Trump talks Alec Baldwin, CNN's Jeff Zucker and Sen. Chuck Schumer on Watters' World

President Donald Trump had nothing good to say about Alec Baldwin, CNN's president Jeff Zucker and Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer in an interview with Jesse Watters to be broadcast this weekend.
During the 'Watters' World' interview to be broadcast at 8 p.m. Saturday and Sunday, Trump would not say who he would fire out of the three men.
"Chuck I'm very disappointed in, because he's a guy who should make deals for the people. Not as a Democrat or Republican," said Trump.
Trump stated that he got Jeff Zucker his job at CNN and described the cable news network as "fake news."
"I think the Alec Baldwin situation is not good," Trump said. "The portrayal of me is ridiculous."
On the subject of whether he believes that former President Obama wants him to succeed, Trump said:
"Well, you know, he's been very nice to me personally. But his people haven't been nice and there's great animosity out there. There's great anger. Leaking is just one example of it. ... So, while he's nice personally there doesn't seem to be a lot of nice things happening behind the scenes. And that's unfortunate."

President Trump no longer safe in White House: Former Secret Service agent

The president is no longer safe on the White House grounds, according to former Secret Service agent Dan Bongino, who once guarded presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama.
Bongino made the stunning assessment in an interview Friday with Fox News. It followed an incident last Friday night when a man jumped the White House fence and may have roamed the property for as long as 15 minutes before he was stopped by the Secret Service.
Jonathan Tran, who carried two cans of mace, set off multiple alarms, Bongino said, and was even spotted by Secret Service officers, but was still able to come within “close proximity” of the White House and even reportedly “jiggled the door” to the executive mansion.
“The intruder set off multiple alarms, alarms that clearly showed someone breached the property, and he was seen by officers who didn't think anything of it. This is a big story,” Bongino told Fox News.

Expand / Contract

President Donald Trump (AP)

“That just shows the president is not safe there - in the White House. The Secret Service does not have the assets, they don't have personnel on the ground they need to keep him safe.”
Should a group of terrorists decide to storm the White House, the Secret Service would not be able to protect Trump, Bongino predicted.
“The Secret Service cannot even keep one person off the grounds - what will they do if 40 terrorists charge the White House?” he asked. “And believe me the terrorists are already thinking about that.”
According to the Secret Service, Tran was charged with entering a restricted building and carrying a dangerous weapon.
Trump, who was on the property, has praised the Secret Service for doing a “fantastic job” and said the suspect was “troubled.”
But Bongino said the current Secret Service management “sucks.”
“The Secret Service is stuck in their ways and don't want to redo and upgrade the White House security plan. President Trump won't be safe there until they do,” Bongino said.
House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, also blasted the latest incident and said “this keeps happening.” Chaffetz’s panel oversees the Secret Service.
He added, “Our information is incomplete at best.”
In a letter to acting Secret Service Director Bill Callahan, Chaffetz said Tran “may have attempted entry into the building. If true, these allegations raise questions about whether the agency’s security protocols are adequate.”
Chaffetz suggested there may have been alarms that were ignored by the Secret Service.
Chaffetz wants a briefing by the end of next week. He also is asking for all video from the White House grounds that night as well as logs from the Joint Operations Center and information about “alarms” at the White House.
The episode recalled another in September 2014, when Omar Gonzales penetrated the White House grounds and actually made it inside. Then-Secret Service Director Julia Pierson afterward conceded “mistakes were made.” But the Secret Service was found to have publicly lied about how far Gonzales made it into the White House.
It cost Pierson her job.
They later found the White House alarms had been muted in the Gonzales incident.

