Tag Archives: DailyKos@Politicaldog101

FEMA: “Not our job to deliver water and food” to Puerto Ricans. Think I am making this up? Wrong!

That was the response Rachel got when FEMA was asked why it has been almost 3 weeks since the last hurricane hit Aibonito, a small town high in the mountains about an hour south of San Juan, and FEMA has yet to deliver a single bottle of water.

FEMA claims the roads aren’t passable,   For the record, when I say “about an hour south” I mean Google Maps puts the drive — right now — at 1 hour and 5 minutes if I take the autopista (highway).  BUT it also says there are portions of the road that are closed.  Soooo you have to take route 173 and that takes 1 hour and 24 minutes.  Maybe Google is wrong, right?  It would be nice if someone on the ground could actually make the trip…. oh wait… what’s that?  The MSNBC film crew already made the trip and it took them “about an hour and a half.”

As the MSNBC video shows, they got there no problem because the road was clear. No bridges out, no trees in the way, no mudslides, no raging rivers.  Not even bad hombres. I realize the last menace would be Mexicans and there shouldn’t be any Mexicans clogging up the roads in Puerto Rico right now. But we all know to the Trump Klan, Puerto Ricans are just Island Mexicans, so they probably worry about that sort of thing.

Presented with the fact of Maddow’s team having video evidence directly contradicting their claims,  FEMA then dropped this bombshell: Apparently, FEMA says it is the mayor’s job to distribute food and water. They are just there to help people fill out paperwork….

More…

Share on Facebook

Donald Trump took $107 million promised to charities … and kept it…

WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 20: President Donald Trump singing along to "My Way" dances with first lady Melania Trump while attending the Freedom Inaugural Ball at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center on January 20, 2017 in Washington, D.C. Trump will attend three inaugural balls. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch - Pool/Getty Images)

Occupying the White House has proven lucrative for Donald Trump. He’s been able to charge the Secret Service hundreds of thousands for rental space and golf carts. He’s been able to turn his Washington Hotel into a place where the emoluments clause is put to constant test. But the AP reports that no other cash-in matches the one Trump took on day one.

President Donald Trump’s inaugural committee raised an unprecedented $107 million for a ceremony that officials promised would be “workmanlike,” and the committee pledged to give leftover funds to charity.

The $107 million is a massive amount for even the most lavish inauguration. It’s almost twice what Barack Obama took in for a celebration that was much more widely attended and which included many more events. Trump even cut back on the number of inaugural balls to only two, compared to the ten balls that the Obamas attended in 2009. With twice the money and one fourth the events, all but a handful of the $107 million gifted to Trump for the inauguration should be available for charitable giving.

It’s been eight months. How much has been given out? None. None at all.

Nothing has yet gone to charity.

What is left from the massive fundraising is a mystery, clouded by messy and, at times, budget-busting management of a private fund that requires little public disclosure. ….

More….

Share on Facebook

We have never let Hillary Clinton speak for herself….

Amen….

By DiesIrae  @Daily Kos…..

Hillary-Clinton-What-Happened.jpg

Say what you want about her politics — love her, hate her, oranything in between — throughout her career one thing is constant. No one has ever accepted Hillary Clinton’s right to speak for herself.

In the early 90s, it was all about how she was too liberal. It was the conventional wisdom that she was far more liberal than her husband. I still remember all the attacks on her for being an outspoken feminist, and the refusal to accept her desire to work for the public interest.

In the late 90s, she was attacked relentlessly for choosing to stay with her husband despite his affair. Never mind that being her personal choice. Then when she got into politics, she was smeared with all the usual tropes against strong women in politics: ambitious, calculating, ruthless.

(Is it any wonder that she reacted by forming a shell? The media, led by certain outlets we all know and love, spent a decade tearing her to shreds not just as a politician, but as a person. She emerged with a siege mentality which arguably handicapped her for the rest of her political career).

