United States Congress

[GreyhoundFan]

Wow, Rachel Maddow reported that Weasel Nunes has abruptly cancelled the next public hearing (scheduled for next Tuesday morning) by the House Intelligence Committee without consulting other committee members. This was the hearing that was to include Sally Yates.

[Toothfairy]

I wonder how the Republicans feel about not having a Plan B 

[Childless]

3 hours ago, Toothfairy said:

I wonder how the Republicans feel about not having a Plan B 

Hell, they never really had a plan A.

[PsyD2013]

Paul Ryan states he wants to destroy American health care.  I hate this shit weasel:

 

 

[fraurosena]

Not only is he a shit weasel, he's also dumb as a rock. Thankfully.
Because who does he think will be patting him on the back for that statement and cheering him on in acchieving his destructive goal? His constituents? Wisconsinites? The American public? 

[AnywhereButHere]

Nice to see some democrats having some fun with this administration. You take it where you can find it, I guess!

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/democrats-introduce-the-mar-a-lago-act/ar-BByHP6Z?li=BBnb7Kz

Quote

A group of Democratic members of Congress are playing the clever acronym game again.

One of the latest to be introduced and to target the Trump administration: the "Making Access Records Available to Lead American Government Openness Act."

Yes, the "MAR-A-LAGO Act."

 

[AmazonGrace]

23 hours ago, formergothardite said:

Thom Tillis was made to squirm when asked about Trump's claim that Obama wiretapped him.  I really hate this guy. 

Some of his constituents put up a missing sign. 

http://www.wcnc.com/news/local/missing-billboard-created-for-sen-thom-tillis/424789657

Investigation into Russian hackings are "parlor games"

[formergothardite]

Makes you wonder what Tillis is hiding. 

[GreyhoundFan]

I thought this was an interesting analysis: "A new dynamic may be emerging in the House: A right and left flank within the GOP willing to buck leadership"

Quote

President Trump and House Speaker Paul D. Ryan made it a binary choice: You’re either for their health-care legislation or you’re for “Obamacare.”

From Reps. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) to Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-N.J.), spanning the party’s ideological spectrum, the answer came back Friday: No, it’s much more complex. It was filled with several different options and possible routes ahead, and dozens of Republicans agreed with their sentiment.

That left Republicans well short of the votes they needed to fulfill a seven-year promise to destroy the 2010 Affordable Care Act once they were fully in charge, delivering a stinging defeat to both Ryan and Trump.

It also suggested a new dynamic in which both the right and left flanks of the Republican conference are emboldened to challenge leadership. And that could make each future negotiation more difficult as the issue matrix gets more complicated and the pockets of internal GOP resistance continue to grow, not shrink, in the new era of Trump’s Republican-controlled Washington.

Some parts of these botched negotiations looked a lot like the recent past. Franks and his House Freedom Caucus cronies played the role of obstructionists who will buck party leaders no matter if it’s John A. Boehner, Ryan’s predecessor, or now Trump. These ideologues gobbled up tons of attention, resulting in much care from Trump, Vice President Pence and top West Wing advisers.

...

In some corners, Republicans saw the past week as a defining moment where lawmakers went from the hypothetical exercise of previous fiscal proposals, which they knew the White House of President Barack Obama would block, into the world of live ammunition in which these proposals could become law.

That gravity, among moderates and some mainstream conservatives, altered votes. “Sometimes you’re playing Fantasy Football and sometimes you’re in the real game,” said Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas), a Freedom Caucus member whom Trump had won over to support the bill.

...

This new combination, with Ryan’s right and left flanks willing to buck him and the new president, presents deep concern for the long-term effort to take up the more complicated effort to overhaul the corporate and individual tax codes.

Before they can even get there, however, Ryan faces an April 28 deadline to come up with a funding stream for the federal agency budgets through the end of the fiscal year. In previous federal spending fights, the Freedom Caucus has refused to lend a hand unless policy riders were attached.

