By David Ferguson
The Republican National Committee (RNC) tried to conceal payments it
made during the 2016 election to a shadowy intelligence-gathering firm
for opposition research against Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton.
Politico reported on Friday
that the RNC paid $41,500 to the Hamilton Trading Group, a
Virginia-based private company run by former CIA operatives. The agency
worked with a former Russian spy to hunt for information that would show
conflicts of interest between Clinton’s role as Secretary of State and
her interests as a private citizen and leader of the Clinton Foundation.
Observers in politics and intelligence noted that it would be odd for
the RNC to make payments to Hamilton Trading given that the group
specializes in matters pertaining to Russia.
“RNC officials and the president and co-founder of Hamilton Trading
Group, an ex-CIA officer named Ben Wickham, insisted the payments, which
eventually totaled $41,500, had nothing to do with Russia,” wrote
Politico’s Kenneth P. Vogel and Eli Stokols.
Wickham and the RNC initially claimed that the payments were in
return for building and security analyses of RNC headquarters in
Washington.
“But RNC officials now acknowledge that most of the cash — $34,100 — went towards intelligence-style reports
that sought to prove conflicts of interest between Democratic
presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State
and her family’s foundation,” Politico said.
HTG produced two dossiers, both of which attempted to make a case
that Clinton directed U.S. interventions in Bulgaria and Israel on
behalf of energy firms that donated to the Clinton Foundation, said
individuals familiar with the documents.
Wickham told Politico in a Thursday interview that he floated the
building inspection story because “any other work we may have done for
them” was covered under a nondisclosure agreement.
“I’m not denying that I wasn’t totally forthcoming, but I’m telling
you why,” Wickham told Politico.
“The security stuff that we did, which
is legitimate, was not covered by any kind of a confidentiality
agreement, so I can discuss that.”
Last June, when the RNC filed financial disclosures with the Federal
Elections Commission (FEC), a $3,400 payment to Hamilton attracted
attention because the firm is not known for building security
consultations, but rather for espionage work related to Russia.
“Adding to the intrigue are the firm’s intelligence connections in Russia, where it was known to perform background checks and provide security services for American officials and companies,” said Politico.
The job was handed to former KGB agent Gennady Vasilenko, who declined to comment on the matter.
Wickham denied that his firm looked into any connections
between the Trump campaign and the Russian government, saying he has
“never had any contact with … Trump or Manafort or their people.”
Politico said the RNC has produced documents detailing a list of
Clinton-related issues it tasked Hamilton Trading with researching.
He said that while his firm is not well-known for building security, it did an assessment for the RNC to protect against a “McVeigh-type” bombing attack or a gun-wielding intruder like the San Bernardino mass shooting.
“We certainly are not widely known, as we have always been a two- to
three-man company and have done little advertising,” Wickham said,
adding that the firm has done anti-terror security consultations for
Amtrak and the International Monetary Fund’s offices in Moscow.
Friday, March 24, 2017
The Russia Scandal Takes A Mind-Blowing Turn That Could Destroy The Republican Party
It wasn't Donald Trump alone who had ties to the Russians during the
2016 campaign. It turns out that the Republican National Committee used a
firm with ties to Russian intelligence to dig up dirt on Hillary
Clinton.
By Sarah Jones
This is truly mind-blowing.
Perhaps you’ve been wondering how establishment Republicans were so happy ignoring the looming treason scandal of their President. It very well could be because they, too, have something Russian to hide.
So it wasn’t Donald Trump alone who had ties to the Russians during the 2016 campaign. It turns out that the Republican National Committee used a firm with ties to Russian intelligence to dig up dirt on Hillary Clinton.
The RNC used former CIA officers’ firm the Hamilton Trading Group, which has “particular expertise” in Russia, to dig up dirt on Clinton according to a Politico report.
“RNC officials and the president and co-founder of Hamilton Trading Group, an ex-CIA officer named Ben Wickham, insisted the payments, which eventually totaled $41,500, had nothing to do with Russia,” Kenneth P. Vogel and Eli Stokols reported.
The RNC claimed the payments were for “security.”
“But RNC officials now acknowledge that most of the cash — $34,100 — went towards intelligence-style reports that sought to prove conflicts of interest between Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State and her family’s foundation.”
Oh.
So the RNC was perfectly comfortable working with a firm that raised eyebrows for its Russian connections, at a time when the intelligence community was telling them that Russia was interfering in the U.S. election.
To say this again, as Putin has bragged about information warfare as the new war, a major U.S. political party sided with a country that declared information warfare, or war if you will, on the U.S.A.
Yes, it is an act of war, it is meant to destroy western democracy in the end.
Russia uses “rigged polls and fake news to sway foreign elections,” the Wall Street Journal reported, on a dossier showing an example of how Russia operated in Bulgaria.
The entire Republican Party had strange ties to a government at war with this country, the country to which Republicans are supposed to be loyal.
Strange things are afloat. No wonder Congressional Republicans are doing everything they can to ignore the screaming treason of the White House. They are quite possibly in on it themselves.
If this scandal comes to a head, that is to say if the intelligence community turns on the Republican Party in an effort to force them to deal with the possible collusion with a hostile foreign power in the White House, the Russia scandal could bring down the Republican Party for a generation.
Republicans should be smart here; this will come out. They should get on the right side of history before it’s too late. Sadly, this party’s elected officials have shown little allegiance to their country.
What is going on here is a scandal that will go down in history. One of two major parties in the U.S. system working with a foreign power that has declared war on the U.S.A. That is not to say they colluded with Russia to bring the U.S. down, but they did work with them as Russia was attacking the election, an act of war. That much is in evidence.
The collusion evidence, the circumstantial collusion evidence, in this case could be as simple as Republicans knew Russians were attacking the U.S. elections when they worked with this firm with ties to Russian intelligence. To be clear, there is not public evidence of direct collusion in terms of quid pro quo right now. There is evidence that the RNC was deceptive about their connections with Russian intelligence in this regard, and that they had it during the campaign.
The fact that the head of the RNC at the time is now in the Trump White House is even more troubling, as Trump has hired people at all points whose contacts with the Russians during the election have already caused one of them to be fired and another to step down from overseeing an investigation into Trump’s ties to Russia.
This should now be amended to the Republican Party’s ties to Russia. Lucky for them, they are in power of both branches of government and trying to get their Supreme Court nominee in as the last gatekeeper in a checks and balances system. The only way this scandal is going to come out is through the intelligence community leaking to the press.
And that’s why Republicans are so outraged about leaks.
But this is not Republicans trying to protect our national security secrets. This is Republicans trying to make sure they cover up the fact that Russia has eyes and ears in the situation room, and has access to our national secrets because of Trump and the GOP.
It was true that going to the extremist corner they did, Republicans could not win a national election without cheating. They knew this, everyone knew this. So it was a shock when Donald Trump, the most extreme of the extreme, won.
But now, it’s not such a shock because it wasn’t won without cheating. It was won with the help of a hostile, aggressive government whose goal is to bring the U.S. down in order to kill the hope of democracy.