In 2008, she lost a heartbreaking primary. She dealt with defeat in an incredibly graceful way, endorsing her opponent unambiguously, with passion, and working her heart out to get him elected. After the election, she accepted an offer to serve as his Secretary of State.

What did she get in return? She became a lightning rod for grievances against the president from the left. All of Obama’s deviations from perfection — not to mention her husband’s — became her responsibility. In late 2015 and early 2016, she was accused at every turn of being a secret Republican. Of being against universal health care despite having proposed it and fought for it in the early 1990s. Of being singlehandedly responsible for Iraq, Afghanistan, and every other foreign policy mistake over the last 25 years (say what you want about her decisions, some of the criticism was far over the top). Of being a tool of Wall Street. Hell, she was accused of being anti-choice.

The fact that these criticisms were the exact opposite of the criticisms thrown at her in the 1990s was irrelevant. Neither narrative really matched reality. Clinton has been a fairly mainstream Democrat for her entire political life…..

More….

Share on Facebook

David Brooks uses Donald Trump as an excuse will stop writing about politics….

Brooks_Weed3.jpg
What will we ever do without David Brooks and his moral compass?
David Brooks doesn’t love us any more and has informed the New York Times that he will no longer be writing about politics in their pages. More specifically, David Brooks doesn’t love the Republicans any more, after seeing the lengths to which they were and are willing to go to maintain power. Brooks particularly doesn’t love Donald Trump any more, saying about Trump, There’s nothing more to be learned about Trump’s mixture of ignorance, insecurity and narcissism. Every second spent on his bluster is more degrading than informative. That sounds about right. Crooks & Liars:

Future historians who want to get a good bead on what things were like during the inmates-running-the-asylum madhouse of American politics in the Year of our Lord 2017 could do worse than study Mr. David Brooks’ column in The New York Times today in some detail.

It is no exaggeration to say that Mr. Brooks spent every hour of his professional career boosting Republicans and Conservatism, mocking Democrats and Liberals, and relentlessly positioning himself as America’s Most Ubiquitous Conservative Public Intellectual.  And yet, in 2017 during the Republican Party’s Year of Jubilee — the year when Mr. Brooks’ Republican Party owned every branch of the federal government and Mr. Brooks’ Conservative Movement had effectively conquered the media both through direct propaganda efforts (Fox News/Hate Radio/etc.) and by bludgeoning the “mainstream media” into a state of meek complicity — Mr. Brooks announced that he was suddenly sick and tired writing about Conservatism or politics.

Which means that, other than the brief “Jewels of Nuance” period during the Age of Bush when Mr. Brooks (and every other Conservative writer) felt it was finally safe to let their inner Sean Hannity completely out and use their public platforms to heap unalloyed contempt and slander on the Dirty Libtards, Mr. Brooks has spent most of his career assiduously avoiding any actual, honest reportage on the state of Conservative politics and culture.

David Brooks, whether he would ever admit it or not, is responsible for this “false equivalence” insanity which has overtaken the media, “both sides do it,” ad nausem….

More …

Share on Facebook

WikiLeaks: Officially in the bag for Trump…Daily Kos…

HannityAssangeFNC.PNG

 Pictured: Two of Donald Trump’s best friends.

In case you had the slightest shadow of a doubt that Julian Assange and WikiLeaks have taken a permanent turn away from the pursuit of spreading truth and are now instead (for some godforsaken reason) serving as a pro-Trump propaganda outlet, they’ve done you the kindness of clarifying the issue by trying to sling dirt on Robert Mueller in the most disgustingly dishonest way possible.

We already knew that Assange coordinated with Roger Stone and hates Hillary, but this is a whole other can of worms: Now WikiLeaks is trying to protect Trump from the man investigating him by attempting to discredit Mueller as some sort of deep-state criminal who sold nuclear weapons to the Russians.

So, without further ado, here’s the lie of the day:

Special Prosecutor Robert Muelller flew to Moscow and gave the FSB 10 grams of Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) in 2009

…twitter….

