Today, in the wake of the newest attack on those who have health insurance via the ACA, I am again struck by one thought. If Trump (who has no actual policy beliefs whatsoever) kept on with his full-throttle culture war bullshit AND came out in favor of universal coverage, he would SOAR to reelection. Of course, he can't do that, because there isn't a single Republican anywhere who would vote for that. So he has instead re-engaged on the same battlefield that lost him the House of Representatives less than 6 months ago.
And, not for nothing, but Trump's budget seems to cut ALL funding for the Special Olympics. Really?? I mean, REALLY??
So not only will the report not be released for WEEKS, but the White House is going to be able to make redactions before it goes to Congress based on Executive Privilege?? On what grounds?? This is a total farce. Let's go out on a limb and say the report is exactly what they say it is, a total vindication. Why should ANYONE skeptical of what has just taken place accept anything that is presented if the White House is going to be able to take a Sharpie and black out anything they deem fit?? If this is allowed, then every "conspiracy theory" about what has taken place since Friday has just been totally vindicated. A exculpatory report does not need "weeks" of vetting, and it sure as shit should not be run through the frickin' White House before it goes to Congress. How much more blantant can a cover-up be?? This is absolutely unreal, all the more so because it's going to work. If this report doesn't leak post-haste, no one is EVER going to know what's in it.
William Barr said the right things during his confirmation hearings, and I thought we could trust him despite his past. But I should not have given him the benefit of the doubt. It's pretty clear Barr is trying to shield Trump from scrutiny, just like McConnell did when he blocked a resolution calling for the public release of the report from reaching the Senate.
Barr had absolutely no reservations about saying the report cleared Trump. But that was the only thing he saw fit to make public. Everything else about the report and its contents is still being kept secret, and according to Lindsay Graham, Barr said that things were going to stay that way for weeks, and that the Trump administration itself would have free access to the report before anyone else.
Now what happens? The Trump administration has weeks and weeks to plan for damage control? Barr is now in a perfect position to tell Trump exactly what the investigation found and how Trump's team can obscure the details and twist the story before the public hears anything. Are we going to just assume that Barr would never do a thing like that?
This is not a good faith attempt to settle the Russia issue in the public eye. This is just more obscuring, and I find it especially frustrating because I thought the conclusion of the Mueller report would finally, finally mean clarity on the issue. I thought we would have a direct, detailed answer, not a sound byte from one of Trump's own cronies.
What precedent are we setting by allowing presidents to control the release of information from investigations into their own activities? Does that seem like the kind of power that would ever be used in a responsible way?
In regards to Jussie Smollett, I believe there is a Federal case being built against him. The FBI is investigating if he mailed a threatening letter to himself. This ain't over.
So not only will the report not be released for WEEKS, but the White House is going to be able to make redactions before it goes to Congress based on Executive Privilege?? On what grounds?? This is a total farce. Let's go out on a limb and say the report is exactly what they say it is, a total vindication. Why should ANYONE skeptical of what has just taken place accept anything that is presented if the White House is going to be able to take a Sharpie and black out anything they deem fit?? If this is allowed, then every "conspiracy theory" about what has taken place since Friday has just been totally vindicated. A exculpatory report does not need "weeks" of vetting, and it sure as shit should not be run through the frickin' White House before it goes to Congress. How much more blantant can a cover-up be?? This is absolutely unreal, all the more so because it's going to work. If this report doesn't leak post-haste, no one is EVER going to know what's in it.
William Barr said the right things during his confirmation hearings, and I thought we could trust him despite his past. But I should not have given him the benefit of the doubt. It's pretty clear Barr is trying to shield Trump from scrutiny, just like McConnell did when he blocked a resolution calling for the public release of the report from reaching the Senate.
Barr had absolutely no reservations about saying the report cleared Trump. But that was the only thing he saw fit to make public. Everything else about the report and its contents is still being kept secret, and according to Lindsay Graham, Barr said that things were going to stay that way for weeks, and that the Trump administration itself would have free access to the report before anyone else.
