US Politics Mega-thread - Page 8157

On July 22 2017 22:52 Danglars wrote:

You'd have to be a pretty dumb guy to believe the latest Sessions story. But you want to take it broad, so I'll detail some of my perspective. It's obvious right now that Trump and the Trump campaign hired shady characters and didn't care. That's reflective of a poor executive at the top and just under. Trump Jr's behavior is also unethical and indefensible. None of it rises to clear evidence that Trump coordinated or was aware of collusion between the Putin regime and his campaign. No payment for releasing hacks or whatever. That his son was eager for oppo no matter where it came from changes little; he was duped by a special pleader for the Magnitsky act whose vagueness should've been a red flag from the start.

He obviously has authoritarian tendencies which makes him more receptive to Putin's foreign policy and internal strong-man character. Another mark against him.

We've had a bevy of retracted stories, stories proved wrong via congressional testimony, and reporters embarrassed. This thread has documented much of the sheer idiocy of the partisan leak campaign and wrong anonymously sourced stories. So I wonder how people are still so blind to not see what's going on. In many other cases, I'd presume you and others would have more doubts about the motivation to lie and conceal in a high-level war between the Democrat party with media and government allies and Trump and his administration and former campaign. And, as an aside, the "host of unsavory characters with strong ties to the Russian government swirling in Trump's orbit" is absolutely false from the start. You got Manafort, who probably did some stuff on their behalf in Ukraine for cash that was not above board. That's it. Take a few steps back and reexamine your presuppositions.

The chief of police in Minneapolis has resigned at the request of the city’s mayor, Betsy Hodges, after Hodges said she had “lost the confidence of the people”.

Janeé Harteau has faced criticism for her handling of the shooting of unarmed Australian woman Justine Damond, as well as previous killings going back to 2013.

“I’ve lost confidence in the chief’s ability to lead us further,” said Hodges in a media statement. “And from the many conversations I’ve had with people around our city, it is clear that she has lost the confidence of the people of Minneapolis as well. For us to continue to transform policing ... we need new leadership at [Minneapolis Police Department].

Hodges’ own media conference later on Friday evening quickly descended into chaos as protesters angrily called for the mayor to resign as well, saying they “had been terrorized enough”. The crowd – a coalition of community groups pushing for police reform – drowned out her comments with chants of “Bye bye Betsy.”

Echoing the catchcry used in calls for justice after the 2016 shooting death of Philando Castile, they shouted: “If Justine don’t get it, shut it down.” The initial round of protests were led by Jonathan Thompson, a friend and coworker of Castile.

After the room was cleared and the conference restarted, Hodges said it had been a “heartbreaking and challenging and awful week for the people of our city”.

“I share people’s frustration about the pace of change in our policing and building community trust. Transformational change is difficult, it is uncomfortable and it takes time,” she said.

Hodges nominated assistant chief Medaria Arradondo to be the next chief. Nicknamed “Rondo”, he served as the department’s public face after Damond’s shooting while Harteau was on personal leave. Arradondo, who is African-American, has been with the department since 1989.

Reached after the protest, Thompson said it was important that he had confronted the mayor in front of an assembled crowd of reporters that included many Australian journalists.

“Betsy Hodges was trying to appease the international press, trying to say, ‘I did something about it. I did something really good. I asked the chief to step down,’ and thinking that’s going to end what’s happening, but it’s not going to end nothing,” he said.

Thompson, who now runs an organization called New North, added that he hoped Australians would find ways to get involved. “The fight for Justine is not over. It’s just begun. We got a lot of allies. We need Australia right here with us ... and we won’t stop fighting for Justine and victims like Justine.”

Mel Reeves, a long time community activist in Minneapolis, was part of the group that stormed the media conference. He said that initially they had just planned a street protest, but went to city hall when they heard about the meeting, and after a few failed attempts, managed to get inside.

“What you witnessed there was frustration. The frustration in this city is building over. The international community needs to understand that the Minneapolis Police Department has been a very abusive one. The killings are just the tip of the iceberg. People get brutalized on a regular basis,” he said.

On July 22 2017 22:52 Danglars wrote:
You'd have to be a pretty dumb guy to believe the latest Sessions story.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Republicans aren’t usually big on raising taxes, but they’re really eager to eliminate the federal deduction for state and local taxes.

Why? A look at the states that benefit the most from the tax break helps explain it – they are all Democratic strongholds. New York, Connecticut, New Jersey and California top the list of states where taxpayers get the biggest deductions. Not a single Republican-leaning state ranks in the top 10.

“Although Republicans usually recoil at any type of tax increase, cutting this tax break would almost be fun for them,” said Martin Sullivan, chief economist for Tax Analysts. “It provides massively disproportionate deductions to high-tax states controlled by Democrats.”

Proposals by House Republican leaders and President Donald Trump would repeal the tax break as part of their packages to overhaul the American tax code. But they are getting a lot of pushback from Republican lawmakers in Democratic-controlled states.

The standoff illustrates how hard it is for Congress to eliminate any popular tax break, even one that primarily benefits the ruling party’s political opponents.

