Donald Trump and the Fellowship of the Alternative Facts (Part 14)

[formergothardite]

Don't deny husband sex either because of God.

[Howl]

43 minutes ago, VelociRapture said:

Would they change their minds if they knew I'm white, my husband is white, and we have a cute little pasty face baby? I feel like it would for some strange reason (having nothing to do with the fact that I suspect they're all hiding nice hooded white robes in their closets.)

YES! In the American psyche, it becomes a problem THAT MUST BE ADDRESSED, but only when it happens to white people, and in particular, white male people. 

 Just read this amazing CNN article this morning titled The cruel double standard that could save Obamacare that lays it out.  I have to say, I thought I was well versed on the vagaries of American injustice towards women and people of color, but reading this article gave me a wider view and lots to think about on the uglier side of American history....and contemporary life.  Insightful....and depressing. 

Quote

A recent poll from the Pew Research Center showed that 54% of Americans now approve of it, the highest number ever recorded by Pew. Some attribute this change to the fact that millions of Americans are now receiving help from the law just as Republicans are poised to dismantle it.

But others cite another factor: The face of Obamacare is now white.

More Americans now realize Obamacare helps millions of working class whites and that it's not -- as once portrayed by conservatives -- a form of welfare pushed by the first black president to help people of color, historians and scholars say. The media landscape is filled with images of the furrowed brows of anxious white residents at congressional town halls who fear they will suffer if they lose Obamacare, says Judy Lubin, a sociologist and adjunct professor at Howard University in Washington.

"When you see white working-class Americans saying that I'm benefiting and my family is getting help from the Affordable Care Act, you start to hear 'repair' not 'repeal,'" Lubin says. "Whites standing up in support of a policy changes the dynamics of the conversation."

and the late George Carlin (THAT George Carlin) was onto this: 

Quote

The latest wrinkle in the Obamacare debate is revealing the existence of what the late comedian George Carlin called the ''American double standard." It's a brutal calculus that works this way: A crisis hits a marginalized group of Americans and no one cares; it hits white people -- particularly white men -- and it becomes a national emergency, activists and historians say.

 

[sawasdee]

@HowlThat was one scary article. I hadn't realised - and I reckon myself relatively well read and well educated - from across the pond the depth of the institutionalisation of racial prejudice. That neither the New Deal nor the GI bill treated blacks in the same way as whites.

Horribly, it makes the present upsurge in white supremacy in the US seem almost more like a return to the norm than the aberration I believed it to be.

[Howl]

Trump is still calling out Hillary on the alt-fact uranium deal.  This also played out in a minor way in the Malheur occupation last year with rumors about selling out uranium in eastern Oregon to Russians.  

Anyway, Snopes.com handily debunks it and labels it FALSE! 

Quote

Russian to Judgment

Allegations of a "quid pro quo" deal giving Russia ownership of one-fifth of U.S. uranium deposits in exchange for $145 million in donations to the Clinton Foundation are unsubstantiated.

 

[RoseWilder]

Every day about 20 new pieces of the Trump-Russia puzzle emerge, and yet not special prosecutor yet. It's infuriating. 

[fraurosena]

27 minutes ago, RoseWilder said:

Every day about 20 new pieces of the Trump-Russia puzzle emerge, and yet not special prosecutor yet. It's infuriating. 

There's something that I don't quite understand.

Exactly WHO can appoint a special prosecutor in the US? I'd like to think that would be the Supreme Court (or at least the Judicial branch of the triparate state). If it is, then I don't quite understand why none of the judges on the Supreme Court (or whatever part of the judiciary) have said, enough is enough, and appoint a special prosecutor.

If it isn't the responsibility of the judicial branch , and it's up to the administration or Congress... well, don't hold your breath, because I don't think it'll happen before the 2018 elections, and only if by that time the Dems would still be able to win a majority in the House. I say 'would still be able to' purposely, because I wouldn't put it past this administration to do everything in its power to stop as many people from voting as possible.

 

[louisa05]

9 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

There's something that I don't quite understand.

Exactly WHO can appoint a special prosecutor in the US? I'd like to think that would be the Supreme Court (or at least the Judicial branch of the triparate state). If it is, then I don't quite understand why none of the judges on the Supreme Court (or whatever part of the judiciary) have said, enough is enough, and appoint a special prosecutor.