Special Prosecutor Robert Muelller flew to Moscow and gave the FSB 10 grams of Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) in 2009

Oh my god, what a startling revelation!

… Oh, wait, what’s that?

Ah, right, it’s total bullshit.

It sure takes cojones to post the entire text of a document on your website, then lie openly about its contents. Or maybe it’s just stupidity and sloppiness. Or maybe it’s just the knowledge that a huge chunk of the American people will accept anything pro-Trump without question…..

More….

Share on Facebook

Something for Republican senators to ponder: Americans prefer Obamacare to Trumpcare, 2 to 1

CHICAGO, IL - JUNE 22: Demonstrators protest changes to the Affordable Care Act on June 22, 2017 in Chicago, Illinois. Senate Republican's unveiled their revised health-care bill in Washington today, after fine tuning it in behind closed doors. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

In a second poll in less than a week, opposition to Trumpcare is growing in the American public. The Kaiser monthly health survey for July showed a 6-point increase in disapproval of the proposal over just the past month, to 61 percent. Now a new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows not only that the people hate Trumpcare, they prefer Obamacare over it by a 2-to-1 margin, 50 percent to 24 percent.

There’s a split by party, as you might expect, with Democrats broadly favoring the existing law and Republicans the latter. But that split wasn’t even, with 77 percent of Democrats favoring the legislation passed in 2010 by their party and only 59 percent of Republicans favoring their party’s solution. Independents in this case came down on the side of the Democrats, with 49 percent favoring the existing law vs. 20 percent backing the GOP alternative.What’s more, roughly 6 in 10 Democrats and a third of independents strongly prefer Obamacare. Only 43 percent of Republicans strongly prefer their party’s proposal. […]

More worrisome for Republicans hoping to pass a new bill is how the support broke out by demographic. Only among Republicans, conservatives, white evangelicals and white men without college degrees did more Americans support the GOP bill than Obamacare. In every other group analyzed, including older respondents and white women without college degrees—an important part of President Trump’s voting base in 2016—backed the existing law by some margin.

Greg Sargent teases a bit more out of the poll, details which show just how much disaster Republicans are courting with this bill. Asked “On health care, which of these do you think is more important for the federal government to do: provide healthcare coverage for low-income Americans, or cut taxes?” a great big majority—63-27 percent—picked healthcare coverage. Majorities across all demographics, even non-college white men (53-38), say the priority is providing health care. So when the 15 million people CBO has projected will lose their coverage in 2018 alone, well that’s maybe not going to go so great for the GOP at the ballot box…..

 

Share on Facebook

Graphic comparison of House/Senate Healthcare Bill’s…

Helpful comparison chart

Montel Williams/USA Today, self-styled Reagan conservative:

For seven years, House Speaker Paul Ryan and congressional Republicans told us they had “a better way.” Many voters took them at their word. We’re finding now, however, that Republicans had no replacement plan, instead cobbling one together last minute. Most likely, congressional Republicans believed they’d never have to actually repeal Obamacare. I’m betting many of them are praying that enough colleagues oppose the bill so that it simply dies, allowing them to blame Democratic obstruction.

At the end of the day, I don’t want another tax cut at the expense of another father not being able to get his daughter the lifesaving care I was able to provide my daughter. No father should have to choose between back-breaking debt and his child’s life. That is the inevitable result of the Senate proposal.

Republicans need to own the fact they’ve created a monster by lying to the base for the last seven years. They need to come clean. The truth is that they don’t really think this is a good bill. They are afraid of their own voters, to whom they gave a bad idea as a battle cry…..

More…

Share on Facebook

As Americans learn how policies affect their personal economies, they will activate

When residents of the Humble Independent School District in Texas realized their board was not acting in their interest and that it would affect their kids for years to come, they activated.

Why would any politician come up with a budget and policies that hurt the citizenry at large? They must know it is career suicide, right? But Republicans and the power structure that rule them are quite adept at what they do.

