Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting!
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.
Unlimited foreign money into Canada, 10 year tax exemption, we foot all security costs, exemption from labour laws etc.
Trump can host it at maralago if he wants it that much.
Agreed, frankly its easy to see why Trump would be moron enough to accept their terms and be proud of it. Frankly everyone should tell FIFA to take their terms and shove them up there ---. But for some reason the Liberals in Canada couldnt get into their head how ridiculous it is. The fact that he has so much company in this is the sad bit.
Maybe buy their own country to host their WC in with all the money they leech from the country hosting the event.
Unlimited foreign money into Canada, 10 year tax exemption, we foot all security costs, exemption from labour laws etc.
Trump can host it at maralago if he wants it that much.
Agreed, frankly its easy to see why Trump would be moron enough to accept their terms and be proud of it. Frankly everyone should tell FIFA to take their terms and shove them up there ---. But for some reason the Liberals in Canada couldnt get into their head how ridiculous it is. The fact that he has so much company in this is the sad bit.
Maybe buy their own country to host their WC in with all the money they leech from the country hosting the event.
I'm willing to give the BC Liberals some benefit of the doubt, since they were running off the back of a successful Winter Olympics and Women's World Cup hosting. Olympics especially probably had some very scary terms as well.
I'm fine with these organizations getting some serious ego checks, though.
Sacramento investigators tracked down the Golden State Killer by comparing the suspect’s DNA to the genetic profiles available online through genealogy websites, the district attorney’s office revealed on Thursday.
Joseph James DeAngelo Jr, 72, a former police officer, was arrested on Tuesday evening at his home in Citrus Heights, following a DNA breakthrough. He is accused of 12 murders and at least 45 rapes from 1976 to 1986.
Law enforcement used a DNA sample from one of the crime scenes and matched it to distant relatives who had used a genealogy website to find out about their family background, the chief deputy district attorney, Steve Grippi, told the Sacramento Bee. Sign up for Guardian Today US edition: the day's must-reads sent directly to you Read more
From the relatives they were able to chart the family tree until they found someone the right age who lived in the area. After that, investigators obtained more recent “abandoned” DNA samples from DeAngelo.
On the one hand, I am glad they can find new ways of cracking such horrific cases open. On the other hand, this is a blatant violation of privacy. The relatives in question didn't consent to be part of a police investigation, which is what is usually done when whole towns are asked to give DNA samples in order to catch a killer. And while this case seems uncontroversial, DNA evidence itself has plenty of problems and this just seems to add to them.
It definitively means that nowadays, you need to be very careful where your DNA ends up at. Basically, you should probably act as if you were scared of people doing some witchcraft to you if they can get an hair or some fingernail clippings.
On April 27 2018 11:33 Gahlo wrote: 4. How much money do you think he would force into US soccer to try and beat the UK if the above happened and he could?
Don't worry, it wouldn't take too much money, since UK doesn't actually have a football team. As for England team, it wouldn't take that much money either, the way they play.
response to a minor point by intro from a page ago on cabinet nominees the reason cabinet nominees are so slow and hard now is because exceptionally poor nominees are being chosen.
No welcome back for Greenhorizons? Fine, I'll do it then:
Trying to get the Fifa World Cup in the US is a weird one. Isn't football still a fairly minor sport over there? Would it really raise the sport's profile if you had it, due to teh Patriotizm? Or would it amount to a giant waste of time? Football's certainly shown its ability to generate massive amounts of money, but it requires people willing to pay lots of money for season tickets for the most part. I think that's the same as your American Football and NBA setups.
Trying to get the Fifa World Cup in the US is a weird one. Isn't football still a fairly minor sport over there? Would it really raise the sport's profile if you had it, due to teh Patriotizm? Or would it amount to a giant waste of time? Football's certainly shown its ability to generate massive amounts of money, but it requires people willing to pay lots of money for season tickets for the most part. I think that's the same as your American Football and NBA setups.
The 1994 world cup was a really great world cup. I don't oppose the US organizing another one. I do think that a combined bid with Mexico and Canada is weird. The US 1994 already had stupid amounts of travel involved (as did Brazil 2014). Now add in visa issues and even larger distances... it doesn't make a lot of sense. Leave combined bids to small countries. Additionally, reserving 3 spots for organizing countries seems like a sham. I guess it is, however, the only way Canada will *ever* compete at a world cup.
The House intelligence committee concluded its Russia investigation on Friday by releasing a heavily redacted copy of its full report clearing Donald Trump's campaign of any wrongdoing.
The 243-page report calls contacts between Trump campaign aides and Russians "ill-advised" and acknowledges that at least one person in the case may have given "incomplete" answers. But overall, it found, there was no conspiracy to work with the foreign operatives attacking the election.