Liberal Dummy Democrat Cartoons

Trump set to meet Merkel at White House after criticizing her during campaign

President Trump on Friday is set to welcome Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel to the White House in what is expected to be an amicable encounter despite Trump's campaign criticism about her "ruining" Germany.
Merkel was reportedly on her way to the airport Monday to fly to Washington when Trump called her to postpone the trip due to the impending snow storm that blanketed the Northeast. The cancelation was seen by some as a metaphor for the current U.S.-German relationship.
The meeting is one of the more highly anticipated ones of Trump’s young presidency. Politico posted a picture of Merkel and blared a headline, “The Leader of the Free World Meets Donald Trump.”
TRUMP MERKEL HOLD JOINT PRESS CONFERENCE AT WHITE HOUSE AT 1:20 PM ET. WATCH LIVE ON FOX NEWS CHANNEL AND FOXNEWS.COM
“She’s used to awkward meetings,” Constanze Stelzenmueller, an expert on German and trans-Atlantic policy at the Brookings Institution, told McClatchy. “She’s handled them quite well. You don’t linger over the personal.”
The encounter will be aimed at building a personal rapport with a European partner who was among former President Obama's strongest allies and international confidantes, White House officials told the Associated Press earlier this month.
The two are expected to discuss strengthening the NATO alliance, collaborating to fight terrorism and taking steps to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. The BBC reported that the two will also discuss transatlantic trade. Merkel will be joined by top officials at German companies including Siemens and BMW.
Merkel reportedly said that the German relationship with the U.S. is important and a two-way street. She said a BMW plant in the U.S. exported “more cars than GM and Ford together” from the U.S. Officials told Reuters that Merkel has prepared carefully for the meeting.
Trump has not been shy in his criticism of the European Union’s immigration policy, and Merkel has criticized Trump’s travel ban.
Trump frequently criticized Merkel during his presidential campaign, accusing her of "ruining Germany" by taking in large numbers of refugees. Merkel, who wields significant sway in Europe, was critical of Trump's refugee and immigration travel ban, which was blocked by the courts.
Merkel, who is seeking reelection later this year, reportedly told a German newspaper, “It’s always better to talk with each other than about each other.”
Bloomberg reported that a day before Merkel left for her U.S. visit, she spoke to Chinese President Xi Jinping to reaffirm “their common support for free trade and open markets.” The report pointed out that the partnership has gained significance since Trump was elected.
Peter Wittig, Germany’s ambassador to the U.S., told PBS that he believes Merkel is interested in forming a “strong, constructive” relationship with Trump.
“And she has said many times she will not go back to the campaign, but will want to engage with him in a constructive manner,” he said. “And I think that’s what we want to see tomorrow.”

Gregg Jarrett: 4 things you need to know about the rulings against Trump's latest travel ban

Federal judges in Hawaii and Maryland ruled against President Trump’s revised travel ban with separate, but similar, orders blocking the main provisions of his executive order which limits travel and immigration to the United States from six predominately Muslim countries.  Here is what you need to know about the rulings from these judges:    
1.) Legally, what did the 2 judges find wrong with the revised travel ban?
Principally, that the executive order violates the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment of the Constitution because it discriminates against Muslims. The judges relied not on the detailed language of the executive order, but on several of the remarks President Trump made as a candidate on the campaign trail, even though he later revised his stance on immigrants seeking entry into the U.S.
The judges largely ignored the President’s justification stated specifically in the ban that he was acting in the interest of national security to protect American citizens from potential terrorists because the 6 banned nations are state sponsors of terrorism (as identified by Congress and President Obama in an anti-terrorism law) and those governments do not assist the U.S. in vetting applicants with background checks.
2.) How unusual is it for a judge to rely so heavily on campaign rhetoric?
It is extraordinary and well beyond the scope of what judges are supposed to consider.  Candidates for office often make statements they don’t entirely mean. Or they later revise or change their views.  That is what candidate Trump did.  After first claiming he would institute a Muslim ban, he later changed his stance to say that he would ban entry from countries that pose a terrorist threat.
But these two judges ignored his revised position and accused the President if using national security as a pre-text for banning Muslims.  In doing so, the judges were pretending to read President Trump’s mind.  It smacks of judicial activism and appears contrary to established law on judicial review.  Courts don’t normally consider campaign rhetoric in interpreting a law or executive order.    
3.) At the same time, 5 judges on the 9^th circuit court of appeals issued their own opinion.  What was it?
This was also unusual.  In an unsolicited filing, five Republican-appointed judges on the 9^th Circuit (the same court which last month ruled against President Trump’s first travel ban) wrote this in a published opinion:
     “Whatever we as individuals may feel about the President or the executive order, the President’s decision was well within the powers of the presidency.”        
These five judges all but accused their colleagues of judicial activism and overreach because they don’t like President Trump or his policies. The five judges recognized that the President has both constitutional (Article 1, Section 8) and statutory authority (the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act) to dictate immigration as it applies to national security threats.  
4.)   So, what happens next?
The ruling by the judge in Hawaii can be appealed to the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals.  The Maryland ruling would be appealed to the 4^th Circuit. They could be reversed on appeal.  Or not.
After that, the cases could wind their way up to the U.S. Supreme Court, which currently has 8 Justices.  Neil Gorsuch, President Trump’s nominee to fill the seat left vacant by Antonin Scalia’s death, is set to begin confirmation hearings next week.  It is possible Democrats may try to delay his confirmation vote, leaving a potential 4-4 split on the high court.  In that case, the lower appellate court rulings would stand. But if those rulings conflict, it is unclear what would happen.
But all of this may turn out to be moot. The main part of the travel ban will expire after 90 days.  
Gregg Jarrett is a Fox News Anchor and former defense attorney.

