By reilo Go To PostThat's not real, stop lying lmao.
Fine, but it could be.
By LFMartins86 Go To Post
Nunes is a idiot this story is too big to bury and all he is doing is creating more reasons a independent committee will be made. Schiff is a former prosecutor.... they aren't the type to just say "fuck it we tried" and let shit go
With their egos stroked, do the HFC demand equivalent spending cuts to offset the tax "reform" bill?
Which leads to death in the Senate.
Which leads to death in the Senate.
By thekad Go To PostWith their egos stroked, do the HFC demand equivalent spending cuts to offset the tax "reform" bill?
Which leads to death in the Senate.
Easily the best part about this whole thing. They have to find the money somewhere else and have to do it fast. It still has to be scored and they wasted a week more than planned on Trumpcare. Those rich people need more money and are counting on him passing this haha
By Fenderputty Go To PostEasily the best part about this whole thing. They have to find the money somewhere else and have to do it fast. It still has to be scored and they wasted a week more than planned on Trumpcare. Those rich people need more money and are counting on him passing this haha
Have you seen his death lineup Budget though...... Arguably if they pass that to get the savings they are literally making the country (likely the world) worse to give rich people tax cuts
I think his budget was overblown. I don't think he can get military spending like he wants.
Here's a good article.
http://www.vox.com/2017/2/27/14751872/budget-process-explained
Here's a good article.
http://www.vox.com/2017/2/27/14751872/budget-process-explained
By Fenderputty Go To PostI think his budget was overblown. I don't think he can get military spending like he wants.
Here's a good article.
http://www.vox.com/2017/2/27/14751872/budget-process-explained
Then Trump is fucked right..... like.... his executive orders are shot down, his AHCA mandate is shit..... the budget and tax cuts are going to be tough and will require compromise, Teump might not get his scotus pick cause the nuke option swings both ways and I think Mitch needs the Dems 60 vote fillibuster as an excuse to block some of the crazier shit the house will send up. We might be ok
Immigration = L
Immigration 2 = L
Sessions recusal = L
Healthcare = L^10
Wiretap claims = L
Upcoming tax / budget = L
Mexico paying for wall = L
Flynn = L
So much winning
Immigration 2 = L
Sessions recusal = L
Healthcare = L^10
Wiretap claims = L
Upcoming tax / budget = L
Mexico paying for wall = L
Flynn = L
So much winning
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/the-closer-the-inside-story-of-how-trump-tried--and-failed--to-make-a-deal-on-health-care/2017/03/24/3e6353d6-0fdc-11e7-9d5a-a83e627dc120_story.html?utm_term=.e7213c7645fa
Shortly after House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) unveiled the Republican health-care plan on March 6, President Trump sat in the Oval Office and queried his advisers: “Is this really a good bill?”Literally did not know what the bill was.
And over the next 18 days, until the bill collapsed in the House on Friday afternoon in a humiliating defeat — the sharpest rebuke yet of Trump’s young presidency and his negotiating skills — the question continued to nag at the president.
Even as he thrust himself and the trappings of his office into selling the health-care bill, Trump peppered his aides again and again with the same concern, usually after watching cable news reports chronicling the setbacks, according to two of his advisers: “Is this really a good bill?”
By Fenderputty Go To PostLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
LMFAO
By reilo Go To Posthttp://www.militarytimes.com/articles/ex-cia-chief-flynns-firm-discussed-removing-cleric-from-us
On the low it sounds like Woolsey snitched on Flynn so in turn yeah if Flynn is smart he is going to snitch up as well......
Also Russia has got to be fucking kidding..... Shit feels desperate like they know that the backlash from this is going to be severe
and no its not just because his name is Boris. He had deep ties to Russia an just got fired today
https://mediamatters.org/research/2016/09/15/media-host-trump-adviser-boris-epshteyn-russia-without-disclosing-his-business-ties/213113
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/trump-urges-followers-watch-fox-news-host-who-demands-paul-ryan-resign-988809
So much fuckery..... How you going to get anything done if the Speaker of the House hates you? How Trump?
So much fuckery..... How you going to get anything done if the Speaker of the House hates you? How Trump?
By reilo Go To Post
I saw this earlier and given what i've seen on his twitter before, I figured this was another WE HAVE HIS TAXES bunch of fucking nothing.