By Sarah Jones
This is truly mind-blowing.
Perhaps you’ve been wondering how establishment Republicans were so happy ignoring the looming treason scandal of their President. It very well could be because they, too, have something Russian to hide.
So it wasn’t Donald Trump alone who had ties to the Russians during the 2016 campaign. It turns out that the Republican National Committee used a firm with ties to Russian intelligence to dig up dirt on Hillary Clinton.
The RNC used former CIA officers’ firm the Hamilton Trading Group, which has “particular expertise” in Russia, to dig up dirt on Clinton according to a Politico report.
“RNC officials and the president and co-founder of Hamilton Trading Group, an ex-CIA officer named Ben Wickham, insisted the payments, which eventually totaled $41,500, had nothing to do with Russia,” Kenneth P. Vogel and Eli Stokols reported.
The RNC claimed the payments were for “security.”
“But RNC officials now acknowledge that most of the cash — $34,100 — went towards intelligence-style reports that sought to prove conflicts of interest between Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State and her family’s foundation.”
Oh.
So the RNC was perfectly comfortable working with a firm that raised eyebrows for its Russian connections, at a time when the intelligence community was telling them that Russia was interfering in the U.S. election.
To say this again, as Putin has bragged about information warfare as the new war, a major U.S. political party sided with a country that declared information warfare, or war if you will, on the U.S.A.
Yes, it is an act of war, it is meant to destroy western democracy in the end.
Russia uses “rigged polls and fake news to sway foreign elections,” the Wall Street Journal reported, on a dossier showing an example of how Russia operated in Bulgaria.
The entire Republican Party had strange ties to a government at war with this country, the country to which Republicans are supposed to be loyal.
Strange things are afloat. No wonder Congressional Republicans are doing everything they can to ignore the screaming treason of the White House. They are quite possibly in on it themselves.
If this scandal comes to a head, that is to say if the intelligence community turns on the Republican Party in an effort to force them to deal with the possible collusion with a hostile foreign power in the White House, the Russia scandal could bring down the Republican Party for a generation.
Republicans should be smart here; this will come out. They should get on the right side of history before it’s too late. Sadly, this party’s elected officials have shown little allegiance to their country.
What is going on here is a scandal that will go down in history. One of two major parties in the U.S. system working with a foreign power that has declared war on the U.S.A. That is not to say they colluded with Russia to bring the U.S. down, but they did work with them as Russia was attacking the election, an act of war. That much is in evidence.
The collusion evidence, the circumstantial collusion evidence, in this case could be as simple as Republicans knew Russians were attacking the U.S. elections when they worked with this firm with ties to Russian intelligence. To be clear, there is not public evidence of direct collusion in terms of quid pro quo right now. There is evidence that the RNC was deceptive about their connections with Russian intelligence in this regard, and that they had it during the campaign.
The fact that the head of the RNC at the time is now in the Trump White House is even more troubling, as Trump has hired people at all points whose contacts with the Russians during the election have already caused one of them to be fired and another to step down from overseeing an investigation into Trump’s ties to Russia.
This should now be amended to the Republican Party’s ties to Russia. Lucky for them, they are in power of both branches of government and trying to get their Supreme Court nominee in as the last gatekeeper in a checks and balances system. The only way this scandal is going to come out is through the intelligence community leaking to the press.
And that’s why Republicans are so outraged about leaks.
But this is not Republicans trying to protect our national security secrets. This is Republicans trying to make sure they cover up the fact that Russia has eyes and ears in the situation room, and has access to our national secrets because of Trump and the GOP.
It was true that going to the extremist corner they did, Republicans could not win a national election without cheating. They knew this, everyone knew this. So it was a shock when Donald Trump, the most extreme of the extreme, won.
But now, it’s not such a shock because it wasn’t won without cheating. It was won with the help of a hostile, aggressive government whose goal is to bring the U.S. down in order to kill the hope of democracy.
The Best Single Statement Ever On GOP "Healthcare" - Devastating
Dear Mom,
You won't comprehend this because you have Stage 6 Dementia, but things need to change. The nice congressmen in Washington want to free us from government dependency so we can make better healthcare choices without the stigma of taking handouts from society.
So, Mom, about your Medicaid Aged and Disabled Waiver that pays me a 40 hr/week pittance to care for you at home 24/7: the new HHS Secretary and Medicaid Chief sent our Governor a letter that says people on Medicaid should seek employment if they want to keep those benefits. This may sound unfair considering you're 89, bladder and bowel incontinent, unable to walk unassisted, and often lapse into episodes of uncontrollable whimpering, but if the government decides it's for the best, we'll all need to buck up and contribute our fair share. After all, your 50 year nursing career doesn't necessarily entitle you to a free ride.
I'll probably need to get a "real" job too, because I exploit the system. Never mind that your care would cost the state $78,000 annually in a nursing home versus the $16,000 it pays me; leave the math to those smart fellas in Washington who understand that big government should stop controlling our lives. The important thing is we'll have freedom to choose, and not impose an unfair tax burden on millionaires and the medical industrial complex.
Once I stop taking handouts, I won't be home with you. We should bolster the economy by hiring attendant care, but it costs more than I can earn, and Medicare won't cover it because those warmhearted legislators support family values like looking after our own. You'll enjoy being home alone all day, Mom. You don't really need regular meals or clean Depends, and when you have one of your falls, you can rest quietly on the floor in a puddle of urine until I get off work. Those dear congressmen give us other options, too, such as permanently placing you in a facility to die more quickly and efficiently. Here's another choice: I could stay home and attend you for free! We'll do fine on your Social Security income by sacrificing a few luxuries like groceries, property taxes, electricity, and the car.
There's a bonus, Mom. I won't be forced to maintain health insurance! Remember “Obamacare” that saved my life through early cancer screening? The Republicans devised a better plan. Because I'm over 50 and earn $150 per year above the Medicaid cutoff, my annual premium will increase by roughly $6,000, but I can choose to opt out! I'll still have "access” but not be victimized by the enslaving tax subsidy that let me afford coverage for the first time in 25 years. I'm excited about returning to indigent emergency room treatment and boosting insurance industry profits while taxpayers shoulder the cost instead.
With so many great options it's hard to decide, but here's our new plan, Mom. Under Trumpcare, I'll "choose" to lose health coverage, seek a minimum wage job, and dump you in a nursing home. Between the cost of facility care, a couple of ER visits and perhaps one minor surgery for me per year, and the food stamps and heating assistance I'll need once you and your Social Security income leave the household, I estimate we will save the government roughly NEGATIVE $350,000 over the next 5 years! Multiply that by the millions of people who will lose coverage, and you can appreciate what a sensible and economical plan the Republicans have devised.
You'll be proud to receive depersonalized institutional care instead of burdening society in comfort with your family. The facility gets your Social Security check, and Medicare/Medicaid will cover the balance until you hit the newly proposed block grant funding cap. If you're still alive then, we're unsure what will happen, but we can trust Congress to do what's right. I hear they're formulating a plan to ship the poor, elderly, and chronically ill to arctic ice floes. It's called “Trump Tower North: the Last Resort.” You might even get to see polar bears before they become extinct! Won't that be fun?
