[h=6]- MAY 11, 2016 -[/h][h=1]EXCLUSIVE: TRUMP SURGES IN SUPPORT, ALMOST EVEN WITH CLINTON IN NATIONAL U.S. POLL[/h]Reuters
Donald Trump's support has surged and he is now running nearly even with Democrat Hillary Clinton among likely U.S. voters, a dramatic turnaround since he became the Republican party's presumptive presidential nominee, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Wednesday.
The results could signal a close fight between the two likely White House rivals as Americans make up their minds ahead of the Nov. 8 election to succeed Democratic President Barack Obama. As recently as last week, Clinton led Trump by around 13 points in the poll.
In the most recent survey, 41 percent of likely voters supported Clinton, the Democratic front-runner, and 40 percent backed Trump, with 19 percent not decided on either yet, according to the online poll of 1,289 people conducted from Friday to Tuesday. The poll had a credibility interval of about 3 percentage points.
The results reflect a big increase in support for Trump since he knocked out U.S. Senator Ted Cruz of Texas and Ohio Governor John Kasich last week to become the last Republican in the White House race.
There was no immediate comment from the Clinton or Trump campaigns.
Clinton, who has all but clinched the Democratic nomination over rival Bernie Sanders, has mostly led Trump in the head-to-head poll this year. Trump briefly matched her support a few times in 2016, most recently in mid-March, after U.S. Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, a favorite of the Republican establishment, dropped out.
Presidential elections are not decided by the national popular vote but by the Electoral College, which is based on state-by-state results.
Opinions are likely to change over the next six months as American voters become inundated with hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign advertising, highly publicized debates and a pair of party conventions.
Trump and Clinton both have much to prove to the American electorate. The Reuters/Ipsos poll found earlier this month that a majority of voters did not trust either candidate with key presidential responsibilities such as managing the U.S. economy, handling the role of U.S. commander in chief, and conducting themselves according to a “high moral standard.”
The candidates' choice of running mates could also be important. Voters surveyed in the poll said they would be more likely to support Clinton if her choice for vice president was a liberal, while Trump would help his chances if he picked someone experienced in politics and someone who is “consistently” conservative.
Trump’s rise in the polls coincides with his attempt to take over the reins of the Republican Party from leaders who clashed with him during a bruising and blustery primary fight.
U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Paul Ryan, the country's top elected Republican, said he would not immediately endorse Trump, and party elders including former Presidents George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush and the last two presidential nominees, Mitt Romney and John McCain, said they would not attend the Republican convention in Cleveland in July.
Donald Trump's support has surged and he is now running nearly even with Democrat Hillary Clinton among likely U.S. voters, a dramatic turnaround since he became the Republican party's presumptive presidential nominee, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Wednesday.
The results could signal a close fight between the two likely White House rivals as Americans make up their minds ahead of the Nov. 8 election to succeed Democratic President Barack Obama. As recently as last week, Clinton led Trump by around 13 points in the poll.
In the most recent survey, 41 percent of likely voters supported Clinton, the Democratic front-runner, and 40 percent backed Trump, with 19 percent not decided on either yet, according to the online poll of 1,289 people conducted from Friday to Tuesday. The poll had a credibility interval of about 3 percentage points.
The results reflect a big increase in support for Trump since he knocked out U.S. Senator Ted Cruz of Texas and Ohio Governor John Kasich last week to become the last Republican in the White House race.
There was no immediate comment from the Clinton or Trump campaigns.
Clinton, who has all but clinched the Democratic nomination over rival Bernie Sanders, has mostly led Trump in the head-to-head poll this year. Trump briefly matched her support a few times in 2016, most recently in mid-March, after U.S. Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, a favorite of the Republican establishment, dropped out.
Presidential elections are not decided by the national popular vote but by the Electoral College, which is based on state-by-state results.
Opinions are likely to change over the next six months as American voters become inundated with hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign advertising, highly publicized debates and a pair of party conventions.
Trump and Clinton both have much to prove to the American electorate. The Reuters/Ipsos poll found earlier this month that a majority of voters did not trust either candidate with key presidential responsibilities such as managing the U.S. economy, handling the role of U.S. commander in chief, and conducting themselves according to a “high moral standard.”
The candidates' choice of running mates could also be important. Voters surveyed in the poll said they would be more likely to support Clinton if her choice for vice president was a liberal, while Trump would help his chances if he picked someone experienced in politics and someone who is “consistently” conservative.
Trump’s rise in the polls coincides with his attempt to take over the reins of the Republican Party from leaders who clashed with him during a bruising and blustery primary fight.
U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Paul Ryan, the country's top elected Republican, said he would not immediately endorse Trump, and party elders including former Presidents George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush and the last two presidential nominees, Mitt Romney and John McCain, said they would not attend the Republican convention in Cleveland in July.
This is why Donald Trump deserves to be president! - MUST SEE COMPILATION!
