Slashdot Mirror

Post some citations on this. The only known info like this HRC was given were a heads up on possible topics for a town hall meeting, and they were quite obvious. For example: http://thehill.com/media/32458...

whenever I meet a Trump supporter, or a Hillary hater, If I bring up Russia, their nationalistic sense of American sovereignty will completely evaporate.

Putin's favorability rating among republicans has tripled since Trump announced his campaign.
In 2015, Putin had a 12% favorability rating with republicans.
Now it is 32%.

Partisanship makes people stupid.

"Being Libertarian" had a perfect example – libertarianism is diametrically opposed from authoritarianism

"Libertarian accommodation of conservative illiberalism is how libertarianism became philosophically arbitrary anti-leftism and withered."
— Wil Wilkinson
VP for Policy, Niskanen Center (libertarian think-tank)

No, the "hackers" involved sent the same phishing emails to the GOP as they did to the Dems. The difference was that GOP tech support blocked the emails, while Dem tech support literally told Podesta it was legitimate, so he went ahead and put in "p@ssword" for them so they could dump the contents of his email account.

The fellow that advised Podesta to enter his password into the phishing email claims his email to Podesta had a typo (a missing word) that completely altered it's meaning - he never meant to tell Podesta to respond to the email.

The only link to Russians is that there is suspicion based on some of the tools used that a Russian-speaker is involved, and since everyone knows there aren't any non-governmental Russian-speaking hackers (sarcasm), an assumption has been made.

The line I heard early on in this story line was "if every piece of evidence points to the Russians, the one thing you can be sure of is that the Russians weren't involved."

First, of all, elections are won and lost not by single things but by collections. One can have more than one mistake or more than one event leading to an election win or loss. Second, the evidence that serious attempts at hacking Clinton did occur is overwhelming, and saying otherwise is simply ignoring the evidence. We even know the exact phishing attempts that lead to the hacks http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/310234-typo-may-have-caused-podesta-email-hack?. Third of all, if you do want to actually point to other things that had an impact also, the statistical evidence that Comey's actions mattered is an almost complete slamdunk. See https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-comey-letter-probably-cost-clinton-the-election/. Facts matter.

It's a good thing Comey is the only person at the FBI investigating Trump. Whew! Bullet dodged!

Comey was fired after asking for more resources to investigate Trump. He wanted more personnel for the investigation.

http://thehill.com/homenews/ad...

About time.

Harry Reid demanded he resign back in December, for example:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the......

So did the Wall Street Journal a couple of weeks later in January, 2017:

http://thehill.com/policy/nati......

It's about time Trump cleaned out that bit of the swamp.

Ferret

Again, it isn't the only federally mandated cost on the schools. IDEA ( Individuals with Disabilities Education Act), while laudable, puts a high cost on schools. If you are in a smaller district with minimal funds with these kinds of increases on costs are of concern in addition to other revenue sources and costs.

http://www.nea.org/home/19029....

The current average per student cost is $7,552 and the average cost per special education student is an additional $9,369 per student, or $16,921. Yet, in 2004, the federal government is providing local school districts with just under 20 percent of its commitment rather than the 40 percent specified by the law, creating a $10.6 billion shortfall for states and local school districts.

Over the past 10 years, the number of U.S. students enrolled in special education programs has risen 30 percent

Also, the decline in participation has an effect on the schools revenue. The school has to bear the cost. Since the program is by district and not by school this can cause problems for needier schools in the same district.

If you are a school faced with all these costs and are no longer financially secure, any revenue source must be looked at regardless whether you like the strings attached or not. Directly answering your question, no but when you add in the other federally mandated expenditures for financially struggling schools it becomes more and more like it.

Is this why email notifications from "The Hill" are sponsored by InfoSys this morning?

Our ally Turkey is in crisis and needs our support

Reference here, since I looked it up:
Article in The Hill, By Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn (R), contributor - 11/08/16

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/309829-dems-propose-historical-park-on-the-moon/

And Manchin is a DINO, anyway. He votes with the GOP most of the time, after all.

On the bright side, he is one of the biggest primary targets for groups like Our Revolution and Justice Democrats, who are trying to rid the Democratic party of these kinds of corporate lackeys...

http://thehill.com/homenews/ca...

https://www.facebook.com/Prima...

https://www.reddit.com/r/Sande...

https://decisiondeskhq.com/qui...

Meanwhile: http://thehill.com/homenews/ne... And: http://www.foxnews.com/food-dr... But, I guess that's ok because #hypocrisy

I don't know of one person who would deliberately not avoid paying taxes when given the opportunity.

I do. Mitt Romney. When he released his tax returns during the 2012 campaign he chose not to take some deductions.

Had Romney taken the full deduction, he would have paid some quarter of a million less in taxes.