I'm so happy that the government wants to stop interfering in our lives.
Love,
Your Freeloading Daughter
P.S. Mom, if you do need a job to keep that Medicaid, I thought of a placement for someone who can't function productively, has no grasp of reality, and relies on government entitlements. 435 congressional seats will open up next year. You appear to be perfectly qualified.
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/3/24/1646735/-Dear-Mom-About-your-50-year-nursing-career-Medicaid-Woman-s-post-will-blow-GOP-minds
You won't comprehend this because you have Stage 6 Dementia, but things need to change. The nice congressmen in Washington want to free us from government dependency so we can make better healthcare choices without the stigma of taking handouts from society.
So, Mom, about your Medicaid Aged and Disabled Waiver that pays me a 40 hr/week pittance to care for you at home 24/7: the new HHS Secretary and Medicaid Chief sent our Governor a letter that says people on Medicaid should seek employment if they want to keep those benefits. This may sound unfair considering you're 89, bladder and bowel incontinent, unable to walk unassisted, and often lapse into episodes of uncontrollable whimpering, but if the government decides it's for the best, we'll all need to buck up and contribute our fair share. After all, your 50 year nursing career doesn't necessarily entitle you to a free ride.
I'll probably need to get a "real" job too, because I exploit the system. Never mind that your care would cost the state $78,000 annually in a nursing home versus the $16,000 it pays me; leave the math to those smart fellas in Washington who understand that big government should stop controlling our lives. The important thing is we'll have freedom to choose, and not impose an unfair tax burden on millionaires and the medical industrial complex.
Once I stop taking handouts, I won't be home with you. We should bolster the economy by hiring attendant care, but it costs more than I can earn, and Medicare won't cover it because those warmhearted legislators support family values like looking after our own. You'll enjoy being home alone all day, Mom. You don't really need regular meals or clean Depends, and when you have one of your falls, you can rest quietly on the floor in a puddle of urine until I get off work. Those dear congressmen give us other options, too, such as permanently placing you in a facility to die more quickly and efficiently. Here's another choice: I could stay home and attend you for free! We'll do fine on your Social Security income by sacrificing a few luxuries like groceries, property taxes, electricity, and the car.
There's a bonus, Mom. I won't be forced to maintain health insurance! Remember “Obamacare” that saved my life through early cancer screening? The Republicans devised a better plan. Because I'm over 50 and earn $150 per year above the Medicaid cutoff, my annual premium will increase by roughly $6,000, but I can choose to opt out! I'll still have "access” but not be victimized by the enslaving tax subsidy that let me afford coverage for the first time in 25 years. I'm excited about returning to indigent emergency room treatment and boosting insurance industry profits while taxpayers shoulder the cost instead.
With so many great options it's hard to decide, but here's our new plan, Mom. Under Trumpcare, I'll "choose" to lose health coverage, seek a minimum wage job, and dump you in a nursing home. Between the cost of facility care, a couple of ER visits and perhaps one minor surgery for me per year, and the food stamps and heating assistance I'll need once you and your Social Security income leave the household, I estimate we will save the government roughly NEGATIVE $350,000 over the next 5 years! Multiply that by the millions of people who will lose coverage, and you can appreciate what a sensible and economical plan the Republicans have devised.
You'll be proud to receive depersonalized institutional care instead of burdening society in comfort with your family. The facility gets your Social Security check, and Medicare/Medicaid will cover the balance until you hit the newly proposed block grant funding cap. If you're still alive then, we're unsure what will happen, but we can trust Congress to do what's right. I hear they're formulating a plan to ship the poor, elderly, and chronically ill to arctic ice floes. It's called “Trump Tower North: the Last Resort.” You might even get to see polar bears before they become extinct! Won't that be fun?
I'm so happy that the government wants to stop interfering in our lives.
Love,
Your Freeloading Daughter
P.S. Mom, if you do need a job to keep that Medicaid, I thought of a placement for someone who can't function productively, has no grasp of reality, and relies on government entitlements. 435 congressional seats will open up next year. You appear to be perfectly qualified.
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/3/24/1646735/-Dear-Mom-About-your-50-year-nursing-career-Medicaid-Woman-s-post-will-blow-GOP-minds
This is impeachment territory, and imprisonment territory, for the highest officials in the United States
Trump, Sessions, Manafort, Kushner all directly involved in selling US foreign policy to Russia for 0.5% of Russian oil giant Rosneft.
In a stunning tweet storm this evening, columnist and reporter Seth Abrahamson (Huffington Post, Dallas Morning News, Seattle Times, Washington Post) laid out all the details on the Russia-Trump connection. And folks, this is impeachment territory, and imprisonment territory, for the highest officials in the United States.
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/3/23/1646686/-RussiaGate-blows-WIDE-OPEN-in-Abrahamson-report-High-crimes-and-misdemeanors-by-Trump-Sessions
Thursday, March 23, 2017
Felek's redNAND-free Wii U Hacking Guide
Noob Friendly / Kid Friendly / Idiot Friendly
WIP - Work In Progress, ToDo: Add vWii hacking guide, Add Credits, Brazilian Method, CBHC Installation
PSA: Don't use Wii U.guide!
Before we start [You need]:
WIP - Work In Progress, ToDo: Add vWii hacking guide, Add Credits, Brazilian Method, CBHC Installation
PSA: Don't use Wii U.guide!
Before we start [You need]:
- SDCard [4GB, for Brazillian Method you need 16GB minimum]
- PC/Laptop with SDCard reader
- Brain. I don't take responsibility for your brick
- Blocking Updates [Using TitleDNS!]
- Browserhax [Homebrew Launcher+Files]
- Mocha CFW set up [redNAND free!]
- Haxchi Installation [Offline Homebrew Solution!]
- Brazilian Method [DLC, Updates, Games]
- ColdBootHaxChi Installation [Optional, CFW on boot!]
Republicans Staggering Supreme Court Hypocrisy
Mitch McConnell has a very very short memory. Cenk Uygur and Ana
Kasparian, the hosts of The Young Turks, show you how Republicans are
giant hypocrites.
“If Neil Gorsuch can’t get 60 votes in today's Senate, perhaps no Republican Supreme Court nominee can, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Tuesday.
“I haven’t seen a single Democrat … indicate they were prepared to either for cloture or to vote for him,” McConnell told reporters. “If Judge Gorsuch can’t achieve 60 votes in the Senate, could any judge appointed by a Republican president be approved with 60 or more votes in the Senate?”
The Kentucky Republican’s comments underscore just how popular Gorsuch is among Republicans amid an otherwise shaky first two months under Donald Trump’s White House. But they also expose a potentially troubling problem for the GOP: No Democrats have announced support for Gorsuch, and he needs at least eight Democratic votes.”
“If Neil Gorsuch can’t get 60 votes in today's Senate, perhaps no Republican Supreme Court nominee can, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Tuesday.
