What's going on with the Executive Departments

[fraurosena]

Well what do you know? They're lying liars that lie...

https://www.propublica.org/article/five-trump-cabinet-members-made-false-statements-to-congress

Quote

As most of the world knows by now, Attorney General Jeff Sessions did not tell the truth when he was asked during his confirmation hearings about contacts with Russian officials.

But Sessions isn't the only one. At least four other cabinet members made statements during their nomination hearings that are contradicted by actual facts: EPA Chief Scott Pruitt, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, and Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price.

The statements were all made under oath, except those of DeVos. It is a crime to "knowingly" lie in testimony to Congress, but it's rarely prosecuted.

The article details the question, the lying answer, the truth, and the liars response (if there was one). Worth the read.

[clueliss]

And the FBI is now asking the department of Justice to ignore Trump's wiretap claims.  

[candygirl200413]

Is Comey feeling bad now about being besties with Trump?

[Childless]

14 hours ago, clueliss said:

And the FBI is now asking the department of Justice to ignore Trump's wiretap claims.  

I don't understand where Trump is coming from on this one.  If his phones were wiretapped, there's obviously a warrant for it out there somewhere.  Does he really want that warrant to see the light of day?  Does he want any findings to see the light of day?  How in any reality do the benefits outweigh the risks in this scenario?  And if his phones were not wiretapped, he just ends up looking like a paranoid lunatic.  If he's really concerned that he was wiretapped, he could have discreetly requested the DOJ look into the matter.  The results would then not be front page news (unless he wanted them to be but, he would have the discretion of deciding whether or not to do that after he had the facts).  It just seems like an awfully stupid move to go on a Twitter rant about it without first a). getting all the facts and b). taking the time to contemplate the ramifications of making such an accusation.

[clueliss]

He's trying to divert attention from elsewhere.  Smoke and mirrors.  

[Childless]

13 minutes ago, clueliss said:

He's trying to divert attention from elsewhere.  Smoke and mirrors.  

I understand that, but this accusation has the very real potential of making things worse for him.  Why wouldn't he have chosen some benign issue or event to use for his smoke and mirrors?  Something that didn't run the risk of hurting him.  Just seems like a dumb move on his part.

[fraurosena]

First of all, I have to state that I'm not a big fan of polls. They're like statistics. There are so many variables that can be manipulated to show exactly what you want them to show. 

That said, coming from CNN, I find the results of this poll (if close to the true sentiments) rather startling:

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/06/politics/trump-approval-rating-russia-poll/index.html

Quote

About two-thirds of Americans say a special prosecutor should investigate contacts between Russians and Trump campaign associates, according to a new CNN/ORC poll, and 55% say they are at least somewhat concerned by reports that some connected to the Trump campaign had contact with suspected Russian operatives.

However, the steady stream of news about investigations into those contacts doesn't appear to have affected President Donald Trump's approval rating, which ticked up only one percentage point -- 44% to 45% -- from January.

Concerns about the reported contacts are closely tied to partisanship, with 71% of Democrats saying they are "very concerned" about it while 54% of Republicans say they have no concerns "at all" about the reports.

Among Republicans, a majority feel Congress can handle the investigation, but a sizable 43% support the call for a special prosecutor, as do majorities of Democrats (82%) and independents (67%). Overall, the poll finds that 65% would rather see a special prosecutor handle the investigation, while 32% think Congress is capable of handling it. [...}

None of this, however, appears to have taken a toll on Trump's approval ratings. Both the president's approval rating and favorability rating have held steady through the early days of his presidency.

According to the poll, 45% approve of Trump's handling of the job, about the same as the 44% who said so in early February, and 45% say they have a favorable view of the President, just about the same as the 44% who said so in January. [...]

The poll, conducted entirely after Trump spoke to Congress last Tuesday, finds the share who say his proposed policies will move the country in the right direction in about the same spot as January, 49% now vs. 48% then. And 53% say Trump's policy priorities do not reflect their own, while 46% feel he is emphasizing policies that reflect their own priorities.

If the bolded is even remotely true to the overall sentiments in America, then that would mean that HALF of the population thinks the tangerine toddler is leading the country in the right direction. 

However:

It's a poll. One of the variables in polls is the type of question asked. The question "Do you think that this administration is leading the country in the right direction?" can be interpreted in more than one way. The obvious way is to interpret the phrase 'the right direction' as being 'the correct direction'. However, it can also be interpreted as being 'in the direction of the Right' or in other words 'to the Right'. If respondents to the poll answered the question with this last interpretation in mind, it does not have to mean that they also agree with this movement to the Right... And therefore, 49% agreeing with that statement does not mean that 49% of respondents approve of it. So, yeah, the percentage is meaningless.

