skinny21

So, aside from the Russian "fertilizer king" and his connections to Trump and Ross, now we're getting steel for Keystone from Russia. The Russian steel magnate who happens to be married to Ivanna's 'best friend'. Heard a great podcast discussing the change in corruption laws - what the framers originally intended and how it changed. Framers were obviously adamant in believing corruption was anathema to a strong democracy. Also discussed the very obvious violations of the emoluments clause. Jeffrey Lorde on Bill Maher - all of the defense's offered (from climate change, to Russian connections to Republican spending) were so weak and trite. It's eerily similar to my 10 year old's attempts to argue with me.

Jumbo, how you gonna say all that and leave off the coincidence of them being in the same place at the same time during the campaign... 5 or 6 times wasn't it?

Congress can call for a special prosecutor. Or could have asked that Sessions refuse himself. Or called for a commission to investigate. Or could pretend to take it seriously. But you knew all of that already.

Was talking to my wife the other day about this - said it's like giving my kids a cookie for dessert and one of them refusing... only to ask for a bowl of ice cream after the others finish their cookies. Sidenote - I teach my kids that when playing board games, they need to keep themselves beyond reproach so no one can accuse them of cheating (like no taking turns when someone goes to the bathroom). It's sad to see adult politicians unable to see this... but this probably applies more to the Rooskie thread... or the cabinet thread.

Yeah, I'd love for more Republicans to step up and take charge here. The Dems doing it doesn't necessarily do them any favors. I've said it in other contexts, but the GOP seems to think that conducting a serious (ie. nonpartisan) investigation is the same as turning on Trump or going against their base... but it's not an either or scenario. I think they'd garner more respect from the middle if they were seen to take this situation seriously. Of course, a party that generally dismisses climate change, treats Trump's statements with kid gloves, constantly flirts with voter suppression, and has made hypocrisy their ***** is probably far more concerned with power than doing the right thing.

To your first point - that's exactly why I would like to know about contacts with other countries. Except, as you well know, the lies about the contacts are (for now) the bigger deal. I agree about the financial ties to China. Between the TPP and the most recent business deal, color me concerned... though that's maybe more fitting for the conflict of interest thread. Russia a 3rd world country with a nuke arsenal? I suppose you could be right, but... 1) they've invaded a foreign nation (one that's part of a serious alliance that's letting them down) and 2) things they seem to want - destabilized Europe, weaker NATO and a less involved US - are all falling into place (coinciding with large scale cyber attacks directed at these targets). 3) there is still a lot of money in Russia, and there figures to be a whole lot more if the sanctions are eased/removed, including Exxon's massive deals with them. I'd argue they are enough of a power that they can threaten or effectively subsume many neighboring nations. Of course, to do that they'd need the rest of Europe, and the US, to back off. As to the media, man, what a situation. I alternately think they should back off a bit due to the numbing you're talking about, and I feel like they are forced to cover this administration 24-7 because the administration keeps breaking norms, showing hostility to every critic or speed bump, and showing a shocking amount of corruption, lying and unnecessarily dangerous statements. And more. I guess I'd say they (the media) need to avoid obsessing over the bungling and keep hammering the bigger concerns... but Trump has effectively declared war on them. To be fair though, almost no matter which stories go where, this administration scares the heck out of me. I can't blame anyone paying attention for freaking out, and the press pays more attention than maybe anyone. I do recall Tapper basically telling Conway he'd love to covering other things including positive aspects of the administration, but the constant scandals wouldn't let him. Call it BS if you want, but this is looking to be one of the most scandalous, hostile, myopic administration in our history, and that doesn't need any help from the media bias or financial incentive... Because this isn't because the Dems lost the Prez., have no voice in the government, or due to the hard right swing we're facing in many important areas. No, it's about the attacks on our democracy, the lying and the potential negative global ramifications surrounding this WH. Hope that doesn't make me a whiny *****, but I can't say I'd be hurt if it did in your eyes... I'm comfortable saying it seems pretty dang sane to be concerned. ?