Romney releases his 2011 tax return and 20-year average tax rate

The guy literally campaigned on not golfing.
Yet another promise broken.

"Because I'm going to be working for you, I'm not going to have time to play golf. Believe me! Believe me. Believe me folks."
08/08/2016

“I would rarely leave the White House because there’s so much work to be done,” Trump, 69, tells ITK. "I would not be a president who took vacations. I would not be a president that takes time off.”
TheHill.com 06/23/15

Most racists don't consider themselves racist.
Most people who voted for Trump are sympathetic to his racist, misogynist, xenophobic, islamophobic views.
Your rationalization is that you wanted a "Scalia" replacement. He was a blatant racist so you are a racist for wanting someone like him.
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballo...
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/nb...

What we know the Russians hacked:

1) DNC e-mails. Publishing these e-mails hurt Hillary in the election. It is believed this alone caused her to drop at least 5 points which was more than the difference in the election. This might be called more of hacking the voters than hacking the vote.

2) The US Election Assistance Commission. The EAC is responsible for national voter registration, establishing voluntary guidelines for voting, and certifying and auditing voting machines. Some news outlets reported that this hack occurred after the election, but the only evidence to support that is that after the election one of the hackers involved was selling the administrator accounts and other data. It also isn't clear if the Russian hacker was state sponsored or not as the hack was not advanced (started with an SQL injection). It doesn't make sense for Russia to hack it after the election, but it might make sense for one of the hackers to sell the data after he didn't need it anymore to try to make extra cash if he wasn't kept in line to keep this secret.

To me the EAC hack is even bigger than the other one, but it has received very little attention and as far as I know hasn't been part of the investigation. After the election Republicans voted to get rid of the EAC in committee, but as far as I can tell it hasn't gone before a full congressional vote. We know Russian hackers achieved full administrator access to the EAC and stole the reports on the audits of the voting machines. This means we know Russia stole the plans on how to hack the voting machines and for some reason this hasn't been investigated. We also know that Trump did better in districts that had the vulnerable voting machines than he did in districts where other systems were used. Most exit polls showed that Clinton won (they show different results for North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Florida). Republicans blocked the recounts and it wasn't clear that the recounts could have determined if there was hacking in districts with no paper trail, although it could have in districts with a paper trail.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/...
http://thehill.com/policy/cybe...

https://www.theguardian.com/us...

Election Systems & Software alone controls 60% of voting machines in the US, and can control the election results. The majority of the rest of the machines are Dominion Voting System (formerly Premier Election Solutions, formerly Diebold) and they also control enough machines to change the results of the election.

How do we know the election itself wasn't hacked?

As opposed to Democrats who literally want to control when and how you take a shit (via pollution and water use laws). Trump is reducing the size of the executive branch departments across the board and in some departments gutting them. Trumps budget cuts ~$1T/year in government spending. You need to watch less MSNBC... http://thehill.com/policy/fina...

You know? Wonderful Europe?

Where the head of the EU just threatened to break up the US.

Where the ruling class hides crime stats on immigrants?

Wheelbarrio, you seem to not be aware of the situation. We had to pass this ACA to find out what was in it (as Nancy Peleosi famously said) because it stood no chance of passing if people knew what was in it. In fact the whole driver behind it called us all stupid (and yes, even you as an Aussie - you're stupid too according to him) - http://thehill.com/policy/heal... , Hear the man himself - https://www.youtube.com/watch?... . "budget neutral" for 10 years, well here we are. Now it's broken and in flames. Bankrupt.

Here's the problem. In 2008 just before BHO took office we had a big bailout under GW Bush. That was in fact the last budget passed, I believe even to this day. We're on a continuing resolution meaning we stay with that same budget that has big money coming out of it year after year. The press is silent on all of this of course, or clueless. This is why we went from 7T debt under Bush to 21T under Obama. Where did all of this money go to? You can bet his friends. Friends that spent like no tomorrow to make sure Hillary was elected, and failed. Now they're really upset that they lost *TRILLIONS*. For sure, under the old course the US would be bankrupt in less than 2 years. We'd be nothing. No Navy, No nothing really. We'd be killing each other a lot I bet. Disease, starvation, millions would die. As it is, this can still happen unless he can stop the money burn. No way? Think Greece, only a LOT worse. I mean, a LOT LOT worse. The more of a hole you dig for yourself, eventually you'll have to get out of it and we have a really big hole.

Don't think you're safe down there. If the US falls, watch out. Everyone else in the world is at risk. In fact, you could probably kiss your butt goodbye. With the guns they took out of the country, Australia could be conquered easily. Japanese from WWII in this situation, you'd fall quickly. Europe will likely fall to the invading Mohammadhists that invaded Europe recently. Fleeing refugees? I saw mostly young men, mostly MILITARY type men. Very few women and children. They're ready and waiting to take over Europe.

