All-purpose news and politics thread: Two Steps Beyond!

[BeastieRunner]

Can you say....Joe Manchin? If any Dem flips, he's bound to be the first.

Yup!

I fully expect this SCOTUS hearing to be messy as well as the vote. It might be one of the most dramatic Senate confirmation hearings and votes in a century!

[ZombieHavoc]

Brett Kavenaugh is very happy about all the protest votes in 2016.

[Mister Ferro]

So how does the verified relationship between Trump and Kennedy's Son's Bank work into this fake news? Does the fact that he actually gave a list of folks he'd retire for mix with that to give you any hangups over the situation? I know it fills me with disgust.

[ZombieHavoc]

We are supposed to pretend or believe that any of Trump's picks don't to have some specious behind-closed-doors deal going on...

[Mister Ferro]

We are supposed to pretend or believe that any of Trump's picks don't to have some specious behind-closed-doors deal going on...

The media continues to believe in this and each time it turns out false. This only helps Trump in the end.

[ZombieHavoc]

The media continues to believe in this and each time it turns out false. This only helps Trump in the end.

I definitely don't believe it's false. There is shady **** behind every single one of his picks, top to bottom.

[Dalak]

https://screenshotscdn.firefoxusercontent.com/images/d9525f36-2b58-4544-92e5-41ed20d9e971.png

Sorry not-sorry, but I don't 100% trust someone who's tweeting guesses and has worked in the middle of the housing crisis for a particularly nasty bank, no matter if they're on my side of politics or not. If she wants to put this to bed post facts and not just words on twitter.

The media continues to believe in this and each time it turns out false. This only helps Trump in the end.

So how do you feel about the Russia story and all the guilty pleas connected to it?

[ZombieHavoc]

Democratic Senator Doug Jones Says He Is “Open to Voting Yes” on Trump’s Supreme Court Nominee
https://www.vogue.com/article/doug-j...-court-nominee


Alabama Democrat Doug Jones says he could vote either way on Trump's SCOTUS pick
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/07/08/p...ntv/index.html


Is Doug Jones really planning to vote for Trump's SCOTUS nominee, even though this year's election is not his re-election? I wonder if Senator Jones will represent the interests of his party? Or will he represent the interests of the people of Alabama who voted for Trump?

I thought U.S. senators were elected by the people of their home states to represent the interests of their home states in the Senate?

I'm glad Jones won but he feels not far from being a republican.

[Dalak]

I'm glad Jones won but he feels not far from being a republican.

Ironically, not a very manly chin even if he seems to fit the Manchin mold.

[ouroboros]

Good. Cuz you know it didn't make sense when you wrote it.

Now, if you don't want to sing Abba with me, how about Black Sabbath? I like a lot of the Ozzy stuff and the first record with Ronnie James Dio. We're all comics fans right? The Jeff Lemire Black Hammer comic has a Deadman parody character named "Jack Sabbath" and a bartender named "Lonnie James".

Cry out legions of the brave...

"Ain't That a Shame" would seem more appropriate, because then we can each mean different things when we sing it.

[ouroboros]

It's not that the lies are equal, but that at a certain point a threshold is crossed and the argument isn't about Trump VS an honest person, but about the Republican VS The Democrat.

The issue with Warren isn't the insult, but that she claims something about her background that isn't true, despite evidence to the contrary.

With the immigration argument, "Abolish ICE" is a policy position, and its relevance should be considered.

With the separated children, there is no good option. There is a law limiting the amount of time children can be held in custody. If the children were released with their parents, that would incentivize more parents to put their kids at risk crossing the border in the future (The family crossings have become a bigger problem recently.) They could just automatically evict anyone who makes an asylum claim in the wrong place (the overwhelming majority of asylum claims from Central America are rejected), although that's not a great choice either. Trump's Executive order is a temporary fix, and may very well be thrown out by a judge.

It's going to be difficult to come up with a bipartisan solution when one of the top-ranking Democrats went around with a T-shirt announcing that he doesn't believe in borders.

https://www.mprnews.org/story/2018/0...neapolis-rally
There was recent discussion about Trump's dad's arrest in the 1920s.

Honestly, I hadn't considered that a backlash against Trump's Pocahontas comments might be informed by Trump's outrageous and ridiculous claims against Obama, in the sense that it makes his comments seem immediately suspect. There's no point to arguing from authority when it comes to Trump (IE- using the fact that he says something to justify its validity) so my understanding of Warren's background isn't based on that at all. It's based on the fact-checkers.

The main difference is that whereas Trump didn't really know or care about Obama's heritage, he had apparently been correctly informed that she was not a real Native American, which is why the "Pocahontas" remark is most likely meant as sarcasm, rather than a racial aspersion.

[ouroboros]

"FACT CHECK OF THE DAY"

"No, Democrats Don’t Want ‘Open Borders’"

President Trump has falsely claimed at least two dozen times since taking office that Democrats want to open American borders. But legislation shows that Democrats support border security measures, though not the border wall he wants to build.

“The Democrats want open borders. They want anybody they wanted, including MS-13, pouring into the country.”

— President Trump, speaking on Monday at a campaign rally in South Carolina

THE FACTS

False.
Democrats have argued that building a wall on the southwestern border is ineffective and a waste of resources, and rejected hard-line proposals to limit legal immigration. But Mr. Trump is grossly exaggerating Democrats’ positions when he conflates their opposition to his signature campaign promise and immigration priorities as “open borders.” And there is no evidence that they “want anybody,” including MS-13, to enter the United States freely.