President Trump touted the report on Twitter and said the "total Witch Hunt! MUST END NOW!"
Source Didn't figure much would come from the House's questioning. Mueller will be the final say in this matter. But I think the admin was/is plagued with the biggest morons politics has seen in recent history.
agreed; no surprise that the house, due to house republicans; would choose to not do its job and ignore malfeasance in favor of whatever is politically expedient for them. shame that people keep voting for unfit leaders.
Apparently they found 16 cell phones in the Cohen raid, including some old ones. Cohen is quickly becoming the most likely candidate for sinking Trump. I'd bet everything I own that on at least one of those phones, or in one of those recorded conversations/files, is evidence of crimes by Trump.
House Speaker Paul Ryan fired the House chaplain two weeks ago, sparking a slow-motion series of events that erupted on the floor Friday, and now threaten a bitter religious freedom debate in Congress in the weeks ahead.
House Democrats led by Rep. Joe Crowley, D-N.Y., forced a vote today to try and establish an investigative panel to look into Ryan's decision to fire Rev. Patrick Conroy, a Jesuit priest who has served as House Chaplain since 2011. Republicans successfully tabled the motion, but the floor fight was an indication that the circumstances surrounding the firing are a growing matter of concern on Capitol Hill.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi blasted the speaker in an unusually harsh statement. "His abrupt, unjust dismissal is hard to understand and impossible to support," she said. "I have expressed my forceful disagreement with this decision to the speaker."
Ryan, Pelosi, and Crowley are all Catholic. Both the House and the Senate have full-time chaplains who preside over the opening sessions of each chamber and offer daily prayers when Congress is in session. The chaplain also provides counsel to the House community, and the post is confirmed at the start of each new, two-year Congress.
Ryan's office first announced Conroy would "step down" in an April 16 statement that received little notice at the time. "As chaplain, Father Conroy has been a great source of strength and support to our community," Ryan said on April 16. "He is deeply admired by members and staff. Father Conroy's ministry here has made a difference, and we are all very grateful to him."
The speaker said he would consult with Pelosi "in the coming weeks" on his successor.
However, in his resignation letter Conroy noted that he was stepping down "as you have requested," and has since made clear that he had no interest in leaving Capitol Hill.
Conroy and his assistant declined to comment to NPR on his firing, but Conroy told The New York Times on Thursday that he was "unclear" as to the reasoning behind his dismissal. His comments fueled Democrats' speculation on Capitol Hill that it was over the political tone in his prayers. Conroy told the Times that Ryan said to him, "Padre, you just got to stay out of politics."
The speaker's office has not offered a detailed explanation of his decision to fire Conroy, but at a meeting with House Republicans on Friday morning he disputed allegations that it was politically motivated. His explanation didn't assure all Republicans, either.
"To me it was an unsatisfactory answer," Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., told CNN. "It is such an unprecedented action to only be taken for very, very serious issues. And the speaker said it was just because certain people said he was not complying with their request or was not giving good counsel. I never heard that from anyone. Anyone who I know who deals with him has the highest regard for him."
Democrat Gerry Connolly of Virginia told NPR, "Why wouldn't you counsel him to do better if there was a problem? Why wouldn't you give him to the end of this Congress which is the end of this year so that he can gracefully exit?"
The murkiness has led to allegations from Democrats—which Ryan has further denied—that the decision involved in part a November prayer on the House floor in which Conroy appeared to criticize the GOP's tax cut legislation and included the line: "May their efforts these days guarantee that there are not winners and losers under new tax laws, but benefits balanced and shared by all Americans."
There is also reports that some lawmakers were dissatisfied with his service, but no one has stepped forward to criticize Conroy. Pelosi disputed that members on her side of the aisle ever voiced opposition to the chaplain. "During Father Conroy's entire service, I've never received a complaint from our members about him pastoring to the needs of the House," she said Friday.
Congress adjourned Friday for a week-long recess. There is no firm timetable on finding Conroy's replacement. He will remain in the job until late May, and continues to offer the opening prayer each day when the House goes in to session. "As the members of this people's House deliberate these days, give them the wisdom and magnanimity to lay aside what might divide us as a people to forge a secure future for our country," he prayed this morning.
This story is fascinating because no reporter can find a good reason why Ryan would dismiss the House Chaplin. Or why Ryan thought no one would object.
For those interested in the relatively unknown position:
There is a bunch of speculation, including that Father Conroy was to liberal and outspoken for Ryan's taste. But the move seems to be an unforced error with zero pay off for the Republicans or Ryan.
On that Hawaii false alarm that happened months back; has anything come out of investigations into the error since then? I heard about the stuff they found within the first couple of weeks; but haven't heard anything since then. maybe there's just nothing to hear though.
