US Politics

[RAZ]

Jan 27, 2017 8:11:24 GMT Stew said:

Good grief:

www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/26/steve-bannon-media-trump-fox

Absolutely disgusting...

[grandpaTJ]

It has been going on since day 1 of his campaign, kinda surprising he got the votes he did, seems people don't care if he
is a freekin maniac, they just want him to do what he says he was going to do.
It hasn't even started to get disgusting yet, tip of the iceberg.

[Tatty]

Jan 27, 2017 8:11:24 GMT Stew said:

Good grief:

www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/26/steve-bannon-media-trump-fox

We were warned...

[grandpaTJ]

In going back an forth with my little brothers I've taken the position that Trump was going to paint himself into a corner and be fairly
ineffective as he tweets his idiot way along. (Example, his ban on refugees and immigration, did he really think people would not notice none of the countries
where he has business interests are on that banned list? )

Now he has admitted that Mexifco won't be paying for his wall, and Kelly Ann Conway when questioned called the statements "Alternate Truth" which she has used now
at least 5 or six times on various things I've read. Orwell's 1984 in full view  Conway is an ugly person, even more repulsive than her boss. Shouts unintelligibly when
arguing, turns her back an walks away, and Trump tweets it as a victory.

Now, his own party is already starting to see the light.

As noted in this thread, Trump won because there were just so many people that stupidly didn't go to the polls. This with taking away people's health insurance (which is
not the disaster the repubs say it is, statistics have shown that all along) 
Come 2018 people that didn't vote, are gonna go to the polls pissed off, and Trump is going to be tweeting to a Democratic house an Senate.

Now, given that I see both parties as equally gifted in chicanery and thievery, it isn't going to start solving a lot of problems, because Orange Julius is going to get
Auto pens pre programed to spell "VETO
But it will offer the benifit of a great deal of comedy gold, and the idiots won't be able to get much of anything done beyond pissing at each other.
As business has been conducted for so long.

Until a candidate steps up and talks term limits, lobbyists placed under serious, and enforceable resrictions, callng halt to spending on continuing to
bujild a military that is already capable of blowing up the planet 30 times, and has been since the 70's. Then gets the people strong behind him
this country might see progress with a leader like that.l (Though in the past, leaders with that kind of public appeal, except Roosevelt, have not
been in office, and if they have, they were either killed outright, or managed to get caught in activities that hurt their ability to get the job done.

'In leaked audio, Republicans destroy their own public talking points on Obamacare'

The Post’s Mike DeBonis has obtained leaked audio of Republicans at a closed-door session airing serious anxieties about the GOP’s strategy
to repeal and replace Obamacare. What’s remarkable is how decisively their specific comments in private undercut the party’s public,
carefully-crafted talking points about the battle to come.

Now, to be clear, these private comments reveal Republicans actually wrestling with the policy challenges that repeal (and replace)
will create, which is a good thing as far as it goes. However, in so doing, they basically admit in various ways that Republicans will be
responsible for the mess that repealing the law — which would probably be done on a delay while Republicans come up with a replacement —
is expected to make.

For instance:

Senators and House members expressed a range of concerns about the task ahead: how to prepare a replacement plan that can be ready to
launch at the time of repeal; how to avoid deep damage to the health insurance market; how to keep premiums affordable for middle-class
families; even how to avoid the political consequences of defunding Planned Parenthood, the women’s health-care organization, as many
Republicans hope to do with the repeal of the ACA.

“We’d better be sure that we’re prepared to live with the market we’ve created” with repeal, said Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.). “
That’s going to be called Trumpcare. Republicans will own that lock, stock and barrel, and we’ll be judged in the election less than two years away.”

The notion that Republicans will have “created” the state of the market that results after repeal, and that they will “own” that outcome,
is refreshing to hear. Republicans have employed a series of overwrought formulations and tortured metaphors that are designed to suggest
that, because Obamacare is already allegedly collapsing, Republicans are merely stepping in with a “rescue mission” to arrest that damage,
while building a “bridge” to an as-yet-unspecified replacement. The game there has been to preemptively lay the groundwork to claim later
that whatever consequences are unleashed by repealing the law were already in motion, and were not created by repeal itself.