While criticizing Mr. Trump’s immigration policies, the Democratic National Committee has committed to improving border security.

Senator Chuck Schumer of New York and Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the Democratic leaders, have rebutted the president’s charges. Additionally, their aides cited several examples of legislation that are supported by Democrats and would have provided border security funding.

Responding last week to Mr. Trump’s earlier claims, Ms. Pelosi said, “No, we do care about the border.”

“We care about protecting our country, but we don’t think we need to protect the border by putting children in cages,” Ms. Pelosi said. “We want to be smart and strong — not reckless, rash and ruthless in this case.”

Thirty Democrats in the House have sponsored a bipartisan immigration bill this year that gives the young undocumented immigrants known as Dreamers a pathway to citizenship. It also enhances technology used to monitor the border, and provides $110 million in grants annually for collaboration between local law enforcement and Border Patrol agents.

All 193 Democrats in the House and 23 moderate Republicans have signed a “discharge” petition to force a vote on that bill and other immigration proposals.

In the Senate, all but one Democrat voted for similar immigration legislation sponsored by Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, and Senator Chris Coons, Democrat of Delaware.

And all but three Democrats voted for yet another bipartisan proposal to provide a pathway to citizenship to Dreamers, authorize $25 billion to build barriers and hire personnel at the border over the next decade. It would also prohibit green-card holders from sponsoring adult children..."

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/27/u...n-borders.html

"Several examples of legislation" is somewhat vague. What specific measures did Democrats support during Obama's two terms, beyond Obama's "deporter-in-chief" stance?

[aja_christopher]

"Several examples of legislation" is somewhat vague. What specific measures did Democrats support during Obama's two terms, beyond Obama's "deporter-in-chief" stance?

Once again, you make the mistake of assuming the (House) Republicans ever intended to work across the aisle on said issue -- the Senate reached a bipartisan solution but the House refused to even vote on it.

Just like with Garland -- there was no "bipartisanship" because they wouldn't even have a vote under Obama.

-------
"The Senate on Thursday passed the most monumental overhaul of U.S. immigration laws in a generation, which would clear the way for millions of undocumented residents to have a chance at citizenship, attract workers from all over the world and devote unprecedented resources for security along the U.S.-Mexico border.

The vote was 68-32. Fourteen Republicans crossed the aisle to vote with all Democrats in favor. Thursday’s vote now puts the onus of immigration reform on the Republican-led House, where leaders have been resistant to the Senate legislation.

“The strong bipartisan vote we took is going to send a message across the country, it’s going to send a message to the other end of the Capitol as well,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), the leader of the so-called Gang of Eight. “The bill has generated a level of support that we believe will be impossible for the House to ignore..."

"Boehner: No vote on Senate immigration bill"

"House Speaker John Boehner is sticking to his position: The House will not vote on the Senate-passed immigration bill.

“I’ve made it clear and I’ll make it clear again, the House does not intend to take up the Senate bill,” Boehner said Monday. “The House is going to do its own job in developing an immigration bill.”

He added, “It is time for Congress to act. But I believe the House has its job to do, and we will do our job.”



https://www.politico.com/story/2013/...on-vote-093845

[worstblogever]

I still liked the Kennedy/McCain immigration bill from 2005 that never got a vote. That version of John McCain would never have won a GOP Primary, but would have been a damned fine president.

[ouroboros]

Once again, you make the mistake of assuming the (House) Republicans ever intended to work across the aisle on said issue -- the Senate reached a bipartisan solution but the House refused to even vote on it.

Just like with Garland -- there was no "bipartisanship" because they wouldn't even have a vote under Obama.

-------
"The Senate on Thursday passed the most monumental overhaul of U.S. immigration laws in a generation, which would clear the way for millions of undocumented residents to have a chance at citizenship, attract workers from all over the world and devote unprecedented resources for security along the U.S.-Mexico border.

The vote was 68-32. Fourteen Republicans crossed the aisle to vote with all Democrats in favor. Thursday’s vote now puts the onus of immigration reform on the Republican-led House, where leaders have been resistant to the Senate legislation.

“The strong bipartisan vote we took is going to send a message across the country, it’s going to send a message to the other end of the Capitol as well,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), the leader of the so-called Gang of Eight. “The bill has generated a level of support that we believe will be impossible for the House to ignore..."

"Boehner: No vote on Senate immigration bill"

"House Speaker John Boehner is sticking to his position: The House will not vote on the Senate-passed immigration bill.

“I’ve made it clear and I’ll make it clear again, the House does not intend to take up the Senate bill,” Boehner said Monday. “The House is going to do its own job in developing an immigration bill.”

He added, “It is time for Congress to act. But I believe the House has its job to do, and we will do our job.”



https://www.politico.com/story/2013/...on-vote-093845

I didn't say anything recently about the cooperation of the Republicans, I only asked to know what specific measures the Dems were supporting.

Though I can think of a lot of situations in which the GOP merely blocked for the sake of blocking, I would think that two of the cited provisos-- giving more citizenship opportunities to the undocumented and attracting more foreign workers to enter the American market-- would be non-starters from the get-go, even if the legislation did devote more dough to border security.