American Politics Thread: Orange is the new POTUS

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by direwolf

More evil s--t from team Trump and the GOP. I don't think any of us should be surprised at this point, but still, what a bunch of d-bags. Hopefully this won't make it past Congress.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a7701631.html

This on the heels of the daughter trying to convince Europeans that her father is such a champion for women around the world. Seriously, Hollywood couldn't write and sell this script. No one would believe it.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Contrasting the PMO's readout of the call versus the White House is hilarious. Canada really are the adults of this continent now.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Contrasting the PMO's readout of the call versus the White House is hilarious. Canada really are the adults of this continent now.

That's just special...

[oldschoolcalgary]

Hey, whaddayu know, Flynn was cozying up to Russia and even took Money from them, which might actually be considered as a treasonous act for a former military official, and you can bet that they will look into whether or not they can prosecute him.

Its pretty funny, and by 'funny' i mean ridiculous, that many experts had concerns with Flynn's connections with Russia and were blown off by Trump's minions...

Any chance of the GOP base is chanting "Lock him up, Lock him up"?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03/17/flynn-was-paid-67g-by-russian-interests-documents-say.html

Its a Faux News link, just in case our resident Trump supporters tries to blow off the Flynn story as "Fake News"

[wittynickname]

This concept of "kayfabe" in the world of politics is kind of fascinating.

The aesthetic of World Wrestling Entertainment seems to be spreading from the ring to the world stage. Ask an average Trump supporter whether he or she thinks the president actually plans to build a giant wall and have Mexico pay for it, and you might get an answer that boils down to, “I don’t think so, but I believe so.” That’s kayfabe. Chants of “Build the Wall” aren’t about erecting a structure; they’re about how cathartic it feels, in the moment, to yell with venom against a common enemy.

Voting to repeal Obamacare again and again only to face President Obama’s veto was kayfabe. So is shouting “You lie!” during a health care speech. It is President Bush in a flight suit, it is Vladimir Putin shirtless on a horse, it is virtually everything Kim Jong-un does. Does the intended audience know that what they’re watching is literally made for TV? Sure, in the same way they know that the wrestler Kane isn’t literally a demon. The factual fabrication is necessary to elicit an emotional clarity.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/25/o...ht-region&_r=0

[KootenayFlamesFan]

My only question is, how was this even still a thing? I just assumed it was so stupid it would already be banned.

Democratic lawmakers reintroduced a bill on Tuesday that would ban conversion therapy nationwide, a controversial practice that seeks to change a person's sexual orientation or gender identity. The practice is currently banned in six states and in the District of Columbia.

The Therapeutic Fraud Prevention Act, filed by Senators Patty Murray of Washington and Corey Booker of New Jersey, constitutes a renewed effort from Congressional Democrats to ban conversion therapy after a Republican majority let the bill die without a hearing last year.

http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-o...m_npd_nn_tw_np

[photon]

North Korea will continue its nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs and the U.S. cannot count on China to apply sufficient pressure to deter the growing threat, experts told a Senate panel Tuesday.

Also, a U.S. military strike on Pyongyang would pose huge risks for the U.S., South Korea and other allies in the region, and the outlook for regime change is grim even if economic incentives were offered.

"The challenges emanating from North Korea are obviously real, dangerous and in the near term," Ashley Tellis, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace testified to at full Senate Armed Services Committee hearing about policy and strategy in the Asia-Pacific region.

Tellis added, "The challenges emanating from China are long term, enduring and aimed fundamentally at decoupling the United States from its Asian partners."

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/25/ex-pe...-unlikely.html

So my question would be what if they do develop an nuclear ICBM? What actually changes? It wouldn't be the first nation to do so. Would it really be so destabilizing that it must be avoided even a the risk of thousands or millions of lives?

[FlameOn]

Trump is now actively advertising Mar-A-Lago on government websites. This is an extremely illegal and impeachable offense as he is directly using public resources to enrich himself while president. Whether the GOP has a spine is a different matter.

What did the president know about the Mar-a-Lago advertisement that appeared for a time on official government websites? And when did he know it? These questions might sound trivial. They aren’t. The webpage about President Donald Trump’s private club, which had all the features of a marketer-drafted puff piece, is a prime example of corruption, namely the knowing use of government means to enhance the private wealth of the president. And corruption is the classic example of a high crime or misdemeanor under the impeachment clause of the Constitution.