Now what happens? The Trump administration has weeks and weeks to plan for damage control? Barr is now in a perfect position to tell Trump exactly what the investigation found and how Trump's team can obscure the details and twist the story before the public hears anything. Are we going to just assume that Barr would never do a thing like that?
This is not a good faith attempt to settle the Russia issue in the public eye. This is just more obscuring, and I find it especially frustrating because I thought the conclusion of the Mueller report would finally, finally mean clarity on the issue. I thought we would have a direct, detailed answer, not a sound byte from one of Trump's own cronies.
What precedent are we setting by allowing presidents to control the release of information from investigations into their own activities? Does that seem like the kind of power that would ever be used in a responsible way?
Maybe it IS what they say it is. But just like their daily actions the last two years, their response to the report being delivered makes it IMPOSSIBLE to think things are on the up and up. This may, in fact, obscure the truth for all-time. If they have the ability to do so based on what is in the report, they can end it, to THEIR benefit, once and for all by just giving up the info. But they refuse to do so.
There was a recent poll that 84% of the public wants to see the full report. Given that it would be a chore to get 84% of the American public to agree the sky is blue on any given day, that is fairly remarkable. But I take no solace in that. The real question is how many of those 84% now believe the report HAS been released. And my guess is that number is massive.
Let's put it this way: if I was charged with murder, and evidence came to light that 100% exonerated me, I wouldn't be losing sleep over the fact that that same evidence might reveal I had a foot fetish. I'd say "get that evidence in front of a judge and jury as quick as possible".
Wow, this is.....really something. I have to ask a serious question: who on the Republican side of the aisle is talking like this?? And I'll grant you that the Democrats don't have NEARLY enough who do, but that is rapidly changing, mostly due to this woman. Frankly, I'm just in awe after 18 years of supporting Democrats to find one who can stand up for herself so effortlessly:
The Green new Deal show vote set up by Mitch McConnell didn't pass in the Senate. Dems voted present except two or something and Republicans voted against it.
So now the question is ok what's your plan, Republicans? What's your plan to deal with climate change? It's a real thing that is a dire emergency looming over the planet.
Surely you've noticed all the fires, floods, and crazy storms that have been increasing every year. They've affected your people in your districts. They've swamped islands like Puerto Rico and cost tens of billions of dollars in damage all over the United States every year. What's your plan, Republicans?
The UN said we have 12 years to limit climate change catastrophe.
So, you don't like the Green New Deal, then What's your plan? What's your plan?
No plan? right. Thought so. No plans. At least the Democrats are willing to get the ball rolling. They take the subject seriously enough to try to do something about it. Republicans have no plan there except to give the rich tax cuts and provide socialism to the rich via corporate welfare. That and ruin healthcare with, again, no plan.
No, that's a millennial talking; she was born in 1989. I'm glad to hear that her inflection is acceptable to you this time, though.
Keep thinking in compartments, you're playing right into their hands. Together we are stronger.
Look, I hope this won't be taken as too harsh. It's a nuanced point, and I want to be clear that I'm not accusing you of any kind of malice.
That said, my view is that rather than joining together with everyone as they are, you're implicitly suggesting that everyone should join you in your compartment. It bothers me that a well educated young woman has to change her manner of speech to satisfy you that her primary identity is "American," not "young woman." Why is that? Were her previous patterns of speech less legitimately American than yours? What gives someone permission to be a generic American instead of having some other primary identity? I think we have to be careful to address those questions in a way that doesn't unnecessarily place the burden on some groups more than others.
@jjstraka34: The clip isn't playing for me. Is there another link, or can someone tell me what it's about so I can look for it?
I'm not really sure, it seems to be working fine for me. If you scroll your Twitter feed, it's bound to come up somewhere this evening. It's AOC responding to the Green New Deal being called elitist.
When a member of a government goes totally out of their way to ridicule a legitimate issue, you know right then, that shit is fucked up.
When a member of the government goes out of his way to look like a dumb asshole, you realize we have to do better America.
If slow Mike Lee can be a Senator, then there's hope for other people that don't think good too.