Almost 44 million claimed the deduction in 2014, according to IRS statistics. That’s nearly every taxpayer who itemizes deductions, a little less than 30 percent of all taxpayers. Sullivan analyzed which states would be hit hardest by repealing the tax deduction. The Associated Press did a similar analysis and came to the same conclusion.

Nationally, the average deduction is about $11,800, but it is much bigger in many blue states. New York is tops with an average deduction of more than $21,000. Connecticut is next at $18,900, followed by New Jersey at $17,200 and California at $17,100.

These are states with high property values, high costs of living, high incomes and relatively high state and local taxes compared to other states. They are also states President Donald Trump lost in last year’s election. Though the president is from New York, he lost the state to Democrat Hillary Clinton by 22 percentage points.

The highest-ranked state won by Trump is Wisconsin, which came in at No. 13, with an average deduction of $11,300.

At the bottom is Alaska, with an average deduction of $4,800. It is followed by Tennessee and Alabama. Among the bottom 10 states, Nevada and New Mexico are the only ones won by Clinton.

The deduction allows taxpayers to write off real estate taxes, and state and local income taxes. If your state doesn’t have an income tax, you can deduct sales taxes. The deduction is heavily weighted to families with high incomes. Seventy-five percent of the benefits went to families making more than $100,000.

Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas, says eliminating a tax break that helps some people will help lawmakers lower tax rates for everyone.

“We’re proposing a much simpler code with lower rates where everyone gets help whether they are paying their state and local taxes or they are putting their kids in college,” said Brady, who chairs the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee.

Eliminating the tax break would raise $1.3 trillion over the next decade, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, money that could be used to help pay for lower income tax rates.

The House Republican plan would eliminate most itemized deductions while nearly doubling the standard deduction, to $24,000 for married couples. Notably, the plan would keep the deductions for mortgage interest and charitable contributions.

The White House and congressional Republicans have been privately negotiating their tax package for weeks, with no public sign that they’re near a consensus. Democrats have been excluded from the talks.

Some Republicans claim the deduction for state and local taxes encourages states to spend and tax more because the taxes can be deducted at the federal level. Some also complain that the deduction forces low-tax Republican states to subsidize high taxes in Democratic states.

However, many blue-state Republicans don’t buy those arguments. They note that most high-cost blue states send more tax dollars to Washington than they receive in federal benefits. And who benefits from those tax dollars? Low-cost red states where incomes are generally lower.

“If we’re going to have a discussion about who is subsidizing whom, it must be across the board. It can’t be just one provision,” said Rep. Leonard Lance, R-N.J.

Lance is teaming up with Rep. Bill Pascrell, Jr., D-N.J., in an effort to maintain the tax break.

“In New Jersey, (the deduction) encourages very strong public schools,” Lance said. “I want to maintain strong public schools. For there to be strong public schools, there has to be adequate spending.”

Rep. Tom MacArthur, R-N.J., said he brings up the deduction every time he sees Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, one of Trump’s top advisers on taxes.

“The minute he walked into the room and saw me he pointed and said, ‘I know, state and local tax deduction,'” MacArthur said.

“I know the White House is committed to bringing taxes down for everybody,” MacArthur said. “But people in high-tax states under the plan they’re proposing would basically be at a break-even while everyone else in the county enjoys tax relief. That’s not fair.”

On July 23 2017 01:27 farvacola wrote:
Those tweets reek of fearful pretext-laying, I think Mueller's firing is on the horizon.

On July 22 2017 23:00 Danglars wrote:

You quote population breakdown versus incarceration rates. Knowing that various races do not offend at the same rates, it's foolish to not include crime reports on offender/victim or offender reports. When they aren't provided and they're obviously needed to complete the picture, I think maybe their inclusion diminishes the shock value of the graph. I'm well aware of the cultural and societal problems of inner cities that are also part of the story alongside possible policing malpractice and sentencing mismatches.

On July 22 2017 22:52 Danglars wrote:

You'd have to be a pretty dumb guy to believe the latest Sessions story. But you want to take it broad, so I'll detail some of my perspective. It's obvious right now that Trump and the Trump campaign hired shady characters and didn't care. That's reflective of a poor executive at the top and just under. Trump Jr's behavior is also unethical and indefensible. None of it rises to clear evidence that Trump coordinated or was aware of collusion between the Putin regime and his campaign. No payment for releasing hacks or whatever. That his son was eager for oppo no matter where it came from changes little; he was duped by a special pleader for the Magnitsky act whose vagueness should've been a red flag from the start.

He obviously has authoritarian tendencies which makes him more receptive to Putin's foreign policy and internal strong-man character. Another mark against him.

We've had a bevy of retracted stories, stories proved wrong via congressional testimony, and reporters embarrassed. This thread has documented much of the sheer idiocy of the partisan leak campaign and wrong anonymously sourced stories. So I wonder how people are still so blind to not see what's going on. In many other cases, I'd presume you and others would have more doubts about the motivation to lie and conceal in a high-level war between the Democrat party with media and government allies and Trump and his administration and former campaign. And, as an aside, the "host of unsavory characters with strong ties to the Russian government swirling in Trump's orbit" is absolutely false from the start. You got Manafort, who probably did some stuff on their behalf in Ukraine for cash that was not above board. That's it. Take a few steps back and reexamine your presuppositions.