Democrats, who have been relied on in the past to backfill those lost conservative votes, have signaled they will not do so this time if the legislation includes funding for controversial measures such as Trump’s request for funding to build a border wall.

...

Said Rep. Mark Amodei (R-Nev.), who oppose the legislation: “Even if it passes today, it’s like — I wanna pick these words very carefully — the adolescent dance school will still continue in full view.”

Maybe Ryan will get pushed out like Boehner.

[Cartmann99]

1 hour ago, GreyhoundFan said:

I thought this was an interesting analysis: "A new dynamic may be emerging in the House: A right and left flank within the GOP willing to buck leadership"

Maybe Ryan will get pushed out like Boehner.

Dear Santa,

I realize it's only March, but....

[GreyhoundFan]

An interesting analysis: "Why Republicans were in such a hurry on health care"

Quote

Why were Republicans rushing to vote on a health-care plan that they'd barely finished drafting, that budget scorekeepers hadn't had a chance to fully evaluate, and that, insofar as people did know about it, was widely despised?

In part, it's because their plan was so unpopular and because it got more unpopular the more people learned about it. But it's also because only by rushing to reshape a full sixth of the American economy without knowing exactly how they would be reshaping it would Republicans be able to use health care to pave the way for the rest of their agenda, including tax reform. In other words, the GOP didn't want to let a detail like tens of millions of people losing their health insurance get in the way of two tax cuts for the rich.

...

The surprising thing, then, isn't that as few as 17 percent of people approved of the American Health Care Act. It's that as many as 17 percent did.

But there's a reason the GOP was pushing a bill that would have taken everything people don't like about the health-care system and made it worse. That's the fact that it would have allowed them to pass two permanent tax cuts for the rich. Anyone, you see, can pass a tax cut that expires after 10 years. But if you want to make it last — and you don't have 60 votes in the Senate — then you need to find a way to pay for it (or at least look like you did). Taking health insurance away from poor and sick people would have done just that for the Obamacare taxes, which primarily hit people in the top 1 or 2 percent. Indeed, as you can see below in the chart from the Urban Institute, the combination of tax cuts for the rich and benefit cuts for the poor that was the GOP health-care plan would have been a reverse Robin Hood that redistributed income from people making $50,000 or less to mostly those making $200,000 or more.

Now, the crazy thing is that this first tax cut for the rich (in the form of Obamacare “repeal and replace”) would have made a second one (this one coming in the form of “tax reform”) look more affordable.

That's because, due to parliamentary rules, tax revisions can't lose any revenue outside the 10-year budget window if it's going to be permanent. The question, though, is lose revenue compared to what. If Republicans had repealed the Affordable Care Act's $1 trillion worth of taxes before they revised taxes, that's $1 trillion less they'd have to come up with to make it look like money wasn't being lost. Now, without those phantom savings, tax restructuring, Speaker of the House Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) admitted, will be “more difficult.” Not that it was ever going to be easy. After all, the $1 trillion they were trying to save with a “border adjustment tax” seems to be on political life support, since every major retailer, including big GOP donors such as Walmart, is opposed to it. And, as you might have guessed, there aren't an extra $2 trillion of savings lying around for them to replace the ones they thought they were going to get from this and repealing the Affordable Care Act.

Which is to say that Republicans will either have to scale back their ambitions for how deeply they will cut taxes or how long they will. Whatever they choose, though, the top tax rate isn't going to stay under 30 percent.

And for the GOP, that's the real tragedy of 24 million people keeping their health insurance.

The chart in the middle of the article is sickening.

[47of74]

9 hours ago, fraurosena said:

Not only is he a shit weasel, he's also dumb as a rock. Thankfully.
Because who does he think will be patting him on the back for that statement and cheering him on in acchieving his destructive goal? His constituents? Wisconsinites? The American public? 

There are some Wisconsin Republicans who probably would pat him on the back, who actually want him and his GOP buddies to destroy health care in this country.  I absolutely despise them because they forced Scott Wanker on the state.

