Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
babylonsister
babylonsister's Journal
babylonsister's Journal
February 14, 2019
National Emergency will be blocked by courts temporarily, DOJ warns White House
A senior official said the White House would win an appeal.
WATCH Video @ Link~~| News headlines today: Feb. 14, 2019
By Jonathan Karl, Mike Levine and Katherine Faulders16m ago
The Justice Department has warned the White House a national emergency declaration is nearly certain to be blocked by the courts on, at least, a temporary basis, preventing the immediate implementation of the president's plan to circumvent Congress and build the wall using his executives powers, ABC News has learned.
However, a senior White House official tells ABC News that the White House is confident the administration can ultimately win the case on appeal.
Lawyers at the White House, the Department of Homeland Security and at the Pentagon have been working for weeks to iron out different options the president would have to obtain funds for his border wall.
By declaring a national emergency at the border, the president could potentially free up billions of dollars to begin work on construction of a southern border wall. Much of that money would be pulled from the Department of Defense.
National Emergency will be blocked by courts temporarily, DOJ warns White House
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/national-emergency-blocked-courts-temporarily-doj-warns-white/story?id=61086962&cid=social_fb_abcn&fbclid=IwAR02zuOStegRnlsqpb8vfL1aOUCJlwf2U6FJ8ql6JAEFskvaRjfxDFwZLp4National Emergency will be blocked by courts temporarily, DOJ warns White House
A senior official said the White House would win an appeal.
WATCH Video @ Link~~| News headlines today: Feb. 14, 2019
By Jonathan Karl, Mike Levine and Katherine Faulders16m ago
The Justice Department has warned the White House a national emergency declaration is nearly certain to be blocked by the courts on, at least, a temporary basis, preventing the immediate implementation of the president's plan to circumvent Congress and build the wall using his executives powers, ABC News has learned.
However, a senior White House official tells ABC News that the White House is confident the administration can ultimately win the case on appeal.
Lawyers at the White House, the Department of Homeland Security and at the Pentagon have been working for weeks to iron out different options the president would have to obtain funds for his border wall.
By declaring a national emergency at the border, the president could potentially free up billions of dollars to begin work on construction of a southern border wall. Much of that money would be pulled from the Department of Defense.
February 14, 2019
The Denver teachers strike is over. They won.
Denver teachers snagged $23 million in pay raises during a three-day strike.
By Alexia Fernández Campbell@AlexiaCampbellalexia@vox.com Feb 14, 2019, 12:40pm EST
Denver’s teachers may soon be returning to school.
More than 2,000 educators, who have been on strike since Monday, said they reached a tentative deal Thursday with the local school district.
Details are not yet available, but the deal includes an average 11.7 percent pay raise and annual cost of living increases, according to the school district and the Denver Classroom Teachers Association, a labor union representing more than 5,000 educators in Denver public schools. It will also include raises for school support staff. Bus drivers and cafeteria workers may also get a raise, but that’s not part of the official agreement with the teachers union.
It also addresses the teachers’ biggest concern: the need to overhaul the merit-pay system, which relies heavily on annual bonuses that fluctuate from year to year. The new system will place more emphasis on education and training when considering promotions, while keeping some bonuses in place.
Where will they find the $23 million to pay for this? The district agreed to cut back on administrative costs, and will eliminate about 150 positions in the school’s central office. Five-figure bonuses for senior school administrators will also come to an end.
The pact was reached after an all-night negotiation marathon between the union and school administrators. Henry Roman, president of the union, described it as a “historic” deal. “No longer will our students see their education disrupted because their teachers cannot afford to stay in their classrooms,” Roman said in a statement Monday morning.
more...
https://www.vox.com/2019/2/14/18224848/denver-teachers-strike-over-deal
The Denver teachers strike is over. They won.
The Denver teachers strike is over. They won.
Denver teachers snagged $23 million in pay raises during a three-day strike.
By Alexia Fernández Campbell@AlexiaCampbellalexia@vox.com Feb 14, 2019, 12:40pm EST
Denver’s teachers may soon be returning to school.
