Vicious Rants of an Angry Yellow Man

I see that the Clemson football team visited the White House and was served various fast food by Trump.  Apparently due to the government shutdown, the White House staff was short and couldn't provide food.  So Trump paid for the fast food out of his own pocket.  In the process, he blamed the Democrats for the shutdown.  People were quick to criticize and make fun of Trump for this low class food affair.  I am not going to do that, it is really too easy.

I am wondering why Chick-Fil-A wasn't on the menu?  It is a fast food chain that is known to support conservative causes.  So it would seem that Trump would want to support this chain.  I mean, how can you not feel for an executive who is anti-gay with a name like Dan Cathy?  I wonder what it does to a man who is constantly called Cathy everyday?  Of course, I think that former MLB pitcher Ron Darling was not bothered by men calling him Darling everyday!

Bit I digress.  It seems that Trump doesn't always help his supporters.  Take the farmers group he is speaking to in New Orleans.  With his trade war with China, the farmers are hurting.  He then tried to decrease the pain by giving subsidies and loans to farmers.  But then with the government shutdown, the farmers are not receiving their subsidies and can' apply for the loans.  Also since farming requires a lot of immigrant help, his stance on immigrants are also hurting farmers.  But why would anyone thinks that a real estate guy who had a rich father would actually be sympathetic to the plights of the American farmers?

There are a lot of arguments over whether the Congress should subpoena the interpreter whose notes were snatched by Trump after a one on one meeting between Trump and Putin.  Trump didn't want any of his aids to go into the meeting with Putin.  Afterward, he took away the interpreter's notes so there will never be any record of what was said.  Some called for the interpreter to testify.  Others think that while Trump was setting a bad precedent by taking the notes, it would also be bad precedent to have the interpreter testify.  Like priests and lawyers, interpreters for president should not have to testify of what was said.  Plus, it is possible the interpreter may not remember clearly what was said at the time.

But I would argue that even if the contents of the meeting should not be divulged by the interpreter, he/she  should testify if Trump actually took the notes.  I think the people have the right to know of this unusual event took place.  Why would a president do that if he had nothing to hide.  If the interpreter can testify that the president indeed did that, I think it would be another sign that Trump is beholden to the Russians.