“I haven’t seen a single Democrat … indicate they were prepared to either for cloture or to vote for him,” McConnell told reporters. “If Judge Gorsuch can’t achieve 60 votes in the Senate, could any judge appointed by a Republican president be approved with 60 or more votes in the Senate?”
The Kentucky Republican’s comments underscore just how popular Gorsuch is among Republicans amid an otherwise shaky first two months under Donald Trump’s White House. But they also expose a potentially troubling problem for the GOP: No Democrats have announced support for Gorsuch, and he needs at least eight Democratic votes.”
Chuck Todd Blasts Paul Ryan On GOP Healthcare Plan
Chuck Todd easily blasts Paul Ryan on his lies about the new GOP healthcare plan.
‘A stooge of the president of the United States’: Nancy Pelosi calls for Devin Nunes to step aside
By David Edwards
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) on Thursday accused House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA) of being a “stooge” for Donald Trump after he released information about foreign intelligence surveillance without first telling his Democratic colleagues.
In a press conference on Wednesday, Nunes revealed that intelligence agencies had incidentally intercepted communications from Trump and his associates while conducting surveillance of foreign targets. Nunes then went to the White House to personally brief the president, who said he felt “somewhat” vindicated by the revelations.
At a briefing with reporters on Thursday, Pelosi said that Nunes appeared to be a “willing stooge” of the president.
“He committed a stunt at the White House yesterday raising questions about Chairman Nunes’ impartiality,” Pelosi explained, noting that Nunes had been a part of the Trump transition team.
“The Republicans are grasping at straws,” she continued. “FBI Director Comey confirmed that President Obama did not wiretap President Trump, affirmed an investigation into links and coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump campaign.”
According to Pelosi, Nunes made it necessary to move forward with an independent investigation because he had proven himself “a stooge for the president of the United States.”
“I think he had demonstrated very clearly that there is no way that there can be an impartial investigation under his leadership on that committee,” she insisted. “It speaks very clearly to the need for an outside independent commission.”
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) on Thursday accused House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA) of being a “stooge” for Donald Trump after he released information about foreign intelligence surveillance without first telling his Democratic colleagues.
In a press conference on Wednesday, Nunes revealed that intelligence agencies had incidentally intercepted communications from Trump and his associates while conducting surveillance of foreign targets. Nunes then went to the White House to personally brief the president, who said he felt “somewhat” vindicated by the revelations.
At a briefing with reporters on Thursday, Pelosi said that Nunes appeared to be a “willing stooge” of the president.
“He committed a stunt at the White House yesterday raising questions about Chairman Nunes’ impartiality,” Pelosi explained, noting that Nunes had been a part of the Trump transition team.
“The Republicans are grasping at straws,” she continued. “FBI Director Comey confirmed that President Obama did not wiretap President Trump, affirmed an investigation into links and coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump campaign.”
According to Pelosi, Nunes made it necessary to move forward with an independent investigation because he had proven himself “a stooge for the president of the United States.”
“I think he had demonstrated very clearly that there is no way that there can be an impartial investigation under his leadership on that committee,” she insisted. “It speaks very clearly to the need for an outside independent commission.”
Tuesday, March 21, 2017
Republicans Are Afraid Trump Is Genuinely Nuts
By Robert Reich
I spent much of this past week in Washington – talking with friends still in government, former colleagues, high-ranking Democrats, a few Republican pundits, and some members of Congress from both sides of the aisle. It was my first visit to our nation’s capital since Trump became president.
My verdict:
1. Washington is more divided, angry, bewildered, and fearful – than I’ve ever seen it.
2. The angry divisions aren’t just Democrats versus Republicans. Rancor is also exploding inside the Republican Party.
3. Republicans (and their patrons in big business) no longer believe Trump will give them cover to do what they want to do. They’re becoming afraid Trump is genuinely nuts, and he’ll pull the party down with him.
4. Many Republicans are also angry at Paul Ryan, whose replacement bill for Obamacare is considered by almost everyone on Capitol Hill to be incredibly dumb.
5. I didn’t talk with anyone inside the White House, but several who have had dealings with it called it a cesspool of intrigue and fear. Apparently everyone working there hates and distrusts everyone else.
6. The Washington foreign policy establishment – both Republican and Democrat – is deeply worried about what’s happening to American foreign policy, and the worldwide perception of America being loony and rudderless. They think Trump is legitimizing far-right movements around the world.
7. Long-time civil servants are getting ready to bail. If they’re close to retirement they’re already halfway out the door. Many in their 30s and 40s are in panic mode.
8. Republican pundits think Bannon is even more unhinged than Trump, seeking to destroy democracy as we’ve known it.
9. Despite all this, no one I talked with thought a Trump impeachment likely, at least not any time soon – unless there’s a smoking gun showing Trump’s involvement in Russia’s intrusion into the election.
10. Many people asked, bewilderedly, “how did this [Trump] happen?” When I suggest it had a lot to do with the 35-year-long decline of incomes of the bottom 60 percent; the growing sense, ever since the Wall Street bailout, that the game is rigged; and the utter failure of both Republicans and Democrats to reverse these trends – they gave me blank stares.
Robert B. Reich has served
in three national administrations, most recently as secretary of labor
under President Bill Clinton. His latest book is "Saving Capitalism: For
the Many, Not the Few." His website is www.robertreich.org
I spent much of this past week in Washington – talking with friends still in government, former colleagues, high-ranking Democrats, a few Republican pundits, and some members of Congress from both sides of the aisle. It was my first visit to our nation’s capital since Trump became president.
My verdict:
1. Washington is more divided, angry, bewildered, and fearful – than I’ve ever seen it.
2. The angry divisions aren’t just Democrats versus Republicans. Rancor is also exploding inside the Republican Party.
3. Republicans (and their patrons in big business) no longer believe Trump will give them cover to do what they want to do. They’re becoming afraid Trump is genuinely nuts, and he’ll pull the party down with him.
4. Many Republicans are also angry at Paul Ryan, whose replacement bill for Obamacare is considered by almost everyone on Capitol Hill to be incredibly dumb.
5. I didn’t talk with anyone inside the White House, but several who have had dealings with it called it a cesspool of intrigue and fear. Apparently everyone working there hates and distrusts everyone else.
6. The Washington foreign policy establishment – both Republican and Democrat – is deeply worried about what’s happening to American foreign policy, and the worldwide perception of America being loony and rudderless. They think Trump is legitimizing far-right movements around the world.
7. Long-time civil servants are getting ready to bail. If they’re close to retirement they’re already halfway out the door. Many in their 30s and 40s are in panic mode.
8. Republican pundits think Bannon is even more unhinged than Trump, seeking to destroy democracy as we’ve known it.
9. Despite all this, no one I talked with thought a Trump impeachment likely, at least not any time soon – unless there’s a smoking gun showing Trump’s involvement in Russia’s intrusion into the election.
10. Many people asked, bewilderedly, “how did this [Trump] happen?” When I suggest it had a lot to do with the 35-year-long decline of incomes of the bottom 60 percent; the growing sense, ever since the Wall Street bailout, that the game is rigged; and the utter failure of both Republicans and Democrats to reverse these trends – they gave me blank stares.