Checking the updates made in the last 3 hours, it looks like it is. Walked back the 'bombshell'
"oh, well, this person totally said Flynn was flipped but really just meant I WONDER IF HE WAS FLIPPED"
Should have known this Abramson person was full of shit, look at the rest of the tweets on that account. Taking nuggets of news and linking them together with nothing more than "it stands to reason that this and then THIS", no actual evidence tying it together. Then there was this - this was the 'source' for all of his OMG NEWS today.
https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/845724216100093952
Justine Bateman. As in the actress. What.
https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/845724216100093952
Justine Bateman. As in the actress. What.
The Liberal government will announce legislation next month that will legalize marijuana in Canada by July 1, 2018.
http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/politics/liberal-legal-marijuana-pot-1.4041902
My country :')
By Zeus Ex Machina Go To PostOk so I am considering moving to Canada……Waiting on the government to announce the legislation. It'll be debated like every other bill and voted on in the House of Commons and the Senate. I'm assuming it'll be handled by the provinces and my province, Ontario, alcohol for example is sold in only specially-licensed stores and administered by the LCBO (Liquor Control Board of Ontario). I'd imagine something similar to that is possible but who knows.
What's the first step?
By Perfect Blue Go To PostWaiting on the government to announce the legislation. It'll be debated like every other bill and voted on in the House of Commons and the Senate. I'm assuming it'll be handled by the provinces and my province, Ontario, alcohol for example is sold in only specially-licensed stores and administered by the LCBO (Liquor Control Board of Ontario). I'd imagine something similar to that is possible but who knows.
Interesting, I like that licensed stores way more than the "4 plants per house hold method" I feel like that is fuckery waiting to happen. Obviously people are going to grow their own, but putting an arbitrary number on it is pointless. If your going to legislate people growing that cuts back on any taxes that can be obtained from it and the additional tax revenue is arguably just as important and decriminalizing it because it makes it hard to then criminalize something you're making significant tax revenue from. Also what is the odds that it passes?
By Zeus Ex Machina Go To PostInteresting, I like that licensed stores way more than the "4 plants per house hold method" I feel like that is fuckery waiting to happen. Obviously people are going to grow their own, but putting an arbitrary number on it is pointless. If your going to legislate people growing that cuts back on any taxes that can be obtained from it and the additional tax revenue is arguably just as important and decriminalizing it because it makes it hard to then criminalize something you're making significant tax revenue from. Also what is the odds that it passes?Some people understandably don't like the LCBO model since it effectively creates a monopoly on the product. Storefronts here in Toronto already sell marijuana openly after a 10 minute "consultation" with a doctor via Skype in the stores, so it'd be interesting to see what happens to the "little guy" in this scenario. I agree with you that the "4 plants" limit is pretty stupid. Apparently the states that legalized it already in the US it is a 6 plant limit.
I'm hesitant to put a percentage but I'd say it's very, VERY, likely. The ruling Liberals have a majority so do not need any bipartisan support but even if they did, the NDP would be with them who are the third party in Parliament and they are even more left on the spectrum. In the HoC the the party members vote together as a bloc at least 90% of the time. The Liberals won by such a massive margin in the 2015 election due to them courting young people and marijuana legalization was a pretty big plank on their election platform. Public opinion here in Canada is also massively in favour of marijuana legalization.
By Perfect Blue Go To PostSome people understandably don't like the LCBO model since it effectively creates a monopoly on the product. Storefronts here in Toronto already sell marijuana openly after a 10 minute "consultation" with a doctor via Skype in the stores, so it'd be interesting to see what happens to the "little guy" in this scenario. I agree with you that the "4 plants" limit is pretty stupid. Apparently the states that legalized it already in the US it is a 6 plant limit.
I'm hesitant to put a percentage but I'd say it's very, VERY, likely. The ruling Liberals have a majority so do not need any bipartisan support but even if they did, the NDP would be with them who are the third party in Parliament and they are even more left on the spectrum. In the HoC the the party members vote together as a bloc at least 90% of the time. The Liberals won by such a massive margin in the 2015 election due to them courting young people and marijuana legalization was a pretty big plank on their election platform. Public opinion here in Canada is also massively in favour of marijuana legalization.
I understand the monopoly aspect, but people are going to grow regardless (as they should), The whole OTC aspect is the tax revenue then justifies the reason to legalize it.