Think I'm wrong? Think about it some, look at some videos of Europe. Check things out. Break into a cold sweat.

Most of these people are only interested in keeping the research dollars flowing, and will cry wolf to anyone who will listen in order to make that happen. Thankfully, we have someone in the White House now that can see through the BS.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/12/2...

http://thehill.com/homenews/ne...

This budget is too dumb even for the Heritage Foundation.

Oh, how I wish you were right:

...The proposed cuts hew closely to a blueprint published last year by the conservative Heritage Foundation, a think tank that has helped staff the Trump transition...

http://thehill.com/policy/finance/314991-trump-team-prepares-dramatic-cuts/

Source?

Here ya go. As you can see, at least one business, at the time of the writing, has already lost a customer because of Trump's weekly visits and others are losing money because they can't do business while he's in town.

As to the cost of Trump's flight down and everything involved, roughly $3 million each time. But since this is Trump, who whined about how many times Obama went golfing and the cost to the taxpayers, I'm sure this won't mean anything. I've seen on several pro-Trump sites and sites where people are favorable to Trump defending these costs because they're nothing but "liberal" hysterics, then turning around and saying if Obama did then Trump can do it despite these same people whining about it when Obama did it.

So yeah, hypocrisy at its finest.

I like the bit where you go "I don't know if what I'm saying is true, but it is true cause it is supported by my hate."

Cause that is where you both fuck up ANY credibility your data might have (cause you don't give a fuck about data) - AND you cement your judgment in hate and prejudice.

Guess what?
Republicans held those positions since Obama's second term, enlarging them from the lead they had since his first term.
If you think it's the "witch" - how come Republicans GAINED AND KEPT GAINING seats under Obama, starting from the last population census?

Two words.
Jerry and mandarin.
Oh and BTW, Democrats actually ended up with a net gain chamber-wise while most governor positions weren't even up for election.

But you just go on believing in witches bro. And enjoying yourself. After all, Trump won.
Why are you still so hung up on the other side losing? Get over it already.
Sing Hallelujah, come on, get happy... and all that jazz.
Don't be such a sore winner.

Won't someone please think of the birds!

No, Pence. And Pruitt too.

Now, what would you expect someone that was trying to avoid scrutiny to do, at this point, when they received the first official request for those emails? I'm pretty sure the answer is anything but "promptly and immediately start handing them over."

This is a convoluted way to say "When asked for the emails, Hillary Clinton promptly and immediately handed them over." And I can only say: [citation needed]

If you are going to claim this, please provide references documenting this prompt and immediate handover.

I claim the opposite: that Hillary Clinton did not promptly and immediately hand anything over, but late and grudgingly. And I will provide references.

The gold standard is Sharyl Attkinson's timeline:

https://sharylattkisson.com/hillary-clintons-email-the-definitive-timeline/

The Benghazi incident happened right before the election in 2012. Judicial Watch filed an FOIA request immediately after this, and Sharyl Attkinson filed one as well in December 2012. These FOIA requests included requests for Hillary Clinton emails related to Benghazi. So our clock starts ticking in November 2012.

February 2013: Judicial Watch sued the State Department for failing to respond to the FOIA requests.

August 2013: the Congress subpoenaed Benghazi-related documents.

2014: Judicial Watch files another FOIA request, then files another lawsuit when it gets no response.

Now, the key happened in December 2014. I'll quote it exactly instead of paraphrasing:

Dec. 5: Clinton privately turns over copies of 30,490 "work-related" emails to the State Dept. totaling 55,000 printed pages. No date has been provided as to when she deleted her "private" emails, but it is presumed to be around this time frame.

So two years after the first FOIA requests, Hillary Clinton finally turned over emails... printed on paper with minimal email header information. She and/or her team deleted literally tens of thousands of emails and then wiped the server. She claimed that these were personal emails, not work-related, but wiping the server was highly improper (actually illegal, I'm pretty sure, but nobody took action against her for it).

Note that the federal document retention laws required her to turn over copies of all work related communications on or before her last day as Secretary of State. She did not turn anything over until forced to, two years later, and she turned over printed paper. If she had simply used the government email system, the government would already have had all her emails; that's why she was supposed to be using the government email system. (She never asked for or received permission for deviating from the normal way of doing things, but those who knew what she was doing never did anything to stop her.)

