US Politics Mega-thread - Page 9388

On December 02 2017 06:26 doomdonker wrote:
I dunno man, I think I like having the most powerful man not influenced by actual British neo-Nazis. But that's just me.

Now you're going to tell me that Trump's just retarded/joking/whatever, Britain First is just a "concerned" right wing group and it isn't important at all that he's watching or viewing neo-Nazi content.



If one or two things being incorrect, despite a large amount of other claims being verifiable or very plausible, makes intelligence worthless, then we better scrap all intelligence then! Might as well scrap all meteorologists as well since they get parts of their reporting wrong too.

I don't know why people are playing this Russia limbo. If we dig back far enough, we've got the same people right now initially claiming that there was no Russia involvement, then little Russia involvement, then only Russian involvement with select few Trump campaign officials then now "but the dossier is fake anyway".

The dossier, written by former British spy Christopher Steele, alleged that Trump hired prostitutes to perform a "golden showers' show in front of him" at the Moscow Ritz Carlton in 2013.

Schiller denied that anything inappropriate happened, telling the committee that he and Trump laughed off the offer and went to bed.

But the dossier also alleges, in a completely different section, that Trump "paid bribes and engaged in sexual activities" in St. Petersburg "but key witnesses were silenced and evidence [was] hard to obtain."

"Speaking to a trusted compatriot in September 2016, two well-placed sources based in St Petersburg, one in the political/business elite and the other involved in the local services and tourist industry, commented on Republican US presidential candidate Donald Trump's prior activities in the city," the dossier reads.

WASHINGTON — After a business meeting before the Miss Universe Pageant in 2013, a Russian participant offered to "send five women" to Donald Trump's hotel room in Moscow, his longtime bodyguard told Congress this week, according to three sources who were present for the interview.

Two of the sources said the bodyguard, Keith Schiller, viewed the offer as a joke, and immediately responded, "We don't do that type of stuff."

The two sources said Schiller's comments came in the context of him adamantly disputing the allegations made in the Trump dossier, written by a former British intelligence operative, which describes Trump having an encounter with prostitutes at the hotel during the pageant. Schiller described his reaction to that story as being, "Oh my God, that's bull----," two sources said.

The conversation with the Russian about the five women took place after a morning meeting about the pageant in Moscow broke up, two sources said.

That night, two sources said, Schiller said he discussed the conversation with Trump as Trump was walking back to his hotel room, and Schiller said the two men laughed about it as Trump went to bed alone. Schiller testified that he stood outside Trump's hotel room for a time and then went to bed.

One source noted that Schiller testified he eventually left Trump's hotel room door and could not say for sure what happened during the remainder of the night.

On December 02 2017 06:55 Wulfey_LA wrote:
The Dossier got the gist of the most explosive allegation correct. Schiller (Trump's longtime bodyguard) confirmed the following allegations in the Dossier:

(1) Trump was at the named hotel
(2) Trump was offered services of 5 Prosititutues

Schiller:
(3a) Schiller says Trump turned them down, but Schiller doesn't know what happened after Schiller left

Dossier:
(3b) Trump took up the offer of the 5 prostitutes and they were used to generate Kompromot

I see all kinds of shit talking on the Dossier, but its dodgiest part has been confirmed right up to the door of Trump's Russian hotel room.



https://www.aol.com/article/news/2017/11/11/trumps-bodyguards-testimony-raises-new-questions-about-the-most-salacious-allegations-in-the-dossier/23274380/

Media are being dishonest about Republican tax bill's treatment of the middle class
The New York Times editorial page crossed the line from spirited opinion journalism to outright activism by tweeting phone numbers of key senators and urging constituents to demand lawmakers oppose the Republican tax bill. Sadly, the publication’s activism has polluted its news coverage.

While the Republican plan is by no means perfect and can and should be improved in a number of ways, debate should at least be conducted with an intellectually honest presentation of basic facts.