If it isn't the responsibility of the judicial branch , and it's up to the administration or Congress... well, don't hold your breath, because I don't think it'll happen before the 2018 elections, and only if by that time the Dems would still be able to win a majority in the House. I say 'would still be able to' purposely, because I wouldn't put it past this administration to do everything in its power to stop as many people from voting as possible.

 

Since the expiration of the post-Watergate Independent Counsel law in 1999, special prosecutors are appointed by the Attorney General and/or the President. SCOTUS never had that particular power. 

This wikipedia article actually lays it out pretty well:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_prosecutor#Since_1999

Congress can request the appointment but, obviously, this is a problem as the president's own appointee has to agree to appoint one and makes the selection. None of this is laid out in the Constitution but rather in law made much later to handle legal situations. 

[47of74]

3 hours ago, formergothardite said:

Don't deny husband sex either because of God.

Don't:

• Work outside the home
• Have less than a dozen kids
• Be in a position of authority over men
• Drive
• Wear pants.

All because God!

(According to the fundies).

 

[fraurosena]

1 minute ago, louisa05 said:

Since the expiration of the post-Watergate Independent Counsel law in 1999, special prosecutors are appointed by the Attorney General and/or the President. SCOTUS never had that particular power. 

This wikipedia article actually lays it out pretty well:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_prosecutor#Since_1999

Congress can request the appointment but, obviously, this is a problem as the president's own appointee has to agree to appoint one and makes the selection. None of this is laid out in the Constitution but rather in law made much later to handle legal situations. 

So essentially, if I read the wikipidia article correctly, it's mostly up to the Attorney General. Wellllll. As that's Jeff Sessions, there's not a snowball's chance in hell of an appointment of a special procecutor then. What on earth would his  motivation be to appoint someone to investigate things that would implicate him too?

Oh man, you guys are way more fucked than I realized... 

[PreciousPantsofDoom]

2 hours ago, Howl said:

 

  The cruel double standard that could save Obamacare 

 

Great article. 

I have to say that one of the very few good things to come out of the whole Trump reign of Terror is that it has caused me to think more deeply about my own white priveledge. I have not considered myself to be racist, but I can see that we all need to go further than that.  

Yeah, I have friends  of many colours and I don't tolerate racist jokes and comments etc., but I've been living in my liberal white bubble not thinking too much about the fact that racist thinking continues to be inherent in so many things.  That it's built into too many systems. That is built in in such a way that whiteys like me can live their lives and never notice it. Thats white priveledge. So thanks to Trumpy for finally making me aware.  Need to do more than be aware, of course, but it's a start. 

Had lunch with a friend who was born in Iran. She is a Canadian citizen, like me. There is a long history of cross border shopping in our town because of our proximity to the US/Can border.  She said that her family has decided they will not be crossing the border for the foreseeable future because they are too worried about problems.  Another friend has been pulled in nearly every time he crosses the border. He was born in Canada, but he is a young East Indian maIe, who looks as if he might be Arabic, therefore its an interview every time.  I  contrast that with the fact that I would anticipate zero problems since I couldn't be whiter if I tried.  And that's just a little anecdote about shopping, not even anything important like the policies and programs mentioned in the article. 

 

[louisa05]

1 minute ago, fraurosena said:

So essentially, if I read the wikipidia article correctly, it's mostly up to the Attorney General. Wellllll. As that's Jeff Sessions, there's not a snowball's chance in hell of an appointment of a special procecutor then. What on earth would his  motivation be to appoint someone to investigate things that would implicate him too?

Oh man, you guys are way more fucked than I realized... 

Congress can demand the appointment, but I doubt a GOP Congress will do so. Of course, getting a fair unbiased appointment from Sessions is not likely. 

Technically, there need not be a special prosecutor for an impeachment. 

[fraurosena]

Just now, louisa05 said:

Technically, there need not be a special prosecutor for an impeachment. 

I dont' think the impeachment process will be started before a majority of dems in Congress though. Unless a lot of GOPpers suddenly come to theire senses before then. I don't give that much of a chance though, as I wouldn't be at all surprised if most of the GOPpers in Congress are also in on the Russian connection in some way or another. 