I would be too. Of course, I can't recall repeated denials about such meetings. Or (many of?) those denials proven false. Or the members of the administration/campaign having a bunch of previous ties to China. Or the administration having so many financial ties to China. Or Trump talking up China's leadership. Or China messing with our election. Or China having a desire to destabilize NATO, and the EU/US. Or multiple members of the campaign getting fired after they were found to have Chinese ties. Crap, I was just gonna mention a few things. I'll stop there. I am serious though that I would be curious about meetings/communications with Chinese officials pre-election.

Haha, I read the first tweet and dumbfounded, showed it to my wife... then scrolled down to the next tweet and thought, "exactly". Right there with you - how can people be so freakin' stupid?

Anyone see the Bernie Sanders and Bill Nye interview? It was about as awkward as you'd expect, but interesting nonetheless. Also - https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/01/thanks-to-trump-scientists-are-planning-to-run-for-office/514229/

Good point Larry. Ridiculous... but still valid.

Wonder if Navalny has invested in a tombstone yet. Better yet, buy one, get your name put on it, carry a picture of it, and show it off every time you speak.

I'm not sure I really get the discriminatory claim. Is it discriminatory to say a blind person can't drive a car?

Think this article was posted somewhere, but the compensation part of this excerpt struck me as pretty ridiculous, especially from a Tea Partier. Maybe I'm looking at it wrong... Scott said Sunday that he used the lunch to press for principles he has pushed publicly, such as financial compensation for states that did not expand Medicaid under the ACA and the importance of providing competition and cutting required benefits to allow people to “buy insurance that fits them.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/a-divided-white-house-still-offers-little-guidance-on-replacing-obamacare/2017/02/26/3981bb8c-fb8c-11e6-be05-1a3817ac21a5_story.html?utm_term=.2f4de7271713 I hate to say it, but I'm glad Trump listened to Kasich, though he still seems brazenly clueless about the subject.

So, I've been thinking that a there needs to be a change in the narrative to some degree. Given the fairly wide swath of moderate Republicans/Democrats and undecideds and nonvoters, it doesn't make a lot of sense to me to frame some of these issues (particularly the ones involved in this thread - Russian interference/connections, Nationalism, etc.) as Republican vs Democratic. You won't move as many moderate Republicans if you are on the offensive/defensive vs all things Republican. The undecideds (while they may be concerned over Trump's 'missteps') will too easily see things as they often have in the past - a fight between the two parties. The nonvoters are more likely to stay home if they see this mess as purely political. While yes, it's come up, I think these issues need to be more frequently and forcefully pushed as American vs unAmerican, and we (and the media) need to step back and discuss these things as such from a broader perspective. It's easy to get bogged down in the weeds, but it's dangerous to do so. Immigrants play a huge huge role in the country's wellbeing, but fighting reform every step of the way can make some lose sight of that bigger picture. Russia wants the US, EU, NATO destabilized. That's obviously a problem - we don't want to slide back to a Cold War type scenario. Global trade keeps us far safer. Nationalism, protectionism and "deconstructionism" are all dangerous for our future. Anyway, gotta go, so I'm going to forego a more coherent conclusion. One last thing I'll add though, is perhaps "a portion of the government" should substitute for "Republicans/GOP". Not that I think there isn't a great deal of blame to go around, but using the latter term focuses on party lines and (presumably) loses some people.

2018/2020 Election Thread - Congress down to councilpersons (screw the President)?

The ACA map in the tweet about Arkansawyers is for 2014. Here's a bit of an update that shows the change in uninsured from year to year. Pretty cool. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/10/31/upshot/up-uninsured-2016.html

I wonder how much of that is offset by the gov't aid the group receives. I'd assume it's still a big kick in the nuts for both the business community and country. I also wonder what this will mean in terms of schools - population/funding/etc.

