-picture terms, the budget bill contained no funding of the border wall; no defunding of sanctuary cities, Obamacare subsidies or Planned Parenthood; no drastic cuts to the EPA; and a $2 billion increase for the National Institutes of Health, in place the $1.2 billion cut sought by Trump. Obamacare repeal even more blatantly doesnt deliver what Trump promised. It will cut roughly 24 million people off of Medicaid, as the CBO score of the last bill showed, while Trump promised to protect Medicaid. It will reduce Medicare benefits, which Trump also promised to protect, and it will gut coverage for pre-existing conditions.

In short, Trumps success in repealing and replacing is a much worse deal than failure would have been. It even makes his budget failure look like a sparkling success. To see things any other way as Trump and the GOP so desperately want you to do you not only have to ignore the facts, but an almost unprecedented chorus of voices from civil society as well: the American Medical Association, AARP, the March of Dimes, etc.

Its still possible that Trump could pull this deal off more possible than most people realize. The Senate could pass a significantly less draconian health care bill, and the House could approve it or a compromise bill worked out in a conference committee thereby providing survival ammunition for House members who just cast seemingly suicidal votes. Maybe only 14 million people would lose coverage. Maybe pre-existing condition protections would be significantly spared. Trump would win. He wouldnt have delivered what he promised, but the political damage would be sustainable perhaps. Such an outcome could easily help build GOP support for him, which in turn might make it possible for him to accomplish other things as well. So from Trumps point of view, its worth the risk that other people alone will carry.

This is the real meaning of the Art of the Deal for Trump: Its not the actual content of the deal that matters, its how youre able to portray it to the world, and use it as a stepping-stone to the next deal, and the one after that.

But what does Trumps actual record as a dealmaker look like? The Art of the Deal was ghostwritten for Trump by Tony Schwartz in the mid-1980s and published in 1987, just two years after Trump destroyed the USFL, with his suicidal effort to go head to head against the NFL, a truly artful deal if ever there was one. As Schwartz told Jane Mayer last July, he now regrets his role in helping create Trumps image. If he were writing it today, Schwartz said, it would be a very different book with a very different title. Asked what he would call it, he answered, The Sociopath. As a magazine writer, he had previously painted a very different picture of Trump, Mayer recalled:

In 1985, hed published a piece inNew Yorkcalled A Different Kind of Donald Trump Story, which portrayed him not as a brilliant mogul but as a ham-fisted thug who had unsuccessfully tried to evict rent-controlled and rent-stabilized tenants from a building that he had bought on Central Park South. Trumps efforts which included a plan to house homeless people in the building in order to harass the tenants became what Schwartz described as a fugue of failure, a farce of fumbling and bumbling.

Thats a far more representative picture of what Trumps deal-making is all about. He frequently pays too much or otherwise invests foolishly, counting on his ability to squeeze the life out of others down the line, as hes done in numerous lawsuits over the years. Altogether, USA Today counted more than 3,500 lawsuitsin which Trump has been involved. Its reporters compared Trumps litigation record to five other top real-estate figures, and found that Trump has been involved in more legal skirmishes than all five of the others combined.

This record alone shows that Trumps not a good dealmaker. A good deal is one that leaves everybody happy. Trump points out that he won most of the suits hes involved in, but thats largely because he was usually matched against people with far fewer resources who simply couldnt spend enough to have a chance. The main point, however, is that a good dealmaker would never have been involved in so many lawsuits to begin with.

Prior to The Art of the Deal, Trumps initial success owed far more to his father than he ever admits thanks to a million-dollar loan and was matched by an ongoing string of failures as well. Afterward, he bankrupted himself in the casino business, a truly remarkable feat. He then recovered with substantial help from shadowy international partnerships. Indeed, it could be argued that a major reason he keeps his taxes hidden is to keep the world from knowing exactly how the image of his economic recovery was fabricated.

Many of the sordid highlights were captured by Kurt Eichenwald last August, in a story simply titled, Donald Trumps Many Business Failures, Explained. Summing up his account of Trumps early record, Eichenwald wrote:

Trump is rich because he was born rich and without his father repeatedly bailing him out, he would have likely filed for personal bankruptcy before he was 35. His casino failures had multiple causes, including his own indisciplined management style. Another key problem was his shaky financing. He promised the Casino Control Commission that banks would be practically throwing money at him, and at prime rates, unlike other developers dependent on high-interest junk bonds which he ended up using himself, after all the banks turned him down. But the most glaring cause of Trumps casino failures was his impulsive investment in three competing casinos, pitting them against one another a truly delusional alt-business plan.