Donald Trump's sharp budget ax: Now the swamp fights back

Now we’re talking real money.
With President Trump detailing the budget cuts he would make to pay for his sharp rise in defense spending, the battle for control of the swamp is getting under way.
The apocalyptic reaction, led by the media, reminds me of 1981, when Ronald Reagan proposed what were then described as draconian proposals to slash the budget. Trump’s cutbacks are far larger. And it’s worth noting that while Reagan got much of what he wanted, the federal budget wound up being bigger by the end of his tenure, and he didn’t eliminate a major agency.
But even the smaller cuts that Trump wants to make are hard because every program in that gargantuan budget has a fiercely loyal constituency backed up by lobbyists who know how many jobs would be lost and in which congressional districts.
Those who don’t want their programs slashed have a built-in PR advantage. They can generate coverage of real-life victims who would be hurt by the withdrawal of this or that federal subsidy, while the other side has to make abstract arguments: Government is too wasteful, the deficit is out of control, we’re living beyond our means.
A Washington Post headline: “Massive cuts to the arts, science and the poor.”
A New York Times headline: “Trump Proposes Eliminating the Arts and Humanities Endowments.”
A Huffington Post headline: "Trump Government Bloodletting."
A BuzzFeed headline: “Slash and Bird”—with a picture of Big Bird, since Trump would end aid to PBS, along with National Public Radio.
Some of this is part of a culture war, and Republicans have tried before to zero out PBS. While big-city stations and programs like “News Hour” and “Sesame Street” would survive, some of the smaller of PBS’s 350 stations would be faced with extinction.
Another Washington Post story ticks off some of the subsidized services that lower-income people rely upon:
“If you’re a poor person in America, Trump’s budget is not for you.” It “would slash or abolish programs that have provided low-income Americans with help on virtually all fronts, including affordable housing, banking, weatherizing homes, job training, paying home heating oil bills, and obtaining legal counsel in civil matters.”
A New York Times piece says that many Trump voters would be among those penalized:
“Some of the budget losers, it turns out, may be some of the very constituencies that have been most supportive of the new president during his improbable rise to power.
“While border guards will have more prisons to lock up unauthorized immigrants, rural communities will lose grants and loans to build water facilities and financing to keep their airports open. As charter schools are bolstered, after-school and summer programs will lose money. As law enforcement agents get more help to fight the opioid epidemic, lower-income Americans will have less access to home energy aid, job training programs and legal services.”
All this is true. It’s also the price that must be paid to slim down government—although Trump is demanding deeper cuts in part to offset his proposed $54-billion boost in defense spending and his planned tax cuts.
Of course, some agencies employ the Washington Monument defense, singling out the services that will most outrage the public as opposed to the training and research programs where much of the fact may lie. (No threat to close the monument this year, since it’s already shut down for repairs.)
It’s reminiscent in some ways of the ObamaCare debate, where the rallying cry of repealing the program is being tempered by the impact on millions of Americans who could lose their coverage.
No president gets everything they want in a budget. But by taking an ax to so many programs, Trump has created a major test with Congress in what is likely to be an unsympathetic media climate.
Howard Kurtz is a Fox News analyst and the host of "MediaBuzz" (Sundays 11 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET). He is the author of five books and is based in Washington. Follow him at @HowardKurtz. Click here for more information on Howard Kurtz. 

Trump's first budget faces early Republican resistance

President Trump’s “America First” budget released Thursday that calls for steep cuts to the State Department and Environmental Protection Agency in order to increase defense spending was called by some Republicans as a pie-in-the-sky wish list that will never pass Congress in tact.
It is not uncommon for a president’s initial “skinny budget” to face an uphill fight with congressmen who control the government’s purse strings. But the early resistance is notable since Republicans control both the House and Senate. Even House Speaker Paul Ryan appeared to hedge his optimism on the plan that he called a “blueprint.”
For better or worse, Trump’s budget appears to make good on some of his key campaign promises. He calls for an increase in defense spending by $54 billion, which The Associated Press points out is the largest increase since President Reagan’s military buildup of the 1980s. The defense increase will be paid for by cuts to the EPA, State Department and federal funding for the arts.
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who often finds himself at odds with Trump, said plainly, “It is clear that this budget proposed today cannot pass the Senate.”
Trump said in a statement that “to keep Americans safe, we have made the tough choices that have been put off for too long.”
Republicans leaders spread out across the country have found items in the budget that would likely not still well with their voters.
Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, spoke out against the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative and Rep. Hal Rogers, R-Ky., called out the budget cut on the Appalachian Regional commission, which assists communities in his region. He called Trump’s budget cuts “draconian, careless and counterproductive.”
“I just want to make sure that rural America, who was very supportive to Trump, doesn’t have to take a disproportionately high cut,” Rep. Robert Aderholt, R-Ala., told the AP.
Republicans praised the president for beefing up the Pentagon, but they were far less enthusiastic about accepting Trump's recipe for doing so without adding to the nation's $20 trillion debt.
"While we support more funding for our military and defense, we must maintain support for our farmers and ranchers," said North Dakota Republican John Hoeven, blasting a 21 percent cut to the Agriculture Department's budget.
KRAUTHAMMER: TRUMP'S BUDGET PROPOSAL IS 'DEAD ON ARRIVAL'
Democrats have spoken out against the budget they say would devastate the work done by agencies like the EPA. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., tweeted, “Democrats in Congress will emphatically oppose these cuts & urge our Republican colleagues to reject them as well.”
White House Budget Director Mick Mulvaney said this is not a take-it-or-leave-it budget. He told The Washington Post that the “message we’re sending to the Hill is, we want more money for the things the president talked about, defense being the top one, national security. And we don’t want to add to the budget deficit. If Congress has another way to do that, we’re happy to talk to them about it.” 

