Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns. The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns.

05-24-2017 , 04:07 PM

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/867445147084226561
05-24-2017 , 04:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kafja
I assume this is a rhetorical question, but the answer is target his advertisers, same as O'Reilly.

List of advertisers on Hannity's show: https://www.mediamatters.org/researc...rtisers/216607

If you use any of these products or services, email them, tweet them, tell them you won't be giving them your custom again while they advertise on Hannity, and tell them why. This stuff does actually work.
1 down already

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...spiracy-theory

Quote:
Fox News host Sean Hannity lost an advertiser Wednesday after pushing a baseless conspiracy theory surrounding the killing of a former Democratic National Committee (DNC) staffer, BuzzFeed reported.

Cars.com announced that it would immediately pull all advertisements from Hannity's 10 p.m. show, a day after the Fox host said he would stop discussing the story of former DNC staffer Seth Rich "for now."
05-24-2017 , 04:22 PM
The Seth Rich conspiracy theory may have been first picked up by Louise Mensch while she was working for Heat Street.

How the murder of a DNC staffer turned into a right-wing conspiracy
https://www.mediamatters.org/blog/20...spiracy/216644
Quote:
On July 22, WikiLeaks released 20,000 emails that had been stolen from the DNC, and Redditors immediately started guessing that Rich was the source of those emails. Heat Street, a News Corp. publication then run by Louise Mensch, ran a roundup of these rumors. In the post, Heat Street simply went through the “r/The_Donald” subreddit, listing different conspiracy theories that users had come up with, even comparing one theory to the work of mathematician John Nash and the movie A Beautiful Mind. Heat Street had also mentioned the FBI rumor in the bottom of a previous post about Rich’s murder, noting that there was no evidence to substantiate it.
05-24-2017 , 04:40 PM
Yeah, this isn't going to go over well:

Quote:
CBO and JCT estimate that, in 2018, 14 million more people would be uninsured under H.R. 1628 than under current law. The increase in the number of uninsured people relative to the number projected under current law would reach 19 million in 2020 and 23 million in 2026. In 2026, an estimated 51 million people under age 65 would be uninsured, compared with 28 million who would lack insurance that year under current law. Under the legislation, a few million of those people would use tax credits to purchase policies that would not cover major medical risks.
05-24-2017 , 04:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostOstrich
So apparently the pope presented Drumpf with a lengthy document on man-made climate change. Nicely done!
Doubt most of you think that what he accomplished with that makes up for his almost certain pleas to Trump to stop abortions.
05-24-2017 , 04:45 PM
this just in -

1 life = $5,200
05-24-2017 , 04:48 PM
I'm pretty impressed by how accessible this report is. Very easy to read. Sounds like they'll drastically reduce the number of overall covered people, and reduce the cost of premiums for young people by narrowing coverage/benefits and increasing premiums for old people.
05-24-2017 , 04:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Sklansky
Doubt most of you think that what he accomplished with that makes up for his almost certain pleas to Trump to stop abortions.
I'm fine with it.

The pope urging the president to make abortion illegal is expected and standard and probably been done since it was made legal in the 70s.

The pope giving the president a giant document with facts regarding climate change is super unexpected and freaking hilarious. Also embarrassing.
05-24-2017 , 04:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Sklansky
Doubt most of you think that what he accomplished with that makes up for his almost certain pleas to Trump to stop abortions.


The Pope last year told his priests to forgive people who have abortions.

Last edited by Paul D; 05-24-2017 at 05:01 PM.
05-24-2017 , 04:54 PM

https://twitter.com/jbarro/status/867480417561083904


https://twitter.com/jbarro/status/867481334809325568
05-24-2017 , 04:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thug Bubbles
I'm pretty impressed by how accessible this report is. Very easy to read. Sounds like they'll drastically reduce the number of overall covered people, and reduce the cost of premiums for people who don't vote by narrowing coverage/benefits and increasing premiums for people who do .
.
05-24-2017 , 04:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis Cyphre
Trump holds first face-to-face talks with Pope Francis






I wonder if the same people who commended them for not wearing a headscarf in Saudi Arabia will also criticize them for covering their heads in the Vatican.
Anyone else weirded out by the similarities in their faces? Must go to a family plastic surgeon.
05-24-2017 , 04:59 PM
Holy ****, look at the last page of the PDF.

64 year old individual who makes $26,500 would be paying (at a minimum) $13,600 for health insurance. That's over 50% of their income.
05-24-2017 , 05:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thug Bubbles
I'm pretty impressed by how accessible this report is. Very easy to read. Sounds like they'll drastically reduce the number of overall covered people, and reduce the cost of premiums for young people by narrowing coverage/benefits and increasing premiums for old people.
How many young people would be excited about that? Most of them have older parents and grandparents. No way would I ever vote for a bill that increases premiums for them.

Whole thing is stupid anyways and we should just have single payer healthcare like every other civilized country.
05-24-2017 , 05:01 PM
When you can't bang your daughter, marry someone who looks like your daughter.
05-24-2017 , 05:01 PM
So everybody else gets screwed, and young healthy people get to pay less...for health insurance that won't be worth very much in the event of an emergency. Seems like a lose/lose/lose. Unless you're one of those millionaires and billionaires getting a sweet sweet tax cut out of the deal.
05-24-2017 , 05:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eyebooger
Holy ****, look at the last page of the PDF.

64 year old individual who makes $26,500 would be paying (at a minimum) $13,600 for health insurance. That's over 50% of their income.

is that 26,500 before taxes?

if so, its now like 2/3 of their money
05-24-2017 , 05:12 PM
It's OK though because old people don't eat that much and most of them have their houses paid off so they can afford to spend basically all their money on insurance.
05-24-2017 , 05:21 PM
13,600 sounds a little under the current market price about for that age. The costs are out of control b/c they can charge whatever the hell they want. That's the real issue here and I guess the only viable solution without bull**** lobbyists getting involved is to remove insurance entirely. Costs will have to go down if demand goes down.
05-24-2017 , 05:24 PM
Man it's a good job that facts matter so much nowadays. This CBO scoring is bound to sink trump for good! If there's one thing trump supporters can't ignore it's government statistics reported in the mainstream media.
05-24-2017 , 05:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomdemaine
Man it's a good job that facts matter so much nowadays. This CBO scoring is bound to sink trump for good! If there's one thing trump supporters can't ignore it's government statistics reported in the mainstream media.
This is a ****post.

This is the type of **** that has led to videos of people yelling at their representatives at townhall meetings.
05-24-2017 , 05:31 PM
the last cbo score was literally the worst thing that has ever happened to trump in regards to job approval
05-24-2017 , 05:39 PM
Messing with old people is going to get Trump ****ed up.
05-24-2017 , 05:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirbynator
the last cbo score was literally the worst thing that has ever happened to trump in regards to job approval
His job approval is still what within 5 points under day 1 of his presidency? It won't do much because everyone knows it's not getting passed in the senate anyway. You guys keep desperately thinking that THIS TIME FOR SURE. Nope, many people insisted there was no evidence on nixon right before he resigned. Trump won't be different. If anything it's gonna be worse b/c media is far less trusted.

      
m