United States Congress of Fail - Part 4

[onekidanddone]

10 hours ago, Howl said:

I listened to Ray Wylie singin' Ssssssnake Farm on the radio last week.  There used to be a Snake Farm on I-35 north of San Antonio when I was a kid.  It gave me the creeps just driving by it.

@Howl  here you go

 

[fraurosena]

 Sheesh, how could they forget their donor's hedge funds while cooking up the tax scam?

GOP tax scam backfires in worst way possible — with GOP donors

Quote

When the GOP forced through its reckless tax scam giveaway to corporations and billionaires, some lawmakers made it clear their priority was not to help working families, but to please the wealthy donors who keep their campaigns funded.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said they had to get it done or “the financial contributions will stop.” Rep. Chris Collins (R-NY) said “who cares” if the tax cuts are unpopular, and later clarified, “My donors are basically saying, ‘Get it done or don’t ever call me again.'”

But according to a new report from CNN, Republicans failed even at keeping their top donors happy.

It turns out several wealthy Republican donors are now withholding funds — including financiers Paul Singer, Ken Griffin, Warren Stephens, Cliff Asness, Bruce Kovner, and Daniel Loeb — because they are angry the bill’s corporate tax cuts do not apply to their hedge funds.

As CNN notes, “Although some of the donors have not sworn off contributions to individual campaigns or even the Republican National Committee, all have so far withheld contributions to the House and Senate Republican campaign arms — which are key players in the 2018 midterm elections — as a way to send a message over the law.”

Furthermore, these six donors “accounted for more than $50 million to Republican groups during the 2016 election cycle; Singer ranked among the top 10 donors of either party, while Griffin and Stephens ranked in the top 20.”

To put this in perspective, in the 2016 cycle, the total expenditure on all candidates was $161 million for the National Republican Congressional Committee, and $134 million for the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

So if this continues, the GOP could see noticeable shortfalls at a time when their majorities are already vulnerable — and when, ironically, their lawmakers face voter anger over the tax cuts.

Some GOP-aligned groups like Americans for Prosperity have run ads against Democrats for opposing the bill. But instead, the bill is rapidly becoming a political disaster for Republicans.

Analyses have found it will put the budget deficit over $1 trillion, and that 83 percent accrues to the top 1 percent of income earners and 80 percent to foreign investors. The bill turned out to include drafting errors and glitches that Republicans are now forced to ask Democrats to help them fix.

Health insurance costs are now set to spike as much as 94 percent in parts of the country thanks partly to the bill’s individual mandate repeal. And some businesses, far from creating jobs, are actually using their tax cuts to fire their workers.

Voters have not fallen for the scam. Recent polls find just 27 percent of voters think the tax cuts were a good idea. Some vulnerable Republican lawmakers organizing rallies to support the tax bill, like Iowa Rep. Rod Blum, have been greeted with near-empty parking lots.

And it is not helping them win elections. In Pennsylvania’s 18th Congressional District, where voters backed Trump in 2016 by 20 points, Republicans had to back off ads promoting the tax scam after an underwhelming voter reaction. They went on to lose the special election to Democrat Conor Lamb, who opposed the tax cuts.

Republicans could and should have seen all of this coming. The bill polled terribly even before it passed. But as the remarks of lawmakers like Graham and Collins showed, the GOP was desperate to deliver the goods to their donors.

If they could not even do that, Republicans should seriously question whether their tax crusade had any point at all.

This tax scam is coming back to bite them in the butt with evilly sharp, pointy teeth.

I can't help but gloat.

[Botkinetti]

Not only am I gloating , while I was reading the article I found myself laughing in a heh-heh-heh way.

[AmazonGrace]

 

[GreyhoundFan]

11 hours ago, AmazonGrace said:

 

 

I'm guessing he's missing some of the rocks that make up his head. What a freaking tool.

[Cartmann99]

On 5/16/2018 at 7:02 AM, fraurosena said:

I can't help but gloat.