Federal Judge Cartoon

Trump lashes out at latest travel ban ruling: 'It makes us look weak!'

Snowflakes

President Trump slammed a Hawaii federal judge who halted his revised travel ban from going into effect Wednesday, saying the ruling was "unprecedented judicial overreach."
"This ruling makes us look weak," Trump thundered at a rally in Nashville, Tenn., before vowing that he would "fight this terrible ruling ... as far as it needs to go, including all the way up to the Supreme Court."
A temporary restraining order issued by U.S. District Court Judge Derrick Watson was made public approximately an hour before Trump took the stage in front of a raucous crowd of placard-waving supporters.
"Let me give you the bad news, the sad news," Trump told his audience about the decision, later adding "and I have to be nice, otherwise I'll get criticized for speaking poorly about our courts."
The order before Watson on Wednesday was a revised version of an earlier order, which temporarily suspended the U.S. refugee program and barred the entry of people from six Muslim-majority countries. More than half a dozen states were attempting to prevent the latest ban from taking effect early Thursday.

"This new order was tailored to the dictates of the Ninth Circuit's, in my opinion, flawed ruling," Trump said. "This is, in the opinion of many, an unprecedented judicial overreach.
"The law and the Constitution," the president argued to a cheering crowd, "give the president the power to suspend immigration when he deems -- or she  ... deems it to be in the national interest of our country."
On Air Force One late Wednesday, White House spokesman Sean Spicer said the administration stood by the initial executive order, which was halted by the appeals court last month.
"We believed the first one was accurate," Spicer said, "[and] the second one was literally tailored to the court ruling." The spokesman said he did not know what the administration's next steps would be.
The travel ban was one of many topics Trump touched on during the campaign-style rally, including his joint effort with House Republicans to replace ObamaCare.
At one point, Trump invoked Tennessee native Andrew Jackson, a fellow populist outsider, and said the seventh president "understood that real leadership means putting America first."
Earlier Wednesday, the president laid a wreath at Andrew Jackson's tomb to mark the 250th anniversary of the former president's birth, and toured the Hermitage, Jackson's home.

"We're keeping our promises," said Trump, noting that he's more than halfway through the 100-day measure by which new presidents are judged. "And we have just gotten started. Wait till you see what's coming, folks."
On the flight back to Washington, he said he hoped to hold rallies "every two weeks. I mean, these are great people."

Tillerson: Asia allies 'critical' for addressing North Korean threat

TOKYO –  U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said Thursday cooperation with allies Japan and South Korea is "critical" to addressing the threat from North Korea's nuclear and missile programs.
Tillerson was speaking as he met with Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida on his first trip to Asia as the top U.S. diplomat.
North Korea is expected to top the agenda at Tillerson's talks in Tokyo. Last week, North Korea test-fired four missiles that landed in ocean off Japan.
Tillerson will meet later Thursday with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.
Japan and South Korea both host tens of thousands of U.S. troops. Washington has been urging the two nations to step security cooperation despite their historically strained relations. This week, the nations' three navies have conducted missile defense information-sharing drills in the region
Tillerson said that strengthening U.S. relations with Japan and trilateral cooperation among all three "is critical in particular as we address North Korea's nuclear and missile programs."
Kishida said the fact that Japan was Tillerson's first stop showed the importance Washington attaches to the relationship. He said the U.S. and Japan had an "unwavering bond."
On Friday, Tillerson travels to South Korea, where U.S. forces are engaged in annual military drills that have angered Pyongyang.
He then goes to China. Washington wants Beijing to exert more pressure on North Korea over its provocative behavior.