Advice To Democrats: Comey Has Given You Your Battle Plan On Gorsuch
Posted by Rude One
It doesn't get any easier than this, dear Democrats. You want something to rally around? You want something that can give you a principled stand against the nomination of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court? Here you go.
Today, FBI Director James "But Her Emails" Comey stated, in as plain a language as one could ask from a rat-faced ratfucker, the FBI is investigating "the nature of any links between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian government and whether there was any coordination between the campaign and Russia’s efforts."
Roll that around in your head for a moment. The FBI. Is investigating. Trump campaign. Russia. Coordination. Think about the fact that when the FBI was investigating Hillary Clinton, the Republican National Committee declared that it "should be disqualifying for anyone seeking the presidency, a job that is supposed to begin each morning with a top secret intelligence briefing."
Put aside any snark about Trump and his inability to sit through an intelligence briefing or having intelligence. Instead, ponder the idea that the Republican Party declared Clinton unqualified for the presidency because of an FBI investigation. Not the conclusion of it. Not the finding of any criminal activity. The investigation, which, to be as fair as possible to bastards, does seem suspicious as hell in any situation.
Also today, the confirmation hearing for Supreme Court nominee Gorsuch got under way in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Under normal circumstances, Gorsuch would just be a garden variety conservative cockknob, but these are not normal circumstances since Merrick Garland should have been confirmed last year.
But, as we know, the GOP is made up of syphilitic lepers who spread their diseases to democracy every chance they get with their scabby genitals. So they created a new rule: No Supreme Court confirmations in the last year before an election. It makes no sense at all. And Democrats should have gone to the motherfuckin' barricades on that, but, alas, they did not, because they are Democrats. So here we are with Gorsuch.
So here's a chance at redemption, dear, dumb, defeated Democrats in the Senate. A simple plan for a vile time. It goes like this: You cannot consider the Supreme Court nominations of Donald Trump until he is cleared by the FBI (and any other U.S. intelligence agency investigating him) of possible collusion with a foreign power to affect the presidential election. The Gorsuch hearings should be shut down until that time. In fact, you should say that you don't believe anyone nominated for a lifetime appointment by Trump should be considered by the Senate until the investigation is done, but you don't have the filibuster to use on other positions.
Go even further. State that anyone who does believe that Trump's SCOTUS nominees should be confirmed is, in essence, also colluding with the Russians, if the FBI discovers Trump has done so. Ask GOP senators if they're willing to take that risk.
See how easy this is? Take the playing field away from the Republicans. Force them to react. Force them to own Trump. Force them to eat his failure and choke on his corruption. Democrats have a stronger anti-confirmation case now than Republicans ever did with Obama.
At the end of the day, they're probably gonna nuke the SCOTUS filibuster rule if Democrats don't roll over and offer to let the GOP fuck them. So make it hurt. Make them just this side of traitors and make them fuckin' sweat awaiting the outcome of the investigation to see if they're nudged across the line.
All you gotta do is stop fucking colluding, too, Democrats.
It doesn't get any easier than this, dear Democrats. You want something to rally around? You want something that can give you a principled stand against the nomination of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court? Here you go.
Today, FBI Director James "But Her Emails" Comey stated, in as plain a language as one could ask from a rat-faced ratfucker, the FBI is investigating "the nature of any links between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian government and whether there was any coordination between the campaign and Russia’s efforts."
Roll that around in your head for a moment. The FBI. Is investigating. Trump campaign. Russia. Coordination. Think about the fact that when the FBI was investigating Hillary Clinton, the Republican National Committee declared that it "should be disqualifying for anyone seeking the presidency, a job that is supposed to begin each morning with a top secret intelligence briefing."
Put aside any snark about Trump and his inability to sit through an intelligence briefing or having intelligence. Instead, ponder the idea that the Republican Party declared Clinton unqualified for the presidency because of an FBI investigation. Not the conclusion of it. Not the finding of any criminal activity. The investigation, which, to be as fair as possible to bastards, does seem suspicious as hell in any situation.
Also today, the confirmation hearing for Supreme Court nominee Gorsuch got under way in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Under normal circumstances, Gorsuch would just be a garden variety conservative cockknob, but these are not normal circumstances since Merrick Garland should have been confirmed last year.
But, as we know, the GOP is made up of syphilitic lepers who spread their diseases to democracy every chance they get with their scabby genitals. So they created a new rule: No Supreme Court confirmations in the last year before an election. It makes no sense at all. And Democrats should have gone to the motherfuckin' barricades on that, but, alas, they did not, because they are Democrats. So here we are with Gorsuch.
So here's a chance at redemption, dear, dumb, defeated Democrats in the Senate. A simple plan for a vile time. It goes like this: You cannot consider the Supreme Court nominations of Donald Trump until he is cleared by the FBI (and any other U.S. intelligence agency investigating him) of possible collusion with a foreign power to affect the presidential election. The Gorsuch hearings should be shut down until that time. In fact, you should say that you don't believe anyone nominated for a lifetime appointment by Trump should be considered by the Senate until the investigation is done, but you don't have the filibuster to use on other positions.
Go even further. State that anyone who does believe that Trump's SCOTUS nominees should be confirmed is, in essence, also colluding with the Russians, if the FBI discovers Trump has done so. Ask GOP senators if they're willing to take that risk.
See how easy this is? Take the playing field away from the Republicans. Force them to react. Force them to own Trump. Force them to eat his failure and choke on his corruption. Democrats have a stronger anti-confirmation case now than Republicans ever did with Obama.
At the end of the day, they're probably gonna nuke the SCOTUS filibuster rule if Democrats don't roll over and offer to let the GOP fuck them. So make it hurt. Make them just this side of traitors and make them fuckin' sweat awaiting the outcome of the investigation to see if they're nudged across the line.
All you gotta do is stop fucking colluding, too, Democrats.
Paul Ryan dreamed about screwing over poor people back in college
"So, the health care entitlements are the big, big, big drivers of our
debt. There are three. Obamacare, Medicaid, and Medicare. Two out of
three are going through Congress right now. So, Medicaid—sending it back
to the states, capping its growth rate. We’ve been dreaming of this
since you and I were drinking out of a keg."
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/03/17/paul_ryan_s_college_dream_was_to_kick_poor_people_off_medicaid.html
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/03/17/paul_ryan_s_college_dream_was_to_kick_poor_people_off_medicaid.html
Monday, March 20, 2017
The GOP has become the party of white nationalism
By Michael A. Cohen
Scott Olson/Getty Images/File
Representative Steve King of Iowa spoke to guests at the Iowa Freedom Summit in January 2015.
There is no greater challenge in covering national politics these days than simply trying to keep up with the daily outrages emanating from Washington. Take, for example, the fact that, two weeks ago, all we were talking about was the fact that Jeff Sessions, the attorney general and nation’s highest law enforcement official, lied to Congress. This week you hear only crickets on Sessions.
But here’s one story that should not fall through the cracks: Representative Steve King of Iowa.
