Post Everything Here

[#1]

[JMOldeVintage]

@TheShoppingMoll - The Florida bill specifically about Jewish People - in fact our new Governor to make a trip to Israel next month to talk trade, etc. & it's being pushed that he may sign the bill into law while on his trip. I'm with you, that any law passed should include ALL people of all faiths & nationalities. 

[finickypatternshop]

Seems trump better watch what he says while in Florida, he failed on at least two very recently. I waited patiently for him to be called out on it, as some were so quick to call out a Dem, but of course he was given a pass. No bar.

I don't agree it should be just for the Jewish religion but should also include Christians, Muslims and any really group with hate directed at them. Specifically I don't agree that speaking out about legitimate concerns about Israel makes one anti-Semitic, same for speaking out about a person who happens to be Jewish/ Muslim/ Christian. A persons religion should not give them a pass on bad behaviour or things they say, two different things. General hate speech should be included too.

[TheShoppingMoll]

Canadian are used to laws that cover everyone whe it comes to discrimination. Canada has had a statute in place, since 1977, with the express goal of extending the law to ensure equal opportunity to individuals who may be victims of discriminatory practices, 

 Section 3 of the Canadian Human Rights Act prohibits discrimination based on "race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, family status, disability and conviction for which a pardon has been granted." 

Florida's statute is essentially saying that the Jewish religion has priority over other religions. No surprise there as Florida governor is a chum of trump.

[2TrickPony]

no. you are entirely incorrect. this is a just part of the statute. It is an addition. I'm assuming that it is in response to our recent mass shootings of Jewish congregations. I don't, as I've just read it for the first time here, know what I think about the entirety of it,  becasue here in the USA we have protections on free speech, even ugly speach, and I'm no lawyer. But some of the later, like this:

"Alleging myths about a world Jewish conspiracy or that Jews control the media, economy, government, or other institutions

how would you control that? you can't jail people here for speach, no matter how ridiculous or ugly or horrible

[TheShoppingMoll]

The bill was drafted in secret, partly to keep it from Congress’s own members who, it was feared, would leak it to lobbyists.

Conclusions of a six-month investigation into the process that led to the tax cut by the Center for Public Integrity, a not-for-profit news agency based in Washington DC.

The 2017 Tax and Jobs Act – the Trump administration’s one major piece of enacted legislation – did deliver the biggest corporate tax cut in US history, but ultimately workers benefited almost not at all.

• Rich Republicans lobbied Trump at a Manhattan fundraiser and got 2.6 percentage points lopped off their highest tax bracket.
• An idea that would have raised $1 trillion and paid for much of the tax cuts was soundly defeated by a powerful business lobby
• Republicans used $1.5 trillion in what some call accounting gimmicks to either hide the true cost of the bill or help justify their votes.
• The bill was drafted in secret, partly to keep it from Congress’s own members who, it was feared, would leak it to lobbyists.
• The tax hike was sold to citizens as a move that would boost the economy, add jobs and hike wages. The president said in one speech that it would bring the average American household “around a $4,000 pay raise”.
• The Communications Workers of America, a 700,000-member union, asked eight major corporations to sign a pledge to hike worker wages by $4,000 a year if their tax rate was cut to 20%, the initial proposed rate. The companies balked and signed nothin

• Just 6% of the tax savings was spent on workers, according to Just Capital, a not-for-profit that tracks the Russell 1000 index.

• In the first three months after the bill passed, the average weekly paycheck rose by $6.21. That would be $233 a year.

