Lurker > Antifar

Balrog0 posted...

politically impossible

Meanwhile
https://apnews.com/658e976fca5e40fe8260cbcc4ae1e865/AP-NORC-Poll:-Most-say-feds-should-ensure-health-coverage

Balrog0 posted...

And distracts from real efforts to expand coverage

what
---

kin to all that throbs

The Trump folks mostly hate McCain for the wrong reasons, but he's spent the past few decades using his immense power for repugnant purposes. His cancer does not absolve his sins, and nobody should be pretending he's good just because he's now ill. He would not give you that same courtesy.
---

kin to all that throbs

Who's going to punish him if he does?
---

kin to all that throbs

Balrog0 posted...

He preemptively shat all over single payer before he took questions lol

*Wanking motion*
---

kin to all that throbs

Can we still make fun of him for pushing for war in Iraq on the morning of 9/11, or foisting Sarah Palin on the country?
---

kin to all that throbs

How many deaths does a person have to be responsible for before their demise doesn't deserve sympathy?
https://thinkprogress.org/on-morning-of-9-11-attacks-mccain-immediately-began-making-the-case-for-iraq-war-4042b28b5f9b
---

kin to all that throbs

Sayoria posted...

No surprise Trump supports yearn for people to die.

John McCain yearns for people to die. If he was a child with his condition, the Make a Wish Foundation would have to take him on a bombing run over Tehran.
---

kin to all that throbs

https://twitter.com/jessica_roy/status/887847253334872065

McCain had no problem enabling the deaths of poor people facing his same condition. I'm not going to celebrate his death, but my sympathies lie elsewhere.
---

kin to all that throbs

The legality of the matter is missing the point
---

kin to all that throbs

Are you familiar with context
---

kin to all that throbs

https://twitter.com/blakehounshell/status/887853138409132032

My guess is this is little more than Trump's usual incoherence, but, uh. That's why it's good to have a president who makes sense.
---

kin to all that throbs

Goal USA! Omar Gonzalez with the header
---

kin to all that throbs

Iodine posted...

I ask this in all seriousness, what is stopping Trump from simply firing Mueller?

*shrug*

Norms, I guess? Most of our government has functioned on unwritten rules for two centuries, but the problem with unwritten rules is...
---

kin to all that throbs

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/887845944678658048

hmm
---

kin to all that throbs

Weird opening 20 minutes.
---

kin to all that throbs

Ray_Dorset posted...

Like really, how can he think it is a good idea to threaten the special investigator?

He's deeply stupid. You ever hear that Werner Herzog bit about chickens? That's Trump.
---

kin to all that throbs

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/19/us/politics/trump-interview-sessions-russia.html?

President Trump said on Wednesday that he never would have appointed Attorney General Jeff Sessions had he known Mr. Sessions would recuse himself from overseeing the Russia investigation that has dogged his presidency, calling the decision “very unfair to the president.”

In a remarkable public break with one of his earliest political supporters, Mr. Trump complained that Mr. Sessions’s decision ultimately led to the appointment of a special counsel that should not have happened. “Sessions should have never recused himself, and if he was going to recuse himself, he should have told me before he took the job and I would have picked somebody else,” Mr. Trump said.

In a wide-ranging interview with The New York Times, the president also accused James B. Comey, the F.B.I. director he fired in May, of trying to leverage a dossier of compromising material to keep his job. Mr. Trump criticized both the acting F.B.I. director who has been filling in since Mr. Comey’s dismissal and the deputy attorney general who recommended it. And he took on Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel now leading the investigation into Russian meddling in last year’s election.

Mr. Trump said Mr. Mueller was running an office rife with conflicts of interest and warned investigators against delving into matters too far afield from Russia. Mr. Trump never said he would order the Justice Department to fire Mr. Mueller, nor would he outline circumstances under which he might do so. But he left open the possibility as he expressed deep grievance over an investigation that has taken a political toll in the six months since he took office.