Ok, enough lecturing. I guess I've made my point. I don't like polls, and I don't like statistics. 

[fraurosena]

The demolition has started, by erasing science from the EPA's Office of Science and Technology mission statement.

 

[Childless]

13 hours ago, fraurosena said:

The demolition has started, by erasing science from the EPA's Office of Science and Technology mission statement.

 

Trump's administration is truly clueless.  Between their targeting of minorities and immigrants and their disdain for science (and education in general), they're going to destroy our tenuous (at best) standing as a world leader.  Its obvious from the cry of despair from businesses when Trump said he wanted to restrict H1B visas that there is a dearth of STEM professionals in this country.  We need immigrants to stay ahead of the rest of the world.  But, why on earth would they want to come here if they know they'll get treated like shit by a government that hates them and hates science?  They won't come.  They'll go elsewhere and help those countries surge forward in the technology race.  We'll get left behind and it won't be long before we find we're no longer the big game in town.  The rest of the world is already starting to move on without us.

[fraurosena]

7 minutes ago, Childless said:

We'll get left behind and it won't be long before we find we're no longer the big game in town.

I'm sorry, but this has already happened:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/07/world/best-countries-world-switzerland-canada-britain-germany.html

Quote

Switzerland took the top spot for the first time based on a combination of its attitude toward education, democracy, business and quality of life. Canada was ranked second and Britain third. Germany, last year’s winner, slid to fourth in part because of a string of terrorist attacks and political tension over its decision to admit large numbers of refugees. Japan came in fifth place.

The United States dropped to No. 7. Survey respondents gave it lower marks on business friendliness, respect for human rights and democracy, and educational quality; they also said they had less desire to visit the country. Nearly 75 percent of respondents said they lost some degree of respect for the United States after the election of Donald J. Trump as president.

 

[Childless]

1 hour ago, fraurosena said:

I'm sorry, but this has already happened:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/07/world/best-countries-world-switzerland-canada-britain-germany.html

 

Damn.  Every day I read yet another article on how great Canada is.  I really, really want to live there.  The only issues I see are trying to get in and my ability to handle the weather.

[fraurosena]

Apparently getting in isn't going to be a problem. Refugees are being welcomed with open arms. 

Can't help you with the weather though...

[Childless]

1 minute ago, fraurosena said:

Apparently getting in isn't going to be a problem. Refugees are being welcomed with open arms. 

Can't help you with the weather though...

I'm still holding out hope that the U.S. west coast will secede and form a sane nation in the image of Canada and I can live in a great country and yet still have my beaches and palm trees.

[GreyhoundFan]

"HHS Secretary Tom Price Says ‘Nobody Will Be Worse Off Financially’ Under Obamacare Repeal"

Quote

President Donald Trump’s administration made a bold guarantee Sunday morning, telling Americans that health insurance won’t cost more if Republicans repeal the Affordable Care Act. 

“I firmly believe that nobody will be worse off financially in the process that we’re going through, understanding that they’ll have choices that they can select the kind of coverage that they want for themselves and for their family, not the government forces them to buy,” Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

This line could become Price’s “If you like your plan, you can keep it” moment ― a sweeping sound bite that ends up being not true. (President Barack Obama eventually had to apologize for his promise in 2013.)

Under the GOP health care replacement legislation, older and low-income Americans who want to buy private health insurance would be hit the hardest, receiving less generous tax credits than they do under Obamacare. Younger and more affluent people, on the other hand, would receive more assistance than they currently do. 

That means older and lower-income individuals could pay more for their premiums and out-of-pocket costs. Others may simply drop their insurance ― since there will be no mandate to have coverage under the Republican legislation ― and would have no protection from sky-high medical bills at all. 

Health policy experts have found that the net effect of the Republican repeal bill would be to raise costs for the average insurance enrollee by $1,542 per year in 2017, and by $2,409 in 2020.

While Price was trying to tamp down fears that people will have to pay more for health insurance under the GOP scheme, Gary Cohn, Trump’s chief economic adviser, was trying to convince people that it doesn’t matter whether fewer Americans will have coverage. 

“It’s not just about coverage, it’s about access to care, it’s about access to be able to see your doctors,” Cohn said in an interview on “Fox News Sunday.” “The numbers of who’s covered and who is not covered ― that’s interesting, and I know that may make some headlines, but what we care about is people’s ability to get health care and people’s ability to go see their doctor.”

“Coverage is really important if you lose it,” responded host Chris Wallace.