The american people need to realize that Donald J. Trump is our last hope, he is the only person who is…
YOUTUBE.COM
The american people need to realize that Donald J. Trump is our last hope, he is the only person who is…
YOUTUBE.COM
[h=6]- MAY 12, 2016 -[/h][h=1]DONALD TRUMP ADVISER SIGNALS PLAN TO CHANGE VETERANS’ HEALTH CARE[/h]The Wall Street Journal
Donald Trump says the Department of Veterans Affairs’ health-care system is badly broken, and this week his campaign released some guidelines that would steer changes he would implement if he wins the presidency.
While short on details, the presumptive GOP presidential nominee would likely push VA health care toward privatization and might move for it to become more of an insurance provider like Medicare rather than an integrated hospital system, said Sam Clovis, Mr. Trump’s chief policy adviser, in an interview.
“We want quality care top to bottom,” Mr. Clovis said in an interview. “If that means we have some form of privatization or some form of Medicare, we don’t see anything wrong with that.”
Mr. Clovis, who is also Mr. Trump’s national campaign co-chair, said the candidate’s priority would be to give veterans timely health care close to home.
That could mean restructuring the system in a way to more resemble an insurance provider along the lines of the popular Tricare system used by 9.6 million members of the Department of Defense, where civilian facilities routinely augment department-run hospitals.
“We’ll certainly look at that model, we want to make it as comprehensive as possible,” said Mr. Clovis when asked about Tricare. “The VA’s a broken system now. We can’t continue down that road.”
Mr. Clovis cautioned that Mr. Trump won’t try to fix what is working.
“There are a lot of VA facilities that are being run very well,” Mr. Clovis said, adding that Mr. Trump doesn’t “want to take away the veterans hospitals and the things that are working well.”
VA officials declined to comment on Mr. Trump’s plans.
The campaign’s proposal to move toward privatization isn’t necessarily new, Mr. Trump’s website has long said the businessman wants to “ensure our veterans get the care they need wherever and whenever they need it,” but he has yet to provide specifics about how he would do that.
As with many of Mr. Trump’s policy positions, some of which he has seemed to reverse, the campaign has been reluctant to provide details. Mr. Clovis declined to lay out specifics, saying, “every time we put a detailed plan out we just get eviscerated in the media.” He added that the campaign is using broad guidelines on the matter and likely will hold back on releasing a comprehensive plan until Mr. Trump’s first 100 days in office.
He also said that Mr. Trump will crack down on fraud, waste and abuse in the system to keep the VA budget essentially flat or even bring costs down.
The Democratic front-runner, Hillary Clinton, has said multiple times in campaign appearances that while she wants to restructure the VA she opposes privatization, referring to it on her website as a “misguided ideological crusade.”
Jon Murray, veterans outreach director for Mrs. Clinton’s campaign said in a statement that the Democrat would “make much-needed reforms to the VA without forcing veterans into a private health-insurance market ill-suited to handle their specialized needs.”
Though Mr. Trump says such plans can work while keeping costs flat, the Congressional Budget Office, which does nonpartisan analysis, said in a 2014 report, the most recent available, that moving the VA toward privatization could increase costs dramatically.
Currently, 9 million of the nation’s 22 million veterans are enrolled in the VA’s health-care system, and 6 million use those benefits regularly. The CBO report noted that of those veterans who use the benefits, 70% receive most of their care outside the VA, often using coverage like private insurance or Medicare.
The CBO also estimated that services provided by the VA would cost about 20% more if obtained in the private sector and prescription drugs would likely cost about 70% more under Medicare and Medicaid.
Expanded privatization could also flood the system with veterans who don’t use the program now, the report said.
The VA’s health-care system, though it has been under fire since revelations in 2014 that employees had been falsifying wait-time records, consistently rates highly with those using the system.
“On really almost every measure, VA health care is as good and in many measures is even better than the private sector,” said Carrie Farmer, a senior policy researcher focusing on veterans’ issues at Rand Corp., a nonpartisan think tank. “Relatedly, the VA is providing, not all the time, but probably better than in the private sector, military cultural competent care.”
In other words, the VA’s doctors are trained to deal with the veteran community and the unique issues they face from post-traumatic stress disorder to traumatic brain injury, hallmarks of the most recent wars. And older veterans are more likely to be sicker and have more total illnesses and injuries than a civilian patient, which can be related to military-specific injuries such as exposure to Agent Orange, a powerful chemical mixture used to defoliate forest cover during the Vietnam War.
VA officials tout that it is the largest integrated health-care network in the U.S., where centralized systems ensure veterans’ health records can be seen by any doctor and veterans are treated holistically rather than each injury or illness in isolation.
“Cost is really only the tip of the iceberg here when you’re talking about the potential effects,” Ms. Farmer said, noting that by her estimates only about 20% of civilian doctors are properly trained and equipped to deal with veterans’ issues.
Many veterans’ organizations, including the Disabled American Veterans, have steadfastly maintained opposition to privatization of the VA, warning that as services slowly get outsourced to civilian doctors, veterans will start to lose the comprehensive care they get at the VA.