See that is what I feel the Democrats need in 2020.... a moderate democrat who is progressive on Marijuana. Americans are so puritanical (and beholden to baby boomers at the top of bothour parties) even the dems are squeamish about saying "we support decriminalization. All that positive evidence of how it works and they are shook red necks (who smoke weed too) will rally against weed.
I still think a complete progressive will have issues in 2020.....Especially if Russia isn't tampering. For example for all the hype behind Bernie his tax plan was atrocious and would of been a major issue if he had been the candidate. The reason he became so popular was the lack of candidates in general. In a normal election cycle we'll see about 12 Dem's go for it and in general the one who seems the most normal and intelligent will come out on top.
Whereas a obama'esque candidate "moderate in general but progressive on some key issues" is the candidate most likely to come out on top. Especially if they are good at messaging those key progressive ideals.
Using Hillary as an example of why a moderate can't win isn't fair she was really bad at messaging, ran against a opponent who was helped by a foreign power, never made the in game decision to embrace the bernie platform when it was at its peak of popularity, and she still won the popular vote by a few million.
Whereas a obama'esque candidate "moderate in general but progressive on some key issues" is the candidate most likely to come out on top. Especially if they are good at messaging those key progressive ideals.
Using Hillary as an example of why a moderate can't win isn't fair she was really bad at messaging, ran against a opponent who was helped by a foreign power, never made the in game decision to embrace the bernie platform when it was at its peak of popularity, and she still won the popular vote by a few million.
Tax cuts will be the next big thing.
That appears to be the only thing Trump really cares about since it will likely benefit him massively.
The question will be whether the GOP is willing to abandon all pretense of fiscal balance and simply push through a massive tax cut without the supposed savings of the AHCA.
That appears to be the only thing Trump really cares about since it will likely benefit him massively.
The question will be whether the GOP is willing to abandon all pretense of fiscal balance and simply push through a massive tax cut without the supposed savings of the AHCA.
Since this is a somewhat common topic in here: https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/03/this-article-wont-change-your-mind/519093/
Article about how facts don't change the minds of people who tie themselves to an idea or belief too closely.
Article about how facts don't change the minds of people who tie themselves to an idea or belief too closely.
By KingGondo Go To PostThe question will be whether the GOP is willing to abandon all pretense of fiscal balance and simply push through a massive tax cut without the supposed savings of the AHCA.
They can't do this via reconciliation. That's why the savings from the AHCA was needed. They could theoretically still pass a tax cut without the savings but it would require 60 votes.
Theoretically the GOP could ditch the FC and look to find common ground with Dems and make some trades. I could see things like lowering the corporate tax rate getting some Dem support. This hinges on the GOP working with Dems and ditching their crazed base though so I don't think it happens.
Either way, he's not getting what was originally intended. The AHCA fuck-up cost him his plans for the entire year.
By Fenderputty Go To PostThey can't do this via reconciliation. That's why the savings from the AHCA was needed. They could theoretically still pass a tax cut without the savings but it would require 60 votes.But Trump is going to reach out to Democrats now! You know, after saying it's their fault (and the Freedom Caucus's and Paul Ryan's. Deal maker!) he couldn't take away health care from millions of people.
It's pretty amazing how politics affects policy. The AHCA should have been a slam dunk for the HFC IMO. Especially once the EHB's were removed. It wasn't a pure repeal, but it managed to cap Medicaid and set the table for all their other goals. All of their tax plans and everything hinged on the AHCA's passage.
It's a shining example of why I hope the left doesn't start a tea party of their own.
It's a shining example of why I hope the left doesn't start a tea party of their own.
By Fenderputty Go To PostIt's pretty amazing how politics affects policy. The AHCA should have been a slam dunk for the HFC IMO. Especially once the EHB's were removed. It wasn't a pure repeal, but it managed to cap Medicaid and set the table for all their other goals. All of their tax plans and everything hinged on the AHCA's passage.
It's a shining example of why I hope the left doesn't start a tea party of their own.
The left have done a good job of avoiding it so far..... Ellison and Perez are even making public appearances together. Usually it's cyclical with them so after every election where they are at odds with the progressive wing, the next election they make sure the moderate they run has a platform that involves a few key progressive policy points attached.
