Summations Only

A few of those guys have responses that don't look completely partisan I am having a hard time sorting out what Tillis is saying...Daines did seem to acknowledge a problem before slamming Obama for something that even if true, really isn't on par with the issues regarding Trump anyway.I don't know how much access you have to Republic leaning folks, but I saw folks expressing their opinions today on Quora. What I see quite often is supporters who are happy that their president is not PC and speaks his mind. And that is their reaction even to the Trump's "shithouse/hole" stuff.

What did Hatch mean by "up until now"? Was that a statement that Trump had finally crossed a line? Yes, but that is an acknowledgment of a problem. That's what I mean by not completely partisan. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

It is a half-hearted attempt but probably sufficient for its purpose.

What would be the coincidence? Do these guys look anything alike? I see two men in ties. They both have eyes... Edited by NoNukes, : spelling of they

Is this a normal request? Have other presidents asked museums for the loan of pieces of art for their personal use? "Can we borrow your Van Gogh". Really?

Based on what you added, Trump's request is not unusual for a president. Viewed in that way, the museum's offer of a golden toilet seems like a gratuitous slam.

Is this campaign as toxic for Republicans as Roy Moore's campaign?Perhaps it is even more disastrous than Moore's run. No indication that Arpaio has any hidden sleaze but that is not the issue. No question that Arpaio is a flat out racist who stands to erode away whatever Republicans can gain by working out a DACA deal. Further, unlike reliably red Alabama, most people think that it is only a matter of time before Arizona turns blue. So the margin of error in Arizona is surely much smaller for Republicans than was the case for Moore.It seems possible that there can be just enough support for a polarizing figure like Arpaio to win the primary only to be buried in a general election. Is there any way Trump can avoid endorsing him? No question that Arpaio is a hero to some folk. But others recognize that Joe cost Arizona an estimated 70 million of dollars because of all of the lawsuits that were lost over Joe's antics, and also understand that Arpaio is a pardoned criminal.

Before getting to the political ramifications, let me say that Trump is clearly not an employer anyone would want to work for. McCabe had claimed that Trump asked him who he voted for. Here is Trump's response:

quote:

---

"I don't think so. No. I don't think I did," Trump told reporters gathering in chief of staff John Kelly's White House office on Wednesday.
"I don't know what's the big deal with that. Because I would ask you, 'who did you vote for?' " Trump said. "I don't think it is a big deal. But I don't remember that. I don't remember asking him the question."

---

What kind of asshat denial is that?

quote:

---

He later said it was a "very unimportant question."

---

More shite:

quote:

---

Trump also slammed McCabe during the exchange for, as he said, getting "more than $500,000 from, essentially, Hillary Clinton."
"He was the star of my speeches," Trump said, referring to McCabe." I would say a man who is more or less in charge of her, the wife got $500,000 from Terry. Now Terry is Hillary."

​

Terry refers to former Democratic Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, but McCabe himself never received any money for his wife's campaign for state Senate. The President is referencing donations to Dr. Jill McCabe's campaign, first reported by The Wall Street Journal last year.

---

As for how McCabe voted, well according to election records, he voted in the Republican primary but did not cast a vote for President. There is no way to make the case that McCabe is a Hilary supporter.As for the political ramifications, well this stuff is all of a piece with Trump's apparent belief that the FBI and all of federal law enforcement are his personal bodyguards and lackeys who owe loyalty to him. Many in the Republican Party seems to understand the thin ice that Trump is skating on with respect to his attempts to fire Mueller.Trump claims that he has not interfered, but the truth is quite obviously something else entirely different from what Trump says. Little surprise there.

quote:

---

Trump has kept nonstop pressure on McCabe ever since he became acting director in May, using the longtime law enforcement official as a punching bag -- both publicly and privately -- to vent his frustrations about the FBI. In December, Trump tweeted "FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe is racing the clock to retire with full benefits. 90 days to go?!!!"

---

First of all, Trump is a moron. Let me get that out of the way just in case somebody thinks I am objective on that issue. I have seen the evidence and I am no longer able to pretend that there is an equal probability that Trump is not an utter buffoon when it comes to science.In defending his belief that AGW is a hoax, Trump retorted this gem:Trump Disputes Climate Change Data

quote:

---

President Donald Trump disputed basic facts concerning climate change, falsely claiming that polar ice caps are not melting, during a wide-ranging interview with British journalist Piers Morgan that aired on Sunday.