The ol' Appalachian Trail Hiker has an interesting theory why TrumpCare imploded;

cnn.com/2017/03/25/politics/mark-sanford-women-testosterone/index.html

Quote

While President Donald Trump is blaming Democrats for the collapse of the Republican health care plan and others point fingers at the conservative House Freedom Caucus, Rep. Mark Sanford has his own theory about the failure: too much testosterone.

After listening to emotional remarks at a pivotal meeting between White House officials, House leadership and Freedom Caucus members Thursday night, Sanford said he noticed that only men had spoken so far, two sources familiar with Sanford's remarks told CNN.

"I'm here to tell (you) that sometimes testosterone can get you in trouble," the South Carolina Republican quipped, according to the sources.

The former South Carolina governor, who had been mentioned as a possible Republican presidential candidate in 2012, was alluding in the meeting to an extramarital affair that led to his resignation as chairman of the Republican Governor's Association in 2009 and his divorce a year later. The affair was discovered after Sanford disappeared for several days while visiting his mistress and claimed to have been hiking the Appalachian Trail.

 

[onekidanddone]

2 minutes ago, 47of74 said:

There are some Wisconsin Republicans who probably would pat him on the back, who actually want him and his GOP buddies to destroy health care in this country.  I absolutely despise them because they forced Scott Wanker on the state.

The ol' Appalachian Trail Hiker has an interesting theory why TrumpCare imploded;

cnn.com/2017/03/25/politics/mark-sanford-women-testosterone/index.html

 

Oh yea, the "hike naked day" guy. 

[GreyhoundFan]

I agree with this analysis: "Why Republicans failed to repeal Obamacare"

Quote

...

— They hated Obamacare but they never understood the Affordable Care Act. This is the uber-explanation for much of what follows. Hating Obamacare became just what you did on the right. It didn’t mean you understood it, beyond maybe getting that it was a government program and thus paid for by taxes. It certainly (and this turned out to be very important) didn’t mean you had any ideas about what it did, how it worked or how many people were benefiting from it … or how to replace it.

— Obamacare created a new baseline. It’s hard to take away something — in this case, health insurance coverage for more than 20 million people — from which people are benefiting. This relates to the above — because they didn’t understand the law, they convinced themselves that calibration problems, of which there were many, were fatal. So, when premiums rose sharply in some of the exchanges, they didn’t understand that most exchange recipients wouldn’t see anything like those increases (due to the subsidies that adjusted to meet the higher costs). They didn’t recognize that less than 10 percent of those with coverage get it through that part of the market. Millions more get Obamacare coverage through the Medicaid expansion, and they convinced themselves that this was a terrible part of a program that no Republican governor or member of Congress would ever want to keep in place.

— They don’t have a policy bench. From Trump on down, many of today’s conservatives tend be much more skilled at campaigning, opposing pretty much everything, riling up their bases with antipathy toward the other side and getting elected (granted, that last bit’s kind of important) than at the qualities that enable governing, like compromise and fact-based analysis. Of course, there are thoughtful conservatives with cogent ideas about health policy, but clearly they’re of little interest to today’s leadership. How do I know that? Because their replacement law — the American Health Care Act — was an incoherent dog’s breakfast of massive tax cuts for the rich and spending cuts for the poor, more a caricature of Republican policy than actual policy. In this regard, credit also goes to the Congressional Budget Office, for quickly and credibly revealing the damage that would be done by the AHCA.

— The one policy Republicans get is tax cuts, and little else motivates/interests them. This is a variant on the previous entry, but it meant that a real motivation for the repeal was cutting about $1 trillion in taxes, including two ACA taxes paid mostly by the wealthiest Americans. It is axiomatic that when you cut such highly progressive taxes, the benefits go to those at the top of the scale, and it quickly became clear that, for example, almost 50 percent of the cuts went to millionaire households. The 400 richest taxpayers, with average income above $300 million, would get a tax break averaging $7 million. Couple that with the sharp cuts in Medicaid and the predicted premium increases for low-income elderly people in their AHCA plan, and even in D.C., the extent of this Robin-Hood-in-reverse play was too much for moderate Republicans, many of whom have ACA beneficiaries in their districts from whom they were hearing.