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/artic...peachment-file

[Mr.Coffee]

the guy is a crook.

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by photon

North Korea will continue its nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs and the U.S. cannot count on China to apply sufficient pressure to deter the growing threat, experts told a Senate panel Tuesday.

Also, a U.S. military strike on Pyongyang would pose huge risks for the U.S., South Korea and other allies in the region, and the outlook for regime change is grim even if economic incentives were offered.

"The challenges emanating from North Korea are obviously real, dangerous and in the near term," Ashley Tellis, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace testified to at full Senate Armed Services Committee hearing about policy and strategy in the Asia-Pacific region.

Tellis added, "The challenges emanating from China are long term, enduring and aimed fundamentally at decoupling the United States from its Asian partners."

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/25/ex-pe...-unlikely.html

So my question would be what if they do develop an nuclear ICBM? What actually changes? It wouldn't be the first nation to do so. Would it really be so destabilizing that it must be avoided even a the risk of thousands or millions of lives?

I certainly don't have anything close to a definitive answer, but I think the biggest destabilizing element is that it creates a situation where the US and its Pacific allies are going to need to aggressively pursue anti-ICBM system deployment... both boost and ascent-phase missile defense in the west pacific, and midcourse defense in Alaska. This could make China feel that their own nuclear missile system is no longer acceptable as a deterrent against US nuclear strikes (combined with the US also exploring tactical nukes), and that could spark a new nuclear arms and missile defense race between the US and China.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by photon

Tellis added, "The challenges emanating from China are long term, enduring and aimed fundamentally at decoupling the United States from its Asian partners."

Putin is doing the same thing. The goal here of all enemies of the west is to decouple and destabilize. This has been the endstate for these foreign interests for decades. The difference now is there is a guy in the White House that does not understand this stuff and is a willing rube to their plans. The goal has always been to find a weak leader in the US and then take advantage of him. Bush was a weak leader, but he surrounded himself with some of the most experienced people in the Republican establishment. Trump is a full on child, and he's surrounded himself with people with no experience or understanding of the portfolios they are responsible for. This is the greatest gift to America's enemies anyone could every have dreamed of. An ineffective, egocentric, easily manipulated President surrounded by inexperienced and incompetent people is the absolute worst case scenario for the American Empire. This is literally the end of the American Empire. The only thing missing is Donnie appointing his horse to the Senate.

[Senator Clay Davis]

He's suffered so much losing in the first 100 days that he doesn't even know who to blame anymore (judge is not on the Ninth Circuit)

[ernie]

Give Trump a break...

Who knew healthcare was so complicated?

Who knew immigration and border control was so complicated?

Who knew international trade was so complicated?

Who knew international peace and security was so complicated?

No one could seriously expect a person running for president to know any of that!

What I wouldn't give for a voting public to understand nuance, how not everything is black and white and that "Ok but what happens next if we do X" is actually a necessary question to ask. Launched a bunch of cruise missiles at Syria but I don't see Assad turning over his chemical stockpiles. Don't worry though I'm sure he won't use them again. NOt saying they should be doing something more significant or anything but the answer you need to answer is "OK but what next?". This administration is incapable of asking that question. They got ratings for a few days and that's all that matters.

[DuffMan]

So, they are going to chop corporate tax rates, or do tax reform, as that will generate so much jobs, and revenues and winning, I can't believe no one thought of it before.
I wonder is some of the extra money will be going to CEO's etc.

[FlameOn]

So Republicans have rolled out Republicare V2 and in it they are removing ACA provisions that prevent pricing discrimination for pre-existing conditions. It looks like they secretly do like the provisions because they put in an exemption to keep it for members of Congress and staff only.

House Republicans appear to have included a provision that exempts Members of Congress and their staff from their latest health care plan.

The new Republican amendment, introduced Tuesday night, would allow states to waive out of Obamacare’s ban on pre-existing conditions. This means that insurers could once again, under certain circumstances, charge sick people higher premiums than healthy people.

Republican legislators liked this policy well enough to offer it in a new amendment. They do not, however, seem to like it enough to have it apply to themselves and their staff. A spokesperson for Rep. Tom MacArthur (R-N.J.) who authored this amendment confirmed this was the case: members of Congress and their staff would get the guarantee of keeping these Obamacare regulations. Health law expert Tim Jost flagged me to this particular issue

https://www.vox.com/2017/4/25/154299...ahca-amendment

So explain to me why this is okay Trump/GOP supporters like TFF and the like.