Asked if Mr. Mueller’s investigation would cross a red line if it expanded to look at his family’s finances beyond any relationship to Russia, Mr. Trump said, “I would say yes.” He would not say what he would do about it. “I think that’s a violation. Look, this is about Russia.”

While the interview touched on an array of issues, including health care, foreign affairs and politics, the investigation dominated the conversation. He said that as far as he knew, he was not under investigation himself, despite reports that Mr. Mueller is looking at whether the president obstructed justice by firing Mr. Comey.

“I don’t think we’re under investigation,” he said. “I’m not under investigation. For what? I didn’t do anything wrong.”

Describing a newly disclosed informal conversation he had with President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia during a dinner of world leaders in Germany earlier this month, Mr. Trump said they talked for about 15 minutes, mostly about “pleasantries.” But Mr. Trump did say that they talked “about adoptions.” Mr. Putin banned American adoptions of Russian children in 2012 after the United States enacted sanctions on Russians accused of human rights abuses, an issue that remains a sore point in relations with Moscow.

---

kin to all that throbs

MC_BatCommander posted...

Something that bugs me about conservatives. Like, I thought they WANTED this, why are they suddenly so pensive about actually pulling the trigger?

Activists have been up their ass about the actual human effects of their ideas for the past few months.
---

kin to all that throbs

Tell Nancy Pelosi's senior policy adviser to support single payer, thanks.
---

kin to all that throbs

I haven't been to that many, but

Roger Waters - The Wall was a hell of a show
---

kin to all that throbs

As a general rule, I'm against employers putting these sorts of restrictions on their workers' views outside of the workplace.
---

kin to all that throbs

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/342664-report-donald-trump-jr-miserable

Donald Trump Jr. is reportedly "miserable" and can't wait for the next four years to end.

A friend of President Trump's two adult sons told People that Trump Jr. and Eric Trump "never wanted this."

“Don can’t do any deals, because he’ll be overly scrutinized. He just goes to work every day and is miserable," a source in their circle added.

Trump Jr. is facing backlash after news surfaced earlier this month that he took a meeting last year with a Russian lawyer.

Last week, Trump Jr. released a chain of emails detailing his conversations about setting up a meeting with a Russian lawyer, who he was told had compromising information on then-Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.

Trump Jr. has since appeared on Fox News, where he said he likely would have "done things a little differently" in retrospect.

President Trump has defended his eldest son, saying most politicians would have taken similar meetings.

A family friend especially close to Trump Jr. and Eric Trump told People the loyalty within their family is "insane."

“They would never speak against their dad," the family friend said.

The source in the brothers' circle added: “You can’t bite the hand that feeds you, but [Trump Jr.] can’t wait for these four years to be over.”

You and me both
---

kin to all that throbs

Glass_Phantom posted...

All Muslims aren't terrorists.

Correct. However, the policy in question has been aiding Al Qaeda, who are terrorists.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/the-cias-syria-program-and-the-perils-of-proxies
http://news.antiwar.com/2016/09/19/cia-armed-moderates-in-syria-included-al-qaedas-nusra-front/

A new report citing former CIA officers has revealed that the agency was knowingly providing weapons, including tow missiles to fighters that were effectively part of al-Qaeda’s Nusra Front, continuing to arm “moderates” so long as they at least nominally kept their moderate names.

http://www.newsweek.com/cia-backed-rebels-fight-alongside-al-qaeda-wing-syria-327064
---

kin to all that throbs

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-ends-covert-cia-program-to-arm-anti-assad-rebels-in-syria-a-move-sought-by-moscow/2017/07/19/b6821a62-6beb-11e7-96ab-5f38140b38cc_story.html

I'm
1. Skeptical of this framing of the move as a concession to Russia; it is also something supported by a majority of Americans as of 2013. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DFIBycLXsAIQ2hv.jpg
2. Not knowledgeable enough on Syria to have a strong opinion, but my impression is that a unilateral pullout is bad news for those who would like to see peace and an end to the carnage.
---

kin to all that throbs

The Deadpool posted...