But its Trumps recovery after his casino disasters on which he built his current reputation. One aspect of this fraud is clearly visible, Eichenwald notes. Trump falsely claimed in two of his books that he owed $9.2 billion, rather than the actual number, $3.4 billion, making his recovery seem far more impressive. How much he actually repaid, how much he wriggled out of, how much was paid by taxpayers as he deducted it from his taxes going forward we cant know any of this for certain, because he wont release his taxes. But it seems probable that Trump only recovered from bankruptcy through four main avenues, in which he made money in various ways, regardless of how well the deals involved turned out.

First, Trump cashed in on reality TV with The Apprentice, a show that made the top 10 only in its first season, and never made the top 40 in its Celebrity reboot. The illusion of his success with this show was bolstered by NBCs prolonged ratings struggles over the same time, making Trump a big fish in a shrinking small pond.

Second, Trump used the illusion of this success to open a variety of other doors, especially naming-rights deals some in construction, and others in a wide range of businesses he knew little about and never really took seriously. Many of these have failed. Rolling Stone chronicled some of them in Donald Trumps 13 Biggest Business Failures: Trump magazine, Trump Mortgage, Trump Steaks, Trump Vodka and of course Trump University.

Third, Trump engaged in wide-ranging deals with Russian and other kleptocratic actors willing to lose large sums in order to launder the rest, as I described here in January, drawing largely on The Curious World of Donald Trumps Private Russian Connections by investigative economist and journalist Jim Henry. As I noted then:

Trumps various unsavory Russia connections arent one-offs, Henry argues. He proceeds to document a much broader pattern, showing that whatever the nature of President-elect Donald Trumps relationship with President Putin, he has certainly managed to accumulate direct and indirect connections with a far-flungprivateRussian/FSU network of outright mobsters, oligarchs, fraudsters, and kleptocrats.

Trump has engaged in deals with similarly suspect actors all across the globe, including figures associated with authoritarian leaders he has recently praised, such as Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Turkey and Rodrigo Duterte in the Philippines. Russia isnt alone, but its emblematic of the kind of dark dealmaking on which Trumps post-casino bankruptcy reputation was built.

None of these deal models are generally viable. Theyrepresent niche and/or quasi-criminal exploits that are commonly shunned by those with actual top-notchdealmaking abilities. Working so long in such sub-prime situations, Trump has lost whatever real first-classdealmaking acumen he might once have had and Eichenwalds reporting casts considerable doubt on how much acumen he ever had. So its really no surprise weve seen Trump floundering so far, and we should only expect more of the same.

The House repeal of Obamacare is being touted as a counternarrative: See, Trump can get things done after all. But a White House celebration after passing a bill through the House is more a sign of weakness than of strength. No one seems to remember any previous president ever doing such a thing. It reads less as confidence than as desperation, unless the president can fool folks into believing otherwise. And fooling people unlike dealmaking is something that Trump actually excels at.

See the original post here:

Donald Trump finally gets a bill passed but his history of dealmaking is still full of failure - Salon

Donald Trump promised to shake up Washington and in many ways, he's lived up to his promise. From his Day One battle over inaugural crowd size to claims of wiretapping by his predecessor, AP looks at some key moments of Trump's first 100 days. (April 27) AP

In this March 20 photo, President Trump arrives to speak at a rally at the Kentucky Exposition Center in Louisville.(Photo: Andrew Harnik, AP)

WASHINGTON President Trump has headlined four big rallies in the first months of his presidency to tout his agenda and savage his foes. A new$1.5 million television ad campaign promotes his accomplishments and attacks the media.

The flurry of activity to build support for Trumps policies isnt organized by the White House but springs from his re-election campaign, which filed paperwork allowing him to begin raising and spending money on Jan. 20 the same day he took the oath of office. By contrast, both President Obama and President George W. Bush had been in office for more than two years before they filed for re-election.