— They’re ungovernable. It caught my attention when former House leader John A. Boehner predicted what just happened a few weeks ago. Part of this was a variation of the “no bench” point above: “In the 25 years I served in the United States Congress, Republicans never, ever, one time, agreed on what a health-care proposal should look like. Not once.” But part was an impossible political Sudoku problem that House Speaker Paul D. Ryan couldn’t solve: If you try to please the moderates, you lose the hard right. Boehner learned that lesson in must-pass votes, like raising the debt ceiling, that he passed with votes from Democrats, which wasn’t going to happen here.

— President Trump wasn’t much help. When I worked for Obama during his first administration, I vividly recall two challenges in moving legislation: Republicans and Democrats. From day one, the R’s were never with us, but we also quickly learned that it would take a ton of work to woo our own caucus. I don’t think team Trump is there yet by a long shot. Moreover, he’s got some unique problems of his own making: People are learning his “art-of-the-deal” shtick, so they know that what he says Monday may well be totally different from where he is Tuesday.

— Their version of reality did not allow for the ACA gaining public support. Various polls, including this one from Pew, show public support for the ACA hitting its highest level on record, with 54 percent approval and 43 percent disapproval (see Figure 3 here as well). Their bubble also seems to have kept them from realizing that their replacement bill was in terrible shape re: public support. Before they pulled the vote on Friday, former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich, of all people, was compelled to tweet out the following: “Why would you schedule a vote on a bill that is at 17 percent approval? Have we forgotten everything Reagan taught us?”

...

 

[Toothfairy]

18 hours ago, Childless said:

Hell, they never really had a plan A.

Too bad they didn't  abort it. 

I can't believe how hard health care is inot this county. Seriously Canada and other parts of the world don't have these issues with health-care. Stupid entitled rich people

[sawasdee]

I've said it before - the UK National Insurance funded National Health is not perfect - but it won't bankrupt you or your children - and if you want extra protection and insurance - so you can pick and choose your day for surgery or appointments - it is available, at a much lower cost than any US insurance.

WHY is there this fear of a single payer scheme? The UK shows, with an imperfect National Insurance, that we can still cover everybody at a lower cost per capita than the US profit based insurance. AND we give options to those who have disposable income to upgrade, to medicine on demand. And everyone is covered, pre existing, fantastically expensive ( in the US) NICU, long term care.. you name it. I was never scared of being ill when I lived in the UK - it's only since I moved to Thailand I realised what it is like to live under a profit based system.

In the last two years, I have been told I needed major spinal surgery (I didn't - sent the MRI to a UK neurosurgeon who could barely contain his disdain), been prescribed HUGE amounts of anti biotics despite my records saying in big red letters ALLERGIC TO MOST ANTIBIOTICS, had to see an ENT specialist to get my ears syringed - which would be done by the practice nurse in the UK  - all of which were purely to maximise the private hospital profits.

I was spoilt by the NHS, which prescribed what you needed, didn't scare you into unnecessary treatment - and was just, actually, damn good!

ETA It almost seems that a segment of US society/politics resents another segment receiving care....

[47of74]

This.  Fucking this, in fact.

 

[Audrey2]

31 minutes ago, 47of74 said:

This.  Fucking this, in fact.

 

Humph! As discussed on another thread, The Irish Undertaker is a great name for this guy. The worst thing for me is, he talks the vehemently pro life line, as influenced by his Catholic faith (I'm not ripping on Catholics, but he has mentioned his Catholic faith, so I will), but then wants people, especially the poor to die once they are born. What really makes me snarly are that many of the poor that he's referring to are mechanics in small garages, nannies, dog walkers, home handymen, lawn maintenance workers, pastors in smaller denominations or no denomination, and many others who work very hard for not that much money. I guess he doesn't feel this way, but I want my restaurant workers to be able to go to the doctor when they're sick (knowing they can't take time off), instead of having bronchitis that is untreated and communicable. 