This week Donald Trump released a draconian budget proposal that would slash the social safety net, increase welfare for the defense industrial complex, and transfer the wealth of the masses to the wealthy through tax cuts. The budget is a Paul Ryanesque/Ayn Randian dream.

Robert Reich’s piece titled “Trump’s Cruel and Deviant Budget” said the budget displayed deviancy in three respects: it imposes huge burdens on people already hurting; it sets a new low bar for congressional and public debate over social insurance in America and the government’s role; and it eviscerates the notion that an important aspect of patriotism involves sacrificing for the common good.

The goal of many in power is to make sure that you feel powerless. When people feel powerless or inconsequential, they will often stay home or take fallacies at face value. That is why many vote against their interest or don’t vote at all. But every single American can make a choice to change our political condition and be engaged.

We are all different and have different abilities. Whether you are shy, like to be with people or not, are computer savvy or not, you can be a part of out political solution.

I have conversations with hundreds of individuals a week over social media, email, and phone calls. I interact with thousands via activism networks like DailyKos, the Politics Done Right radio show on Pacifica’s KPFT 90.1 FM Houston network, Facebook Live feeds, Coffee Party USAIndivisible Houston, and others.

I hear two distinct messages. The first comes from those that are politically active, are fighting the good fight, and at the same time are upset at those who vote against their interests or don’t vote at all. The second comes from those who feel depressed or unworthy, who state they don’t believe they can make a difference.

It is important that those fighting the good fight get over their disgust for non-voters, or those voting against their interests. The fighters must encourage the others through education framed in their realities, in a non-threatening and empathetic manner.

More

Share on Facebook

Do Democrats need Trump voters for next years Midterm Elections?

Who needs Trump voters? Not Democrats.

Stop me if you’ve seen a headline (or five) that proclaims something along the lines of: “Most Trump voters still support Trump.” Typically, the article includes quotes from Trump voters in Pennsylvania or Michigan. Sometimes it revolves around polling showing people don’t “regret” voting for Trump. The takeaway is usually: Trump still has the support of his base, which means Democrats haven’t cracked the Trump nut yet.

But here’s the thing: Democrats don’t need to crack that nut by 2018; Trump can hang on to most — if not all — of his base, and Democrats could still clean up in the midterm elections…

Let’s start with the basic fact that Trump won just 45.9 percent of the vote in 2016. That doesn’t make his victory any less legitimate — winning (the Electoral College) with a plurality rather than a majority is still winning — but Trump has a smaller base than every president elected since 1972, except for Bill Clinton in 1992. Trump voters are not a majority.

More importantly for the sake of 2018, they don’t represent the majority of voters in the majority of congressional districts. Trump won more than 50 percent in 205 of 435 districts. If House Republicans won every district where Trump won a majority in 2016 but lost every other one, Democrats would control 230 seats. Among seats won by a Republican in 2016, Trump fell short of a majority in 40 districts. Democrats need to win only 24 of those to win control of the House.

As Enten notes at the beginning of his article, recent polling shows Trump voters still overwhelmingly support Trump. And Enten’s review of the last eight midterm elections shows the GOP will hold them, because Trump voters are rank and file GOP…..

More….

Share on Facebook

I Love It: Hillary Throws Shade on NY Times While Praising French Election

By Bethesda 1971  @ Daily Kos…
Hillary.jpg

5/7/17, 4:32 PM
Victory for Macron, for France, the EU, & the world.

Defeat to those interfering w/democracy. (But the media says I can’t talk about that)

Hmm.  Could this be a response to the (failing) New York Times editorial this morning Two Presidential Candidates Stuck in Time? in which the Times juxtaposes HIllary’s interview last week with the worst of Trump’s lunacy? In which she dared to respond to Amanpour’s questions about the election and North Korea?  To quote one commenter:

This editorial is one of the most disturbing that I’ve read in the NYT, ever. The false equivalency between Donald Trump’s inability to let go of the election compared to Hillary Clinton’s occasional statements on the subject is breathtaking.