If this guy can be Senator, you can do anything. Again, Republicans have NO PLAN. They just offer games and hate. They're a fantastic opposition party, it's easy to be against everything and stand for nothing, they're not so good at governing.
TLDR: Right wing think tanks are lying about it. The right wing media is running with the facts from a right wing think tank (93 trillion) that is ridiculous. Republicans push phony attacks on Green New Deal’s cost, ignore ‘tens of trillions’ in benefits.
The GND is currently a non-binding resolution with goals. Not specific policy proposals so any cost is made up. They're all going with a number comes from a right wing think tank.
"Opponents of serious climate action are routinely using a nonsensical $93 trillion dollar cost projection to attack the Green New Deal even though the figure has been roundly debunked by fact checkers."
The GND in reality is an effort to mobilize the U.S. economy and jobs to shift away from fossil fuels as fast as technologically possible to preserve the livable climate that has made modern civilization possible
Trump's own government agencies estimation a loss of $500 billion per year due to climate change and "According to the Trump admin's National Climate Assessment, with no action, climate change will result in 10% GDP loss by 2090."
I believe that Trump believes there was no collusion. He's not savvy enough to recognize it even it it was happening right under his nose though. In my opinion of course...
I think we can go a lot, lot further than that. We can say that we know there was none, among himself or anyone with any association with him, based upon a lengthy multi year investigation into every facet of his life and his associates lives.
That's about as reasonably certain as we can possibly be about criminal matters of this sort.
OK, I'll bite. As has been discussed many times, collusion is not a criminal matter. However, collusion does have serious national security implications and I expect the Mueller report to refer to those in relation to the actions of the Trump campaign. It's beyond dispute that there were a considerable number of links between the campaign and Russia, but what the report should provide information on is what motivated those links and what the implications of facilitating foreign interference in US elections are.
You've said many times in recent days that the Mueller report clears Trump of any wrongdoing. I don't agree with that and don't really understand how you can make that statement based on the Barr letter. There are numerous examples of blatant lies told by members of this administration - Trump may be the worst, but he's far from the only one. I said before I thought Mueller had credibility and I would accept his report, but I'm not going to blindly accept what Barr says the report says.
I am amazed in fact that the media do appear to have blindly accepted Barr's story. I generally think the BBC analysis is good, but on this issue all the headlines and summaries they've published have accepted that the report clears Trump. Buried in the details of the stories there are questions about whether that is actually the case, but the overall message is clear - Trump is exonerated. I've had to reflect on that and whether they know something about the report that I don't, but I don't think that's the case. Instead I think they're just generally ignoring the possibility that Barr is not accurately portraying the report. That seems foolish to me. Of course, having written this post I will appear very foolish myself if Barr does in fact go ahead and publish the report and it transpires that he has accurately summarized it. However, I think the chance that will happen is sufficiently small I'm willing to take that risk .
I believe that Trump believes there was no collusion. He's not savvy enough to recognize it even it it was happening right under his nose though. In my opinion of course...
I think we can go a lot, lot further than that. We can say that we know there was none, among himself or anyone with any association with him, based upon a lengthy multi year investigation into every facet of his life and his associates lives.
That's about as reasonably certain as we can possibly be about criminal matters of this sort.
OK, I'll bite. As has been discussed many times, collusion is not a criminal matter. However, collusion does have serious national security implications and I expect the Mueller report to refer to those in relation to the actions of the Trump campaign. It's beyond dispute that there were a considerable number of links between the campaign and Russia, but what the report should provide information on is what motivated those links and what the implications of facilitating foreign interference in US elections are.
You've said many times in recent days that the Mueller report clears Trump of any wrongdoing. I don't agree with that and don't really understand how you can make that statement based on the Barr letter. There are numerous examples of blatant lies told by members of this administration - Trump may be the worst, but he's far from the only one. I said before I thought Mueller had credibility and I would accept his report, but I'm not going to blindly accept what Barr says the report says.