[47of74]

3 hours ago, Audrey2 said:

Humph! As discussed on another thread, The Irish Undertaker is a great name for this guy. The worst thing for me is, he talks the vehemently pro life line, as influenced by his Catholic faith (I'm not ripping on Catholics, but he has mentioned his Catholic faith, so I will), but then wants people, especially the poor to die once they are born. What really makes me snarly are that many of the poor that he's referring to are mechanics in small garages, nannies, dog walkers, home handymen, lawn maintenance workers, pastors in smaller denominations or no denomination, and many others who work very hard for not that much money. I guess he doesn't feel this way, but I want my restaurant workers to be able to go to the doctor when they're sick (knowing they can't take time off), instead of having bronchitis that is untreated and communicable. 

15 years ago I considered myself to be "pro life" but then I had an awakening when I realized that it didn't seem like a pretty good sized chunk of pro-life people really didn't give a good goddamn about human life once it was born.  The only time they seemed to give a rats ass about human life is before birth or if it could be used for political points - such as Schiavo.  That started the "pro life" house of cards collapsing inward.  I think by 2005 it had pretty much completely collapsed and I considered myself pro-choice by then.  I left the Roman church because too many of the leaders gladly took the 30 pieces of silver the "pro life" and misogynists gave them, and how they were twisting themselves in to all manner of theological pretzels trying to make the church into a subsidiary of the GOP.  Talking 'bout you, Dolan, Jenky, Benedict, Ryan, Olmstead, et al...

[GreyhoundFan]

12 hours ago, sawasdee said:

snip

WHY is there this fear of a single payer scheme? The UK shows, with an imperfect National Insurance, that we can still cover everybody at a lower cost per capita than the US profit based insurance. AND we give options to those who have disposable income to upgrade, to medicine on demand. And everyone is covered, pre existing, fantastically expensive ( in the US) NICU, long term care.. you name it. I was never scared of being ill when I lived in the UK - it's only since I moved to Thailand I realised what it is like to live under a profit based system.

snip

ETA It almost seems that a segment of US society/politics resents another segment receiving care....

Yes, that's exactly it. There is a segment of US society that feels that they shouldn't have to pay a penny for the good of anyone else. It's all about ME, not WE. Also, some of them are terrified that the "gubmint" will tell them what to do if there is a single payer system. Of course, they aren't smart enough to realize that their insurance company already does this. I'm harassed frequently by my insurance company, who wants me to submit to more tests to "help" me. Except it's not really to help, it's to cut their costs, my health is not their concern; their bottom line is their only concern.

 

"Fox News host calls on Ryan to step down, hours after Trump tweets about her show"

Quote

A Fox News personality — whom President Trump had urged his supporters to watch Saturday night — called on House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) to step down, saying he had done a disservice to Trump by failing to pass a high-profile health-care bill last week.

At the top of her show, Jeanine Pirro, host of “Justice With Judge Jeanine,” delivered a scathing commentary on Ryan’s performance in the days leading up to the decision to pull the House Republican bill to overhaul the Affordable Care Act.

“It failed within the first 70 days of President Donald Trump’s administration, a president who made the replacement of Obamacare the hallmark of his campaign and then used valuable political capital to accomplish it,” said Pirro, placing the blame squarely on Ryan.

“Speaker Ryan, you come in with all your swagger and experience and you sell 'em a bill of goods which ends up a complete and total failure, and you allow our president in his first 100 days to come out of the box like that, based on what?” she said. “Your legislative expertise, your knowledge of the arcane ins and outs of the bill-writing process? Your relationships? What? Your drinks at the Hay-Adams with your pals?”

...

Now, any regular reader of this forum knows I despise the Irish undertaker with the fire of a thousand suns, but that bolded statement is rich. So, she's slamming on Ryan for having drinks at the Hay-Adams hotel with his pals? Um, the tangerine toddler can't function if he's not at one of his gaudy properties.