Gloat away, my friend! Just between you, me, and the fence post, there are days when gloating at their shortsighted stupidity is the only thing getting me through the day. 

[GreyhoundFan]

"In major embarrassment to GOP, House fails to pass massive Farm Bill in face of conservative Republican showdown"

Spoiler

A sweeping farm bill failed in the House on Friday in a major embarrassment to GOP leaders who were unable to placate conservative lawmakers demanding commitments on immigration.

Leadership put the bill on the floor gambling it would pass despite unanimous Democratic opposition. They negotiated with members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus up to the last minutes.

But their gamble failed. The vote was 198-213, with 30 Republicans joined 183 Democrats in defeating bill.

The outcome exposed what is becoming an all-out war within the House GOP over immigration, a divisive fight the Republicans did not want to have heading into midterm elections in November that will decide control of Congress.

The bill’s collapse also revealed the intractable divisions within the GOP conference that have bedeviled House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) and will be certain to dog the top lieutenants in line to replace him, Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.).

With moderate Republicans maneuvering to force a vote on legislation offering citizenship to some younger immigrants who arrived in the country as children, conservatives revolted. The farm bill became a bargaining chip as they lobbied leadership for a vote on a hard-line immigration bill.

Leaders tried to come up with a compromise, but a series of eleventh-hour negotiations, offers and counteroffers failed. Both McCarthy and Scalise will take their share of the blame for the failure, and their fortunes in the race to replace Ryan next year could suffer accordingly.

The farm bill itself became practically a sideshow, despite its importance to agriculture and the significant changes it would institute to food stamp programs.

On immigration, Scalise described a deal that would ensure a vote on a conservative immigration bill by Reps. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) and Michael McCaul (R-Texas) — while also allowing moderate Republicans the opportunity to negotiate on legislation that could win the support of President Trump and resolve the status of immigrants who face losing protections offered by the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA.

“We came to an agreement that I think gives everybody what they want,” Scalise said ahead of the farm bill vote. “That’s a vote on Goodlatte-McCaul as well as an opportunity to try to work with the president on an alternative that can pass on DACA. We want to solve the DACA problem and secure the border and I still think there’s a path to get there working with the president.”

The solution may eventually emerge, but it didn’t do so in time to save the farm bill Friday.

Goodlatte-McCaul bill authorizes construction of a border wall, cracks down on “sanctuary cities” that protect immigrants against federal immigration authorities, and provides for three-year temporary guest work permits that don’t offer a chance at citizenship. Leaders and conservatives alike agree that it doesn’t command the votes to pass the House, but nonetheless conservatives want to vote on it.

The farm bill itself broke open partisan divisions in the House as Democrats abandoned negotiations with Republicans over the food stamp changes, which would require adults to spend 20 hours per week either working or participating in a state-run training program as a condition to receive benefits. Democrats argue that a million or more people would end up losing benefits as a result because most states don’t have the capacity to set up the training programs required.

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) described the legislation as “cruel” and argued that with the proposed changes to food stamps, “Republicans are taking food out of the mouths of families struggling to make ends meet.”

Republicans contend the food stamp changes are a reasonable approach that would help move able-bodied adults from poverty to work. “Our bill goes shoulder-to-shoulder with recipients to help get them the training and education they need to attain a job that can provide for them and their families,” said Agriculture Committee Chairman K. Michael Conaway (R-Tex.).

The House farm bill would have been a non-starter in the Senate anyway, which is writing its own farm bill. Any legislation that ultimately makes it to President Trump’s desk will have to look more like the Senate version, where bipartisan support will be necessary for anything to pass and there is not sufficient support for the food stamp changes.

Trump had tweeted his support for the House bill late Thursday, writing: “Tomorrow, the House will vote on a strong Farm Bill, which includes work requirements. We must support our Nation’s great farmers!” So the president, too, shares in Friday’s failure.