I am amazed in fact that the media do appear to have blindly accepted Barr's story. I generally think the BBC analysis is good, but on this issue all the headlines and summaries they've published have accepted that the report clears Trump. Buried in the details of the stories there are questions about whether that is actually the case, but the overall message is clear - Trump is exonerated. I've had to reflect on that and whether they know something about the report that I don't, but I don't think that's the case. Instead I think they're just generally ignoring the possibility that Barr is not accurately portraying the report. That seems foolish to me. Of course, having written this post I will appear very foolish myself if Barr does in fact go ahead and publish the report and it transpires that he has accurately summarized it. However, I think the chance that will happen is sufficiently small I'm willing to take that risk .
Not only that but Barr was literally involved in covering up other crimes (Iran Contra). The default position needs to be sure buddy we believe you but we need to be able to verify it for ourselves.
TLDR: Right wing think tanks are lying about it. The right wing media is running with the facts from a right wing think tank (93 trillion) that is ridiculous. Republicans push phony attacks on Green New Deal’s cost, ignore ‘tens of trillions’ in benefits.
The GND is currently a non-binding resolution with goals. Not specific policy proposals so any cost is made up. They're all going with a number comes from a right wing think tank.
"Opponents of serious climate action are routinely using a nonsensical $93 trillion dollar cost projection to attack the Green New Deal even though the figure has been roundly debunked by fact checkers."
The GND in reality is an effort to mobilize the U.S. economy and jobs to shift away from fossil fuels as fast as technologically possible to preserve the livable climate that has made modern civilization possible
Trump's own government agencies estimation a loss of $500 billion per year due to climate change and "According to the Trump admin's National Climate Assessment, with no action, climate change will result in 10% GDP loss by 2090."
Which is fucking huge.
$500B is a little less than 3% present GDP. God knows what the GDP of America will be in 2090. I'd guess around 70 trillion dollars.
That's a huge damned anchor on the economy to be ignoring.
$500B is a little less than 3% present GDP. God knows what the GDP of America will be in 2090. I'd guess around 70 trillion dollars.
That's a huge damned anchor on the economy to be ignoring.
It is, but the report is still extremely (arguably unreasonably) optimistic. It's essentially looking at the impact on the US domestically of changes to the climate and the impact on GDP reflects factors such as the reduced productivity in very hot weather, required changes in agriculture and costs of increased natural disasters.
However, it does not take account of indirect impacts from the effects on other countries - and those are likely to be considerable, e.g. as a result of:
- many millions of people being displaced by rising water levels. This will increase the migration pressures that have already been a significant worldwide concern in recent years.
- changing climates will lead to resource shortages in some areas and probably result in conflicts over things like rights to water use. That could easily drag the US into further regional conflicts as intractable as existing ones such as Syria.
- the changing distribution of wealth as a result of climate change is likely to have an impact on US trade.
And of course the above is related just to the economic impact. As much or more of a concern though are impacts on health and well-being.
Also very relevant is that whatever the costs of taking action now, those costs are likely to rise sharply the longer action is delayed. For that not to be true we would need to discover some new, cheap, way of removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere (not just reducing future emissions, but removing it directly). That does not seem like a good gamble to me.
I believe that Trump believes there was no collusion. He's not savvy enough to recognize it even it it was happening right under his nose though. In my opinion of course...
I think we can go a lot, lot further than that. We can say that we know there was none, among himself or anyone with any association with him, based upon a lengthy multi year investigation into every facet of his life and his associates lives.
That's about as reasonably certain as we can possibly be about criminal matters of this sort.
OK, I'll bite. As has been discussed many times, collusion is not a criminal matter. However, collusion does have serious national security implications and I expect the Mueller report to refer to those in relation to the actions of the Trump campaign. It's beyond dispute that there were a considerable number of links between the campaign and Russia, but what the report should provide information on is what motivated those links and what the implications of facilitating foreign interference in US elections are.
You've said many times in recent days that the Mueller report clears Trump of any wrongdoing. I don't agree with that and don't really understand how you can make that statement based on the Barr letter. There are numerous examples of blatant lies told by members of this administration - Trump may be the worst, but he's far from the only one. I said before I thought Mueller had credibility and I would accept his report, but I'm not going to blindly accept what Barr says the report says.