[Cartmann99]

*waves to everyone*

We've been having high winds here, and it knocked the power out. Just came back on about 30 minutes ago. Was so desperate for news about the healthcare bill, that I used some of my pre-paid minutes on my cellphone for data access, so I could check CNN a few times. 

Spent the rest of the time rereading part of The Handmaid's Tale, which put me in a bad mood considering the truckloads of bullshit the Republicans are currently trying to sell us.

So, do we think that Trump is really going to leave the ACA alone for the time being, or will there be more fun and games next week?

[louisa05]

2 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

I dont' think the impeachment process will be started before a majority of dems in Congress though. Unless a lot of GOPpers suddenly come to theire senses before then. I don't give that much of a chance though, as I wouldn't be at all surprised if most of the GOPpers in Congress are also in on the Russian connection in some way or another. 

That the GOP would never impeach their own is certainly conventional wisdom, but I'm not sure. The mess they just made of health care reveals that the GOP Congress is not at all a united front. If it continues to be clear that Trump is not going to be an electoral asset to them, many more centrist Republicans in Congress may have a change of heart. He threatened the members who had declared no votes that he would see to it that they won't get reelected and clearly no one was afraid. His dismal (and dropping) approval ratings made it an empty threat. If he is going to be an albatross around their necks, they may turn on him. 

 

[JMarie]

9 minutes ago, Cartmann99 said:

*waves to everyone*

We've been having high winds here, and it knocked the power out. Just came back on about 30 minutes ago. Was so desperate for news about the healthcare bill, that I used some of my pre-paid minutes on my cellphone for data access, so I could check CNN a few times. 

Spent the rest of the time rereading part of The Handmaid's Tale, which put me in a bad mood considering the truckloads of bullshit the Republicans are currently trying to sell us.

So, do we think that Trump is really going to leave the ACA alone for the time being, or will there be more fun and games next week?

He says he's going to "let Obamacare explode" and then introduce something new.  He also now says he's going to start working on tax reform.  Oh goodie.

[CTRLZero]

6 minutes ago, Cartmann99 said:

So, do we think that Trump is really going to leave the ACA alone for the time being, or will there be more fun and games next week?

He needs more time to cajole and threaten.  I guess it's time to send messages of support to those who were brave enough to withstand his attempt to rush this through.  (Glad your power is back.)

[JMarie]

39 minutes ago, 47of74 said:

Don't:

• Work outside the home
• Have less than a dozen kids
• Be in a position of authority over men
• Drive
• Wear pants.

All because God!

(According to the fundies).

 

• Cut your hair
• Send your children to indoctrination centers (AKA public schools)
• Have premarital anything

[47of74]

2 minutes ago, JMarie said:

• Cut your hair
• Send your children to indoctrination centers (AKA public schools)
• Have premarital anything

• Or do anything other than the missionary position.
• Or actually enjoy sex in the slightest.

Also all because God and Jeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeezus.

[fraurosena]

4 minutes ago, louisa05 said:

That the GOP would never impeach their own is certainly conventional wisdom, but I'm not sure. The mess they just made of health care reveals that the GOP Congress is not at all a united front. If it continues to be clear that Trump is not going to be an electoral asset to them, many more centrist Republicans in Congress may have a change of heart. He threatened the members who had declared no votes that he would see to it that they won't get reelected and clearly no one was afraid. His dismal (and dropping) approval ratings made it an empty threat. If he is going to be an albatross around their necks, they may turn on him. 

 

Ah yes, so true. He will be the magnificent scapegoat and glittering deflection away from their own traitorous asses. As he probably was meant to be right from the start.

10 minutes ago, JMarie said:

He says he's going to "let Obamacare explode" and then introduce something new.  He also now says he's going to start working on tax reform.  Oh goodie.

If you can stand to listen to him, watch this. He says Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Shumer are the losers here...

I also came across this beauty from Garry Kasparov. It made me giggle.

 

 

[Ali]

Shouldn't I be tired of winning by now?

[47of74]

Democratic Underground just had the best response to the Trumptastic Failure

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017430757

Spoiler

 

 

[iweartanktops]

Spoiler

 

This makes me happy! I hope the spoiler worked. 

[fraurosena]

WTF guys? Who is this idiot judge? 