More than 2,000 educators, who have been on strike since Monday, said they reached a tentative deal Thursday with the local school district.
Details are not yet available, but the deal includes an average 11.7 percent pay raise and annual cost of living increases, according to the school district and the Denver Classroom Teachers Association, a labor union representing more than 5,000 educators in Denver public schools. It will also include raises for school support staff. Bus drivers and cafeteria workers may also get a raise, but that’s not part of the official agreement with the teachers union.
It also addresses the teachers’ biggest concern: the need to overhaul the merit-pay system, which relies heavily on annual bonuses that fluctuate from year to year. The new system will place more emphasis on education and training when considering promotions, while keeping some bonuses in place.
Where will they find the $23 million to pay for this? The district agreed to cut back on administrative costs, and will eliminate about 150 positions in the school’s central office. Five-figure bonuses for senior school administrators will also come to an end.
The pact was reached after an all-night negotiation marathon between the union and school administrators. Henry Roman, president of the union, described it as a “historic” deal. “No longer will our students see their education disrupted because their teachers cannot afford to stay in their classrooms,” Roman said in a statement Monday morning.
more...
https://www.vox.com/2019/2/14/18224848/denver-teachers-strike-over-deal
February 14, 2019
Pelosi, Schumer Draw Red Line: Emergency Declaration ‘Would Be A Lawless Act’
By Matt Shuham
February 14, 2019 4:56 pm
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) on Thursday said President Donald Trump declaring a national emergency to get more border wall funds than Congress appropriates “would be a lawless act.”
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said Thursday that Trump would declare an emergency, and that he would have the Republican leader’s support in doing so.
Schumer and Pelosi said of the move: “It is yet another demonstration of President Trump’s naked contempt for the rule of law. This is not an emergency, and the president’s fearmongering doesn’t make it one.”
Read Schumer and Pelosi’s full statement below:
Pelosi, Schumer Draw Red Line: Emergency Declaration 'Would Be A Lawless Act'
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/pelosi-schumer-a-national-emergency-would-be-a-lawless-act?fbclid=IwAR3xGh_HI8MSmmIZOT2lqcGN-8uCE6dGtVGpxGK3Wny83-ne3FQYIEGzPkwPelosi, Schumer Draw Red Line: Emergency Declaration ‘Would Be A Lawless Act’
By Matt Shuham
February 14, 2019 4:56 pm
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) on Thursday said President Donald Trump declaring a national emergency to get more border wall funds than Congress appropriates “would be a lawless act.”
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said Thursday that Trump would declare an emergency, and that he would have the Republican leader’s support in doing so.
Schumer and Pelosi said of the move: “It is yet another demonstration of President Trump’s naked contempt for the rule of law. This is not an emergency, and the president’s fearmongering doesn’t make it one.”
Read Schumer and Pelosi’s full statement below:
Pelosi, Schumer Joint Statement On the Possibility of President Trump Declaring a National Emergency
Washington, D.C. – Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer released this joint statement on the possibility of President Trump declaring a national emergency:
“Declaring a national emergency would be a lawless act, a gross abuse of the power of the presidency and a desperate attempt to distract from the fact that President Trump broke his core promise to have Mexico pay for his wall.
“It is yet another demonstration of President Trump’s naked contempt for the rule of law. This is not an emergency, and the president’s fearmongering doesn’t make it one. He couldn’t convince Mexico, the American people or their elected representatives to pay for his ineffective and expensive wall, so now he’s trying an end-run around Congress in a desperate attempt to put taxpayers on the hook for it. The Congress will defend our constitutional authorities.”
Washington, D.C. – Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer released this joint statement on the possibility of President Trump declaring a national emergency:
“Declaring a national emergency would be a lawless act, a gross abuse of the power of the presidency and a desperate attempt to distract from the fact that President Trump broke his core promise to have Mexico pay for his wall.
“It is yet another demonstration of President Trump’s naked contempt for the rule of law. This is not an emergency, and the president’s fearmongering doesn’t make it one. He couldn’t convince Mexico, the American people or their elected representatives to pay for his ineffective and expensive wall, so now he’s trying an end-run around Congress in a desperate attempt to put taxpayers on the hook for it. The Congress will defend our constitutional authorities.”