I am amazed in fact that the media do appear to have blindly accepted Barr's story. I generally think the BBC analysis is good, but on this issue all the headlines and summaries they've published have accepted that the report clears Trump. Buried in the details of the stories there are questions about whether that is actually the case, but the overall message is clear - Trump is exonerated. I've had to reflect on that and whether they know something about the report that I don't, but I don't think that's the case. Instead I think they're just generally ignoring the possibility that Barr is not accurately portraying the report. That seems foolish to me. Of course, having written this post I will appear very foolish myself if Barr does in fact go ahead and publish the report and it transpires that he has accurately summarized it. However, I think the chance that will happen is sufficiently small I'm willing to take that risk .
The polling (to my surprise, actually) bears this out. Most STILL think Trump obstructed the investigation, over 80% still want to see the full report, and (most interestingly) Trump's numbers haven't moved an ounce. Everyone who believed he was innocent still does and are clinging to the Barr Memo. Everyone who thought he was guilty still do and are being reinforced by the total lack of transparency regarding the release (or lack of release) of the report. Trump's numbers remain already baked in. Democrats, before this and after, are still going to have to mobilize their base to defeat him. Can't think of a better way to step on a favorable news cycle you were gifted by a media who played along with Barr's chardade than to again attempt to rip health insurance from 20-30 million people and have your Secretary of Education use the phrase "difficult choices had to be made" when suggesting all funding for the Special Olympics be cut from the budget. A 4-page memo from your hand-picked Attorney General isn't going to do any good if you insist on acting like mustache-twirling villians from an Austin Powers sequel at every available opportunity.
To be fair, NIH says 34.9% of 18- to 25-year-olds have used marijuana or hash in the last year, compared to 12.2% for 26 and up [source]. And in 2016, per the Census Bureau, "citizens 65 years and older reported higher turnout (70.9 percent) than 45- to 64-year-olds (66.6 percent), 30- to 44-year-olds (58.7 percent) and 18- to 29-year-olds (46.1 percent)" [source].
I knew the statistics before I commented. I didn't pull the sarcasm completely out of my ass. You beat me to the punch-line @joluv !
Yeah, nevermind that millenials are THE most productive generation in this country so far, we must all be pot smoking lazy good for nothings.
Comments
And, not for nothing, but Trump's budget seems to cut ALL funding for the Special Olympics. Really?? I mean, REALLY??
Barr had absolutely no reservations about saying the report cleared Trump. But that was the only thing he saw fit to make public. Everything else about the report and its contents is still being kept secret, and according to Lindsay Graham, Barr said that things were going to stay that way for weeks, and that the Trump administration itself would have free access to the report before anyone else.
Now what happens? The Trump administration has weeks and weeks to plan for damage control? Barr is now in a perfect position to tell Trump exactly what the investigation found and how Trump's team can obscure the details and twist the story before the public hears anything. Are we going to just assume that Barr would never do a thing like that?
This is not a good faith attempt to settle the Russia issue in the public eye. This is just more obscuring, and I find it especially frustrating because I thought the conclusion of the Mueller report would finally, finally mean clarity on the issue. I thought we would have a direct, detailed answer, not a sound byte from one of Trump's own cronies.
What precedent are we setting by allowing presidents to control the release of information from investigations into their own activities? Does that seem like the kind of power that would ever be used in a responsible way?
In regards to Jussie Smollett, I believe there is a Federal case being built against him. The FBI is investigating if he mailed a threatening letter to himself. This ain't over.
Maybe it IS what they say it is. But just like their daily actions the last two years, their response to the report being delivered makes it IMPOSSIBLE to think things are on the up and up. This may, in fact, obscure the truth for all-time. If they have the ability to do so based on what is in the report, they can end it, to THEIR benefit, once and for all by just giving up the info. But they refuse to do so.
There was a recent poll that 84% of the public wants to see the full report. Given that it would be a chore to get 84% of the American public to agree the sky is blue on any given day, that is fairly remarkable. But I take no solace in that. The real question is how many of those 84% now believe the report HAS been released. And my guess is that number is massive.