Traditionally, presidents use federal money to push their policies and refrain from overtly political activity until later in their terms. But Trumps unorthodox move to immediately start fundraisingallows him to capitalize on federal election laws to push his agenda in new ways. He can rally his supporters, openly denounce his political enemies and pressure recalcitrant lawmakers in Congress all without running afoul of rules that bar using taxpayer money for politics.

Trump's perpetual campaign operation isanother sign of the ways the billionaire president isupendingpolitical norms.

"I don't think it should surprise anyone that he's continuing to break the mold and come up with new and innovative ways to exercise the power of the presidency and run for re-election," said Michael Glassner, a longtime campaign aide whom Trump tapped to serve as executive director of the re-election effort."It's a continuation of his reinvention of the American political system."

Campaign finance experts say operating as a candidategives Trumpthe legal freedom to act in ways that he can't as president.

At a taxpayer-funded rally, for instance, it might be harder for Trumptotoss out protesters.At campaign events, Trump can and does. At a recent Harrisburg, Pa., rally to mark his 100th day in office, the president yelled get him out of here as police removed a protester, who had waved a Russian flag and called Trump a traitor.

Trumps strategy helps him make sure the audience is friendly, and it frees him up to say what he wants, said Larry Noble, a former Federal Election Commission official who works for the Campaign Legal Center watchdog group.

But by legally declaring his candidacy on his first day in office, he made it very partisan immediately, Noble added. We didnt have any period when we could look at the president as the president of the whole country.

Glassner said the campaign doesn't restrict attendanceat Trumpevents.

Participants needtickets to attend, however.That ticketing allows the campaign aides to growTrump's already massive database of supporters and their addresses another way to solicit campaign donations and to mobilize Trump-friendly votersfor policy battles he' s wagingin Washington.

Glassner estimates that roughly55,000 people have attended Trump's rallies so far this year.

Lew Oliver, chairman of the Orange County Republican Party in central Florida, said Trump seems to draw energy from the rallies. They also have the added benefit of reminding the federal lawmakersup for re-election in 2018 of the support he enjoys among Republican voters outside Washington. Two of Trumps recent rallies in Melbourne, Fla., and Harrisburg underscore his victories in those crucial swing states.

Keeping constituents in campaign mode is a way of keeping the base energized to put pressure on Republicans in Congress, Oliver said.

"I think everything he does projects the power and authority of the presidency, and this is part of that," Glassner said of the rallies."It is a way to exhibit to Democrats and Republicans that he is a force to be reckoned with and that the enthusiasm for him outside the Beltway has not diminished."

Because television networks carry the events live "it's really an uncensored, unfiltered way for him to communicate with Americans," Glassner added.

The campaign also communicates with more than 22million supporters via Facebook. Onepostcelebrated Friday'sHouse passage of a health-care bill to repeal and replace Obamacare. Another accuses television networks of censoring Trump. Several networks, including CNN, declinedto run the campaign's 100-day ad because it attacks the media as "fake news."

Trump in Nashville: 'Time for us to embrace our glorious national destiny'

Read more:

In major victory for Republicans, House passes Obamacare repeal

Trump campaign blasts CNN for not airing 100 days ad

The early activity already appears to be paying off financially for Trumps campaign and the Republican Party.

Donald J. Trump for President Inc.raised $7.1million in the first three months of the year, far surpassing the $1.15 million that Obama's campaign committee brought in during the first quarter of his presidency. Altogether, the Republican National Committee, Trump and theirjoint fundraising committeestopped $53 million during the first quarter of 2017, much of it fueled by the same kind of small-dollar donors who flocked to Trump's 2016 campaign.

If Team Trump maintains that pace, fundraising could surpass $400 million by the end of 2018, shooting pastthe $343 million the RNC took in during the 2016 presidential election cycle.

Glassner would not discuss the campaign's fundraising goals, but said it's not too soon to prepare for the "tremendous monetary costs" ahead.

Trumps go-early approach could fundamentally alter how campaigns are financed for years to come, said Michael Toner, a Republican election lawyer and former Federal Election Commission chairman.

Trump's move to raise money from Day One on the job could emerge as the new blueprint for presidents, Toner said. And you have to wonder: Does this accelerate the decision-making for the people who are thinking about challenging him?

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2pjKKyO

Originally posted here:

President Trump seizes on election rules to push his agenda in new ways - USA TODAY