The current farm bill expires Sept. 30 and the legislation would have reauthorized numerous programs and policies. In addition to the food stamps, flash points included an extension of supports for the sugar program, which a coalition of conservative lawmakers backed by free-market outside groups tried unsuccessfully to get rid of in an amendment defeated Thursday.

The legislation also would have extended the Agriculture Department’s subsidy program that compensates farmers when average crop prices fall below certain levels — and expanded by widening who counts as a “farmer,” for subsidy purposes.

Conaway pleaded for the legislation before the vote. “Times are not good right now in the heartland. Many of our nation’s farmers and ranchers, who have been struggling under the weight of a five-year recession, are just one bad year away from being forced out of business,” he said. “And in the face of these serious challenges, the last thing they need is the uncertainty of a prolonged debate over the 2018 farm bill.”

 

[Howl]

I love the smell of a Nunes smackdown in the morning! 

 

[GreyhoundFan]

A good one from Jennifer Rubin. "A sorry end to Paul Ryan’s speakership"

Spoiler

House Speaker Paul D. Ryan’s last year in office is proving disastrous, a fitting end to the speakership of a man once considered a principled conservative reformer. His refusal to fulfill his constitutional role as leader of the House but rather play the role of presidential poodle and Republican attack dog for his increasingly unhinged caucus has had dire consequences for the GOP House majority, the intelligence oversight process and the broader conservative movement.

Among his most egregious failures has been his refusal to rein in House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), who, in concert with the White House, created a phony “unmasking” scandal and released a misleading memo casting aspersions on the FBI and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in connection with the warrant to conduct surveillance on suspected spy Carter Page. As Nunes’s crowd, together with the president, now threatens to reveal a secret FBI and CIA source, in an unprecedented breach of the House’s intelligence oversight responsibilities, the extent of Ryan’s reckless disregard for his oath becomes clear.

The Post reports on the role of a retired American professor who cooperated with U.S. intelligence in investigating highly questionable contacts between Russian and the Trump campaign:

The role played by the source is now at the center of a battle that has pitted President Trump against his own Justice Department and fueled the president’s attacks on the special counsel’s investigation. … There is no evidence to suggest someone was planted with the campaign. The source in question engaged in a months-long pattern of seeking out and meeting three different Trump campaign officials.

The Washington Post — after speaking with people familiar with his role — has confirmed the identity of the FBI source who assisted the investigation, but is not reporting his name following warnings from U.S. intelligence officials that exposing him could endanger him or his contacts.

There is no evidence the FBI behaved improperly. (“The FBI commonly uses sources and informants to gather evidence and its regulations allow for use of informants even before a formal investigation has been opened. In many law enforcement investigations, the use of sources and informants precedes more invasive techniques such as electronic surveillance.”)

Indeed, had the FBI failed to follow up on evidence that a presidential campaign was engaged in secret communications with a foreign government, it would have been excoriated for dereliction of duty. Moreover, none of this was revealed during the campaign — in stark contrast to the airing of the allegations against Hillary Clinton for misuse of email, an action that looks downright trivial in comparison with a far-flung Russian plot to boost Trump, a scheme that at critical points was eagerly greeted by top members of the Trump campaign. (Trump himself of course publicly encouraged the hacking of the Democratic National Committee and John Podesta’s emails and made hay out of them in the closing days of the campaign.)

At any stage in this outrageous attack on American intelligence operations and the Justice Department, Ryan could have stepped in to replace members of the Intelligence Committee, to reprimand them and/or to rebuff the president’s attempt to interfere with and smear investigators seeking to uncover an attack on our democracy. Should the source be revealed, endangering lives and/or national intelligence-gathering, the blame should fall at least in part on Ryan. (“The stakes are so high that the FBI has been working over the past two weeks to mitigate the potential damage if the source’s identity were revealed, according to several people familiar with the matter. The bureau took steps to protect other live investigations that he has worked on and sought to lessen any danger to associates if his identity became known, said these people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive intelligence operations.”)