February 14, 2019
Trump Judicial Nominees Are Refusing to Endorse Brown v. Board of Education
In normal times, it would be unthinkable. Under Trump, it’s become a trend.
Stephanie Mencimer
February 14, 2019 6:00 AM
There’s no Supreme Court decision more widely celebrated than Brown v. Board of Education, the unanimous 1954 ruling that abolished school segregation. But this month, when Neomi Rao appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee for a hearing on her nomination to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, she refused to say whether she thought the case had been correctly decided.
Asked by Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) whether the court had made the right decision in Brown, Rao replied, “As a judicial nominee, I think it’s not appropriate for me to comment on the correctness of particular precedents.” Blumenthal asked her for a yes or no, but Rao would say only that Brown is “an incredibly important decision of the Supreme Court”—a dodge she twice repeated when pressed further.
In normal times, the moment might have been extraordinary. During the Trump administration, it’s par for the course. Rao is one of at least 10 Trump nominees to the federal courts in the past year who have refused to offer an opinion on Brown. Several of those nominees have been confirmed or approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee and set for a full Senate vote. Among them is Wendy Vitter, wife of former Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), whom Trump nominated to a district court seat in Louisiana. In April, she told the judiciary committee, “I don’t mean to be coy, but I think I get into a difficult, difficult area when I start commenting on Supreme Court decisions which are correctly decided and which I may disagree with.”
Until Trump took office, refusing to endorse Brown as a judicial nominee would have been unthinkable. Both of former President George W. Bush’s Supreme Court appointees, Chief Justice John Roberts and archconservative Justice Samuel Alito, had no trouble answering the question in the affirmative during their confirmation hearings, nor did Justice Elena Kagan when she was nominated to the court by former President Barack Obama. But times have changed.
more...
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/02/trump-judicial-nominees-are-refusing-to-endorse-brown-v-board-of-education/
Trump Judicial Nominees Are Refusing to Endorse Brown v. Board of Education
Trump Judicial Nominees Are Refusing to Endorse Brown v. Board of Education
In normal times, it would be unthinkable. Under Trump, it’s become a trend.
Stephanie Mencimer
February 14, 2019 6:00 AM
There’s no Supreme Court decision more widely celebrated than Brown v. Board of Education, the unanimous 1954 ruling that abolished school segregation. But this month, when Neomi Rao appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee for a hearing on her nomination to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, she refused to say whether she thought the case had been correctly decided.
Asked by Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) whether the court had made the right decision in Brown, Rao replied, “As a judicial nominee, I think it’s not appropriate for me to comment on the correctness of particular precedents.” Blumenthal asked her for a yes or no, but Rao would say only that Brown is “an incredibly important decision of the Supreme Court”—a dodge she twice repeated when pressed further.
In normal times, the moment might have been extraordinary. During the Trump administration, it’s par for the course. Rao is one of at least 10 Trump nominees to the federal courts in the past year who have refused to offer an opinion on Brown. Several of those nominees have been confirmed or approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee and set for a full Senate vote. Among them is Wendy Vitter, wife of former Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), whom Trump nominated to a district court seat in Louisiana. In April, she told the judiciary committee, “I don’t mean to be coy, but I think I get into a difficult, difficult area when I start commenting on Supreme Court decisions which are correctly decided and which I may disagree with.”
Until Trump took office, refusing to endorse Brown as a judicial nominee would have been unthinkable. Both of former President George W. Bush’s Supreme Court appointees, Chief Justice John Roberts and archconservative Justice Samuel Alito, had no trouble answering the question in the affirmative during their confirmation hearings, nor did Justice Elena Kagan when she was nominated to the court by former President Barack Obama. But times have changed.
“Rao’s refusal to acknowledge that Brown was rightly decided is a serious flouting of democratic norms and a judicial dog whistle,” says Todd A. Cox, the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund policy director, “signaling that Brown, its legacy, and all the progress flowing from it are potentially up for renegotiation.”
more...