Other organizations, such as the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, agree.
“We are not for full choice,” said Elizabeth Welke, a political associate at the organization, adding that the Iraq-Afghanistan group wants the VA to remain the provider and coordinator of veterans care.
“There are specific programs that VA offers that aren’t in the private sector: poly-trauma and spinal cord injuries,” said Ms. Welke. And “when you go to the VA everyone is a vet. Doctors who are out in the community don’t necessarily understand that.”
Donald Trump says the Department of Veterans Affairs’ health-care system is badly broken, and this week his campaign released some guidelines that would steer changes he would implement if he wins the presidency.
While short on details, the presumptive GOP presidential nominee would likely push VA health care toward privatization and might move for it to become more of an insurance provider like Medicare rather than an integrated hospital system, said Sam Clovis, Mr. Trump’s chief policy adviser, in an interview.
“We want quality care top to bottom,” Mr. Clovis said in an interview. “If that means we have some form of privatization or some form of Medicare, we don’t see anything wrong with that.”
Mr. Clovis, who is also Mr. Trump’s national campaign co-chair, said the candidate’s priority would be to give veterans timely health care close to home.
That could mean restructuring the system in a way to more resemble an insurance provider along the lines of the popular Tricare system used by 9.6 million members of the Department of Defense, where civilian facilities routinely augment department-run hospitals.
“We’ll certainly look at that model, we want to make it as comprehensive as possible,” said Mr. Clovis when asked about Tricare. “The VA’s a broken system now. We can’t continue down that road.”
Mr. Clovis cautioned that Mr. Trump won’t try to fix what is working.
“There are a lot of VA facilities that are being run very well,” Mr. Clovis said, adding that Mr. Trump doesn’t “want to take away the veterans hospitals and the things that are working well.”
VA officials declined to comment on Mr. Trump’s plans.
The campaign’s proposal to move toward privatization isn’t necessarily new, Mr. Trump’s website has long said the businessman wants to “ensure our veterans get the care they need wherever and whenever they need it,” but he has yet to provide specifics about how he would do that.
As with many of Mr. Trump’s policy positions, some of which he has seemed to reverse, the campaign has been reluctant to provide details. Mr. Clovis declined to lay out specifics, saying, “every time we put a detailed plan out we just get eviscerated in the media.” He added that the campaign is using broad guidelines on the matter and likely will hold back on releasing a comprehensive plan until Mr. Trump’s first 100 days in office.
He also said that Mr. Trump will crack down on fraud, waste and abuse in the system to keep the VA budget essentially flat or even bring costs down.
The Democratic front-runner, Hillary Clinton, has said multiple times in campaign appearances that while she wants to restructure the VA she opposes privatization, referring to it on her website as a “misguided ideological crusade.”
Jon Murray, veterans outreach director for Mrs. Clinton’s campaign said in a statement that the Democrat would “make much-needed reforms to the VA without forcing veterans into a private health-insurance market ill-suited to handle their specialized needs.”
Though Mr. Trump says such plans can work while keeping costs flat, the Congressional Budget Office, which does nonpartisan analysis, said in a 2014 report, the most recent available, that moving the VA toward privatization could increase costs dramatically.
Currently, 9 million of the nation’s 22 million veterans are enrolled in the VA’s health-care system, and 6 million use those benefits regularly. The CBO report noted that of those veterans who use the benefits, 70% receive most of their care outside the VA, often using coverage like private insurance or Medicare.
The CBO also estimated that services provided by the VA would cost about 20% more if obtained in the private sector and prescription drugs would likely cost about 70% more under Medicare and Medicaid.
Expanded privatization could also flood the system with veterans who don’t use the program now, the report said.
The VA’s health-care system, though it has been under fire since revelations in 2014 that employees had been falsifying wait-time records, consistently rates highly with those using the system.
“On really almost every measure, VA health care is as good and in many measures is even better than the private sector,” said Carrie Farmer, a senior policy researcher focusing on veterans’ issues at Rand Corp., a nonpartisan think tank. “Relatedly, the VA is providing, not all the time, but probably better than in the private sector, military cultural competent care.”
In other words, the VA’s doctors are trained to deal with the veteran community and the unique issues they face from post-traumatic stress disorder to traumatic brain injury, hallmarks of the most recent wars. And older veterans are more likely to be sicker and have more total illnesses and injuries than a civilian patient, which can be related to military-specific injuries such as exposure to Agent Orange, a powerful chemical mixture used to defoliate forest cover during the Vietnam War.
VA officials tout that it is the largest integrated health-care network in the U.S., where centralized systems ensure veterans’ health records can be seen by any doctor and veterans are treated holistically rather than each injury or illness in isolation.
“Cost is really only the tip of the iceberg here when you’re talking about the potential effects,” Ms. Farmer said, noting that by her estimates only about 20% of civilian doctors are properly trained and equipped to deal with veterans’ issues.
