US Politics Mega-thread - Page 7235

In a surprise move, the Minnesota Senate on Wednesday voted to bar internet service providers from selling their users’ personal data without express written consent.

The move was a reaction to a Tuesday vote in Congress to lift a ban on that practice imposed in 2016 by the Federal Communication Commission.

Sen. Ron Latz, DFL-St. Louis Park, offered the amendment onto the Senate’s economic development budget bill, saying it was urgently needed to protect Minnesotans’ privacy after the congressional vote.

On March 31 2017 15:02 OuchyDathurts wrote:
Can they not make the immunity contingent on him taking down someone higher than him? We're only giving you immunity if you've got shit on the drug kingpin.


As a Minnesotan this gives me hope. Other American's, call your state legislators, try and protect your shit because its very obvious the Federal Republicans will never do anything to safeguard you! Seriously, start calling, get this passed in your states people.



www.twincities.com

On March 31 2017 11:58 Ghostcom wrote:


I kinda hope it was to send a message that talks of further EU splintering is as ridiculous as talks of Ohio seceding. But it is Juncker, so who knows?

On March 31 2017 11:54 xDaunt wrote:

I thought it was fucking hilarious that he listed Ohio as one of the states that would secede.

On March 31 2017 18:37 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:
Of course Juncker and the other Eurocrats hate Trump for promoting Brexit.
The EU breaks up they're out of their cushy 200,000 Euro yearly salaries.
Around 10,000 EU officials earn more than the UK Prime Minister.

The BBC has learned that US officials "verified" a key claim in a report about Kremlin involvement in Donald Trump's election - that a Russian diplomat in Washington was in fact a spy.
So far, no single piece of evidence has been made public proving that the Trump campaign joined with Russia to steal the US presidency - nothing.
But the FBI Director, James Comey, told a hushed committee room in Congress last week that this is precisely what his agents are investigating.

Former National Security Adviser Mike Flynn, who is in discussions with lawmakers to receive immunity in exchange for questioning about potential ties between Russia and officials in President Trump’s campaign, once said being “given immunity” mean “you probably committed a crime."

The Washington Post reported Flynn made the comments during an interview on “Meet the Press” in Sept. 2016. He was asked at the time about Hillary Clinton’s aides being granted immunity during the FBI probe into her private email server.

On March 31 2017 22:06 Doodsmack wrote:


If only I had a nickel for every time someone posts an article I already posted .

On March 31 2017 22:06 LightSpectra wrote:
Does anybody still think the whole Russian investigation is just a big waste of time? Sounds like every day we're one step closer to getting a smoking gun.

I'm gonna take some sick pleasure in watching some posters here eat their crow if (when?) it happens.

President Trump escalated a Twitter war with lawmakers in his own party on Thursday evening, calling out three members of the Freedom Caucus by name.

"If @RepMarkMeadows, @Jim_Jordan and @Raul_Labrador would get on board we would have both great healthcare and massive tax cuts & reform," he tweeted.

The attack follows an earlier 140-character missive aimed at both the Freedom Caucus and Democrats. It's a curious tactic, given that Trump's only two options to pass his agenda through Congress are to either unite the fractured GOP or to form new alliances across the aisle.

"The Freedom Caucus will hurt the entire Republican agenda if they don't get on the team, & fast. We must fight them, & Dems, in 2018!" Trump tweeted on Thursday morning.

It did not change hearts or minds.

"Freedom Caucus stood with u when others ran. Remember who your real friends are. We're trying to help u succeed," replied Rep. Raúl Labrador, R-Idaho, a member of the group of conservatives who helped take down the GOP health care bill.

The public and personal feuding among Republicans percolated throughout the U.S. Capitol this week as GOP confidence in their party's ability to govern alongside the Trump administration is shaken.

"It's clear that tensions are running high," said Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas. "I believe we can come together, and the only way for us to govern and deliver on our promises is for Republicans not to turn the cannons on each other, but stand united behind shared principles, and that's what I hope all of us do."

The White House has provoked congressional Republicans further in recent days by suggesting he'll just go around them and cut deals with Democrats instead.

House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., tried to head off any potential alliance, telling CBS: "I don't want that to happen." Ryan's reasoning — correctly — is that if the president needs Democrats to pass major legislation, it will be a lot less conservative than anything the speaker hopes to enact in the next two years.

Ryan was more conciliatory toward the president than Labrador.

"This is a can-do president, who's a business guy, who wants to get things done, and I know that he wants to get things done with a Republican Congress," Ryan told CBS. "But if this Republican Congress allows the perfect to be the enemy of the good, I worry we'll push the president into working with the Democrats. He's suggested as much."

Across the Capitol, Ryan's argument did not impress at least one prominent fellow Republican. Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Corker, R-Tenn. called out Ryan, again on Twitter: "We have come a long way in our country when the speaker of one party urges a president NOT to work with the other party to solve a problem."