Let's put it this way: if I was charged with murder, and evidence came to light that 100% exonerated me, I wouldn't be losing sleep over the fact that that same evidence might reveal I had a foot fetish. I'd say "get that evidence in front of a judge and jury as quick as possible".
This isn't a millennial talking, this is an American talking.
Keep thinking in compartments, you're playing right into their hands. Together we are stronger.
The video is on her twitter @semiticgod
@semiticgod Try clearing your browsers cache?
So now the question is ok what's your plan, Republicans? What's your plan to deal with climate change? It's a real thing that is a dire emergency looming over the planet.
Surely you've noticed all the fires, floods, and crazy storms that have been increasing every year. They've affected your people in your districts. They've swamped islands like Puerto Rico and cost tens of billions of dollars in damage all over the United States every year. What's your plan, Republicans?
The UN said we have 12 years to limit climate change catastrophe.
Virtually every single nation on Earth and is committed to the Paris Climate Accords. Except the corrupt Republican party in the US, they apparently want us all to die in multiple ways including negligence.
So, you don't like the Green New Deal, then
What's your plan? What's your plan?
No plan? right. Thought so. No plans. At least the Democrats are willing to get the ball rolling. They take the subject seriously enough to try to do something about it. Republicans have no plan there except to give the rich tax cuts and provide socialism to the rich via corporate welfare. That and ruin healthcare with, again, no plan.
Well to be totally honest India, China and Brazil do not give a shit about the Earth either.
Look, I hope this won't be taken as too harsh. It's a nuanced point, and I want to be clear that I'm not accusing you of any kind of malice.
That said, my view is that rather than joining together with everyone as they are, you're implicitly suggesting that everyone should join you in your compartment. It bothers me that a well educated young woman has to change her manner of speech to satisfy you that her primary identity is "American," not "young woman." Why is that? Were her previous patterns of speech less legitimately American than yours? What gives someone permission to be a generic American instead of having some other primary identity? I think we have to be careful to address those questions in a way that doesn't unnecessarily place the burden on some groups more than others.
I'm not really sure, it seems to be working fine for me. If you scroll your Twitter feed, it's bound to come up somewhere this evening. It's AOC responding to the Green New Deal being called elitist.
Look, I hope this won't be taken as too harsh. It's a nuanced point, and I want to be clear that I'm not accusing you of any kind of malice.
Then peddle your wares someplace else please. I'm not buying into any cults Ideologies today.
When a member of a government goes totally out of their way to ridicule a legitimate issue, you know right then, that shit is fucked up.
I'll be at the Copper Coronet.
When a member of the government goes out of his way to look like a dumb asshole, you realize we have to do better America.
If slow Mike Lee can be a Senator, then there's hope for other people that don't think good too.
If this guy can be Senator, you can do anything. Again, Republicans have NO PLAN. They just offer games and hate. They're a fantastic opposition party, it's easy to be against everything and stand for nothing, they're not so good at governing.
TLDR: Right wing think tanks are lying about it. The right wing media is running with the facts from a right wing think tank (93 trillion) that is ridiculous. Republicans push phony attacks on Green New Deal’s cost, ignore ‘tens of trillions’ in benefits.
The GND is currently a non-binding resolution with goals. Not specific policy proposals so any cost is made up. They're all going with a number comes from a right wing think tank.
"Opponents of serious climate action are routinely using a nonsensical $93 trillion dollar cost projection to attack the Green New Deal even though the figure has been roundly debunked by fact checkers."
The GND in reality is an effort to mobilize the U.S. economy and jobs to shift away from fossil fuels as fast as technologically possible to preserve the livable climate that has made modern civilization possible
Trump's own government agencies estimation a loss of $500 billion per year due to climate change and "According to the Trump admin's National Climate Assessment, with no action, climate change will result in 10% GDP loss by 2090."