Did the French election hack stir up feelings around the NYT role in publishing the hacked DNC emails? If so it might explain why the editorial board is anxious to say, “move along folks, nothing to see because nothing has happened here, Hillary did not lose the election because of anything we might have said or done.”

Or the Times editorial and the talking heads on cable all week not being able to deal with Hillary’s honest responses and completely misunderstanding how she could blame both herself and Comey?

Hey Times — this only proves your election malfeasance — At least Hillary reminds us how you helped deprive us of a President who (among so many other things) has a sense of humor….

Source…

Note….

The NY Times also ran a pice that appiauldes the French Media for NOT running around with it’s hair on fire when  just elected Emmanuel Macron’s hacked stuff showed up…

Hillary Clinton should be more than a little bitter at the American Media for treating her vastly different than Trump….

Share on Facebook

The opioid overdose epidemic hypocrisy of Donald Trump…Daily Kos…

As both a former drug researcher, and former user, I am not in denial about the rising number of overdose deaths in the U.S. To sit and watch the Orange Killer in the oval office hold a “listening session” using the families of overdose victims and tearful recovering addicts as a front for his public relations scam made me want to puke. His announcement at the end of March that he is launching “The President’s Commission on Combating Drug Addiction and the Opioid Crisis,” flies in the face of his attempts to get rid of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in collusion with Republicans in the House and Senate—which would have dropped the addiction treatment mandate covering 1.3 million Americans.

Mother Jones has been on his case like white on rice. In “Remember When Trump Said He Cared About the Opioid Crisis? Fast Forward to Now” they point out:

The purpose of the commission, which will report to Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, is to write a report by October of this year on the status of the epidemic and make recommendations for the future, after which it will cease to exist. The Surgeon General’s office under President Obama published a very similar report last November. Trump has yet to appoint a “drug czar”, or director of the Office of Drug Control Policy, which is charged with evaluating and overseeing federal anti-drug efforts.

Meanwhile, Trump has repeatedly proposed taking resources away from the programs that could stop the epidemic. For example:

  • The president’s proposed 2017 budget would cut $100 million from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration’s mental health block grants, which help provide substance abuse services across the country.
  • His proposed 2018 budget would cut 16.2 percent of funding from the Department of Health and Human Services, the umbrella agency that funds things like SAMHSA and other mental health and substance abuse programs.
  • The 2018 budget claims it would include a “$500 million increase above 2016 enacted levels to expand opioid misuse prevention efforts and to increase access to treatment and recovery services.” When pressed by Rep. Katherine Clark (D-Mass.), HHS Secretary Tom Price admitted that this $500 million is reference to funding from the 21st Century Cures Act, which Congress enacted under Obama signed into law late last year.
  • Though it didn’t ultimately pass, Trump was hard-set on repealing the Affordable Care Act, which would have left nearly 3 million Americans without often life-saving addiction treatment.

More.

Share on Facebook

Trump and Ryan could lose Trumpcare battle—and still destroy Obamacare

 By Egberto Willies   @  Daily Kos

The Trumpcare bill, which seeks to replace the Affordable Care Act, seems to be hanging by a thread. Public opinion polls now show Obamacare above water and Trumpcare under water. Gambling types would surely bet that the bill—in just about every form—will fail. But that would be nothing more than a short-term gain, and it is important that progressives understand that—right now.

Rejoicing in this likely upcoming win is a fool’s errand. Why? Because for many Americans, specifically those who are not on Medicaid, Obamacare is a financial strain. I am self-employed, and I’m paying about $1,200 a month with a family deductible of $12,000. My plan is an HMO. But in past years a program like this would be considered a “catastrophic” plan. I would have to spend $26,400 before the insurance kicks in. To be fair, the doctor fees are an affordable $40.00 to $100.00, and labs and medicine are discounted.

I understand these costs intellectually, in the context of the corrupt health care system that we have. I understand that the drug companies, the hospitals, and the insurance companies are businesses with shareholders. They all want to show growth, regardless of whether they provide more value or services. That growth consists of an unwarranted increase in health care costs across the board.