Ryan’s legacy will be not only of someone who politically enabled an unfit president, but also of someone who presided over the erosion of trust required for a proper intelligence oversight process. Ryan has done his party no favors in permitting it to become irrational conspiratorialists and antagonists of our intelligence community. His passivity has only encouraged Trump to abuse his powers, which may, when the facts are laid bare, amount to obstruction of justice.

This week Ryan completely lost control of his own troops, watching the farm bill go down in humiliating fashion as he tried to stave off an immigration compromise that might actually pass. He is no longer doing the people’s business — either to pass necessary, bipartisan legislation or to defend the people’s security. Perhaps he should retire now. Any temporary replacement could hardly do a worse job for the remaining months of the GOP majority.

 

[GreyhoundFan]

"The Banana States of America"

Spoiler

By one key measure, it is now official: This is the most authoritarian Congress in history.

The House Rules Committee, meeting in its ornate chamber on the third floor of the Capitol on Monday night, sent two bills to the House floor under “closed” rules — that is, legislation that must be rubber stamped in toto, without being amended by so much as a comma. That brings the number of closed rules in this Congress to 84, beating the previous record of 83 set in 2014, according to the Democrats’ tally (a Republican tally counts one fewer). And here’s the truly remarkable part: Republicans have another seven months in this Congress to run up the score.

There are various explanations for this. But what this means in practical terms is the GOP majority has used parliamentary maneuvers to block votes on amendments to legislation that would likely pass with broad bipartisan support — on outsourcing jobs, immigration, gun safety, disaster relief, Social Security, Medicare, the environment, prescription drug costs, Pell Grants, national security, criminal-justice reform, veterans’ benefits, drinking water, child nutrition and maternal health.

But this heavy-handedness hasn’t produced much: just 14 bills signed into law that aren’t ceremonial or rejecting previous regulations. Last week, conservative Republicans brought down the farm bill, normally a popular piece of legislation, because they had a dispute with Republican leaders — over a separate immigration bill.

Hillary Clinton warns of a “full-fledged crisis in our democracy.” Rex Tillerson, the former secretary of state fired by President Trump, now warns that “American citizens are on a pathway to relinquishing our freedom.” (Too bad he didn’t say so when he was on the job.)

They are both correct, in a sense, but right now the fear of the United States going totalitarian doesn’t feel quite right. This crowd is too clownish to be Stalinist. Rather, the United States is turning into a banana republic:

The president of the United States orders the Justice Department to investigate his political opponents. The Justice Department complies.

The president, The Post reports, personally urged the postmaster general to double the rate it charges Amazon, apparently because he doesn’t like the coverage by The Washington Post, owned by Amazon founder Jeffrey P. Bezos.

Trump settles a trade dispute with China on terms even his allies say are too favorable to the Chinese. Meanwhile, the Financial Times reports that a Chinese state-owned bank asked clients to pay $150,000 to attend a fundraiser with Trump.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo threatens to impose the “strongest sanctions in history” on Iran. The French economy minister proposes that Europe fight the U.S. sanctions by compensating European businesses hurt by the sanctions.

Trump, only days after saying “everyone” thinks he deserves a Nobel Peace Prize for his North Korea negotiations, receives a message from Pyongyang saying it would not give up its nuclear weapons and citing national security adviser John Bolton’s “repugnance.”

The latest school shooting, this one in Texas, claims 10 lives. Incoming National Rifle Association president Oliver North blames Ritalin. Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R) blames abortion.

Longtime presidential confidant Roger Stone says he’s prepared to be indicted for some conjured-up “extraneous crime” as part of a special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s probe.

Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee observe May 17, the 64th anniversary of the Brown v. Board of Education decision banning segregated schools, by debating the judicial nomination of Wendy Vitter, who refused to say whether Brown was properly decided.

Donald Trump Jr., the New York Times reports, met three months before the election with a representative of wealthy princes from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates who wanted to help his father’s campaign.

Newly appointed presidential lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani, who previously disclosed that the president paid hush money to silence a porn actress alleging an affair with him, calls her lawyer, Michael Avenatti, a “pimp.” Avenatti tweets a video of Giuliani in drag.