• All the posturing about real “reform” of the tax code and “revenue neutrality” for the legislation was meaningless. In fact, the bill had to create a $1.5tn 10-year deficit to pay for its generous tax cuts. Without the deficit, the corporate rate of 21% could never have been achieved and, more important, the bill could not have passed at all.
• It contained egregious mistakes, created massive new loopholes and opened the door to new forms of tax avoidance.  
• For Trier, the tax expert, the plan carried another message: Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin — who clearly had had a hand in the one-pager — was “not ready to lead tax reform.”
• There was a new limit on how much interest corporations could deduct, but real-estate developers and utilities were exempted. No surprise there as trump o is a real estate development co.
• Republicans needed to raise more revenue — and targeted liberal leaning institutions and states.
• Private universities were nailed with a 1.4 percent tax on their endowments. People in high-tax East and West Coast states were disproportionately affected by having their state and local tax deductions limited. 
• Nonprofits had to pay a new tax if they paid their officials more than $1 million. 
•  The law took away tax benefits worth up to $20 a month for bike commuters.
• Incentives shrunk for contributing to large and small charities alike. 
• Restaurants and retailers were cut out of the capital expensing bonus available to others.
• Farmers were allowed to take a 20 percent deduction on profits from selling to farmers’ grain co-operatives, but not to other wholesalers.
•  Tax Policy Center The bills seemed to have only three goals,: “Cut tax rates for corporations and non-corporate businesses, add no more than $1.5 trillion to the budget deficit over the next 10 years so a measure can be enacted on a partisan basis using special budget rules, and pass a bill — any bill.”
• into the bill went a provision for a $2,000 child tax credit, demanded by Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla.
• Into the bill went the sale of oil and gas leases in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, long sought by Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski. 
• Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., obtained assurances that pass-through businesses would get favorable treatment either on the floor or in the conference bill.
• Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., got a promise (later not upheld) that travel restrictions to Cuba would be relaxed via another bill. On Dec. 2, Blackstone CEO Stephen Schwarzman hosted a $100,000-a-plate fundraiser for President Trump at his New York apartment. Some of the two-dozen wealthy donors there reportedly complained that the tax bill would hurt them personally. Two weeks later, when the bill made it through conference, the top tax bracket rate had been cut from 39.6 percent to 37 percent.   

The report can be read in full at The Cter for Public Integrity website. They have detailed it in such a way no one reading it can believe that trump tax cuts benefited anyone other than the rich. 

Does anyone really believe that trump would do anything that would benefit someone other than himself & his cronies? 

[CopperPhoenixDesigns]

By Devlin Barrett and Matt Zapotosky

April 30 at 7:16 PM

Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III wrote a letter in late March complaining to Attorney General William P. Barr that a four-page memo to Congress describing the principal conclusions of the investigation into President Trump “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance” of Mueller’s work, according to a copy of the letter reviewed Tuesday by The Washington Post.

So the A.G. lied about the Mueller report findings ??  

[JMOldeVintage]

Lie!?! Oh No, Never (dripping in sarcasm).

[PillowDetails]

" So the A.G. lied about the Mueller report findings ?? "

He lied to Congress that he didn't know if Mueller agreed with him, when directly asked.

Barr before Senate tomorrow, May 1st.  

Tweet from Schumer - 

"In light of Mueller's letter, the misleading nature of Barr’s 4/10 testimony & 4/18 press conference is even more glaring. Barr must bring the letter with him when he testifies in the Senate tomorrow. And it’s time for Mueller to testify publicly. Now."

[finickypatternshop]

Anyone who read even 20 pages into his report will know that barr lied. They can call it his interpretation, or misrepresenting it or any other thing that softens the truth (just like some do with trump) but he lied plain and simple. Obviously some never read it or they wouldn't be so surprised that Dems aren't accepting barrs bull or twisting it that Dems no longer support Mueller himself. Not true. There is an audio version if reading is too difficult...talking to you trump.

Can the memo from Mueller be read somewhere or was it just leaked out.

[PillowDetails]

@finickypatternshop  WAPO and NYT have parts of the LETTER  from Mueller, to Barr.  

[2di4jewelryoriginals]

[PillowDetails]

Mazie Hirono.  Kamala Harris.  Don't mess with them.  Just don't.

[finickypatternshop]

They were awesome, quick to put a stop to his mansplaining or his attempt to control things. The trumplicans were feckless as usual, so obvious they have no interest in the truth. Makes one wonder why, well not really, knowing/acknowledging the obvious might mean them having to do something about it. I got the sense barr never even read the Mueller report.

[TheShoppingMoll]

These 2 women reduced Barr to a bowl of jello.  No wonder that he is afraid to come back.

“Attorney General Barr, has the president or anyone at the White House ever asked or suggested that you open an investigation of anyone?” Harris began. “Yes or no?”

Barr briefly stammered. 

“Could you repeat the question?” he asked.