The GOP has not been able to figure out whether its plan will lead to coverage for more people, fewer ― or, as Cohn tried to argue, it just doesn’t really matter. 

In January, Trump vowed “insurance for everybody.” On Friday, Price also promised, “We don’t believe that individuals will lose coverage at all.” But that same day, House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) seemed to acknowledge his plan won’t cover as many people, in an interview with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt. 

“We always know you’re never going to win a coverage beauty contest when it’s free market versus government mandates. If the government says thou shall buy our health insurance, the government estimates are going to say people will comply and it will happen,” he said. “And when you replace that with we’re going to have a free market, and you buy what you want to buy, they’re going to say not nearly as many people are going to do that. That’s just going to happen. And so you’ll have those coverage estimates. We assume that’s going to happen. That’s not our goal.”

And on CBS’s “Face the Nation” Sunday, Ryan admitted he actually has no idea how many people will lose coverage.

“I can’t answer that question. It’s up to people,” he said.

Obamacare extended health insurance to 20 million people who didn’t previously have it. 

Low-income Americans would also face consequences in both access and cost under the repeal bill with the GOP’s plan to get rid of the expansion of Medicaid and turn it into a block grant program.

The bill effectively repeals Medicaid as we know it, and replaces it with a system of limited block grants to states that pays per person, rather than by the cost of health care expenses. The difference will need to be made up by the 70 million elderly, poor and working-class people on Medicaid. While people often think of Medicare as the principal health care program for the elderly, it is Medicaid that covers nursing care. 

Thirty-one states and the District of Columbia have expanded eligibility for Medicaid under Obamacare, which has resulted in about 11 million people getting coverage. But under the Republican bill, starting in 2020, the federal government would no longer provide federal funds for people who newly qualify under the expanded eligibility standards. 

The federal government would continue to provide funds for any expansion enrollee who was on the program before 2020 ― until he or she left Medicaid. 

Cohn, however, was not worried about these changes in his “Fox News Sunday” interview. 

“If you are on Medicaid, you’re going to stay,” he said. The expansion is not going to change. There’s a roll-off period. There’s a period of transition, and we’re very confident that the period of transition is going to work.”

...

 

This whole Ryancare plan is one of the most misbegotten things to come out of the U.S. Capitol.

 

[GreyhoundFan]

Good grief, Ben Carson is a piece of work: "Ben Carson told HUD staff he could zap their brains into reciting whole books read 60 years ago. What?"

Quote

...

As a surgeon at Johns Hopkins Hospital in 1987, Carson famously separated infant twins conjoined at the head. But on Monday, he told a factually wrong parable about the brain. Specifically, Carson said, the brain was incapable of forgetting and could be electrically stimulated into perfect recall — a statement that, even though made by one of the most famous former neurosurgeons alive, was far more fiction than science.

It came in an anecdote meant to motivate the federal employees, a bit Carson developed on the public speaking circuit. He described the brain’s surprising power as a way to show the audience that they were more capable than they believed.

...

The article goes on to dispute the latest nutty thing uttered by Carson.

[clueliss]

Some of these people really need snopes walking right next to them 24/7

[GreyhoundFan]

5 minutes ago, clueliss said:

Some of these people really need snopes walking right next to them 24/7

The sad thing is: the Branch Trumpvidians would still believe the crap they are being fed.

[GreyhoundFan]

The wonderful George Takei had this to say about that idiot Price's assertion that nobody will be worse off with Trump/RyanCareless:

[GreyhoundFan]

Our buddy, Betsy, made the news again: "Did Betsy DeVos just ask states to ignore part of federal education law?"

Quote

Did Education Secretary Betsy DeVos just ask states to ignore a part of the K-12 federal education law, the Every Student Succeeds Act?

Let’s look at what she said — and what the law says — about whom state officials should consult as they draw up ESSA accountability plans to be submitted to the Education Department for approval. These plans are supposed to show how states will establish student performance goals and create a system to hold schools “accountable” for student progress.

The ESSA says that state education agencies (SEAs), when developing their accountability plans, must consult with outside stakeholders, including teachers, principals, parents, administrators and others.

...

On Monday, the Education Department issued different language in a new “template” that states can use to create their ESSA accountability plans. It has far fewer requirements than the Obama administration’s template by design; DeVos has said power should be with the states to decide how to run their schools. The new template says states must consult only with one party: the governor.

...

Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, said in a statement:

“One of the problems of education reform over the last two decades was the attempt by billionaires and politicians to impose top-down dictates about what schools should do and how they should do it, and to strip the voices of those closest to kids—their parents and teachers. That was changed by ESSA through its requirement of ‘stakeholder engagement,’ which brings in parent and teacher voices and reflects America’s deep connection to public education. Betsy DeVos’ action betrays the very intention of this law.”