​

Trump argued that sea ice is not, in fact, melting at unprecedented rates, contradicting overwhelming scientific evidence.

​

"The ice caps were going to melt, they were going to be gone by now but now they're setting records. Now they're at a record level," the president told Morgan on Britain's ITV News. "There are so many things happening."

---

Here is how another news source described Trump's idiocy:Trump's Latest Climate Change Interview Was Absurd

quote:

---

Donald Trump sat down for an interview with the unfortunate Piers Morgan at Davos last week and offered a bit of his considerable expertise on climate change. It was a reminder of the unique joy of having a president who knows little about anything, and cares less what he doesn't know.

---

If you are someone who honestly disbelieves that AGW is real, you should be absolutely appalled at how stupid the president is making your position look. Fortunately, I don't have that issue to deal with.

Generally, the party ratio is subcommittees is as close as possible to the same as it is in the committee. Membership is controlled by the committee which in turn is always dominated by the majority party, and there is no way they would allow the minority party to control the subcommittee.What we can say is that Republicans chair every single committee. The senior Democrat on the committee is the "ranking member" and all of the ranking members are Democrats. It would be quite surprising if the membership of any committee was not from the majority party.

Is this really what Republicans believe is a good strategy? I understand that Trump's base has different priorities and ways of looking at the world than I do. But does anyone really believe this is a great idea? If so then I suspect I will never understand how folks think.Even if you were one of the insane folks that believe nuking North Korea is a good idea, and I know there are people out there like that. What the '%$#@' are you going to use more nukes on? China?You guys who couldn't stomach voting for Hilary. Feel better now? I think my avatar needs updating... It's running a little slow.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Yeah, I know. I acknowledged that point sometime in the past. Heck, you could have voted for Trump in your state without making a difference. I could have done that too.But none of that excuses the justifications folks give for not voting for Hilary despite the meaninglessly of your vote. And those same justifications are also given in those states that did matter. I imagine that most folks have some clue. But that knowledge has never stopped folks from believing that nuclear war is something we can win.I am aware the official time is 2 before midnight. I am updating my avatar after lunch... Not sure what time I will put on it.

All of the votes in California were meaningless. Every single one of them. My vote in North Carolina was meaningless. Nobody in California could have done a single thing inside of their voting booth to change the outcome. They might just as well stayed home.Perhaps I am just having an issue with the word "blame". The folks in blue states did not elect Trump regardless of how they voted, but we can still wonder about their thought process if they voted for Trump, and find that thinking reprehensible. So yeah, still on the hook. I would hope not.I tried to change my avatar but could not upload a new image. Is there a problem?

Paul Ryan has been telling a story about the huge tax cut a secretary he knows received.Paul Ryan deletes tweet about tax cuts after Twitter backlash | CNN Politics

quote:

---

Washington (CNN)House Speaker Paul Ryan deleted a tweet Saturday touting the GOP tax overhaul after critics called him out for appearing out of touch with the reality of low-income individuals' financial situations.

​

The tweet shared the story of a secretary who, according to a report by the Associated Press, was "pleasantly surprised her pay went up $1.50 a week."
"A secretary at a public high school in Lancaster, PA, said she was pleasantly surprised her pay went up $1.50 a week ... she said [that] will more than cover her Costco membership for the year," Ryan tweeted with a link to the full article.

---

Paul Ryan learned, apparently from reading the mocking responses, that $1.50 was not a big raise. I wonder how anyone might have thought that it would? CNN points out that a Costco membership is $60 dollars a year. The woman's comment sounds like something I might say sarcastically.Here is the CNN quote of the day...

quote:

---

Jon Favreau, a former Obama staffer, tweeted: "As a thank you for passing a $1 trillion corporate tax cut, Paul Ryan received $500,000 in campaign contributions from the Koch brothers, which would probably cover the cost of buying a Costco."

---

ABE: Corrected my math error. The raise does cover the Costco membership with enough left over to almost see a movie once per year.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

The memo has turned out to be next to nothing. I find the entire episode amusing. Perhaps the Democrats should have taken a different approach prior to the release of the memo because at this point, the biggest partisan questions surround their objections to the release.Meanwhile, the GOP issue with declassifying material for such minimal political gain seems a substantial issue.