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/02/trump-judicial-nominees-are-refusing-to-endorse-brown-v-board-of-education/
February 14, 2019
I wish they'd gone with their first instincts.
https://politicalwire.com/2019/02/14/justice-officials-discussed-pushing-trump-out-of-office/
Justice Officials Discussed Pushing Trump Out of Office
February 14, 2019 at 10:38 am EST By Taegan Goddard
Justice Officials Discussed Pushing Trump Out of Office
I wish they'd gone with their first instincts.
https://politicalwire.com/2019/02/14/justice-officials-discussed-pushing-trump-out-of-office/
Justice Officials Discussed Pushing Trump Out of Office
February 14, 2019 at 10:38 am EST By Taegan Goddard
“Andrew McCabe, the former deputy F.B.I. director, said in an interview aired on Thursday that top Justice Department officials were so alarmed by President Trump’s decision in May 2017 to fire James Comey, the bureau’s director, that they discussed whether to recruit cabinet members to invoke the 25th Amendment to remove Mr. Trump from office,” the New York Times reports.
“The concerns about the president’s actions also prompted Mr. McCabe to order the bureau’s team investigating Russia’s election interference to expand their scope to also investigate whether Mr. Trump had obstructed justice by firing Mr. Comey. They also were to examine if he had been working on behalf of Russia against American interests.”
After the interview aired, Trump ripped McCabe on Twitter, calling him “a disgrace to the FBI and a disgrace to our Country.”
“The concerns about the president’s actions also prompted Mr. McCabe to order the bureau’s team investigating Russia’s election interference to expand their scope to also investigate whether Mr. Trump had obstructed justice by firing Mr. Comey. They also were to examine if he had been working on behalf of Russia against American interests.”
After the interview aired, Trump ripped McCabe on Twitter, calling him “a disgrace to the FBI and a disgrace to our Country.”
February 14, 2019
Rule change sharpens Dem investigations into Trump
By Morgan Chalfant - 02/14/19 06:00 AM EST
A change to House rules is putting sharper teeth into Democratic investigations of President Trump and his administration.
The change allows staff of House committees to conduct depositions without any lawmakers present, freeing up the panels to move through witnesses in their investigations quickly without the constraints of the previous Congress.
The change will offer Democrats on powerful House committees including Intelligence, Oversight and Reform, and Judiciary substantial momentum as they open wide-ranging probes into Trump, producing new headaches for the White House as the president readies his reelection bid.
more...
https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/429934-rule-change-sharpens-dem-investigations-into-trump
Rule change sharpens Dem investigations into Trump
Rule change sharpens Dem investigations into Trump
By Morgan Chalfant - 02/14/19 06:00 AM EST
A change to House rules is putting sharper teeth into Democratic investigations of President Trump and his administration.
The change allows staff of House committees to conduct depositions without any lawmakers present, freeing up the panels to move through witnesses in their investigations quickly without the constraints of the previous Congress.
The change will offer Democrats on powerful House committees including Intelligence, Oversight and Reform, and Judiciary substantial momentum as they open wide-ranging probes into Trump, producing new headaches for the White House as the president readies his reelection bid.
“It’s more teeth, faster legs, longer breath, greater strength and just bigger,” said Steven Cash, a former staffer and counsel to the Senate Intelligence Committee.
“The other thing it signals is this isn’t the political theater of the Benghazi hearings. They’re not really interested in what comes out on television. They want sworn testimony. That indicates to me they’re looking for facts and not show,” added Cash, who is now a lawyer at Day Pitney specializing in criminal and national security law.
“The other thing it signals is this isn’t the political theater of the Benghazi hearings. They’re not really interested in what comes out on television. They want sworn testimony. That indicates to me they’re looking for facts and not show,” added Cash, who is now a lawyer at Day Pitney specializing in criminal and national security law.
more...
https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/429934-rule-change-sharpens-dem-investigations-into-trump
February 14, 2019
Trump Guts Task Forces Protecting Elections
Because of course he does. 
https://politicalwire.com/2019/02/13/trump-guts-task-forces-protecting-elections/
Trump Guts Task Forces Protecting Elections
February 13, 2019 at 10:55 pm EST By Taegan Goddard
Daily Beast: “Two teams of federal officials assembled to fight foreign election interference are being dramatically downsized, according to three current and former Department of Homeland Security officials. And now, those sources say they fear the department won’t prepare adequately for election threats in 2020.”