She is such a piece of work.

[RoseWilder]

Why has this man not been fired or resigned yet: 

 

[GreyhoundFan]

"From ‘fake news’ to no news: Tillerson leaving press behind on Asia trip could send message to China"

Quote

As Secretary of State Rex Tillerson arrives in Asia on Wednesday for his first major trip, one of his loudest messages could be one that goes unspoken.

State Department officials said Tillerson’s focus during meetings in Japan, South Korea and China will be on North Korea’s nuclear threat, as well as trade and economics. But his aversion to dealing with U.S. journalists — and his decision to initially bar them from his traveling party before granting a seat to a reporter for a conservative website at the last minute — have added to growing questions about the Trump administration’s commitment to a free press and transparent government.

For the nation’s top diplomat, the approach cuts sharply against the practice of his predecessors in both Republican and Democratic administrations who have allowed reporters on their planes as an expression of American values — and as a tool to help pressure authoritarian regimes toward political reforms and greater openness.

Tillerson’s abrupt change of direction comes at a time when his boss, President Trump, and other senior White House officials have referred to mainstream media outlets as “fake news,” “the opposition party” and “the enemy of the people,” and the White House has restricted access to some news briefings.

Foreign capitals have taken notice. Tamaki Tsukada, spokesman for the Japanese embassy in Washington, said “there is an elevated concern in the Japanese media about that level of control” that Trump is trying to exert on the U.S. news media.

...

 

Good, more secrecy. This will end well. (end sarcasm font)

[GreyhoundFan]

"On first day in office, new Medicaid chief urges states to charge premiums, prod recipients to get jobs"

Quote

Hours after she was sworn in, the Trump administration’s top official for Medicaid and her boss dispatched a letter to the nation’s governors, urging states to alter the insurance program for the nation’s poor by imposing insurance premiums, charging them for part of emergency room bills and prodding them to get jobs.

The letter, sent Tuesday night by Seema Verma, the new administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), and Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price, also derides the Medicaid expansion that 31 states and the District of Columbia adopted under the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

The expansion, which has extendedMedicaid to 11 million people with incomes of up to about $16,000 for a single person or nearly $34,000 for a family of four, “was a clear departure from the core, historical mission of the program,” the letter says.

By paying so much for covering these new beneficiaries, they contend, the ACA has “provided states with an incentive to deprioritize the most vulnerable populations.” The three-page letter does not mention that, for the first three years, the federal government paid the entire cost of covering the expansion group and still pays nearly all of that.

The message from Verma and Price signals an initial step toward redesigning the program along lines that conservatives have long favored and that the new Medicaid administrator brought to Indiana as a consultant and the chief architect of broad changes that state first adopted nearly a decade ago.

...

The letter from Verma and Price stops short of urging an outright work requirement, saying that CMS will “review and approve meritorious innovations that build on the human dignity that comes with training, employment and independence.”

Asked whether the Trump administration would allow states to impose work requirements within Medicaid, an HHS spokesman replied, “We can’t speculate.”

Verma was sworn in on Tuesday, a day after the Senate confirmed her nomination by a vote of 55 to 43 along party lines. The vote reflected the deep divisions on Capitol Hill over the Trump administration’s plans for the nation’s health-care system. At her confirmation hearing earlier this month, Verma sidestepped the question of whether she would favor a nationwide extension of the unusual Medicaid provisions she helped Indiana secure.

Indiana requires everyone who receives benefits to pay monthly premiums, and their contributions are invested in health savings accounts. Very poor people who do not make the payments are bumped down to a lower tier of coverage, while people with slightly more income are temporarily removed from the program.

...

It's a bad, bad idea to have someone who "helped" Indiana take charge of such an important program.

[GreyhoundFan]

Wow, this is why it's a bad idea to have someone with no diplomatic experience as Secretary of State: "Tillerson says diplomacy with North Korea has ‘failed’; Pyongyang warns of war"

Quote

TOKYO — Diplomacy has failed and it’s time to “take a different approach” to North Korea, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said here Thursday, as the North Korean Embassy in China warned that American military threats were bringing the region to the brink of nuclear war.

Tillerson’s comment — that 20 years of diplomacy have been unable to persuade the regime in Pyongyang to abandon its pursuit of nuclear weapons — will fuel fears in the region that military options might be on the table to deter North Korea. That could prove devastating for Seoul, where more than 20 million people in the South Korean capital region live within range of North Korean artillery.