House Republicans' health care failure has left Senate Republicans wondering if they need to shoulder more of the legislative burden. In that event, Democrats will be integral to the process because of the 60-vote hurdle to do most of the legislating in the Senate.

For their part, Democrats say they are ready — if not exactly excited — to work with the president. "We say, 'any time, anywhere,' " House Minority Leader Pelosi, D-Calif., told reporters on Thursday. "We never stand in the way of anyone meeting with a Democratic or a Republican president."

Rep. Jim Himes, D-Conn., chairs the New Democrat Coalition, a faction of about four dozen business-friendly Democrats that, in theory, stand ready to work with the president on certain agenda items, like infrastructure spending. But Himes hasn't heard from the president. "No, the White House has not reached out," he said. "We're totally willing to engage in that, provided that it's consistent with our values."

Himes also said the burden to extend the olive branch rests on the other side of the aisle. "Look, these guys run the show now. They've got the Oval Office, they've got the Senate and the House. If they're interesting in having our support, it's kind of on them to come to us."

At least in the short term, Republicans have decided they need to work with Democrats to keep the government open. The federal government faces a shutdown on April 28 unless Congress enacts another stopgap spending bill or passes the remaining annual spending bills.

Seeking to head off another shutdown fight, GOP leaders and the appropriations committees are working behind the scenes on a bill to enact the remaining 11 spending bills at previously agreed to spending levels that conservatives opposed in the past. They are also looking to separate out the president's funding request to start building a U.S.-Mexico border wall, and the speaker has indicated Republicans will not add in "poison pill" policy riders on things like defunding Planned Parenthood.

All of those concessions are intended to bring Democrats on board to make sure Congress can pass the legislation. The end result is a less conservative vision of how Congress should spend the nation's money. If it works, it might also provide a framework for how this Congress will work going forward.

On March 31 2017 11:54 xDaunt wrote:

I thought it was fucking hilarious that he listed Ohio as one of the states that would secede.

'Verified' Is Now a Derogatory Term on Twitter

Since 2009, Twitter has added a blue checkmark symbol to certain accounts that have been deemed "verified," which means "that an account of public interest is authentic," according to Twitter. For some, the verified distinction is coveted. For others, it's become a dirty word. "Verifieds" or "blue checks" are the elite, the establishment. Since many members of the media are verified, they have also become associated, for some, with the perceived liberal bias of the fourth estate. Conservatives, alt-righters, and Donald Trump fans have noticed that when Trump tweets, there is invariably a flood of "blue check liberals" responding in a negative way. There is also the perception that Twitter, a California company, is biased toward liberals.

President Donald Trump shouldn’t talk about whether former national security adviser Michael Flynn should be granted immunity, a top House Republican advised Friday.

The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday evening that Flynn has informed the FBI and House and Senate Intelligence Committees – which are investigating Russia’s alleged meddling in the U.S. presidential election – that he will agree to be interviewed if granted immunity from prosecution. Flynn was asked to resign last month after misleading Vice President Mike Pence and others about his conversations with the Russian ambassador to the U.S. during the transition.

Trump tweeted Friday morning that “Flynn should ask for immunity in that this is a witch hunt (excuse for big election loss), by media & Dems, of historic proportion!”

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) told Fox News he disagrees with the president’s characterization of the Russia investigation, as well as the commander in chief’s decision to comment on it.

“No, I don’t think it’s a witch hunt,” Chaffetz said. “Look, it’s very mysterious to me, though, why all of a sudden General Flynn is suddenly out there saying he wants immunity. A, I don’t think Congress should give him immunity. If there’s an open investigation by the FBI, that should not happen. I also don’t believe that actually that the president should be weighing in on this. They’re the ones that actually would prosecute something.”

Chaffetz suggested he was being just as critical of Trump as he was of former President Barack Obama, specifically, he said, when Obama commented on the IRS targeting scandal before he had all the facts.

“And I don’t think Donald Trump should be weighing in on this at this point,” he said. “But I don’t think there should be given immunity, either. I mean, immunity from what? We don’t know what that is.”

Flynn’s past comments about immunity resurfaced soon after the Wall Street Journal report. The former Trump campaign adviser said in a September “Meet the Press” interview with host Chuck Todd, “When you are given immunity, that means you have probably committed a crime.”

Asked if Flynn’s request for immunity indicated that he may be guilty of something, Chaffetz conceded that “it doesn’t look good.”

“If all of a sudden you have somebody stand up and say, ‘Hey, I need immunity,’ you know, it kinda raises your eyebrows,” he said. “Even General Flynn back in the day said and used that same thing against Hillary Clinton. So, you know, it comes around to bite you, and I just think they need to get to the facts.”

“There are some swirling things that need to be answered,” he added.