University of Houston professor Seth Chandler wrote a piece titled “Republican Stalemate Will Test Whether Obamacare Is Indeed Collapsing” that pointed out a reality about Obamacare. He predicts that we are headed for a stalemate—and progressives should not consider that a win….

More….

Share on Facebook

Steve Bannon under active criminal investigation for… get this… residency fraud.?

 By DiesIrae   @ Daily Kos

Bannon_Trump_Signing_Big_Boy.JPG

[Changed image – original was a distraction. This is always appropriate for any Bannon story.]

Courtesy of O’Harrow and Boburg at the Washington Post. Trump’s chief strategist Steve Bannon, a white nationalist who has repeatedly pushed false claims of massive voter fraud by minorities voting in jurisdictions where they do not actually live, is now the subject of an active criminal investigation in Florida, centering on Bannon’s “residency” and “qualifi[cations] to vote in the state”:

The Post learned that state prosecutors in Miami have an active investigation into Bannon’s assertions that he was a Florida resident and qualified to vote in the state from 2014 to 2016. In late August, investigators subpoenaed Bannon’s lease of a Coconut Grove home and other documents. They also contacted the landlords of that home and another that Bannon leased nearby, and sought information from a gardener and handyman who worked at one of the homes, according to documents and interviews.

The problem for Mr. Bannon is that it seems he may have actually been living in California (or possibly in Washington, or New York, but definitely not Florida):

[Bannon] owned a house and condo in Southern California, where he had entertainment and consulting businesses, a driver’s license and a checking account. He claimed Florida as his residence, registering to vote in Miami and telling authorities he lived at the same address as his third ex-wife….

He did not get a Florida driver’s license or register a car in the state. He never voted in Florida, and neighbors near two homes he leased in Miami said they never saw him. His rent and utility bills were sent to his business manager in California.

Even if the Florida investigation comes up empty, the story might not be over. There is significant speculation, previously reported in an August 2016 Guardian story (and re-upped by the Post article) that he may have been trying to avoid California taxes.

Dear Attorney General Becerra: this seems worth taking a look at, doesn’t it?

Note….

But proving wrongdoing in Bannon’s case could be difficult because state law does not clearly define residency, according to an official who spoke on the condition of anonymity….

Source…

Share on Facebook

Betsey DeVos confirmed as Education Sec on VP Pence tiebreaker Senate vote…

WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 17: Betsy DeVos, President-elect Donald Trump's pick to be the next Secretary of Education, arrives for her confirmation hearing before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee in the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill January 17, 2017 in Washington, DC. DeVos is known for her advocacy of school choice and education voucher programs and is a long-time leader of the Republican Party in Michigan. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Betsy DeVos

For the first time in American history, a vice president had to vote in the Senate to break a tie on a Cabinet nominee, and Betsy DeVos was confirmed as Donald Trump’s education secretary. DeVos has no experience as an educator, or even as a public school student or parent of public school students, but she sure does donate a lot of money to Republicans.

Republican Sens. Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski could have stopped DeVos in committee, but instead they voted for her there, waited to ensure she would have enough votes, then took the opportunity to grandstand about how they couldn’t vote for her. Democrats were united against DeVos, and senators were flooded with calls opposing her nomination, but in the end, there weren’t three Republicans to vote against an unqualified, unpopular nominee. Republicans whose offices were getting so many calls against DeVos that voters couldn’t get through or even leave voicemails nonetheless voted for her.

Republicans own Betsy DeVos and all her works. They tried to hide her from the public, burying her speedy confirmation hearing in the evening. They blew off massive numbers of their constituents who let them know she was unacceptable. They brought Mike Pence in to cast a historic (not in a good way) vote to confirm her. She’s theirs.

Unfortunately, now she’s in a position to ruin American public education…..

image…Chip Smodevilla/Getty Images

Share on Facebook

Russian crime bosses kept Trump empire afloat?

Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump speaks at the Trump Soho Hotel in New York on June 22, 2016. / AFP / KENA BETANCUR (Photo credit should read KENA BETANCUR/AFP/Getty Images)

In 2008, Donald Trump Jr. attended a real estate conference, where he stated that

Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets. We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia.

As it turns out, that may have been an understatement. Human rights lawyer Scott Horton, whose work in the region goes back to defending Andrei Sakharov and other Soviet dissidents, has gone through a series of studies by the Financial Times to show how funds from Russian crime lords bailed Trump out after yet anther bankruptcy. The conclusions are stark.

Among the powerful facts that DNI missed were a series of very deep studies published in the [Financial Times] that examined the structure and history of several major Trump real estate projects from the last decade—the period after his seventh bankruptcy and the cancellation of all his bank lines of credit. …

The money to build these projects flowed almost entirely from Russian sources. In other words, after his business crashed, Trump was floated and made to appear to operate a successful business enterprise through the infusion of hundreds in millions of cash from dark Russian sources.

He was their man.

Yes, even that much seems fantastic, and the details include business agencies acting as a front for the GRU, billionaire mobsters, a vast network of propaganda sources, and an American candidate completely under the thumb of the Kremlin.

It reads like the a B-grade spy novel, a plot both too convoluted—and too bluntly obvious—for John le Carré. The problem is it may not be a conspiracy theory. It may be a conspiracy.

 Horton’s analysis comes from piecing together information in three Financial Times “deep reports.” One of these focused on Sergei Millian, the head of the Russian American Chamber of Commerce in the US at the time of Trump Jr.’s “money pouring in from Russia” claim….

More…

Note…

There are reports that President trump will make his first trip out of the country to Iceland to meet with Russian President Putin….

Update….

I guess that was too much…

The report has been denied....

Share on Facebook

Bernie Sanders will help Democrats rally against Medicare/Medicaid cuts

 By Meteor Blades   @ Daily Kos
ESSINGTON, PA - JULY 27:  Senator Bernie Sanders exits the stage after addressing the New Hampshire, Maine and Vermont delegation breakfast at the Democratic National Convention (DNC) on July 27, 2016 in Essington, Pennsylvania. The convention officially began on Monday and is expected to attract thousands of protesters, members of the media and Democratic delegates to the City of Brotherly Love.  (Photo by Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images)

Bernie Sanders doing the Democratic Party job of persuading congressional colleagues to help organize nationwide pre-inaugural protest rallies over potential cuts in Medicare and Medicaid, as well as other health matters Republicans are likely to take up in Congress come January.

In what Tim Fernholz at Quartz calls the Democrats’ “first major gesture of opposition” to the incoming Trump regime, Senator Chuck Schumer, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, and Senator Bernie Sanders have put their signatures on a letter to congressional colleagues Wednesday that might have come as a surprise to many of them. It encourages them to join with Sanders to help organize pre-inaugural rallies in their states to rouse opposition to a Republican-driven budget bill “that will severely undermine the health needs of the American people.” Leftover money from the Sanders campaign will fund the organizing effort.

The expected budget bill provisions, as you see in the full letter below, are a direct attack on Medicare and Medicaid, the three say, and will likely include hikes in prescription drug prices and a threat to nursing home care for millions of Americans.

Called “Our First Stand: Save Health Care,” the resistance rallies are slated for Sunday, Jan. 15. Here’s Fernholz:

Sanders, whose run for the Democratic presidential nomination this year emboldened the left wing of the Democratic party, has seen his cachet rise in a party looking for leadership following Hillary Clinton’s defeat in November. Amidst the recriminations and a messy race to head up the party’s national committee, it hasn’t been clear who would be the face of Democratic opposition to Trump. Now, we have an answer.

While Sanders’ harsh critique of the millionaire and billionaire class turned off professional Democrats who benefit from the global economy during his primary run, the election results have convinced party leaders that they need to better articulate how their economic policies will lead to broadly shared prosperity.

More….

Share on Facebook