It'd be good for the people.

This is the problem they have with it.
---

kin to all that throbs

JlM posted...

The Long Trail

Ooh, Long Trail is great
---

kin to all that throbs

darkjedilink posted...

Why should anyone work with Democrats on health care reform when Democrats fucked it all up in the first place?

Because Republicans can't get 50 votes on their own, and their recent attempts at carving their own path had incredibly small public support.
---

kin to all that throbs

I was pretty overwhelmed by EU4. I mean, I can see that it's obviously a great game, and I put 40 hours into it, but also I think I only got to 1600.
---

kin to all that throbs

eston posted...

Sometimes just having a large amount of cash is grounds for seizure. It's not illegal to have $20k on you, but if you get pulled over with it they will take your money. They don't have to prove anything, and they don't have to give it back.

I read recently that while there's an organized process for regaining your property if you are acquitted in court, it's a whole different hassle to recover it if you aren't charged in the first place.
---

kin to all that throbs

Asherlee10 posted...

What's the TL;DR of the topic?

People fall for "Medusa Magazine" again
---

kin to all that throbs

Policy has to be written; that's not exactly Trump's strong suit
---

kin to all that throbs

Suchomimus posted...

Y'know it's weird. Imagine going to Japan or China and seeing no Japanese or Chinese people. Imagine going to Mexico and seeing no Mexican people.

Imagine going to the US and seeing no Native Americans
---

kin to all that throbs

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C9aJpTVUQAADeqd.jpg
---

kin to all that throbs

https://twitter.com/SteveKopack/status/887745276848594944
---

kin to all that throbs

Whew
---

kin to all that throbs

https://twitter.com/LettieriDC/status/887092429450510340
---

kin to all that throbs

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

What exactly is white culture?

The great and similar histories and culture of Finland and Ireland.
---

kin to all that throbs

https://twitter.com/PaulaReidCBS/status/887697111374024705
---

kin to all that throbs

Quadrophenia for me
---

kin to all that throbs

More days than not.
---

kin to all that throbs

https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2017/06/24/medusa-magazine-website-is-probably-a-hoax/

On the side of “hoax” is also the fact that none of the authors’ names link to real people. And there’s also this comment by reader “Bortwell”:

Hi, Jerry.

It’s easy to prove that this website is fake. For example, take this article: https://medusamagazine.com/are-military-combat-roles-really-best-suited-to-men

The author is “Hailey Altmigi”, who supposedly has a journalism degree, but whose name appears nowhere else on the Internet. Also, “migi” is the Japanese word for “right”. So her family name translates to “Alt-right”.

Definitely a fake website, although Poe’s law makes it very difficult to tell.

Finally, reader Chakravarthy commented:

This website is satire, PCC.

The site is registered in the name of one Elijah Adiasany. This is the guy who runs the website Age of shitlords. Looking further: https://www.sockt.com/php/ageofshitlords.com or here: http://whois.easycounter.com/ageofshitlords.com

Age of shitlords is a website that is dedicated to criticizing these “SJW” types.

---

kin to all that throbs

This website is not to be taken seriously; we've been over it before. There's no reason to even believe this supposed author exists as a person.
---

kin to all that throbs

"Be realistic" in politics is almost always code for "lie back and think of England."
---

kin to all that throbs

Darkman124 posted...

i'm gonna call cardin's office and bitch them out today

Here's a fun part

Perhaps most stunning is our interview with the primary sponsor of the bill, Democratic Senator Benjamin Cardin, who seemed to have no idea what was in his bill, particularly insisting that it contains no criminal penalties.

But as the ACLU put it, “violations would be subject to a minimum civil penalty of $250,000 and a maximum criminal penalty of $ 1 million and 20 years in prison.”