[47of74]

49 minutes ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Yes, that's exactly it. There is a segment of US society that feels that they shouldn't have to pay a penny for the good of anyone else. It's all about ME, not WE. Also, some of them are terrified that the "gubmint" will tell them what to do if there is a single payer system. Of course, they aren't smart enough to realize that their insurance company already does this. I'm harassed frequently by my insurance company, who wants me to submit to more tests to "help" me. Except it's not really to help, it's to cut their costs, my health is not their concern; their bottom line is their only concern.

Yeah, insurance companies suck.  I had to put off surgery for over a year because of the clowns work foisted on all of us.  You could have cancer ravaging your insides and they'd want you to try some diet and exercise and on line coaching instead of doing what is medically necessary.  I had to drop them and pay more for an ACA plan that would give me the coverage I needed.  I told my boss too about having to do that.

My doctor hates insurance companies.  She would rather take care of people than put up with all the insurance company bullshit that would've gotten ten thousand times worse if the GOP had gotten their wet dream of repealing the ACA

[GreyhoundFan]

"Why would D.C. Democrats consider writing checks to a pro-life Republican? He’s challenging Jason Chaffetz in Utah."

Quote

The little-known Utah Republican hoping to unseat Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R) is hunting for campaign cash thousands of miles from his home base among the most unlikely of supporters: District residents.

Damian Kidd’s quest for help in Washington got off to an awkward start late last week when he flew east to hold a “meet-and-greet” with District residents — in Virginia.

The candidate apologized for the geographic inconvenience as guests on Friday night trickled into a meeting room at Arlington’s Key Bridge Marriott, where the refreshments consisted of water dispensed from a cooler.

“This is what we could find on St. Patrick’s Day,” said Kidd, 41, a personal-injury lawyer in Provo. “We’re going to make the best out of what we have here.”

His visitors, about 18 or so by night’s end, appeared to know far less about him and his conservative beliefs than they do about Chaffetz, the five-term congressman whose involvement in District affairs has triggered widespread scorn in the city.

Indeed, the event seemed more like a group-therapy session as guests vented about the Utah incumbent who says he wants to move federal agencies out of D.C. and whose most recent challenge to the city’s autonomy was to lead a campaign to nullify an assisted-suicide law the D.C. Council had passed.

“I’m insulted that someone in Utah is going to overturn laws we pass,” said Santiago Testa, a Realtor who resides in the District. “I mean, we’re the nation’s capital — have some respect.”

Behind Testa, Micah Lubens, 29, who lives in the Eckington neighborhood and works in marketing, derided Chaffetz’s well-known practice of sleeping on a cot in his Capitol office when he’s in Washington and traveling to Chinatown to eat at an outlet of Five Guys, a fast-food burger chain.

“It’s an attitude,” Lubens said. “It’s like, ‘I’m working here but I don’t really want to live here.’ ”

A few feet away, Kimberly Rosenfield, 30, a book editor who lives in Petworth, counted herself among those who protest what she describes as Chaffetz’s overreach by calling his office “every day to complain about the potholes” in her neighborhood.

“I absolutely hate Jason Chaffetz,” she said. “I want to see if Damian is willing to leave D.C. alone.”

On that score, Kidd did not disappoint, reassuring those he met that he sees no need to interfere in District affairs and that he’s happy to provide “help getting this meddler off their backs.”

...

Evan McMullin, who ran for president as an independent, has said he’s considering a challenge to Chaffetz in 2018. Kathryn Allen, a physician running as a Democrat, says she has pulled in more than $400,000 for her campaign.

...

Now, I don't particularly care for Kidd, McMullin is a much better choice, and Kathryn Allen is also far better, but I'd be thrilled for someone to unseat the smug Chappass.

 

 

"‘Saying no is easy, leading is hard’: GOP congressman resigns from Freedom Caucus after health-care drama"

Quote

If President Trump is going to put the blame for Republicans' inability to pass health-care legislation on the House Freedom Caucus, at least one member of the conservative coalition thinks it deserves it.

Rep. Ted Poe (R-Tex.) resigned Sunday from the coalition of 35 to 40 conservative House lawmakers in protest over the group's opposition to the Republican health-care bill that tanked in Congress on Friday.