They had a couple doozies on (I believe it was) Rachel Maddow - At McConnell's TH - one lady talking about about coal miners and (the threat of) stripping away their healthcare and promising them jobs that weren't going to come back (that created their health problems in the first place). She finished with (paraphrasing) "answer that and I'll sit the hell down like you made Senator Warren sit down". Another TH, guy starts his question with (paraphrasing) "I'm sorry for my forcefulness in trying to be heard" One GOPer says (paraphrasing) "If you all keep applauding every question I won't have time to answer as man questions". To which someone shouts out "They're trying to show their support for the questions". Which draws a big applause. Have to wonder how much of these TH's are actually just pure shouting matches vs the media showing the more volatile moments of the crowd. Sad that some seem to think these these people are paid to be there. Like, really? You can't think of any reason for people to be pissed off right now? A wapo reporter attended several THs and the few conservatives (well, Republicans anyway) he spoke to were convinced people were driving down from the city to protest. Reporter pointed out that they were in Iowa, where the have the county on the license plate, so it was pretty easy to see that wasn't the case.

@twaCurious what you think about the idea that cracking down on immigration will lead to (illegal) immigrant's unwillingness to aid law enforcement - reporting crimes, bearing witness, testifying, or giving themselves up if they commit crimes.

To me, the biggest implications involve (as others have mentioned) a further emboldened Russia that 1) destabizes Europe (our allies) 2) enriches itself (and allows it to upgrade its military might 3) continues to undermine our democracy and other "legitimate" democracies 4) erodes US ability to continue as a superpower (economically and militarily) 5) enables ascendancy of more authoritarian regimes 6) decreases the worldwide focus on climate change and humanitarian policies. It might not look too extreme in the short term, but these are things that can lead to a rapid decline in our (America's) civilization. Historically, we're already starting to push the bounds of a civilization superpower - I believe Rome (the longest lasting) lasted around 350 yrs and we're around 250. I doubt the most Romans saw the fall coming until it was upon them. Not trying to be all doom and gloom, but it's easy for us (or any people living in a strong nation/civilization) to not realize how quickly things can snowball.

@twaYeah, as I was responding to you I considered mentioning the fact that it could be one of those cases of pushing the boundaries of the executive/judiciary. Doesn't change the fact that he shoulders the blame if something happens though.

Can? Sure. Likely to? I don't know, but the odds look iffy at the moment. Philosophically though, you could argue he still loses because he claims the judges are making our country less safe and they are to blame if something happens. Yet the blame falls on him if instead of a (relatively) quick rewrite/redo, he spends time in court. I mean, the judges gave him a roadmap on how to go about it, right? So, in that sense, he's putting his ego ahead of national security (if the threat is as dire as he seems to think).

It's fascinating to me that regarding the EO, Trump seems stuck between losing (I mean, it's possible that changes) or admitting he was wrong. Should be an easy choice - just redraft the EO, but that ego....

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/08/politics/donald-trump-travel-ban-defense/index.html Trump - EO couldn't have been written more precisely. What a joke. The fact that they didn't even (seemingly) try to find out how our vetting works before deciding they needed the 'temp' ban... just completely degrades the argument. The fact that they didn't (seemingly) question how the EO would affect public opinion abroad (especially in the same 'terrorist' states they are so concerned about), would be laughable if it weren't so (likely to be) detrimental to our safety. Stoke fear by empowering our enemies - check Attempt to cripple the media - check Attempt to erode any checks and balances to the Executive branch - check Create news to push potential corruption to the back burner - check Well on their way...

It makes me laugh that my (elementary age) kids refer to any kids that disrupt the classroom as "bad kids", but I'm also painfully aware that this is likely to change as they get older. Now, I'm careful to point out that it could be that these kids aren't getting the attention they need at home, etc. because I don't want mine to look down on them or anything. I'm also thrilled that so far bullying/fighting/etc. isn't a factor at their school, and this is a very diverse school (tons of Latino immigrants, etc.). We're looking to move to a different neighborhood, but I've heard some pretty bad stories about the predominantly white school they'd be attending. Anyway, wish more schools would utilize the IB method of education. As others have said though, I think the parents and peers have a huge hand in education, with the latter having even more of an impact as they get older. Don't know how in the world you fix parents or the culture holding kids back.