Many veterans’ organizations, including the Disabled American Veterans, have steadfastly maintained opposition to privatization of the VA, warning that as services slowly get outsourced to civilian doctors, veterans will start to lose the comprehensive care they get at the VA.
Other organizations, such as the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, agree.
“We are not for full choice,” said Elizabeth Welke, a political associate at the organization, adding that the Iraq-Afghanistan group wants the VA to remain the provider and coordinator of veterans care.
“There are specific programs that VA offers that aren’t in the private sector: poly-trauma and spinal cord injuries,” said Ms. Welke. And “when you go to the VA everyone is a vet. Doctors who are out in the community don’t necessarily understand that.”
[h=6]- MAY 12, 2016 -[/h][h=1]TRUMP: MUSLIM BAN ‘JUST A SUGGESTION’[/h]CNN
Donald Trump, who issued a December press release "calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States," said Wednesday such a ban "hasn't been called for yet" and it was "only a suggestion."
It's the latest lightning-speed evolution for the real estate tycoon as he pivots from the provocateur who upended the Republican primary to a general election candidate preparing to square off with likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton.
"We have a serious problem, and it's a temporary ban -- it hasn't been called for yet, nobody's done it, this is just a suggestion until we find out what's going on," the presumptive Republican presidential nominee told Fox News Radio's Brian Kilmeade Wednesday.
But when Trump first introduced the proposed ban back in December he explicitly said in both a speech and in a press release: "Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on."
Trump is scheduled to spend the day in Washington, meeting with House Speaker Paul Ryan, who has so far withheld endorsing the businessman, and Republican party officials in hopes of bridging the gap between them. Ryan and Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus both swiftly condemned Trump's call for a ban in December.
Trump's proposal is "not who we are as a party" and violates the Constitution, Ryan had said in December.
"This is not conservatism," he had said. "Some of our best and biggest allies in this struggle and fight against radical Islam terror are Muslims."
Trump's presidential rivals at the time had also slammed his proposal, including New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie who has since endorsed Trump and been tapped to lead his transition team should he win the White House.
"This is the kind of thing that people say when they have no experience and don't know what they are talking about. We do not need to resort to that type of activity nor should we," Christie had said on the Michael Medved radio show. "What we need to do is to increase our intelligence activities. We need to cooperate with peaceful Muslim Americans who want to give us intelligence against those who are radicalized."
Trump on Wednesday also put a new emphasis on the temporary nature of his proposed ban in an interview with Fox News' Greta Van Susteren.
"No, it was never meant to be -- I mean that's why it was temporary," he said, when asked if he would consider backing off the controversial ban.
"Sure I'd back off on it. I'd like to back off on it as soon as possible, because frankly, I'd like to see something happen. But we have to be vigilant," he said. "There is a radical Islamic terrorism problem that our president doesn't even want to talk about."
Trump was also pressed by Van Susteren on what kind of exceptions he might make to the "total and complete shutdown" he originally proposed. He pointed to Muslim military service members, while continuing to stress his desire to see the ban lifted once some sort of progress was made in the fight against terror.
"(Muslim military members) would all come back," he said. "I mean we have exceptions, and again, it's temporary, and ultimately it's my aim to have it lifted. Right now there is no ban. But I'd like to see -- there has to be an idea, there has to be something."
As the presumptive GOP nominee explained, "Ideally you wouldn't have the ban for very long. I mean, we just have to find out what's happening."
Looks like Guesser will not be deported after all. What a pity.
Donald Trump, who issued a December press release "calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States," said Wednesday such a ban "hasn't been called for yet" and it was "only a suggestion."
It's the latest lightning-speed evolution for the real estate tycoon as he pivots from the provocateur who upended the Republican primary to a general election candidate preparing to square off with likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton.
"We have a serious problem, and it's a temporary ban -- it hasn't been called for yet, nobody's done it, this is just a suggestion until we find out what's going on," the presumptive Republican presidential nominee told Fox News Radio's Brian Kilmeade Wednesday.
But when Trump first introduced the proposed ban back in December he explicitly said in both a speech and in a press release: "Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on."
Trump is scheduled to spend the day in Washington, meeting with House Speaker Paul Ryan, who has so far withheld endorsing the businessman, and Republican party officials in hopes of bridging the gap between them. Ryan and Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus both swiftly condemned Trump's call for a ban in December.
Trump's proposal is "not who we are as a party" and violates the Constitution, Ryan had said in December.
"This is not conservatism," he had said. "Some of our best and biggest allies in this struggle and fight against radical Islam terror are Muslims."
Trump's presidential rivals at the time had also slammed his proposal, including New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie who has since endorsed Trump and been tapped to lead his transition team should he win the White House.
"This is the kind of thing that people say when they have no experience and don't know what they are talking about. We do not need to resort to that type of activity nor should we," Christie had said on the Michael Medved radio show. "What we need to do is to increase our intelligence activities. We need to cooperate with peaceful Muslim Americans who want to give us intelligence against those who are radicalized."