“I have resigned from the House Freedom Caucus,” Poe said in a statement. “In order to deliver on the conservative agenda we have promised the American people for eight years, we must come together to find solutions to move this country forward. Saying no is easy, leading is hard, but that is what we were elected to do. Leaving this caucus will allow me to be a more effective Member of Congress and advocate for the people of Texas. It is time to lead.”

...

 

[RoseWilder]

Things are not looking good for the GOP right now: 

 

[GreyhoundFan]

"Devin Nunes is making it very hard for Republicans to claim they can run an impartial investigation on Russia"

Quote

From the perspective of impartiality, one of the problems with Congress investigating Russia’s meddling in the U.S. election and whether President Trump’s circle had anything to do with it is Congress itself.

It’s a political body made up of — well, politicians. That’s not to say these politicians can’t put on their impartial hats to undertake a large-scale investigation about the independence of U.S. democracy from foreign influence. But congressional investigations have a higher threshold of impartiality to meet than, say, an independent investigation outside the confines of Congress.

In recent days, Rep. Devin Nunes, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, is making it very hard for his committee to meet those standards of impartiality.

...

But here’s what anyone trying to follow the twists and turns of this Trump-Russia-wiretapping story is left with: A top Republican congressman and Trump ally was at the White House the day before he released information that appeared to somewhat defend the president on his defenseless wiretapping claims.

What’s more, the congressman released this secret information to the president — whose circle is under investigation by the FBI for alleged ties to Russia — before sharing it with his own committee members.

From there, it’s not a stretch for a reasonable person to consider whether Nunes, who served on Trump’s transition team, wants to protect the president. And from there, it’s not a stretch to question the impartiality of the investigation Nunes is leading in the House on Russia meddling in the U.S. election.

And that, say ethics and national security experts, is where the real damage in Nunes’s White House trip lies.

“I guess you could say I was gobsmacked by this,” said Norm Ornstein, a nonpartisan ethics scholar with the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute. “The integrity of the system is built on the independence of Congress from any investigation involving the executive branch.

“I just think this is so far over the line you can’t even see the line anymore,”  he said.

...

On Monday, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said he didn't think Nunes had created a perception problem with all this: "You can't ask someone to do a review of the situation and then create an interference because they're reviewing the situation," he said, referring to the fact Nunes likely had help from an White House official to review the classified documents in a secret room.

But Congress, by its nature, was already at risk of appearing motivated by partisanship as it looked into these very critical questions. At the very least, Nunes just opened up the door for people to believe their worst about Congress: that its members put politics above all else.

“If we issue a report where Democrats find one thing and Republicans find another, both sides retreat to their respective corners and nothing gets revealed,” Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.), the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, told The Fix before this Nunes wiretapping news broke.

...

In addition to its Senate and House intelligence committees, Congress could set up a special congressional committee dedicated to investigating this, a la the Republican-majority Benghazi committee. Or it could set up a completely independent investigation outside of Congress, a la the 9/11 commission. (The ladder is what Schiff has called for.)

There's no immediate sign that Republican leaders would be on board with any of those investigative alternatives. They're already looking into something their president would rather they leave alone — Russia. House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) nor Nunes did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the latest Nunes revelations.

Ryan has repeatedly said that Congress's own intelligence committees are perfectly up to the job of impartially investigating Russia, wherever it leads.

But Nunes is making it that much harder for Republicans to argue that.

I hope Nunes ends up paying for all his crap.

[fraurosena]

50 minutes ago, GreyhoundFan said:

I hope Nunes ends up paying for all his crap.

Oh, I'm quite sure that when the whole Russian connection thing blows up, he'll be taken down with the rest of them. Remember, he was also present at that meeting where they were plotting to kidnap Fetullah Gulen (Erdogan's enemey) to Turkey. To me that's a sign that he's in the thick of the colluding, corrupt, treasonous and traitorous conspirators currently in the administration and GOP top.