Ultimately, the attorney general said no one had directly asked him to open an investigation, but he allowed that the topic had come up. “I’m trying to grapple with the word ‘suggest,’” he told Harris. “I mean, there have been discussions of matters out there that they have not asked me to open an investigation, but ...”

Mueller does not have a weak chin.

Whomever wrote recieved  March 28 should be fired on that alone. Received is not spelt recieved. 

[OwlTalk]

That's right!

[JMOldeVintage]

Well I missed the Barr "hearing" or "interview" today, but in watching clips of it can only say: (1) AG Barr needs to remember he is the Attorney General for the United States of America. He is NOT Trump's personal attorney. (2) GOP cannot accuse Democrats of doing anything for political reasons, since Graham has stated he will not go any further on anything, not even talk to Mueller, unless he hears something he disagrees with.

[2di4jewelryoriginals]

This sums it all up:

[TheShoppingMoll]

Checking out George Conway's Twitter feed.

Christina Wilkie‏Verified account @christinawilkie

Trump has retweeted 60 tweets in the past 18 minutes, nearly all of them in response to Joe Biden’s endorsement by the firefighters union. To my knowledge, we’ve never seen him retweet this many people in such a short period of time.

George Conway‏ @gtconway3d 16h16 hours ago

seems like he has a concern of some sort

From another person's Twitter feed.  Middle schoolers have been keeping count of trump lies.

[PillowDetails]

Here's some insider info from Rush Limbaugh!  See, if I wasn't listening in my car yesterday, on the way to the PO to mail off some orders (yay) - we wouldn't know this (because it's not being reported anywhere else) - 

"Here’s another thing. Members of Congress were demanding the unredacted report, demanding it, because they knew somewhere in there, there had to be evidence of collusion. So Barr prepared an unredacted version, and it’s in a room where anybody in the Senate can go look at it. They can’t take it out, but they can go look at it. You know how many people have? Two.

Two members of Congress have gone to look at the unredacted report, and both are Republican. Not a single Democrat has gone in to look at the unredacted version, meaning they’re lying through their teeth. They know that the report doesn’t have any collusion. They’re just saying this stuff for public consumption so they can continue to try to poison the minds of the American people who only watch Drive-By Media for their news."

I hate like anything to give this joker the time of day, but I feel it is needed to help try to understand what about half of the country is listening to and believes.  That 10 minute round trip to the PO every day is about all I can't take of him, and about all I need to get a gist of what's going on with him and his followers.

You know this guy is Trump's buddy.  The concept of the Mueller report in a "room" and 2 people viewed it?  

[PillowDetails]

"So Barr prepared an unredacted version"

So many questions.  Maybe Rush should be questioned by congress?

[OwlTalk]

From what I read on Politico, it's a "less redacted" version of the report, not a fully unredacted one. And it seems that the now uncovered parts are nothing burgers, at least to the few who saw it. It was to be seen by only 12 lawmakers (6 Dems and 6 Repubs), not just "anybody". The Dems boycotted, wanting a fully unredacted version, available to more members of Congress. Apparently prepared by Barr, and  he hasn't offered a fully unredacted version to Congress that I've heard of --- I could be wrong about that.

I really can't stand Tush Bimbaugh!

[finickypatternshop]

I listen to/read all kinds of stuff too but always note that they are liars so take what they say with a grain of salt. Some are worse than others, the best is when they accuse liberals of pushing conspiracies, like HELLO! Self awareness is not their strength ;)

[TheShoppingMoll]

From Politico

The six Democrats to whom Barr offered access to the report boycotted en masse, complaining that Barr should have provided a fully unredacted report to a broader set of lawmakers investigating Trump’s conduct.

Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) “I trust what Barr put forward,” he said. “I’m satisfied right now with what I know.” He will not view report.

As only 12 members of Congress would be able to read the report and could not discuss it with other members of Congress.

What would be the point of even looking at it, if you are not allowed to discuss it with any other Congress members?

Collins & Graham, saying that nothing about the slightly less redacted report has changed their minds, is typical.

Democrats need to keep those subpeonas coming.

[Parachute425]

PillowDetails - thanks for taking one for the team. I don't have the stomach for it.

[VibrantSoulWellness]

Someone claimed this on twitter, but offered no proof. I wondered where it came from and now I know :-/