Trump on Wednesday also put a new emphasis on the temporary nature of his proposed ban in an interview with Fox News' Greta Van Susteren.
"No, it was never meant to be -- I mean that's why it was temporary," he said, when asked if he would consider backing off the controversial ban.
"Sure I'd back off on it. I'd like to back off on it as soon as possible, because frankly, I'd like to see something happen. But we have to be vigilant," he said. "There is a radical Islamic terrorism problem that our president doesn't even want to talk about."
Trump was also pressed by Van Susteren on what kind of exceptions he might make to the "total and complete shutdown" he originally proposed. He pointed to Muslim military service members, while continuing to stress his desire to see the ban lifted once some sort of progress was made in the fight against terror.
"(Muslim military members) would all come back," he said. "I mean we have exceptions, and again, it's temporary, and ultimately it's my aim to have it lifted. Right now there is no ban. But I'd like to see -- there has to be an idea, there has to be something."
As the presumptive GOP nominee explained, "Ideally you wouldn't have the ban for very long. I mean, we just have to find out what's happening."
Looks like Guesser will not be deported after all. What a pity.
[h=6]- MAY 12, 2016 -[/h][h=1]A JOINT STATEMENT FROM HOUSE SPEAKER PAUL RYAN AND DONALD J. TRUMP[/h]The United States cannot afford another four years of the Obama White House, which is what Hillary Clinton represents. That is why it’s critical that Republicans unite around our shared principles, advance a conservative agenda, and do all we can to win this fall. With that focus, we had a great conversation this morning. While we were honest about our few differences, we recognize that there are also many important areas of common ground. We will be having additional discussions, but remain confident there’s a great opportunity to unify our party and win this fall, and we are totally committed to working together to achieve that goal. We are extremely proud of the fact that many millions of new voters have entered the primary system, far more than ever before in the Republican Party's history. This was our first meeting, but it was a very positive step toward unification.
Wonder which Sicko down here was/is Drumpfs Butler? 
hno:
Trump's Longtime Butler Thinks President Obama Should Be Hanged
by ALEXANDRA JAFFE and JANE C. TIMM
This butler is a mess.
Donald Trump's longtime butler Anthony Senecal told NBC News Thursday that he thinks President Barack Obama should be "hung ... from the portico of the White Mosque — it used to be the White House."
It was the latest inflammatory statement from the servant turned unpaid Mar-a-Lago historian, whose Facebook post arguing Obama should've been "shot as an enemy agent in his first term," first reported by Mother Jones, prompted a Secret Service investigation.
Donald Trump speaks at a campaign rally in Eugene, Oregon, U.S. on May 6, 2016. JIM URQUHART / Reuters
The agency released a statement Thursday saying they were "aware of this matter and will conduct the appropriate investigation."
But in a phone interview with NBC News, Senecal stood by his remarks in the Facebook post and went even further, saying the president's children were "rent-a-kids" because he felt they didn't look sufficiently like their parents, and that Muslims should be shot or bombed in the U.S.
"There's more than some issues with [President Obama] — he's a goddamn traitor, T-R-A-I-T-O-R," Senecal said. "I think he should be hung. I think he should be hung next to Hillary Clinton, and I think it should be public, I think it should be televised."
He added: "I think it ought to be done from the portico of the White Mosque — it used to be the White House."
Senecal said "it's a good possibility" that President Obama is a Muslim, and "I know he was" born in Kenya, though he admitted he can't prove it.
Of the Obama's children, Senecal said he felt they may not actually be related to the president and his wife because, "first of all, they don't even look like him. There's no notification of their birth. I haven't seen a baby picture yet."
Senecal also expressed frustration over Muslims, saying, "I do not like them, any of them … I don't trust them." He added that the few American Muslims he knows are "nice people," though he had harsh words for Muslim immigrants.
"But the boatloads they're bringing in here, I have no use for," he said. "I think they ought to be shot at the shore."
Senecal said Muslims have "just totally disgraced" some cities in the U.S., naming Detroit and Milwaukee as examples, and suggested the U.S. "designate those as nuclear bomb sites."
"We need to bomb em out," he said. "I could care less if they're in the U.S. — I don't want em in the U.S., they don't belong here. They belong in the sand dunes where they came from."
While Senecal's proposals for handling Muslims in the states are more extreme than the Muslim ban proposed by his employer, the two share a skepticism of Islamic followers and President Obama's citizenship. Still, Senecal said repeatedly he had never discussed his political views with his employer, choosing rather to air them on Facebook when "I get really ticked off."
Related: Donald Trump and Paul Ryan Could Not Be Further Apart
It was precisely that — a Facebook post — that drew Senecal fresh scrutiny Thursday, after Mother Jones reported on a post in which he said "our pus headed 'president' … should have been taken out by our military and shot as an enemy agent in his first term!!!!!"
The post was only accessible to those who are friends with Senecal on Facebook, but according to Mother Jones, the former Trump butler has a long history of writing such posts attacking the president, Hillary Clinton and other politicians while promoting his former employer.