Earlier this week King shared an article on Twitter offering his support for the Dutch politician Geert Wilders, who has based his political ascendancy on bashing Muslim immigrants. King added the words, “Wilders understands that culture and demographics are our destiny. We can’t restore our civilization with somebody else’s babies.”
These comments are catnip to white nationalists.
In fact, former Ku Klux Klan imperial wizard David Duke retweeted King with the words “GOD BLESS STEVE KING.”
Not surprisingly, the reaction from Democrats was one of revulsion and demands for an apology.
King, however, was undeterred.
On Monday, King repeated his offensive words and added, “You’ve got to keep your birth rate up and that you need to teach your children your values and, in doing so, then you can grow your population and you can strengthen your culture, you can strengthen your way of life.”According to King, he wants to see an America that is “homogenous” and one where “we look a lot the same.”
This is not King’s first time at the racist rodeo. Back in July he raised questions about the contributions of nonwhite people to “civilization.”
A virulent opponent of immigration, King has called for an electrified fence to be built on the US-Mexico border to give electric shocks to those trying to enter the country. Back in 2013 he said that for every successful child of an undocumented immigrant there are 100 more drug mules with “calves the size of cantaloupes” from hauling drugs. King also has been photographed with a Confederate battle flag in his congressional office.
To put it simply, Steve King is a racist.
And yet, it seems that being a racist — one who has repeatedly made prejudicial comments about blacks and Hispanics — is not the kind of thing that gets you drummed out of the modern Republican Party. Indeed, it seems to have no impact at all.
After King’s cantaloupe comment, then-House Speaker John Boehner called the congressman’s words “deeply offensive and wrong.” Current Speaker Paul Ryan’s reaction to King’s latest remarks was more muted. “I disagree with that statement,” Ryan said. He added, “I’d like to think that he misspoke and it wasn’t really meant the way that that sounds and hopefully he’s clarified that.”
But when it comes to mealy-mouthed condemnations of blatantly racist and xenophobic comments, Ryan can’t hold a candle to White House spokesman Sean Spicer, who said, “The president believes that this is not a point of view that he shares.”
Several Hispanic Republican congressmen condemned King’s remarks, but most Republicans have been silent. Calls to censure King or strip him of his chairmanship of the House Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Rights have been ignored.
While some might be inclined to dismiss King as a fringe figure, the very fact that so few Republicans are willing to criticize him speaks volumes. They clearly don’t want to alienate those voters who agree with King’s racist remarks. It’s yet one more reminder of the extent to which white nationalism and open racism have become normalized within the modern Republican Party.
Indeed, earlier this month, the Huffington Post ran a disturbing piece on the grotesque, virulently racist book “The Camp of the Saints,” which top White House advisor Steve Bannon has used to describe the influx of nonwhite, Muslim refugees into Europe. The book describes the destruction of white, Christian Europe, by nonwhite immigrants led by an Indian demagogue. In the book, Europe is overrun by poor, nonwhite migrants.
Bannon’s endorsement of this grotesque piece of literature is at pace with the policies he’s promoted since becoming the president’s top strategist: from the travel-ban executive order that specifically targets Muslims to its focus on building a wall on the US-Mexico, all to keep out nonwhite immigrants.
Guess who else recently plugged “The Camp of the Saints.” Yup: Steve King.
Even after a campaign in which Donald Trump ran on an unambiguous platform of racism, xenophobia, and intolerance, it has, somehow, become inappropriate to identify the role that white nationalism plays in defining and uniting the modern Republican Party. Yet when people like Steve King continue to play leadership roles in the GOP and avoid condemnation for racist remarks, what more evidence do we need that many GOP voters, rather than being turned off by the open embrace of race-based appeals from Republican leaders, find them attractive. Steve King is not some fringe figure — he’s the mainstream of the modern Republican Party.
That’s one story that cannot be ignored.
Michael A. Cohen’s column appears regularly in the Globe. Follow him on Twitter @speechboy71.
Scott Olson/Getty Images/File
Representative Steve King of Iowa spoke to guests at the Iowa Freedom Summit in January 2015.
There is no greater challenge in covering national politics these days than simply trying to keep up with the daily outrages emanating from Washington. Take, for example, the fact that, two weeks ago, all we were talking about was the fact that Jeff Sessions, the attorney general and nation’s highest law enforcement official, lied to Congress. This week you hear only crickets on Sessions.
But here’s one story that should not fall through the cracks: Representative Steve King of Iowa.
Earlier this week King shared an article on Twitter offering his support for the Dutch politician Geert Wilders, who has based his political ascendancy on bashing Muslim immigrants. King added the words, “Wilders understands that culture and demographics are our destiny. We can’t restore our civilization with somebody else’s babies.”
These comments are catnip to white nationalists.
In fact, former Ku Klux Klan imperial wizard David Duke retweeted King with the words “GOD BLESS STEVE KING.”
Not surprisingly, the reaction from Democrats was one of revulsion and demands for an apology.
King, however, was undeterred.
On Monday, King repeated his offensive words and added, “You’ve got to keep your birth rate up and that you need to teach your children your values and, in doing so, then you can grow your population and you can strengthen your culture, you can strengthen your way of life.”According to King, he wants to see an America that is “homogenous” and one where “we look a lot the same.”
This is not King’s first time at the racist rodeo. Back in July he raised questions about the contributions of nonwhite people to “civilization.”
A virulent opponent of immigration, King has called for an electrified fence to be built on the US-Mexico border to give electric shocks to those trying to enter the country. Back in 2013 he said that for every successful child of an undocumented immigrant there are 100 more drug mules with “calves the size of cantaloupes” from hauling drugs. King also has been photographed with a Confederate battle flag in his congressional office.
To put it simply, Steve King is a racist.
And yet, it seems that being a racist — one who has repeatedly made prejudicial comments about blacks and Hispanics — is not the kind of thing that gets you drummed out of the modern Republican Party. Indeed, it seems to have no impact at all.
After King’s cantaloupe comment, then-House Speaker John Boehner called the congressman’s words “deeply offensive and wrong.” Current Speaker Paul Ryan’s reaction to King’s latest remarks was more muted. “I disagree with that statement,” Ryan said. He added, “I’d like to think that he misspoke and it wasn’t really meant the way that that sounds and hopefully he’s clarified that.”
But when it comes to mealy-mouthed condemnations of blatantly racist and xenophobic comments, Ryan can’t hold a candle to White House spokesman Sean Spicer, who said, “The president believes that this is not a point of view that he shares.”
Several Hispanic Republican congressmen condemned King’s remarks, but most Republicans have been silent. Calls to censure King or strip him of his chairmanship of the House Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Rights have been ignored.
While some might be inclined to dismiss King as a fringe figure, the very fact that so few Republicans are willing to criticize him speaks volumes. They clearly don’t want to alienate those voters who agree with King’s racist remarks. It’s yet one more reminder of the extent to which white nationalism and open racism have become normalized within the modern Republican Party.
