Leroy42 wrote: » Well that is if you believe he wanted to burn it all down. I get the impression he didn't want to burn it down, but to change it to what he wanted. It wasn't the GOP he had a problem with, it was that they weren't hardline enough. He was more than happy for the system to continue as long as the GOP were in charge of it.
Water John wrote: » I presume, not answering before the grand jury, is an option?
Mr.Micro wrote: » Pessimistic, but you are right. I would add that much of the world is losing respect for the USA. Trump has been/ is the icing on the cake. The double standards really grates on thinking people. Then absolute nonsense to explain away things. In effect neither the Republicians of the Democrats are fit for power IMO.
Overheal wrote: » Of course, Republicans won't give a damn about balancing a budget while in power - neither did the Democratshttp://reason.com/blog/2018/01/16/gop-leaders-tell-fiscal-hawks-to-fly-awa I'm more and more convinced the country is just royally ****ed over; I can't imagine how we get back to any sort of rational, bipartisan medium, short of another great disaster - which will probably just cause a huge war, and more spending.
spacecoyote wrote: » But on the other hand, he has kind of worked with the agenda of wanting to see the whole system burn to the ground. Seeing a President impeached, and the two sides of political system in chaos would play massively into that agenda. There would be no bigger step he could really take in relation to that than to throw Trump & a large faction of the Rep party under the bus (maybe this is purely wishful thinking)
Leroy42 wrote: » There is simply no advantage to Bannon being cooperative. He will destroy whatever cred he still has with the alt-right and potentially land himself in hot water. It is not like he will be welcomed as a hero onto the left if he did. Better to keep his mouth shut so that he holds the threat of talking rather than talking and losing everything. He continues to be important based on what he could do, he loses that as soon as he speaks. If there is something there (and given both his refusal to testify and Trumps refusals it is clear that something is up) then talking can only lead to bad things. What did being up front do for Flynn? Nothing, Trump tossed him aside quicker than a used hanky, and although he has already tossed Bannon aside there is always the chance to get back in or at least stay relevant. You can bet that Bannon is already thinking of Breitbard MkII.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » That's a fair point. However, it would be foolish in the extreme to lie to a grand jury should he eventually testify.
Headshot wrote: » Link here:https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/16/us/politics/steve-bannon-mueller-russia-subpoena.html Hopefully Bannon will be very sore on what happened to him and goes all out on Trump
B0jangles wrote: » It's being reported in other sources, but I don't know how reliable they are:http://www.hougansydney.com/whats-happening-in-haiti/breaking-news-haiti-to-unsealed-files-pertaining-to-former-haitian-dictator-jean-claude-duvalier-laundering-money-through-trump-tower-during-his-time-in-power The above is a general news site about Haiti
Overheal wrote: » I would take that with a grain of salt.
spacecoyote wrote: » Not sure if this is fake or not, as it doesn't link to any back up, but if true would be some serious poetic justicehttps://twitter.com/EdKrassen/status/953015685826846720
Itssoeasy wrote: » Steve bannon has been summoned to testify before a grand jury in US Russia inquiry.
Leroy42 wrote: » Simply, because politics in the US is broken and does not serve the people. You are given little choice, and due to the set up in many cases your choice means little anyway as the state votes the way it does always. The recent vote in Alabama gives some hope that things can start to chance, but even with such a terrible candidate, the GOP almost got in.
Overheal wrote: » Im just baffled how they can do this and expect not to be primaried hard. Fortunately he's up for the boot this November.
Leroy42 wrote: » There is little doubt that US needs significant infrastructure spending over the next few years. The problem is how to pay for it. GOP have boxed themselves in a bit here as they have already given away the possibility of getting money from any increase in the economy by their recent tax giveaway, which they claim will be paid for by increased growth etc. The best they project it that it is zero sum game. So corporate America will not be paying for it. The second option is public America (workers etc), but that would involve tax increases which would go totally against the recent tax plan and destroy the base. So the only option is to make it look like nobody is paying for it, ie public/private. Whereby the private companies get to get all the profits and the majority of the risks. That would make it look like Trump is getting it done whilst not costing anybody anything, at least until the projects open (so likely well past reelection). It shows have crazy the recent tax reduction plan was. They gave it all away up front and left nothing for the government to deal with the known issues that they face. WHy not even step down the CT rate cut over a few years, with the "extra CT" gained being put directly t the infrastructure.
Water John wrote: » Reminds me of the story of Bush Snr, who didn't know what the scanner in the supermarket was for.
The automaker will invest $1 billion in order to move production of the heavy-duty pickup from Saltillo, Mexico to the freshly retooled Michigan site. It will add 2,500 jobs to the Detroit suburb when the plant overhaul is complete in 2020. “It is only proper that our employees share in the savings generated by tax reform and that we openly acknowledge the resulting improvement in the U.S. business environment by investing in our industrial footprint accordingly,” CEO Sergio Marchionne said in a prepared statement. FCA also announced over 60,000 of its US employees would be receiving $2,500 bonuses, another result of the tax reform bill passed by the Trump administration late last year.