By Fenderputty Go To PostThey can't do this via reconciliation. That's why the savings from the AHCA was needed. They could theoretically still pass a tax cut without the savings but it would require 60 votes.
Theoretically the GOP could ditch the FC and look to find common ground with Dems and make some trades. I could see things like lowering the corporate tax rate getting some Dem support. This hinges on the GOP working with Dems and ditching their crazed base though so I don't think it happens.
Either way, he's not getting what was originally intended. The AHCA fuck-up cost him his plans for the entire year.
Republicans ain't working with Dems..... they have too many ideologues in their party to do that. If anything I am expecting heavy gridlock unless Trump himself in a moment of clarity is the one to make the first move on working with the Dems which I don't see happening. Don't forget the current Republican Party isn't made of people who want to run Gov't it's made up of people who were put their to dissentagainst gov't
By Zeus Ex Machina Go To PostRepublicans ain't working with Dems….. they have too many ideologues in their party to do that. If anything I am expecting heavy gridlock unless Trump himself in a moment of clarity is the one to make the first move on working with the Dems which I don't see happening. Don't forget the current Republican Party isn't made of people who want to run Gov't it's made up of people who were put their to dissentagainst gov't
Ohh I definitely agree it's unlikely. It would have to be started by Trump. Ryan is too much of a spineless fuckwad to do anything like search for a bipartisan bill. Still ... it's theoretically possible.
There was a report this morning that the GOP is kinda freaking about the Dems filibustering Gorsuh because they don't have votes to nuke it within the Senate. Too many of the old guard left over and the filibuster gives a ton of power to the senate over the house and can empower individual senators.
Trump may only get executive orders regarding the EPA and shit done his first year.
By Fenderputty Go To PostOhh I definitely agree it's unlikely. It would have to be started by Trump. Ryan is too much of a spineless fuckwad to do anything like search for a bipartisan bill. Still … it's theoretically possible.
There was a report this morning that the GOP is kinda freaking about the Dems filibustering Gorsuh because they don't have votes to nuke it within the Senate. Too many of the old guard left over and the filibuster gives a ton of power to the senate over the house and can empower individual senators.
Trump may only get executive orders regarding the EPA and shit done his first year.
I see it as an excuse. They can just ignore stuff and say "We don't have the votes for it" if they bring it to 51 the house would hound all the senators to pass everything and in the long run that would cost senatos seats since you can't gerrymander states
http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/27/politics/adam-schiff-nunes-recusal-russia/index.html
Oh shit schiff told Nunes he needs to recuse himself
Oh shit schiff told Nunes he needs to recuse himself
Well now ...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-administration-sought-to-block-sally-yates-from-testifying-to-congress-on-russia/2017/03/28/82b73e18-13b4-11e7-9e4f-09aa75d3ec57_story.html?utm_term=.9277802c3032
And Paul Ryan's already reassured us that Nunes is still vital to the house intel committee.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-administration-sought-to-block-sally-yates-from-testifying-to-congress-on-russia/2017/03/28/82b73e18-13b4-11e7-9e4f-09aa75d3ec57_story.html?utm_term=.9277802c3032
The Trump administration sought to block former acting attorney general Sally Yates from testifying to Congress in the House investigation of links between Russian officials and Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, The Washington Post has learned, a position that is likely to further anger Democrats who have accused Republicans of trying to damage the inquiry.
And Paul Ryan's already reassured us that Nunes is still vital to the house intel committee.
By Zeus Ex Machina Go To PostThey stalling but the Feds still investigating so it's pointless
pretty much
the bad optics haven't really been worth it in this case but I guess they are going to try to control what they can control
So if they didn't collude with Russia during the generals before, trying to derail the investigation is certainly is the next closest thing.
The best part is the WH response is its clearly contradicted by the letters from the DoJ. Ryan continuing to play politics by keeping Nunes as the chair has me wondering if this actually reaches all the way down to Ryan as well. I had assumed he was just a spineless cunt origionaly, but like bro, at some point even spineless cunts have to read the writing on the wall.
Ryan is in too much shit with the GOP right now to do any such thing
But I don't know why he still cares about his position at this point. He needs to get as far from this administration as possible.
But I don't know why he still cares about his position at this point. He needs to get as far from this administration as possible.
Remember when Ryan was thought of as a competent politician and then he was put in charge and it turns out he's as incompetent as they come? Whoever saw that coming?