Indeed, earlier this month, the Huffington Post ran a disturbing piece on the grotesque, virulently racist book “The Camp of the Saints,” which top White House advisor Steve Bannon has used to describe the influx of nonwhite, Muslim refugees into Europe. The book describes the destruction of white, Christian Europe, by nonwhite immigrants led by an Indian demagogue. In the book, Europe is overrun by poor, nonwhite migrants.
Bannon’s endorsement of this grotesque piece of literature is at pace with the policies he’s promoted since becoming the president’s top strategist: from the travel-ban executive order that specifically targets Muslims to its focus on building a wall on the US-Mexico, all to keep out nonwhite immigrants.
Guess who else recently plugged “The Camp of the Saints.” Yup: Steve King.
Even after a campaign in which Donald Trump ran on an unambiguous platform of racism, xenophobia, and intolerance, it has, somehow, become inappropriate to identify the role that white nationalism plays in defining and uniting the modern Republican Party. Yet when people like Steve King continue to play leadership roles in the GOP and avoid condemnation for racist remarks, what more evidence do we need that many GOP voters, rather than being turned off by the open embrace of race-based appeals from Republican leaders, find them attractive. Steve King is not some fringe figure — he’s the mainstream of the modern Republican Party.
That’s one story that cannot be ignored.
Michael A. Cohen’s column appears regularly in the Globe. Follow him on Twitter @speechboy71.
Trump Is The Biggest Failure In History As His Disapproval Rating Skyrockets To 58%
Donald Trump has set a record that has never
been reached before in the history of polling as his disapproval rating
has reached 58% - two months into his time in office.
By Jason Easley
Donald Trump has set a record that disapproval rating that has never been reached before in the history of polling as his disapproval rating has reached 58% two months into his time in office.
Here is the latest Gallup Daily Tracking Poll of Trump’s approval rating:
Trump’s approval rating has plunged to 37% as his disapproval rating has soared to 58%.
Never in US history has a president been this unpopular so early in his first term. Trump has lost 2 points in approval and gained three disapproval points since the CBO revealed that 24 million people would lose their health insurance under Trumpcare.
Trump has the worst job approval numbers since Gallup began tracking presidents in 1945. At this same point during his first term, President Obama’s job approval rating was in the low 60's. George W. Bush’s approval rating was in the low 50's. It took Ronald Reagan a year to have an approval rating as bad as Trump’s, and it was a year into Richard Nixon’s second term before he hit the low that Trump is at.
The practical political lesson for Democrats is that they should not shy away from linking Congressional Republicans to their unpopular president. What should be frightening for elected Republicans is that things will probably get much worse for Trump in the future. The first few months of his term are supposed to be the most popular point of his presidency.
How low can Donald Trump go? It is possible that he may set records for unpopularity that will stand for decades.
Trump promised to make America great, but instead, he has been a complete failure as president.
By Jason Easley
Donald Trump has set a record that disapproval rating that has never been reached before in the history of polling as his disapproval rating has reached 58% two months into his time in office.
Here is the latest Gallup Daily Tracking Poll of Trump’s approval rating:
Trump’s approval rating has plunged to 37% as his disapproval rating has soared to 58%.
Never in US history has a president been this unpopular so early in his first term. Trump has lost 2 points in approval and gained three disapproval points since the CBO revealed that 24 million people would lose their health insurance under Trumpcare.
Trump has the worst job approval numbers since Gallup began tracking presidents in 1945. At this same point during his first term, President Obama’s job approval rating was in the low 60's. George W. Bush’s approval rating was in the low 50's. It took Ronald Reagan a year to have an approval rating as bad as Trump’s, and it was a year into Richard Nixon’s second term before he hit the low that Trump is at.
The practical political lesson for Democrats is that they should not shy away from linking Congressional Republicans to their unpopular president. What should be frightening for elected Republicans is that things will probably get much worse for Trump in the future. The first few months of his term are supposed to be the most popular point of his presidency.
How low can Donald Trump go? It is possible that he may set records for unpopularity that will stand for decades.
Trump promised to make America great, but instead, he has been a complete failure as president.
Sunday, March 19, 2017
Young Americans: Most see Trump as an illegitimate president
WASHINGTON — Jermaine Anderson keeps going back to the same memory of Donald Trump, then a candidate for president of the United States, referring to some Mexican immigrants as rapists and murderers.
"You can't be saying that (if) you're the president," says Anderson, a 21 year old student from Coconut Creek, Florida.
That Trump is undeniably the nation's 45th president doesn't sit easily with young Americans like Anderson who are the nation's increasingly diverse electorate of the future, according to a new poll.
A majority of young adults — 57 percent — see Trump's presidency as illegitimate, including about three-quarters of blacks and large majorities of Latinos and Asians, the GenForward poll found.
GenForward is a poll of adults age 18 to 30 conducted by the Black Youth Project at the University of Chicago with the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.
A slim majority of young whites in the poll, 53 percent, consider Trump a legitimate president, but even among that group 55 percent disapprove of the job he's doing, according to the survey.
"That's who we voted for. And obviously America wanted him more than Hillary Clinton," said Rebecca Gallardo, a 30 year old nursing student from Kansas City, Missouri, who voted for Trump.
Trump's legitimacy as president was questioned earlier this year by U.S. Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga.: "I think the Russians participated in helping this man get elected. And they helped destroy the candidacy of Hillary Clinton."
Trump routinely denies that and says he captured the presidency in large part by winning states such as Michigan and Wisconsin that Clinton may have taken for granted.
Overall, just 22 percent of young adults approve of the job he is doing as president, while 62 percent disapprove.
Trump's rhetoric as a candidate and his presidential decisions have done much to keep the question of who belongs in America atop the news, though he's struggling to accomplish some key goals.
Powered by supporters chanting, "build the wall," Trump has vowed to erect a barrier along the southern U.S. border and make Mexico pay for it — which Mexico refuses to do. Federal judges in three states have blocked Trump's executive orders to ban travel to the U.S. from seven — then six — majority-Muslim nations.
In Honolulu, U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson this week cited "significant and unrebutted evidence of religious animus" behind the revised travel ban, citing Trump's own words calling for "a complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States."
And yes, Trump did say in his campaign announcement speech on June 6, 2015: "When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best ...They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people." He went further in subsequent statements, later telling CNN: "Some are good and some are rapists and some are killers."
It's extraordinary rhetoric for the leader of a country where by around 2020, half of the nation's children will be part of a minority race or ethnic group, the Census Bureau projects. Non-Hispanic whites are expected to be a minority by 2044.
Of all of Trump's tweets and rhetoric, the statements about Mexicans are the ones to which Anderson returns. He says Trump's business background on paper is impressive enough to qualify him for the presidency. But he suggests that's different than Trump earning legitimacy as president.
![Graphic shows results of GenForward poll on younger Americans’ attitudes toward Donald Trump and his presidency; 2c x 4 inches; 96.3 mm x 101 mm;]({"default":{"load":"default","w":"36","h":"40","src":"//img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BByldsw.img?h=400&w=360&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f"}})
© The Associated Press Graphic shows results of GenForward poll on younger Americans attitudes toward Donald Trump and his presidency.