And in other news...
https://www.algemeiner.com/2019/03/26/new-zealand-mosque-chairman-accuses-mossad-zionist-business-of-orchestrating-christchurch-shootings/
*reaches for popcorn*
OK, I'll bite. As has been discussed many times, collusion is not a criminal matter. However, collusion does have serious national security implications and I expect the Mueller report to refer to those in relation to the actions of the Trump campaign. It's beyond dispute that there were a considerable number of links between the campaign and Russia, but what the report should provide information on is what motivated those links and what the implications of facilitating foreign interference in US elections are.
You've said many times in recent days that the Mueller report clears Trump of any wrongdoing. I don't agree with that and don't really understand how you can make that statement based on the Barr letter. There are numerous examples of blatant lies told by members of this administration - Trump may be the worst, but he's far from the only one. I said before I thought Mueller had credibility and I would accept his report, but I'm not going to blindly accept what Barr says the report says.
I am amazed in fact that the media do appear to have blindly accepted Barr's story. I generally think the BBC analysis is good, but on this issue all the headlines and summaries they've published have accepted that the report clears Trump. Buried in the details of the stories there are questions about whether that is actually the case, but the overall message is clear - Trump is exonerated. I've had to reflect on that and whether they know something about the report that I don't, but I don't think that's the case. Instead I think they're just generally ignoring the possibility that Barr is not accurately portraying the report. That seems foolish to me. Of course, having written this post I will appear very foolish myself if Barr does in fact go ahead and publish the report and it transpires that he has accurately summarized it. However, I think the chance that will happen is sufficiently small I'm willing to take that risk
GOP: Quotes hitler
Rep Mo Brooks (R) quoted Mein Kampf on the House of Representatives floor approvingly.
Living in glass houses throwing stones, again.
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/435950-omar-requests-accountability-for-gop-lawmaker-who-quoted-hitler-on-house-floor
Not only that but Barr was literally involved in covering up other crimes (Iran Contra). The default position needs to be sure buddy we believe you but we need to be able to verify it for ourselves.
Which is fucking huge.
$500B is a little less than 3% present GDP. God knows what the GDP of America will be in 2090. I'd guess around 70 trillion dollars.
That's a huge damned anchor on the economy to be ignoring.
It is, but the report is still extremely (arguably unreasonably) optimistic. It's essentially looking at the impact on the US domestically of changes to the climate and the impact on GDP reflects factors such as the reduced productivity in very hot weather, required changes in agriculture and costs of increased natural disasters.
However, it does not take account of indirect impacts from the effects on other countries - and those are likely to be considerable, e.g. as a result of:
- many millions of people being displaced by rising water levels. This will increase the migration pressures that have already been a significant worldwide concern in recent years.
- changing climates will lead to resource shortages in some areas and probably result in conflicts over things like rights to water use. That could easily drag the US into further regional conflicts as intractable as existing ones such as Syria.
- the changing distribution of wealth as a result of climate change is likely to have an impact on US trade.
And of course the above is related just to the economic impact. As much or more of a concern though are impacts on health and well-being.
Also very relevant is that whatever the costs of taking action now, those costs are likely to rise sharply the longer action is delayed. For that not to be true we would need to discover some new, cheap, way of removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere (not just reducing future emissions, but removing it directly). That does not seem like a good gamble to me.
Or Russia...
The polling (to my surprise, actually) bears this out. Most STILL think Trump obstructed the investigation, over 80% still want to see the full report, and (most interestingly) Trump's numbers haven't moved an ounce. Everyone who believed he was innocent still does and are clinging to the Barr Memo. Everyone who thought he was guilty still do and are being reinforced by the total lack of transparency regarding the release (or lack of release) of the report. Trump's numbers remain already baked in. Democrats, before this and after, are still going to have to mobilize their base to defeat him. Can't think of a better way to step on a favorable news cycle you were gifted by a media who played along with Barr's chardade than to again attempt to rip health insurance from 20-30 million people and have your Secretary of Education use the phrase "difficult choices had to be made" when suggesting all funding for the Special Olympics be cut from the budget. A 4-page memo from your hand-picked Attorney General isn't going to do any good if you insist on acting like mustache-twirling villians from an Austin Powers sequel at every available opportunity.
Yeah, nevermind that millenials are THE most productive generation in this country so far, we must all be pot smoking lazy good for nothings.