“One of the task forces is now half the size it was a few months ago… and there’s no indication that DHS senior political leadership will staff it up or sustain it. Instead, there are concerns it will completely wither away. The other task force also shrunk significantly shortly after the midterms… and before its members produced a thorough assessment of what happened during the 2018 elections.”
“One of the task forces is now half the size it was a few months ago… and there’s no indication that DHS senior political leadership will staff it up or sustain it. Instead, there are concerns it will completely wither away. The other task force also shrunk significantly shortly after the midterms… and before its members produced a thorough assessment of what happened during the 2018 elections.”
February 13, 2019
Posted on Wed, Feb 13th, 2019 by Sarah Jones
Democrats Defend Omar from GOP Attack By Threatening to Censure King and McCarthy
Democrats are done with the hypocrisy of Republicans on matters of racism and bigotry.
In response to Republican’s threatening floor action against Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MI), Democrats — who already demanded an apology from Omar — have “moved to protect her by privately suggesting they’d censure Republican Steve king and take action against Republican Kevin McCarthy for his own tweet issue,” Washington Post Congressional reporter Rachel Bade wrote on Twitter Wednesday afternoon.
“Omar’s apology tour comes as Democratic leaders have floated what amounts to an ultimatum to their GOP colleagues eager to rebuke the freshman Muslim lawmaker. While Republicans said earlier this week that they may force a vote in the full House against Omar — such as a privileged resolution disapproving her actions — senior House Democrats have suggested they might retaliate, putting Republicans in the equally awkward position of having to reprimand one of their own, including their top leader,” Bade explained in her article.
snip//
Republicans are not acting in good faith as they weaponize racism against Democrats, which is not only harmful to the political atmosphere, but more broadly harms those they are claiming to be defending by only caring about racism when it can help their power politically so that they can continue to enact policies that harm minorities and continue hate speech that stokes the fires of violence.
Racism is a real problem, but it is certainly not a problem any Republican has a moral standing on. And I mean zero Republicans. They are all enabling this president and their own fellow Republicans who are trying to make white nationalism a normal thing. It is not.
snip//
Republicans have not censured King or McCarthy. They do not self-regulate.
Republicans are playing up to Trump’s base of poorer white Americans for everything it’s worth, and without a care about how low they go.
As I keep saying, the one good thing the Trump era has done is given Democrats a spine. They should not back down, since Republicans are not acting in good faith. We are at a sad place in our history when one side is so distorted by power that they don’t even care when they’re being hypocrites. There’s no way to debate or have important dialogue with people who don’t see the issue as important, but rather only see it as a way to gain power for themselves.
Democrats Defend Omar from GOP Attack By Threatening to Censure King and McCarthy
https://www.politicususa.com/2019/02/13/democrats-defend-omar-from-gop-attack-by-threatening-to-censure-king-and-mccarthy.htmlPosted on Wed, Feb 13th, 2019 by Sarah Jones
Democrats Defend Omar from GOP Attack By Threatening to Censure King and McCarthy
Democrats are done with the hypocrisy of Republicans on matters of racism and bigotry.
In response to Republican’s threatening floor action against Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MI), Democrats — who already demanded an apology from Omar — have “moved to protect her by privately suggesting they’d censure Republican Steve king and take action against Republican Kevin McCarthy for his own tweet issue,” Washington Post Congressional reporter Rachel Bade wrote on Twitter Wednesday afternoon.
“Omar’s apology tour comes as Democratic leaders have floated what amounts to an ultimatum to their GOP colleagues eager to rebuke the freshman Muslim lawmaker. While Republicans said earlier this week that they may force a vote in the full House against Omar — such as a privileged resolution disapproving her actions — senior House Democrats have suggested they might retaliate, putting Republicans in the equally awkward position of having to reprimand one of their own, including their top leader,” Bade explained in her article.
snip//
Republicans are not acting in good faith as they weaponize racism against Democrats, which is not only harmful to the political atmosphere, but more broadly harms those they are claiming to be defending by only caring about racism when it can help their power politically so that they can continue to enact policies that harm minorities and continue hate speech that stokes the fires of violence.