This is not to deny that Obamacare is going through some difficulties right now. But the Republican rhetoric about its supposed collapse
and implosion is just nonsense. For a good, balanced look at the situation, see this piece by Jonathan Cohn. As he reports, while experts

are by no means unanimous on this conclusion, a number believe that the ACA marketplaces are generally stable. They say that much of the
criticism is based on cherry-picked evidence and that the doomsday talk is overblown (the supposedly soaring premiums are actually where
they were expected to be) or absurd (the notion of a death spiral is belied by robust enrollment). They add that the most immediate threat
to the law is Republican efforts to gum up the works, say with executive actions by President Trump, or through repeal on a delay that leads
insurers to exit the marketplaces because of uncertainty that any GOP replacement will ever materialize.

Behind closed doors, Republicans are admitting that such an outcome will be their own creation. (In fairness, some, such as Pete Sessions,
are also saying this publicly.)

Also note this from the leaked audio:

Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) warned his colleagues that the estimated budget savings from passing the Obamacare repeal bill — which could
approach a half-trillion dollars — are needed to fund the costs of setting up a replacement. “This is going to be what we’ll need to be
able to move to that transition,” he said.

Portman seems to be suggesting that Republicans face real danger in repealing the law, because so doing would also repeal its tax hikes —
et Republicans will need that revenue to pay for any replacement coverage. The implicit admission here is that it will be very hard for
Republicans, having repealed the ACA, to pass a replacement that, in effect, would require new spending — and a way to pay for it. Yes,
it turns out that to cover people, we have to spend money, and yes, that money has to come from somewhere.

And this:
Rep. Tom MacArthur (R-N.J.) also worried that the plans under GOP consideration could eviscerate coverage for the roughly 20 million
Americans now covered through state and federal marketplaces, as well as those covered under Medicaid expansion: “We’re telling those
people that we’re not going to pull the rug out from under them, and if we do this too fast, we are in fact going to pull the rug out
from under them.”

Republicans have worked very hard to obscure whether their eventual replacement will cause those who have coverage now under Obamacare
to lose it. They have done this by suggesting that no one will lose coverage during the transition, without saying whether they will
lose it under the eventual GOP replacement. Trump himself has said that “everybody” will be covered under the GOP plan that replaces t
he ACA, and in early January, top adviser Kellyanne Conway also flatly stated this to be the case. But then Conway subsequently fudged
that promise, saying instead that everyone would have coverage “during the transition time,” which doesn’t mean under the GOP replacement.
Yet here you have Rep. MacArthur flatly admitting that an outcome which involves widespread loss of coverage is very possible.

To reiterate, it is useful to see Republicans wrestling with the fact that repeal (and replace) will bring major challenges and could
produce a terrible outcome in humanitarian terms. But we have to ask: Given that Republicans have supposedly been preparing for the
chance to repeal (and replace) the ACA for years, why do they seem so surprised by this?

WAPO Article HERE

[Stew]

So Trump has banned Syrian refugees from entering the US. However he has no problem allowing people from Saudi Arabia to enter. Saudi Arabia, where the vast majority of the plotters of 9/11 jailed from.

Why is that I wonder? 💵💵💵💵💵

[grandpaTJ]

All those Trump Hotels going up in South America, I know that very publicly one of his projects was fast tracked for approval during
his visit, and it was without question something he requested. Believe it was Argentina. Right now it is is just what politicians
have been doing for a long time. Public knowledge, but not like what well see with Trump. He is gonna have the press living in his
back pocket, and the more his guard dogs bark about it, the more attention he'll draw.

Thing is, Republican congresses aren't going to do much, an the American people are either sitting at home sniveling but not doing
anything, or the Trumplodytes are laughing and winking about it.l "Shucks Billy Bob Jethro, ain't he smart?" "Sure is Jethro Bob Billy,
and won't be long he'll be getting us some good jobs building that wall down there Mexico way"

I'm doing 2 letters a week to my Senators, Grassley got so pissed off, one of the replys was not form letter, was obviously
dictated, telling me I didn't understand the complex issues.
Made me proud that I at least got his attention.
(was about them stonewalling Obama's Supreme Court Justice,k Grfassley is chairman of the Judiciary committeek, senile old dickhead)

[Kamilo]

Jan 28, 2017 8:17:48 GMT Stew said:

So Trump has banned Syrian refugees from entering the US. However he has no problem allowing people from Saudi Arabia to enter. Saudi Arabia, where the vast majority of the plotters of 9/11 jailed from.