And now we see our national legislature setting a new standard for inoperability.

Republicans point out that the tally of “closed” rules has been inflated by Democrats refusing to offer amendments in a number of cases. They also point out that when they do open up bills for amendments, they take a lot: More than 1,000 so far, more than Democrats allowed when they were last in charge.

Regardless, the closing of debates means no chance to pass legislation that has the broad support of the American public — and, if given a vote, broad support from their representatives. And it’s not as if the Republican majority has been able to come up with an agenda of its own: Of the 172 bills signed into law so far, 142 are noncontroversial “suspension” bills such as post-office namings.

Democracy is indeed under threat – from a tyranny of buffoonery.

 

[AmazonGrace]

Area Lawmaker Portrays Mass Murderer as Victim : "Who's a Good Boy, Who Wants a Treat?"

 

[fraurosena]

1 hour ago, AmazonGrace said:

Area Lawmaker Portrays Mass Murderer as Victim : "Who's a Good Boy, Who Wants a Treat?"

 

I gave this a WTF, and I stand by it.

However, the parent in me can in some measure understand this father believing his son was a 'good boy'. Parents cannot control every single thing their teenage kid does, and they most certainly cannot know every single thing their teenage kid does (unless they're creepily controlling helicopter parents, that is).

I can believe this father may have been blindsided by his son's behavior and is now in full on denial mode. Is he in part culpable for having his weaponry available to his son? Probably. But I could totally understand that he had no idea that his son would turn into a murderer and use his father's guns to kill his classmates in cold blood. And if so, I also understand his father's need to find reasoning behind such an act, and bullying gives at least a rationale that is believable. Maybe his son was bullied and he snapped, maybe he wasn't and he's just a stone-cold killer. I have no way of knowing. But I can't really condemn his dad for saying what he does right now, when he's still in complete and utter shock.

 

[Bethella]

7 hours ago, fraurosena said:

I can believe this father may have been blindsided by his son's behavior and is now in full on denial mode. Is he in part culpable for having his weaponry available to his son? Probably. But I could totally understand that he had no idea that his son would turn into a murderer and use his father's guns to kill his classmates in cold blood. And if so, I also understand his father's need to find reasoning behind such an act, and bullying gives at least a rationale that is believable. Maybe his son was bullied and he snapped, maybe he wasn't and he's just a stone-cold killer. I have no way of knowing. But I can't really condemn his dad for saying what he does right now, when he's still in complete and utter shock.

This is speculation, but it could also be that the father only heard his son's side of the story. There have been claims that the son was harassing one of the victims and that when he wouldn't stop she embarrassed him in class. He could have been coming home from school complaining about the girl who didn't like him, was mean to him and embarrassed him, without giving his father the full story. If the son was the only source of information the father had, then the information was probably biased.

[AmazonGrace]

The father can say anything but a senator should know better I think

[AmazonGrace]

 

[AmazonGrace]

Narrator: He wanted to fire a Catholic priest for praying for the poor.

[GreyhoundFan]

"What has Trey Gowdy been smoking?"

Spoiler

What has Trey Gowdy been smoking?

And can we order it in bulk?

The South Carolina Republican, who roared into Congress in the tea-party election of 2010, has been one of the most partisan, vitriolic and conspiracy-minded legislators in his eight years here. As recently as January, he was demanding answers about a bogus “secret society” within the FBI and special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s probe.

But since then, Gowdy has contracted a case of late-onset honesty.

On “CBS This Morning” on Wednesday, Gowdy, chairman of the House Oversight Committee, dismissed the notion, propagated by President Trump, that the FBI had a “spy” in the Trump campaign. He said the FBI did what it “should have done” and that informants such as the one used by the FBI are used “all day, every day by law enforcement.”

Gowdy told Fox News on Tuesday that, after a classified briefing on the subject, “I am even more convinced that the FBI did exactly what my fellow citizens would want them to do.”