The Times ran a front-page story on Thursday with the breathless headline, “G.O.P. Tax Plan Could Reshape Life in the U.S.” Though it was dubbed “analysis,” that doesn’t excuse this line, which was widely-cited on social media: “By 2027, people making $40,000 to $50,000 would pay a combined $5.3 billion more in taxes, while the group earning $1 million or more would get a $5.8 billion cut, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation and the Congressional Budget Office.” It isn’t merely misleading, but factually inaccurate. And it’s indicative of a lot of media coverage about the tax bill, so it’s worth exploring in more detail.

On December 02 2017 06:58 Danglars wrote:

The "gist of the most explosive allegation" is not that Trump stayed in the hotel or was offered hookers. A ten year old would receive a low grade for that attempt at summarizing.

On December 02 2017 07:01 KwarK wrote:
Given that we're at near full employment and have been for a few years now I'm not entirely sure how the tax cuts are meant to stimulate the economy and promote new growth.

On December 02 2017 06:58 Danglars wrote:

The "gist of the most explosive allegation" is not that Trump stayed in the hotel or was offered hookers. A ten year old would receive a low grade for that attempt at summarizing.

On December 02 2017 06:41 Mohdoo wrote:


And then we elect a democrat in 2020 and it all changes, so i dunno. Shitty, yeah, but it's not like this tax plan will actually go that long.

On December 02 2017 06:59 Introvert wrote:
Honestly it seems that this version is better than previous ones.


http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/media-are-being-dishonest-about-republican-tax-bills-treatment-of-the-middle-class/article/2642275

He takes a look at the rest after that opening.

Posting from phone sorry for any weird copy paste or formatting.

On December 02 2017 07:08 On_Slaught wrote:


This is the silver lining. Beyond the fact Trump is deplorable, this will be the equivalent of Obamacare for Republicans in the last 6 years, except the bill itself is obviously worse than Obamacare ever was. Even the Dems couldn't fuck up this gift. At the very least the playbook has already been written. Hopefully we can get ahead of schedule and take back the Senate in 2018, even if the odds aren't great.

On December 02 2017 07:03 Wulfey_LA wrote:


Schiller concedes the hookers got near Trump's hotel room. How are you not seeing how that is a huge step towards verifying the pee party? Trump's own bodyguard places the alleged number of hookers at the alleged hotel on the alleged night near Trump's room and Schiller confirms Trump knew about the hookers.

EDIT: this would be like Kato confirming that OJ was at the house, had the knife in his hand, with the gloves, talked to Kato about killing his wife, Kato and OJ say .. "nah" ... then Kato goes to bed and wakes up and finds Mrs. OJ cut to shreds.

On December 02 2017 07:07 hunts wrote:


Come on, you can try better than that. At this point you are literally just trolling (although I suppose you have never not trolled?) "here's this evidence, but I will counter it with some vaguery and say it didn't happen because I said so." Like obviously you don't want it to be true because you're pro trump and all that, but at some point you have to face reality, right? I guess given you and others like you still believe in uranium one, pizza gate, and the murder of Ben Ghazi, I shouldn't make such wild assumptions, but one can hope.

On December 02 2017 07:01 KwarK wrote:
Given that we're at near full employment and have been for a few years now I'm not entirely sure how the tax cuts are meant to stimulate the economy and promote new growth.

On December 02 2017 07:13 Plansix wrote:
Pretty sure the it is black mail material, not some smoking gun criminal act.

On December 02 2017 07:17 Excludos wrote:


One doesn't exclude the other.

On December 02 2017 07:10 Danglars wrote:

https://twitter.com/taxfoundation/status/933081745272004608
The nonpartisan tax policy foundation showed an across the board tax cut.

It still didn't sway me to support it. Far too little is actually getting cut for the amount of political capital they're expending on the effort. I also don't think the individual mandate repeal will make it into the final version post-reconciliation.