Virginia court rules for Trump in travel ban dispute, order still halted

Quote

A U.S. federal judge in Virginia ruled on Friday that President Donald Trump's travel ban was justified, increasing the likelihood the measure will go before the Supreme Court as the decision took an opposing view to courts in Maryland and Hawaii that have halted the order.

U.S. District Court Judge Anthony Trenga rejected arguments by Muslim plaintiffs who claimed Trump's March 6 executive order temporarily banning the entry of all refugees and travelers from six Muslim-majority countries was discriminatory.

Never mind, the judge is a repub.

Quote

Trenga, an appointee of Republican President George W. Bush

Sigh. Should have known.

[GreyhoundFan]

1 hour ago, Cartmann99 said:

*waves to everyone*

We've been having high winds here, and it knocked the power out. Just came back on about 30 minutes ago. Was so desperate for news about the healthcare bill, that I used some of my pre-paid minutes on my cellphone for data access, so I could check CNN a few times. 

Spent the rest of the time rereading part of The Handmaid's Tale, which put me in a bad mood considering the truckloads of bullshit the Republicans are currently trying to sell us.

So, do we think that Trump is really going to leave the ACA alone for the time being, or will there be more fun and games next week?

Oh no, he's already trying to muck with it. There were a bunch of talking heads on MSNBC, one of whom was a Democratic consultant. He said that they've (the Repubs) already passed several items quietly to hurt medium sized businesses and that they'll continue to do so.

 

1 hour ago, JMarie said:

He says he's going to "let Obamacare explode" and then introduce something new.  He also now says he's going to start working on tax reform.  Oh goodie.

One of John Boehner's former staffers was on MSNBC. At the very end of the interview, Chuck Todd mentioned about tax reform and said to the staffer, "oh, like that will be simple, unlike health care." Apparently Boehner has said that the Repubs have never, ever been able to agree on healthcare.

[GreyhoundFan]

An interesting analysis: "Donald Trump played a game of chicken with House Republicans. Then he blinked. Bigly."

Quote

Donald Trump was elected in large part on one, loud promise: I know how to make deals these normal politicians don't.

Part of that mystique — as outlined in his best-selling book “The Art of the Deal” — is the willingness to call his rival's bluff, to put his cards on the table and ask everyone else to do the same.

That's what Trump did Thursday night after a postponement of the planned vote to begin the process of reforming the Affordable Care Act. House Republicans needed to put up or shut up, Trump insisted. Despite being told the votes simply weren't there, Trump pushed forward — arguing that it was now or never.

It was vintage Trump, taking a gamble no other typical politician would take: Force a vote on a massive part of your legislative agenda with an uncertain outcome.

Then Trump blinked.

...

Now begins the blame game. And there's plenty to go around. The White House was already starting to point the finger at Ryan for making health-care reform the first legislative priority of the new Republican-controlled Washington. Rank and file members were suggesting that simply not enough time was given to thinking about what was in the bill before it was offered. Establishment Republicans blamed the House Freedom Caucus for their refusal to compromise.

All true! But Trump is the president of the United States. Trump ran as the only person who could solve the major problems facing the country. Trump was the one who billed himself as the dealmaker extraordinaire, the guy who had faced down people in corporate boardrooms all over the country and all over the world — and won.

But when the time came to push all his chips to the middle of the table, Trump folded. Period. Beyond the spin, that is what happened here. If Trump had continued to insist that the bill be put to a vote, trust me that Ryan would have done it despite his reservations.

What you are likely to hear over the next few hours and days is that Trump did so because no deal is better than a bad deal. The problem with that argument is Trump's Twitter paper trail. Friday, as the House prepared to vote, Trump tweeted that this legislation was a great chance for Republicans to make good on their campaign promises — calling the legislation a “great plan.”

Trump will, as he always does, somehow declare victory and move on. “The beauty,” Trump told Costa, “is that they [Democrats] own Obamacare. So when it explodes, they come to us, and we make one beautiful deal for the people.”

The simple fact, however, is that Trump wanted this deal, pushed for this deal, called his own party's bluff on this deal and then walked away when it appeared as though the deal wouldn't come together.

Dealmaker Donald played chicken. But he lost his nerve at the last minute.

Cheeto the chicken!