Earlier, Gowdy took issue with his fellow Republicans’ claims that Russia didn’t try to help Trump win the election, saying it was “clear based on the evidence” that Russia sought to defeat Hillary Clinton. And he didn’t join other Republicans in their categorical claim that there was no Trump campaign collusion with Russia.

He also defended the broad mandate of the Mueller investigation, and he delivered a blunt message to Trump to talk to Mueller and give him time and independence: If Trump is innocent, then “act like it.”

Actually, we know exactly what Gowdy is smoking: the sweet herb of retirement. He announced at the end of January that he was leaving Congress, which freed him to speak his mind without fear of a political price. Several of the 48 departing House Republicans have, like Gowdy, become last-minute truth tellers about Trump on their way out, including Thomas J. Rooney, Charlie Dent, Ryan Costello and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen.

A scant few Republicans in Congress deserve praise for speaking out against Trump even before announcing retirement. But most, including Gowdy, deserve the proverbial two cheers for their belated honesty. When all this comes crashing down, they can say they spoke out. But when they could have made a difference, before Trump took a box cutter to the fabric of democracy, they were silent.

Even now, Gowdy is far from a Trump critic. In the same CBS interview, Gowdy defended Trump’s frustration with Attorney General Jeff Sessions’s recusal in the Russia probe. Trump tweeted Gowdy’s defense, ignoring Gowdy’s dismissal of Trump’s nonsense “spy” claim.

And Gowdy always had some law-and-order tendencies that occasionally broke with party orthodoxy. The conspiracy crowd denounced him when the Benghazi committee, which he led, failed to validate their dark theories about Clinton.

But he was, in his eight years, one of the great GOP flamethrowers. He referred to his lengthy Benghazi probe as a “trial” of Clinton, and after a promising initial hearing, it quickly devolved into a partisan fight that singled out bugbears of the right such as Clinton aides Sidney Blumenthal and Huma Abedin.

His theatrical outbursts at committee hearings — “I want indictments!” he bellowed during one hearing into overspending — grabbed headlines. He spearheaded the effort to hold Internal Revenue Service official Lois Lerner in contempt of Congress, and he claimed that the Obama administration’s refusal to cooperate with Congress was “proof” that President Barack Obama knew about the botched gun-running program “Fast and Furious.”

Gowdy, though undertaking three investigations into the Trump administration, has been rather more forgiving of this administration’s refusal to cooperate. Democrats on his committee say he hasn’t issued a single subpoena to the administration. When I asked Wednesday about Gowdy, Elijah E. Cummings (Md.), the top Democrat on the committee, was grudging: “We now live in a kind of alternate universe when individual Republicans get massive praise just for acknowledging the obvious and restating basic facts.”

Gowdy’s spokeswoman, Amanda Gonzalez, said he wouldn’t speak with me for this column — not a complete surprise given that I had previously identified him as “Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-Benghazi).”

In a recent CNN interview, Gowdy complained about the partisan atmosphere, saying “it really is just about winning” and criticizing Republicans whose objective was “not to do good for the country.” To Politico, he lamented that “there is more civility in a death penalty case than there is in some congressional hearings.”

But Gowdy added to the incivility. Now he’s leaving Washington, like Cincinnatus returning to his fields — or in Gowdy’s case, to the courtroom — and the place is in (even) worse shape than when he arrived.

Better late than never, he’s speaking up on his way out. If only incumbent Republicans were courageous enough to do the same.

 

[AmazonGrace]

 

[AmazonGrace]

 

[AmazonGrace]

 

[AmazonGrace]

 

[AmazonGrace]

When thou mockest thy president 

Does Trump even understand how trade works? It's not like Trudeau decides how much Canadian companies will buy from the US and how much American companies will buy from Canada.

[AmazonGrace]

 

[formergothardite]

The last thing they want is pictures of small children being housed in bad conditions crying for their parents. 

[Audrey2]

10 hours ago, AmazonGrace said:

 

So proud of my Senator, for checking into this.