And in a sign of mounting tensions, the North Korean Embassy held an extraordinary news conference in Beijing to issue its warning of nuclear war while vowing to continue with its own nuclear testing program as a legitimate form of self-defense.

...

Tillerson did not go to the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo to meet staff Thursday morning, as is often customary, but instead stayed in his hotel, where he read and received briefings from embassy officials, a spokesman said.

Like his boss, Tillerson holds the media in low regard; in another break with past practice, Tillerson did not allow the press corps to travel with him to Asia, instead choosing just one journalist — from the conservative Independent Journal Review — to fly on his plane.  

Thursday’s news conference in Tokyo also looks to be the new secretary’s only forum for speaking to the media during this trip, and even then, he took questions from only four preselected reporters.

It's a lengthy article, one that is quite scary.

[Childless]

13 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Wow, this is why it's a bad idea to have someone with no diplomatic experience as Secretary of State: "Tillerson says diplomacy with North Korea has ‘failed’; Pyongyang warns of war"

It's a lengthy article, one that is quite scary.

So, we go to war with North Korea and simultaneously piss off both our "enemies" (China) and our allies (South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, etc.) in Asia.  In one fell swoop we will get the entire continent to loathe us.  Well on our way toward the entire world hating our guts.  I need to get out of this shithole country before I get trapped here.

[GreyhoundFan]

"The dangerous trajectory of Rex Tillerson’s tenure"

Quote

If there has been a narrative about the Trump administration’s foreign policy, it has been the idea that the primary cleavage is between the populists and the grown-ups. The populists consist of Trump, Stephen K. Bannon, Peter Navarro and Bannon’s minions in the White House. The grown-ups are Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, national security adviser H.R. McMaster and national economic council head Gary Cohn.

What about Secretary of State Rex Tillerson? He has been lumped with the grown-ups, but I’m beginning to wonder if he will be put in any relevant category going forward.

The hard-working staff here at Spoiler Alerts has been unimpressed with Tillerson’s brief tenure as secretary of state, but acknowledged that “Tillerson might just be moving down the learning curve at this point.” Esteemed international relations scholar Robert Jervis has been even less impressed with Tillerson, noting 10 days ago in Foreign Policy that “the secretary of state has had little impact on the Trump administration so far. And, if anything, his role appears headed for further decline.”

...

It’s still early days, but a few things can be gleaned from Tillerson’s swing through Asia. Unfortunately, they’re not terribly positive.

First, there’s this tidbit from Anna Fifield and Anne Gearan’s article in The Washington Post about Tillerson’s stay in Tokyo: “Tillerson did not go to the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo to meet staff Thursday morning, as is often customary. He instead stayed in his hotel, where he read and received briefings from embassy officials, a spokesman said.”

So that’s bad. There are already a mess of stories about Tillerson losing the confidence of State Department officials. Not bothering to visit the embassy in Tokyo is just Dumb Diplomacy 101.

Then there was Tillerson’s decision to give only one seat to a journalist during his trip — the Independent Journal Review’s Erin McPike. McPike scored an exclusive interview with Tillerson, in which he said some not-so-bright things about his South Korean hosts. To her credit, McPike pushed Tillerson pretty hard on media access. This led him to hem and haw and then finally say the following:

First and foremost is what is my mission and why am I going? How can I best accomplish that mission? What’s the most effective way for me to do that? I’m not a big media press access person. I personally don’t need it. I understand it’s important to get the message of what we’re doing out, but I also think there’s only a purpose in getting the message out when there’s something to be done. And so we have a lot of work to do, and when we’re ready to talk about what we’re trying to do, I will be available to talk to people. But doing daily availability, I don’t have this appetite or hunger to be that, have a lot of things, have a lot of quotes in the paper or be more visible with the media.

How to put this gently… I personally don’t give a flying fig how much Rex Tillerson needs or doesn’t need the media. I care about two things far more important than the secretary of state’s personal comfort. First, if he doesn’t bring the media along, he’s signaling to other countries that he doesn’t care all that much about a free press. As David Sanger noted in today’s New York Times, the “useful symbolism of top American officials’ being seen to travel with a free and intrusive press asking questions that leaders do not want to hear” is not insignificant. Sometimes, the presence of an independent press is the message.

Second, whether Tillerson wants to issue a message isn’t the only thing that matters. If his foreign interlocutors want to get a message out, they will have a decided advantage if Tillerson can’t counter with a traveling press corps. As Sanger notes, “foreign policy is rarely made in the kind of media-free bubble that Mr. Tillerson wants.”

...

 

The article goes on to talk about how Tillerson sucked up to China. Sigh.