Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 9 minutes ago, Week said: FYI - at least once a week or two - I find myself trawling through a page or so of your (assuming yours - LUMPY) photobucket. Sometimes I just need things like: http://s1336.photobucket.com/user/Lumpy67/media/lasorda_phanatic_640_zpsz9hns0s5.gif.html? I'm sorry and thank you. No worries. That's why I leave it open. Love that GIF as well. I had an old Tiny Pic account that had probably 5 times as many images and GIFs on it. I so regret losing access to that account. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGimletEye Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 Just now, Commodore said: any funding item that can't be justified as unable to be done at the state level should be zeroed out (immediately or gradually depending on how disruptive it would be) Are you sure this view of the role of the federal government is conservative enough? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arryn Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 1 hour ago, Commodore said: California should be able to set their own guidelines Separate but Equal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 I don't really get why anyone would defend Maddow here. She's not dumb. As someone else said, she basically trolled america for ratings. It's pretty clear what her intention was when she tweeted tweet, and she knew there was nothing new to report. I don't know if she thought that just her rant about stuff we already know would be enough to get her off the hook, or she just underestimated peoples tolerance for that kind of 'click bait', but it's clear she miscalculated, and she should just own up to it. It's not like that's an actual news show....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commodore Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 10 minutes ago, Swordfish said: I don't really get why anyone would defend Maddow here. She's not dumb. As someone else said, she basically trolled america for ratings. More like she got ahead of her skis and publicly over-promised before she dug into the details, and couldn't walk it back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 Just now, Commodore said: More like she got ahead of her skis and publicly over-promised before she dug into the details, and couldn't walk it back Also possible. Irresponsible either way. It accomplished absically the opposite of what she wanted to accomplish: 1 - Adds some measure legitimacy to the notion that the press is unfair to Trump 2 - Shows that he did in fact pay a lot of taxes, at least in that year. (Pedantic distinctions about type of tax aside) 3 - It flys in the face of the notion that Trump was a terrible businessman, because he made $150 million dollars that year. (at least on the surface, which is all that really matters). it's just a debacle for her all around, and she should just admit it and move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 15 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: Not sure I follow. Who has coercive enforcement policy if not the state? At present, no one. But what is needed is an international govt with similar coercive powers over international affairs (and multinational corporations) as the state has over national affairs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 1 hour ago, Swordfish said: Also possible. Irresponsible either way. It accomplished absically the opposite of what she wanted to accomplish: 1 - Adds some measure legitimacy to the notion that the press is unfair to Trump 2 - Shows that he did in fact pay a lot of taxes, at least in that year. (Pedantic distinctions about type of tax aside) 3 - It flys in the face of the notion that Trump was a terrible businessman, because he made $150 million dollars that year. (at least on the surface, which is all that really matters). it's just a debacle for her all around, and she should just admit it and move on. Trump's not the only one who can't admit they screwed up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 3 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said: Trump's not the only one who can't admit they screwed up. And also, water is wet...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 In other news, the Senate Intel committee and Paul Ryan come out and said there's no evidence of any tapping of Trump by any govt agency or by secret agent Obama. Also, now that 2 federal judges have ordered a stay on the new Muslim ban EO, what's next? Trump has said he'd take it right to the SC. I guess he needs to go all in with this and keep climbing the judicial ladder until he hits the wall or gets the answer he wants. They seemed to actually take some time and effort in crafting this EO and possibly got some legal advice from someone who is not a bush lawyer. These bans were meant to be stop gaps to allow the administration to draft new "extreme vetting" processes for immigration and refugee intakes. Have they been working on these new procedures? Will those procedures be challengable in court and possibly also fall over? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cas Stark Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 1 hour ago, Commodore said: More like she got ahead of her skis and publicly over-promised before she dug into the details, and couldn't walk it back How many details did she think there were to get from 2 pages? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 3 minutes ago, Cas Stark said: How many details did she think there were to get from 2 pages? yeah. Also, according to her, they'd spent all night working on it. So if they couldn't cover two pages worth of details in 24 hours..... I mean, it shouldn't have taken more than tn minutes of looking at those documents to determine there was no smoking gun there. it's barely even newsworthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Week Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 5 minutes ago, Swordfish said: yeah. Also, according to her, they'd spent all night working on it. So if they couldn't cover two pages worth of details in 24 hours..... I mean, it shouldn't have taken more than tn minutes of looking at those documents to determine there was no smoking gun there. it's barely even newsworthy. It does put his tax plan (removing the AMT) into some context. There is no smoking gun, but it does raise additional questions (e.g. 100M in business losses - line 21). Quote Johnston, a veteran tax policy journalist who’s authored a book on Trump, said on MSNBC that the tax return pages “came in the mail” to him. (The return is marked “Client Copy,” suggesting the leak came from returns prepared for Trump’s use, not from the IRS.) Not super exciting without all of the backup/tax calculations ... still it isn't entirely a nothing-burger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted March 16, 2017 Author Share Posted March 16, 2017 An explanation for the tax form leak by Trump has been provided by the internet. Trump married Melania. in 2005. She was a permanent resident since 2001. She applied for US citizenship in 2006. As part of the citizenship application, she had to file five years worth of tax returns if single, three years if married. So she filed her single returns for 2003 and 2004 and the married return for 2005. So Trump's return had to be squeaky clean for the year 2005, her citizenship depended on it. It's probably the only year he played by the rules. As he said, he's always audited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGimletEye Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 Remember way back when the charge against Hillary Clinton was that she was just too chumy with Wall Street and good old Comrade Trump, hero of the proletariat, was going to take them on? https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/03/16/goldman-sachs-ceo-salutes-bank-veterans-who-joined-trump-administration-says-he-hopes-more-follow/ Quote NEW YORK — In his annual note to shareholders Thursday, Goldman Sachs' chief executive Lloyd Blankfein acknowledged the controversy sparked by the growing number of the bank's alums who are taking high-ranking jobs in the Trump administration. A bit of a useful primer on thinking about leverage ratio’s and risk weighted assets. http://rooseveltinstitute.org/why_we_need_both_capital_requirements/ Quote We’re going to hear a lot more from Republicans about how a single, simple 10 percent leverage requirement can replace much of what Dodd-Frank does. This idea is central to the Republican CHOICE Act, and it was also reiterated recently in FDIC Vice-Chairman Thomas Hoenig’s plan for regulatory relief. Once again, even if you think a simple leverage ratio is all that is needed, the fact is that Jeb Hensarlings Financial Bomb Act’s leverage requirement of 10% is just way too frickin low. And plus, thinking that bankruptcy court will be sufficient to handle all failing institutions (particularly if there is no living will requirement) is getting into wishful thinking I believe. And Trump says,"I know the Republican Healthcare Plan will fuck over the people that voted for me. But, hey what did they expect?" http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/3/16/14945030/trump-tucker-carlson-health-care Quote Tucker Carlson’s sit-down with Donald Trump Wednesday night was not exactly a hard-hitting interview, but the Fox News host did speak up at one point for conservative populists who are a bit skeptical of Trump’s embrace of Paul Ryan’s health care plan. Carlson noted that one centerpiece of the American Health Care Act is a huge tax cut for rich investors. At the same time, he added, “a Bloomberg analysis shows that counties that voted for you, middle-class and working-class counties, would do far less well under the bill than counties that voted for Hillary." Trump’s response: “Oh, I know.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 37 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said: An explanation for the tax form leak by Trump has been provided by the internet. Trump married Melania. in 2005. She was a permanent resident since 2001. She applied for US citizenship in 2006. As part of the citizenship application, she had to file five years worth of tax returns if single, three years if married. So she filed her single returns for 2003 and 2004 and the married return for 2005. So Trump's return had to be squeaky clean for the year 2005, her citizenship depended on it. It's probably the only year he played by the rules. As he said, he's always audited. But who killed Mr Mustered with the rope in the conservatory? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 Well this is a shocking development, and by shocking, I mean as predictable as humanly possible. Way to go, Donny dip****: http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/14/china-south-korea-join-tpp-members-in-trade-talks.html TL:DR China is filling a trade vacuum and doing all the winning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted March 16, 2017 Author Share Posted March 16, 2017 1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said: But who killed Mr Mustered with the rope in the conservatory? Silly question. The microwave beamed out invisible rays of death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 1 minute ago, Fragile Bird said: Silly question. The microwave beamed out invisible rays of death. Hahaha. Touche. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 Who’s to Blame for the Trumpcare Debacle, Donald Trump or Paul Ryan? http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/03/whos-to-blame-for-the-trumpcare-debacle-trump-or-ryan.html http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/cotton-ryan-obamacare-repeal-replace-236102 Cotton goes after Ryan agenda in battle of GOP heavyweights First on taxes and now on health care, the Arkansas senator has mercilessly attacked the well-laid plans of the House speaker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.