Racism is a real problem, but it is certainly not a problem any Republican has a moral standing on. And I mean zero Republicans. They are all enabling this president and their own fellow Republicans who are trying to make white nationalism a normal thing. It is not.
snip//
Republicans have not censured King or McCarthy. They do not self-regulate.
Republicans are playing up to Trump’s base of poorer white Americans for everything it’s worth, and without a care about how low they go.
As I keep saying, the one good thing the Trump era has done is given Democrats a spine. They should not back down, since Republicans are not acting in good faith. We are at a sad place in our history when one side is so distorted by power that they don’t even care when they’re being hypocrites. There’s no way to debate or have important dialogue with people who don’t see the issue as important, but rather only see it as a way to gain power for themselves.
February 13, 2019
Lawmakers Call on FBI to Investigate Reports of Undocumented Workers at Trump Properties
Letter here:
https://grijalva.house.gov/uploads/2.13.19_FBIInvestigation_Grijalva%20.pdf
Lawmakers Call on FBI to Investigate Reports of Undocumented Workers at Trump Properties
https://www.thedailybeast.com/lawmakers-call-on-fbi-to-investigate-reports-of-undocumented-workers-at-trump-properties?ref=homeLawmakers Call on FBI to Investigate Reports of Undocumented Workers at Trump Properties
Ten lawmakers called on FBI Director Christopher Wray in a Wednesday letter to investigate “the disturbing allegations” that the Trump Organization routinely and knowingly hired undocumented immigrants to work at his golf clubs. After a group of workers was terminated on January 18, the letter notes, “some of these brave workers have now decided to come forward and detail an elaborate ploy by the Trump Organization to systematically procure cheap immigrant labor and employ undocumented immigrants—despite knowing that the documents they provided were false. In addition to this alleged criminal enterprise, the workers describe a culture of coercion, mistreatment, and instances of physical abuse.” The letter comes after a series of blockbuster reports from The New York Times and The Washington Post alleging that Trump Organization managers went as far as encouraging undocumented workers to secure fake documents and forcing them to hide during important events. The letter also asks that the undocumented immigrants who have come forward be protected, claiming that deporting them would amount to obstruction of justice.
Letter here:
https://grijalva.house.gov/uploads/2.13.19_FBIInvestigation_Grijalva%20.pdf
February 13, 2019
Senate Intel Chief Richard Burr Covered for Trump While Russia Attacked 2016 Election
Senate Intel Chief Richard Burr Covered for Trump While Russia Attacked 2016 Election
https://www.thedailybeast.com/senate-intel-chief-richard-burr-covered-for-trump-while-russia-attacked-2016-election?ref=homeSenate Intel Chief Richard Burr Covered for Trump While Russia Attacked 2016 Election
Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC)—the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s probe into Russian interference in the 2016 election who has been publicly credited for his bipartisan approach—repeatedly denied evidence of Russian meddling on behalf of President Trump even after briefings from the intelligence community proved otherwise, according to a Wednesday report from Just Security. As a member of the Gang of Eight and the Gang of Twelve—a group of top-level lawmakers authorized to receive national-security intelligence—Burr was repeatedly presented with evidence showing that Russian agents had hacked the Democratic National Committee, were working to help Trump win, and were targeting state-level voting systems. Nevertheless, on Oct. 3, 2016, he told Foreign Policy that “I have yet to see anything that would lead me to believe” that Russia was meddling in the election to help Trump. Just Security adds that Burr was also the only person who joined the Trump campaign who was privy to intelligence showing that members of the Trump campaign may have been colluding with Russia.
Profile Information
Gender: FemaleHometown: NY
Home country: US
Current location: Florida
Member since: Mon Sep 6, 2004, 09:54 PM
Number of posts: 171,096