Meanwhile Spicer is now claiming it is not the responsibility of the White House to vet the people they hire into crucial roles. He say's Trump has not responsibility to find out if Russia paid Flynn or not. If Trump is not ultimately responsible for finding out the trustworthiness of the person he appoints to National Security positions, what is Trump's responsibility then?

The White House sought to distance itself from the investigation into former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn's dealings with Russia after the House Oversight Committee announced Tuesday Flynn had accepted payments from Russian organizations, which is against the law.

"You fill out the forms, you do an investigation, you do a background check. Every employee gets that background check done, and they have a security clearance and they fill it out and that's how everyone operates under the same guise," Spicer said, under repeated questioning.

"You rely on that person when they sign their name and then investigators to pick it up," he said, explaining why the White House had not caught Flynn's engagements with Russia. "But there's always going to be, in the case of people who had a prior clearance in the case of the time that they filled it out and had it adjudicated, they could have engaged in something and whether they updated that or not."

https://www.usnews.com/news/politics...n-in-2015-2016

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by FlameOn

So explain to me why this is okay Trump/GOP supporters like TFF and the like.

because they're not that bright, so they vote against their own best interests and think they are putting it to the snowflake liberals.

If only we could reason with them.

[photon]

Unless they cut somewhere else to pay for it (offsets), tax cuts would have to expire in 10 years to go through reconciliation (since the deficit can't be increased after 10 years with that process). To be permanent they'd have to get 60 votes in the Senate. That's what Bush did.

But it seems for corporate taxes that's not the case.

Here's a GOP staffer, Ryan’s senior tax counsel George Callas, talking about it. Basically he says that cutting corporate tax rates has a big enough impact that even if they're expired after 3 years, the effects will be around after the 10 year window.

“Here’s a datapoint for folks: A corporate rate cut that is sunset after three years will increase the deficit in the second decade. We know this. Not 10 years. Three years. You could not do a straight-up un-offset three-year corporate rate cut in reconciliation. The rules prohibit it. You might be able to do two years. A two-year corporate rate cut … would have virtually no growth effect.… It would just be dropping cash out of helicopters on corporate headquarters for a couple of years.”

https://www.c-span.org/video/?427261...mit-tax-policy

EDIT: Sorry, fast forward to the 33:00 minute mark of the video, the juicy part isn't very long.

So it appears Trump and his people are ignorant of the laws and processes and will want something that has no hope of passing. Again. Question is is it just because Trump didn't bother to consult with Ryan or anyone who might know this? Or are they letting Trump continue to make a fool of himself.

[FlameOn]

Originally Posted by photon

So it appears Trump and his people are ignorant of the laws and processes and will want something that has no hope of passing. Again. Question is is it just because Trump didn't bother to consult with Ryan or anyone who might know this? Or are they letting Trump continue to make a fool of himself.

This is what happens when you immediately fire more than five hundred government leadership positions, with no transition plan, and leave over 85% vacant by imposing a federal hiring freeze. You have no idea of how to do the job, since you don't have the people doing the analysis, and policies you try to put into place have no hope of succeeding because they are missing input from experienced government personnel.

[photon]

Originally Posted by FlameOn

Meanwhile Spicer is now claiming it is not the responsibility of the White House to vet the people they hire into crucial roles. He say's Trump has not responsibility to find out if Russia paid Flynn or not. If Trump is not ultimately responsible for finding out the trustworthiness of the person he appoints to National Security positions, what is Trump's responsibility then?

Going to hire the best people!

The letter from Jason Chaffetz and Elijah Cummings was bipartisan. Cummings said yesterday that the White House needs to understand that Congress decides what Congress investigates, and that the line that there's no documents doesn't hold water. He said that he'll try and work with Chaffetz to issue subpoenas if they don't get anything, that's probably wishful thinking though.

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by FlameOn

This is what happens when you immediately fire more than five hundred government leadership positions, with no transition plan, and leave over 85% vacant by imposing a federal hiring freeze. You have no idea of how to do the job since you don't have the people doing the analysis and policies you try to put into place have no hope of succeeding because they are missing input from experienced government personnel.

who knew tax cuts would be so complicated.