In one from 2015, Senecal called Clinton "Killery Clinton" and said "she should be in prison awaiting hanging," according to Mother Jones.
During the phone interview, Senecal acknowledged his posts were "absolutely controversial — and that's the way I want it."
"I want people to start to think," he said.But while Senecal speculated it was possible that after Trump read his comments he might tell him, "you're fired," he insisted that was unlikely.
"He wouldn't fire me over this — he might tell me to tone it down — but I'm sure he wouldn't fire me," Senecal said, describing Trump as "loyal."
Senecal confirmed the authenticity of these posts to Mother Jones, who reported on the hate-filled social media presence of the man who worked for Trump for decades, weeks after The New York Times profiled the retired butler as a gentle man keyed into Trump's desires and moods.
Senecal told Mother Jones that after he informed Trump he planned to retire in 2009, the mogul convinced him to stay on as the unofficial historian. It's an unpaid role, but Senecal said he makes money by giving tours of the estate.
Still, the Trump campaign insisted Senecal hasn't worked for Trump "for years."
"Tony Senecal has not worked at Mar-a-Lago for years, but nevertheless we totally and completely disavow the horrible statements made by him regarding the president," Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks said in a statement.
hno:Trump's Longtime Butler Thinks President Obama Should Be Hanged
by ALEXANDRA JAFFE and JANE C. TIMM
This butler is a mess.
Donald Trump's longtime butler Anthony Senecal told NBC News Thursday that he thinks President Barack Obama should be "hung ... from the portico of the White Mosque — it used to be the White House."
It was the latest inflammatory statement from the servant turned unpaid Mar-a-Lago historian, whose Facebook post arguing Obama should've been "shot as an enemy agent in his first term," first reported by Mother Jones, prompted a Secret Service investigation.
Donald Trump speaks at a campaign rally in Eugene, Oregon, U.S. on May 6, 2016. JIM URQUHART / ReutersThe agency released a statement Thursday saying they were "aware of this matter and will conduct the appropriate investigation."
But in a phone interview with NBC News, Senecal stood by his remarks in the Facebook post and went even further, saying the president's children were "rent-a-kids" because he felt they didn't look sufficiently like their parents, and that Muslims should be shot or bombed in the U.S.
"There's more than some issues with [President Obama] — he's a goddamn traitor, T-R-A-I-T-O-R," Senecal said. "I think he should be hung. I think he should be hung next to Hillary Clinton, and I think it should be public, I think it should be televised."
He added: "I think it ought to be done from the portico of the White Mosque — it used to be the White House."
Senecal said "it's a good possibility" that President Obama is a Muslim, and "I know he was" born in Kenya, though he admitted he can't prove it.
Of the Obama's children, Senecal said he felt they may not actually be related to the president and his wife because, "first of all, they don't even look like him. There's no notification of their birth. I haven't seen a baby picture yet."
Senecal also expressed frustration over Muslims, saying, "I do not like them, any of them … I don't trust them." He added that the few American Muslims he knows are "nice people," though he had harsh words for Muslim immigrants.
"But the boatloads they're bringing in here, I have no use for," he said. "I think they ought to be shot at the shore."
Senecal said Muslims have "just totally disgraced" some cities in the U.S., naming Detroit and Milwaukee as examples, and suggested the U.S. "designate those as nuclear bomb sites."
"We need to bomb em out," he said. "I could care less if they're in the U.S. — I don't want em in the U.S., they don't belong here. They belong in the sand dunes where they came from."
While Senecal's proposals for handling Muslims in the states are more extreme than the Muslim ban proposed by his employer, the two share a skepticism of Islamic followers and President Obama's citizenship. Still, Senecal said repeatedly he had never discussed his political views with his employer, choosing rather to air them on Facebook when "I get really ticked off."
Related: Donald Trump and Paul Ryan Could Not Be Further Apart
It was precisely that — a Facebook post — that drew Senecal fresh scrutiny Thursday, after Mother Jones reported on a post in which he said "our pus headed 'president' … should have been taken out by our military and shot as an enemy agent in his first term!!!!!"
The post was only accessible to those who are friends with Senecal on Facebook, but according to Mother Jones, the former Trump butler has a long history of writing such posts attacking the president, Hillary Clinton and other politicians while promoting his former employer.
In one from 2015, Senecal called Clinton "Killery Clinton" and said "she should be in prison awaiting hanging," according to Mother Jones.
During the phone interview, Senecal acknowledged his posts were "absolutely controversial — and that's the way I want it."
"I want people to start to think," he said.But while Senecal speculated it was possible that after Trump read his comments he might tell him, "you're fired," he insisted that was unlikely.
"He wouldn't fire me over this — he might tell me to tone it down — but I'm sure he wouldn't fire me," Senecal said, describing Trump as "loyal."
Senecal confirmed the authenticity of these posts to Mother Jones, who reported on the hate-filled social media presence of the man who worked for Trump for decades, weeks after The New York Times profiled the retired butler as a gentle man keyed into Trump's desires and moods.