That’s because, as Josh Ruebner expertly detailed when the bill was first unveiled, “the bill seeks to amend two laws – the Export Administration Act of 1979 and the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945,” and “the potential penalties for violating this bill are steep: a minimum $250,000 civil penalty and a maximum criminal penalty of $1 million and 20 years imprisonment, as stipulated in the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.”

---

kin to all that throbs

https://theintercept.com/2017/07/19/u-s-lawmakers-seek-to-criminally-outlaw-support-for-boycott-campaign-against-israel/

A group of 43 Senators – 29 Republicans and 14 Democrats – want to implement a law that would make it a felony for Americans to support the international boycott against Israel, which was launched in protest of that country’s decades-old occupation of Palestine. The two primary sponsors of the bill are Democrat Ben Cardin of Maryland and Republican Rob Portman of Ohio. Perhaps the most shocking aspect is the punishment: anyone guilty of violating its prohibitions will face a minimum civil penalty of $250,000, and a maximum criminal penalty of $1 million and 20 years in prison.

The proposed measure, called the Israel Anti-Boycott Act (S. 720), was introduced by Cardin on March 23. The Jewish Telegraphic Agency reports that the bill “was drafted with the assistance of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee [AIPAC].” Indeed, AIPAC, in its 2017 Lobbying Agenda, identified passage of this bill as one of its top lobbying priorities for the year:

The bill’s co-sponsors include the senior Democrat in Washington, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, his New York colleague Kirsten Gillibrand, and several of the Senate’s more liberal members, such as Ron Wyden of Oregon, Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut and Maria Cantwell of Washington. Illustrating the bipartisanship that AIPAC typically summons, it also includes several of the most right-wing Senators such as Ted Cruz of Texas, Ben Sasse of Nebraska, and Marco Rubio of Florida.

A similar measure was introduced in the House on the same date by two Republicans and one Democrat. It already has amassed 234 co-sponsors: 63 Democrats and 174 Republicans. As in the Senate, AIPAC has assembled an impressive ideological diversity among supporters, predictably including many of the most right-wing House members – Jason Chaffetz, Liz Cheney, Peter King – along with the second-ranking Democrat in the House, Steny Hoyer.

Among the co-sponsors of the bill are several of the politicians who have become political celebrities by positioning themselves as media leaders of the anti-Trump #Resistance, including three California House members who have become heroes to Democrats and staples of the cable news circuit: Ted Lieu, Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell. These politicians, who have built a wide public following by posturing as opponents of authoritarianism, are sponsoring one of the most oppressive and authoritarian bills that has pended before Congress in quite some time.

LAST NIGHT, the ACLU posted a letter it sent to all members of the Senate urging them to oppose this bill. Warning that “proponents of the bill are seeking additional co-sponsors,” the civil liberties group explained that “it would punish individuals for no reason other than their political beliefs.” The letter detailed what makes this bill so particularly threatening to basic civic freedoms:

https://cdn01.theintercept.com/wp-uploads/sites/1/2017/07/aclu1-1500467719-540x433.png

It is no small thing for the ACLU to insert itself into this controversy. One of the most traumatic events in the organization’s history was when it lost large numbers of donors and supporters in the late 1970s after they defended the free speech rights of neo-Nazis to march through Skokie, Illinois, a town with a large community of Holocaust survivors.

Even the bravest of organizations often steadfastly avoid any controversies relating to Israel. Yet here, while appropriately pointing out that the ACLU “takes no position for or against the effort to boycott Israel or any foreign country,” they categorically denounce this AIPAC-sponsored proposal for what it is: a bill that “seeks only to punish the exercise of constitutional rights.”

---

kin to all that throbs

https://twitter.com/donnabrazile/status/887331637998096384
---

kin to all that throbs

2016 was so good though.
---

kin to all that throbs

@chill02 ?
---

kin to all that throbs