"I'm thinking, he's saying that most of the people in the world who are raping and killing people are the immigrants. That's not true," said Anderson, whose parents are from Jamaica.
Megan Desrochers, a 21 year old student from Lansing, Michigan, says her sense of Trump's illegitimacy is more about why he was elected.
"I just think it was kind of a situation where he was voted in based on his celebrity status verses his ethics," she said, adding that she is not necessarily against Trump's immigration policies.
The poll participants said in interviews that they don't necessarily vote for one party's candidates over another's, a prominent tendency among young Americans, experts say. And in the survey, neither party fares especially strongly.
Just a quarter of young Americans have a favorable view of the Republican Party, and six in 10 have an unfavorable view. Majorities of young people across racial and ethnic lines hold negative views of the GOP.
The Democratic Party performs better, but views aren't overwhelmingly positive. Young people are more likely to have a favorable than an unfavorable view of the Democratic Party by a 47 percent to 36 percent margin. But just 14 percent say they have a strongly favorable view of the Democrats.
Views of the Democratic Party are most favorable among young people of color. Roughly six in 10 blacks, Asians and Latinos hold positive views of the party. Young whites are somewhat more likely to have unfavorable than favorable views, 47 percent to 39 percent.
As for Trump, eight in 10 young people think he is doing poorly in terms of the policies he's put forward and seven in 10 have negative views of his presidential demeanor.
"I do not like him as a person," Gallardo says of Trump. She nonetheless voted for Trump because she didn't trust Clinton. "I felt like there wasn't much choice."
___
The poll of 1,833 adults age 18-30 was conducted on Feb. 16 through March 6 using a sample drawn from the probability-based GenForward panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. young adult population. The margin of sampling error for all respondents is plus or minus 4 percentage points.
The survey was paid for by the Black Youth Project at the University of Chicago, using grants from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation and the Ford Foundation.
Respondents were first selected randomly using address-based sampling methods, and later interviewed online or by phone.
Saturday, March 18, 2017
Trump budget cuts meals on wheels to fund defense contractors
"The preliminary outline for President Donald Trump's 2018 budget could
slash some funding for a program that provides meals for older,
impoverished Americans.
The budget blueprint suggests cutting funds for the Department of Housing and Urban Development by about $6.2 billion, a 13.2% decrease from its 2017 funding level.
Here's what Trump wants cut
Almost half of those savings will come by eliminating the $3 billion Community Development Block Grant program, which provides money for a variety of community development and anti-poverty programs, including Meals on Wheels."
The budget blueprint suggests cutting funds for the Department of Housing and Urban Development by about $6.2 billion, a 13.2% decrease from its 2017 funding level.
Here's what Trump wants cut
Almost half of those savings will come by eliminating the $3 billion Community Development Block Grant program, which provides money for a variety of community development and anti-poverty programs, including Meals on Wheels."
Mick Mulvaney defends meals on wheels cuts
"At a news conference Thursday, Mick Mulvaney, President Trump’s budget
chief, defended proposed cuts to the Meals on Wheels program, which
provides food aid to needy senior citizens, by saying the program is one
of many that is “just not showing any results.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/03/16/trump-budget-chief-says-meals-on-wheels-is-not-showing-any-results-hes-wrong/?utm_term=.076df1fe6814
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/03/16/trump-budget-chief-says-meals-on-wheels-is-not-showing-any-results-hes-wrong/?utm_term=.076df1fe6814
Thursday, March 16, 2017
Jaws Drop As Trump WH Claims Starving Seniors By Killing Meals On Wheels Is Compassionate
Trump Budget Director Mick Mulvaney told reporters today that
eliminating food for senior citizens via the Meals On Wheels program was
the compassionate thing to do because if a program can't demonstrate
results, it should get cut.
By Jason Easley
When Mulvaney was asked about the elimination of funding for Meals On Wheels, he answered, “I think you know that Meals On Wheels is not a federal program. It’s part of that Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) that we give to the states, and then many states make the decision to use that money on Meals On Wheels. What I can tell you about CDBG's is that’s what we fund. Right? So we spend $150 billion on those programs since the 1970's. The CDBGs have been identified as programs since I think the second Bush administration as ones that we just not showing any results. We can’t do that anymore. We can’t spend money on programs just because they sound good. Meals On Wheels sounds great. Again, that’s a state decision to fund that particular portion, but to take the federal money and to give that to the states, and say look we want to give you federal money for programs that don’t work. I can’t defend that anymore.”
Later Mulvaney was asked if this is a hard-hearted budget. He answered, “I don’t think so. In fact, I think it is one of the most compassionate things we can do to. You’re only focusing on half of the equation. Right? You’re focusing on recipients of the money. We’re trying to focus on both the recipients and the folks who give us the money in the first place, and I think it’s fairly compassionate to go to them and say look, we’re not going to ask you for your hard earned money anymore.”
In other words, screw the starving elderly and the kids who are going to go without afterschool programs, people like Donald Trump aren’t giving you their “hard earned” money anymore.
Meals on Wheels helps 2.4 million seniors have access to food while being able to stay in their own homes. The results for the program can be seen in both nutritional terms and increased independence for millions of Americans. Meals on Wheels saves taxpayers $34 billion a year in healthcare costs.
This is a vital program for America’s communities, and anyone who claims otherwise is not telling the truth. The selfish argument about taxpayers isn’t going to fly in this case.
The Trump administration has gone from being out of touch with America to trying to starve Americans.
By Jason Easley
When Mulvaney was asked about the elimination of funding for Meals On Wheels, he answered, “I think you know that Meals On Wheels is not a federal program. It’s part of that Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) that we give to the states, and then many states make the decision to use that money on Meals On Wheels. What I can tell you about CDBG's is that’s what we fund. Right? So we spend $150 billion on those programs since the 1970's. The CDBGs have been identified as programs since I think the second Bush administration as ones that we just not showing any results. We can’t do that anymore. We can’t spend money on programs just because they sound good. Meals On Wheels sounds great. Again, that’s a state decision to fund that particular portion, but to take the federal money and to give that to the states, and say look we want to give you federal money for programs that don’t work. I can’t defend that anymore.”
Later Mulvaney was asked if this is a hard-hearted budget. He answered, “I don’t think so. In fact, I think it is one of the most compassionate things we can do to. You’re only focusing on half of the equation. Right? You’re focusing on recipients of the money. We’re trying to focus on both the recipients and the folks who give us the money in the first place, and I think it’s fairly compassionate to go to them and say look, we’re not going to ask you for your hard earned money anymore.”
In other words, screw the starving elderly and the kids who are going to go without afterschool programs, people like Donald Trump aren’t giving you their “hard earned” money anymore.
Meals on Wheels helps 2.4 million seniors have access to food while being able to stay in their own homes. The results for the program can be seen in both nutritional terms and increased independence for millions of Americans. Meals on Wheels saves taxpayers $34 billion a year in healthcare costs.
This is a vital program for America’s communities, and anyone who claims otherwise is not telling the truth. The selfish argument about taxpayers isn’t going to fly in this case.
The Trump administration has gone from being out of touch with America to trying to starve Americans.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)