Senecal told Mother Jones that after he informed Trump he planned to retire in 2009, the mogul convinced him to stay on as the unofficial historian. It's an unpaid role, but Senecal said he makes money by giving tours of the estate.
Still, the Trump campaign insisted Senecal hasn't worked for Trump "for years."
"Tony Senecal has not worked at Mar-a-Lago for years, but nevertheless we totally and completely disavow the horrible statements made by him regarding the president," Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks said in a statement.
Teflon Trump.
They keep tying
Hitlergate
David Dukegate
Corey Lewandowskigate
Calafornia delegatesgate
Now
Butlergate
It is so funny that posters waste time posting this shit, and it has no impact.
Teflon Trump rules.
+4
TRUMP TRAIN, ILLUSTRATED: The red line indicates Donald Trump's level of support, and the blue line is Clinton's, in Reuters polling data stretching over the past month
Washington (CNN)Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, the likely general election presidential nominees, are running neck-and-neck in the battleground states of Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania, results driven by wide gender and racial gaps among voters, a new general election poll shows.
Clinton edges Trump in Florida and Pennsylvania, while Trump leads in Ohio, according to the Quinnipiac University poll released Tuesday.
In both Florida and Pennsylvania the poll shows Clinton narrowly over Trump, 43% to 42%. In Ohio, Trump leads Clinton 43% to 39%.
"At this juncture, Trump is doing better in Pennsylvania than the GOP nominees in 2008 and 2012. And the two candidates are about where their party predecessors were at this point in Ohio and Florida," said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac poll, in a memo accompanying the poll results.
They keep tying
Hitlergate
David Dukegate
Corey Lewandowskigate
Calafornia delegatesgate
Now
Butlergate
It is so funny that posters waste time posting this shit, and it has no impact.
Teflon Trump rules.
+4
TRUMP TRAIN, ILLUSTRATED: The red line indicates Donald Trump's level of support, and the blue line is Clinton's, in Reuters polling data stretching over the past month
Washington (CNN)Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, the likely general election presidential nominees, are running neck-and-neck in the battleground states of Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania, results driven by wide gender and racial gaps among voters, a new general election poll shows.
Clinton edges Trump in Florida and Pennsylvania, while Trump leads in Ohio, according to the Quinnipiac University poll released Tuesday.
In both Florida and Pennsylvania the poll shows Clinton narrowly over Trump, 43% to 42%. In Ohio, Trump leads Clinton 43% to 39%.
"At this juncture, Trump is doing better in Pennsylvania than the GOP nominees in 2008 and 2012. And the two candidates are about where their party predecessors were at this point in Ohio and Florida," said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac poll, in a memo accompanying the poll results.
- SHARE PICTURE
+3
Former Vice President Dan Quayle said today that he will support Donald Trump and defended the businessman's qualifications for the Oval Office
- SHARE PICTURE
+3
Quayle suggested Trump pick Senator Rob Portman of Ohio to serve as his No. 2. 'He'd be a great choice. Man of stature, substance,' he said. 'You pick him, you'll say, that's the way he's going to govern
[h=1]SHELDON ADELSON: I ENDORSE DONALD TRUMP FOR PRESIDENT[/h]The Washington Post
At the outset of the 2016 election, the GOP primary field was nearly as large as that of last weekend’s Kentucky Derby. In total, 17 Republican hopefuls campaigned to win the party’s nomination for president.
Like the Derby, the race for the Republican nomination started from a wide gate — some entries with better post positions, others with more backing. We had candidates with such perceived advantages as wide name identification, large campaign war chests, supposed geographic benefits and other assets they hoped would tip the race in their direction.
Ultimately, each candidate had to convince the party’s primary voters across the country that he or she deserved to be the nominee.
One candidate has won that race, and now Republicans must join together to make sure he wins the next one.
While the primary cycle still has some important elections ahead, it is clear that Donald Trump will be the Republican nominee for president.
I am endorsing Trump’s bid for president and strongly encourage my fellow Republicans — especially our Republican elected officials, party loyalists and operatives, and those who provide important financial backing — to do the same.
The alternative to Trump being sworn in as the nation’s 45th president is frightening.
For nearly eight years, Republicans have fought tooth and nail against President Obama and his policies. We waged battles over debt, government spending, Obamacare and the Iran nuclear deal — an issue of paramount importance to me personally and to many others around the world.
We gained some victories, but on too many issues Obama achieved his goals, if not necessarily America’s goals. As Republicans, we know that getting a person in the White House with an “R” behind his name is the only way things will get better.
That opportunity still exists. We must not cut off our noses to spite our faces.
If Republicans do not come together in support of Trump, Obama will essentially be granted something the Constitution does not allow — a third term in the name of Hillary Clinton.
I’ve spent time talking to Donald Trump. Do I agree with him on every issue? No. But it’s unlikely that any American agrees with his or her preferred candidate on every issue.