Why is that I wonder? 💵💵💵💵💵

And the Clinton foundation received millions and millions from that same country...Why is that I wonder? 💵💵💵💵💵.

The game is played by both sides.

[Stew]

Jan 28, 2017 15:09:10 GMT Kamilo said:

Jan 28, 2017 8:17:48 GMT Stew said:

So Trump has banned Syrian refugees from entering the US. However he has no problem allowing people from Saudi Arabia to enter. Saudi Arabia, where the vast majority of the plotters of 9/11 jailed from.

Why is that I wonder? 💵💵💵💵💵

And the Clinton foundation received millions and millions from that same country...Why is that I wonder? 💵💵💵💵💵.

The game is played by both sides.

Did Clinton ever promise to ban people from known certain states as part of her campaign? No. It's played by both sides but not to this level of hypocrisy. By all means get tough on terrorist harbouring/fostering states but cherry-picking them?

[Deleted]

Think this thread could merge with the dipper thread if it's not more careful

[Stew]

www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2017-trump-immigration-ban-conflict-of-interest/

[.]

Every day is a struggle to not explode with anger at the CUNTS who voted for Trump. Pick a reason (in no particular order):

1. Stealing public lands to be sold off to Republican donors under the guise of "returning" federal land to the states
2. bans on refugees from arab countries not doing business with Trump
3. religious favoritism giving christians preference on refugees
4. removing all mention of climate change, LGBTQ rights, and any pages in Spanish from the White House website
5. banning agencies from continuing their research, meeting with the press, or publishing their findings without first running it through the Trump propaganda machine
6. Chief nazi-sucking apologist Steve Bannon saying the press is "the opposition party" and that the press needs to "shut its mouth".
7. repealing key elements of the ACA that will result in people in high risk pools and those pre-existing conditions to be dropped from insurer rolls and unable to get new coverage. This will result in thousands of deaths.
8. moving to defund Planned Parenthood
9. moving to repeal/defang the Endangered Species Act
10. opening up public lands to oil, gas, timber, and mining interests/exploration
11. silencing the EPA, because things like lead in the water supply of Flint, Michigan is not really a problem. if those people don't like it, they don't have to drink the water, right?
12. advancing know-nothing incompetent buffoons like Betsy DeVos, Rex Tillerson, Ben Carson, Nikki Haley et al., as cabinet members and/or ambassadors.
13. still talking about this motherfucking wall between us and Mexico
14. not divesting Trump business interests from White House business (conflicts of interests)
15. not releasing his tax returns and hiding his connections to Russia
16. nearly causing an international crisis with China 
17. threatening to defund the UN
18. treating every aspect of governance like the sleaziest used car salesman on earth trying to bilk the customer.



the list goes on

[grandpaTJ]

Jan 28, 2017 15:26:58 GMT Stew said:

www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2017-trump-immigration-ban-conflict-of-interest/

An he talked about putting Clinton in jail. All those bastards lie, but his business interests an how he is still doing things could
be considered a direct violation of the constitutional requirements for him to divest himself from an potential conflict of interest.
He just basically has said he is not giving up ownership, will let h is kids run the companies, which is not good enough./

[Deleted]

This is from someone on Red Cafe called Syrian-Scholes

This is honestly one of the worst days of my life, I really really hope they lift the ban at least for green card holders at the end of 90 days, I will be deprived of seeing my sister and my nephews for the time being though saddens me to no ends.

He's a Green Card holder legally in the U.S

[grandpaTJ]

Jesus, that is flat out wrong there. Every time you read a bit of news that fooker and Bannon (who is writing the exec orders for Trump) have
taken my country another 10 yeas backwards into dark places.

[king nothing]

I find this utterly incredible and not in a good way! C&P from the article Stewart posted.

Trump could be poised to make millions of dollars off of his publicly financed Secret Service protection. During the campaign, the Trump Organization charged the Secret Service between $1.6 million and $8.5 million to fly on his aircraft. Trump could make even more money once he takes office: he has continued to fly around the country on his Boeing 757 jet with Secret Service in tow. And with Melania Trump and 10-year-old son Barron planning to remain in their Trump Tower condo once Trump occupies the White House, the NY Post estimates it might cost as much as $3 million a year, payable to Trump, for the Secret Service to rent space in the building. It’s less clear who would be responsible for the costs of advanced security at Trump-branded properties around the world. The security of every president or president-elect costs the public money, but it is unusual that Trump has profited from some of those funds.