He managed to get the leftists to wear pink pussy hats as they marched through cities?

Breitbart slams Trump for 'hypocrisy' over Sessions attacks

Source

I believe we are all being sucked down the Alice in Wonderland rabbit hole

White House press aide Michael Short resigned on Tuesday, capping off hours of drama over whether he would be fired by President Trump’s new communications director.

"I have resigned, effective immediately," Short said in a brief text message. "It was a privilege to serve the President of the United States."

Source

Dear Mods

Could you please establish some sort of child forum for our children?

Rod Rosenstein lauds Trump inauguration speech amid President's DOJ criticism

Source

Sleeping Beauty has woken up after only 6 months and read Trump's speech

U.S. just had the best jobs report in 16 years

Trump to defy 'fake news' and keep fulfilling promises made to American people

Jobs up, illegal immigration down, making America great again!

US employment has been on an upward trend since 2009 and is still working on Obama's economic plan.

Are you sure?

Seems he's Trumping that trend:

Indeed, today’s unemployment rate -- 4.4 percent -- is tied for the lowest in the past 16 years, going back to June 2001.

Source

And you think the job numbers react instantly to anything the president does? He's only been in power for six months. I'd suggest that what you're seeing now is the result of policy enacted in the previous eight years.

A very fail safe interpretation.

As long as unemployment drops, that's still Obama's policies at work.

As soon as the trend changes, that's Trump's fault.

I don't know what the usual lag between policy implementation and market effects is, but I'm pretty sure there is one and it's more than a few weeks. I'd happily attribute any and all market movements to the policies enacted by Congress (it's not all about Trump -- or Obama -- by the way), after the relevant "lag" period has passed. So Trump can trumpet an uptick in employment (or a reduction in unemployment -- not the same thing) later (if those conditions still apply), but not yet.

I wish a day would go by when Trump doesn't sicken me...

http://news.sky.com/story/donald-tru...diers-10962709

In direct contradiction to this...
https://www.defense.gov/News/Special...gender-policy/

What the hell would he know about serving in the military?!!!!

You would think that they would be happy and proud to have people volunteering to serve their country in the military.
But it seems like a generic tweet to explain how they figured out how to save 10s of millions in military spending aka tax dollars.

Well it would be more credible if Trump listed his policies that have influenced unemployment.

Trump said investing in infrastructure, cutting the trade deficit, lowering taxes and removing regulations will boost job creation but so far these ideas are still no more than wishes.

Upholding conservative values, undoing the damage done by Obama.

I think we can also add these to Trump's achievements.

Baawaawaa, macho American soldiers can't cope with transgender colleagues. Nor female ones either methinks.

Seems the Brits have no problems or disruptions.

It makes sense, I'm totally in favour of this ban.

How can you expect men who spend their days playing dress-up in colourful costumes, holding large ersatz phalluses and penetrating enemy positions to remain focused when someone of questionable sexuality is in their midst?

Conservative values? But Trump (or to be accurate, someone who definitely isn't Trump, given that everything is spelled correctly and the tweet includes big boy words like "entail") tweeted that "the military... cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail". So it's all about saving costs, honest.

Of course, if Americans (including transgender American soldiers) had access to decent healthcare insurance in the future then the medical costs wouldn't be the concern of the military.

And it's strange that he uses the conditional word "would". Newsflash, there are thousands of transgender people currently serving in the US military. Is there any indication of "tremendous medical costs and disruption" (except among flabby white septuagenarians) as a result?

This sounds like a PR deflection ploy to deflect attention from the GOP's disastrous efforts to repeal Obamacare.

Is this true or opinion? I would be surprised if it is true (but I've been wrong before).