After the 2012 election cycle, I was asked frequently what I would look for in a future presidential contender. While I had some personal preferences because of friendships with some of the 2016 candidates, I kept coming back to the issue of executive experience.
In my view, a governor of a state is ideally qualified to be president. A governor is a state’s final decision maker — its chief executive and steward of the public’s money. I felt strongly that someone with that level of CEO experience would be well-trained for the job of president.
It turns out that is exactly what we are getting in Trump. He is a candidate with actual CEO experience, shaped and molded by the commitment and risk of his own money rather than the public’s. He is a CEO success story that exemplifies the American spirit of determination, commitment to cause and business stewardship.
Despite being the grandson of a Welsh coal miner and the son of a Boston cab driver, I’ve had the remarkable experience of being part of almost 50 different businesses in my more than 70-year business career. So, tell me I’m not a conservative enough Republican or I’m too hawkish on Israel or whatever else you may think, but I think I’ve earned the right to talk about success and leadership.
You may not like Trump’s style or what he says on Twitter, but this country needs strong executive leadership more today than at almost any point in its history. The world is less secure than ever, and our allies have lost confidence in our ability to lead. The economy is not growing the way it should. The middle class is finding it harder and harder to get by.
Trump has created a movement in this country that cannot be denied. He will end this primary election cycle having garnered more Republican primary votes for president than anyone before.
But some Republicans are sitting on the sidelines, threatening to stay home on Election Day or, worse, suggesting they will vote for Clinton. They must realize the stakes are too high for an outcome that will have a damaging impact on our country.
Republicans have the candidate who the people decided is our winner from a field of 17 viable contenders. It’s time for all Republicans to mount up and back our nominee.
At the outset of the 2016 election, the GOP primary field was nearly as large as that of last weekend’s Kentucky Derby. In total, 17 Republican hopefuls campaigned to win the party’s nomination for president.
Like the Derby, the race for the Republican nomination started from a wide gate — some entries with better post positions, others with more backing. We had candidates with such perceived advantages as wide name identification, large campaign war chests, supposed geographic benefits and other assets they hoped would tip the race in their direction.
Ultimately, each candidate had to convince the party’s primary voters across the country that he or she deserved to be the nominee.
One candidate has won that race, and now Republicans must join together to make sure he wins the next one.
While the primary cycle still has some important elections ahead, it is clear that Donald Trump will be the Republican nominee for president.
I am endorsing Trump’s bid for president and strongly encourage my fellow Republicans — especially our Republican elected officials, party loyalists and operatives, and those who provide important financial backing — to do the same.
The alternative to Trump being sworn in as the nation’s 45th president is frightening.
For nearly eight years, Republicans have fought tooth and nail against President Obama and his policies. We waged battles over debt, government spending, Obamacare and the Iran nuclear deal — an issue of paramount importance to me personally and to many others around the world.
We gained some victories, but on too many issues Obama achieved his goals, if not necessarily America’s goals. As Republicans, we know that getting a person in the White House with an “R” behind his name is the only way things will get better.
That opportunity still exists. We must not cut off our noses to spite our faces.
If Republicans do not come together in support of Trump, Obama will essentially be granted something the Constitution does not allow — a third term in the name of Hillary Clinton.
I’ve spent time talking to Donald Trump. Do I agree with him on every issue? No. But it’s unlikely that any American agrees with his or her preferred candidate on every issue.
After the 2012 election cycle, I was asked frequently what I would look for in a future presidential contender. While I had some personal preferences because of friendships with some of the 2016 candidates, I kept coming back to the issue of executive experience.
In my view, a governor of a state is ideally qualified to be president. A governor is a state’s final decision maker — its chief executive and steward of the public’s money. I felt strongly that someone with that level of CEO experience would be well-trained for the job of president.
It turns out that is exactly what we are getting in Trump. He is a candidate with actual CEO experience, shaped and molded by the commitment and risk of his own money rather than the public’s. He is a CEO success story that exemplifies the American spirit of determination, commitment to cause and business stewardship.
Despite being the grandson of a Welsh coal miner and the son of a Boston cab driver, I’ve had the remarkable experience of being part of almost 50 different businesses in my more than 70-year business career. So, tell me I’m not a conservative enough Republican or I’m too hawkish on Israel or whatever else you may think, but I think I’ve earned the right to talk about success and leadership.
You may not like Trump’s style or what he says on Twitter, but this country needs strong executive leadership more today than at almost any point in its history. The world is less secure than ever, and our allies have lost confidence in our ability to lead. The economy is not growing the way it should. The middle class is finding it harder and harder to get by.
Trump has created a movement in this country that cannot be denied. He will end this primary election cycle having garnered more Republican primary votes for president than anyone before.
But some Republicans are sitting on the sidelines, threatening to stay home on Election Day or, worse, suggesting they will vote for Clinton. They must realize the stakes are too high for an outcome that will have a damaging impact on our country.
Republicans have the candidate who the people decided is our winner from a field of 17 viable contenders. It’s time for all Republicans to mount up and back our nominee.