On April 28 2018 05:07 zlefin wrote: On that Hawaii false alarm that happened months back; has anything come out of investigations into the error since then? I heard about the stuff they found within the first couple of weeks; but haven't heard anything since then. maybe there's just nothing to hear though.
IIRC, they showed the board that had all the alert switches, and the reaction was basically "how has this never happened before?"
Circling back to the discussion we had a few pages ago about what should be the acceptable bounds of news media sources, check out this poll on which is a better characterization of the news media:
"[CHOOSE ONE] The news media is…
🅰️ An important part of democracy 🅱️ Enemy of the people"
To be a Republican now puts you at a 50% chance of seeing the news media as an enemy of the people. So coming in here and insisting on fact based news sources and hard blocking stuff from the conservative entertainment universe really does mean kicking out the Republican perspective. 50% of them really do think that the FOX/Breitbart alternative reality is real and that everything else is an enemy of the people.
On April 28 2018 06:13 Wulfey_LA wrote: Circling back to the discussion we had a few pages ago about what should be the acceptable bounds of news media sources, check out this poll on which is a better characterization of the news media:
"[CHOOSE ONE] The news media is…
🅰️ An important part of democracy 🅱️ Enemy of the people"
To be a Republican now puts you at a 50% chance of seeing the news media as an enemy of the people. So coming in here and insisting on fact based news sources and hard blocking stuff from the conservative entertainment universe really does mean kicking out the Republican perspective. 50% of them really do think that the FOX/Breitbart alternative reality is real and that everything else is an enemy of the people.
Another fun part of that poll is that a lower % of people today want the dems to start impeachment preceding if they win the house than 3 months ago. That is good news for Trump
That poll is extremely discouraging. I hope that there is some realization by next congress that they need to lead a discussion on the role of news media in this country. These business models of making networks to cater to a specific political demographic are caustic to democracy.
On April 28 2018 06:13 Wulfey_LA wrote: Circling back to the discussion we had a few pages ago about what should be the acceptable bounds of news media sources, check out this poll on which is a better characterization of the news media:
"[CHOOSE ONE] The news media is…
🅰️ An important part of democracy 🅱️ Enemy of the people"
To be a Republican now puts you at a 50% chance of seeing the news media as an enemy of the people. So coming in here and insisting on fact based news sources and hard blocking stuff from the conservative entertainment universe really does mean kicking out the Republican perspective. 50% of them really do think that the FOX/Breitbart alternative reality is real and that everything else is an enemy of the people.
Another fun part of that poll is that a lower % of people today want the dems to start impeachment preceding if they win the house than 3 months ago. That is good news for Trump
I've said this before and I will say it again (Harry Reid says practically the same thing), there is no reason to start an impeachment process based on the facts we have now. Collusion with Russia isn't actually an impeachable offense because it would be before DJT took Office. Impeachment needs to be based on abuses of power while in Office, not stuff before. Like say ... firing Comey to end the Russia thing (but this is waiting on the Mueller investigation) and/or firing Mueller to stop the investigation before it completes (this is what took down Nixon). The current YAY IMPEACHMENT crowd are just sign waivers. Anyone with a legal background who has thought about the subject knows better.
On April 28 2018 06:13 Wulfey_LA wrote: Circling back to the discussion we had a few pages ago about what should be the acceptable bounds of news media sources, check out this poll on which is a better characterization of the news media:
"[CHOOSE ONE] The news media is…
🅰️ An important part of democracy 🅱️ Enemy of the people"
To be a Republican now puts you at a 50% chance of seeing the news media as an enemy of the people. So coming in here and insisting on fact based news sources and hard blocking stuff from the conservative entertainment universe really does mean kicking out the Republican perspective. 50% of them really do think that the FOX/Breitbart alternative reality is real and that everything else is an enemy of the people.
Another fun part of that poll is that a lower % of people today want the dems to start impeachment preceding if they win the house than 3 months ago. That is good news for Trump
Impeachment was never going to happen before 2018 and it's not likely to happen after. Turns out the big "trump's an evil asshole" strategy wasn't very effective since everyone knew that when he won in the first place.
They pretty much squandered the entire off year on Trump (who is still more favored than Hillary) and virtually nothing on their vision. All the focus on Russia and Mueller has been a total waste politically.
If they somehow manage to take the house it will be because 50%+ of the wins will be seats opened up by retirement/death/disgrace and virtually all of them will be depressed turnout for Republicans rather than more Dem votes.
As we covered yesterday the DCCC and the Democratic leaders think primaries being frauds is totally cool, and so they learned nothing from 2016.
Democrats are trying really hard to throw 2018 and 2020 and if more neolibs don't pull a P6 and turn on bad leadership they'll end up following them to a Kamala nomination and 4 more years of Republican control.
EPT