And then, the FBI revealed that they had found another 15,000 work-related emails that Hillary Clinton had failed to turn over (she turned over 30,000, so that's not a small number of emails). https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/08/22/the-fbi-found-15000-emails-hillary-clinton-didnt-turn-over-uh-oh/

In the 30K emails turned over (printed on paper) there weren't any emails related to Benghazi. In the 15K emails recovered by the FBI, 30 Benghazi-related emails were found. That means Hillary Clinton deleted Benghazi-related emails rather than turn them over, and of course the original FOIA requests were specifically looking for Benghazi-related emails.

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/293837-fbi-recovers-30-clinton-emails-involving-benghazi-attack

Quote from that article:

With Hillary you have to pay attention to her exact words.

Ok, lets look at what she actually said:

“This is another instance where what is common practice — I need information, I had some points I had to make and I was waiting for a secure fax that could give me the whole picture, but oftentimes there is a lot of information that isn’t at all classified,” Clinton said Sunday on "Face the Nation." “So whatever information can be appropriately transmitted unclassified often was. That’s true for every agency in the government and everybody that does business with the government.”
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/265367-clinton-defends-telling-aid-to-send-data-through-nonsecure-channel

Later we found out that's because she ordered her people to (unlawfully) remove the markings.

As you can see, that's false. Furthermore, you've been corrected many times and continue to repeat that lie. You don't have any interest in the truth, only scoring points for your "team."

Of course in some cases they didn't remove the markings, so she did have stuff marked classified too.

There were only two emails that contained any markings.* They were her phone call schedules for the day that had been declassified and partial markings were incorrectly left in the middle of the documents. Her call sheets are only classified to begin with in case the calls aren't made so as to avoid embarrassing the other party that they were blown off by the secretary of state. You can see the two documents yourself in the emails released by the state department. Which is all the proof you need that they were indeed unclassified because "leaking" does not declassify a document, so the fact that they were published by the state department proves they were unclassified.

Here are the two emails, you can see the errnoneous "(C)" (for confidential, the lowest level of classification) on the individual line-items:
CALL TO PRESIDENT BANDA
KOFI ANNAN CALL SHEET

* state department press statement that there were only two such cases search for "aware of two" to find the part of the press conference where that is confirmed.

I'll see your politicalcompass.org and raise you:
http://hotair.com/archives/201...
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundi...
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfro...
http://insider.foxnews.com/201...
http://archive.mrc.org/biasbas...

Really Detroit? More votes cast for HilLIARy! than registered voters in the precinct?

It said that there were explained voter tally problems in 34 precincts, ie. machines where they can see the fault, 236 precincts that balanced, 248 precincts that between them had 465 fewer paper ballots than the machines counted, and 144 precincts that between them had 264 more paper ballots than the machines had counted. Sounds to me like their voting machines are falling apart, like everything else in Detroit. It did not say who these votes (either missing or extra) were for, nor did it make any comment on how the turnout compared to the number of registered voters. However, given that the unexplained discrepancies average out at fewer than 2 votes per precinct, we can be reasonably sure that the discprepancies would be so dwarfed by the number of people who didn't bother to vote, that your claim is ludicrous.

Poll: Americans want Democrats to work with Trump

A strong majority of Americans say Democrats should look to cooperate with President Trump to strike deals, according to the inaugural Harvard-Harris poll provided exclusively by The Hill.

Most people want politicians to not fuck the country up fighting each other? Who'da thunk it? I will note, your quote says cooperate. I'm sure most reasonable politicians will cooperate to some degree, although I don't follow politics that side of the pond closely enough to know how much. However, what I've seen of Donald Trump so far would indicate a man who demands compliance rather than attempting to cooperate with anyone.

On Thursday, a Ukrainian man who hatched a plan in 2013 to send heroin to my home and then call the cops when the drugs arrived was sentenced to 41 months in prison for unrelated cybercrime charges. Separately, a 19-year-old American who admitted to being part of a hacker group that sent a heavily-armed police force to my home in 2013 was sentenced to three years probation.

Sergey Vovnenko, a.k.a. "Fly," "Flycracker" and "MUXACC1," pleaded guilty last year to aggravated identity theft and conspiracy to commit wire fraud. Prosecutors said Vovnenko operated a network of more than 13,000 hacked computers, using them to harvest credit card numbers and other sensitive information... A judge in New Jersey sentenced Vovnenko to 41 months in prison, three years of supervised released and ordered him to pay restitution of $83,368.

And now people like this are in charge of our elections.

LOL at you, because they're SMARTER than the people you'd like to have in charge of elections.

Really Detroit? More votes cast for HilLIARy! than registered voters in the precinct?

B-b-b-but PopeRatzo says voter fraud doesn't exist! Of course, that's because he leaves out the fact that the sky isn't blue on his planet.

And how do you think obstructing Trump at every turn is going to play out in 2018? Can you say, "60-vote Republican super-majority in the Senate":

Poll: Americans want Democrats to work with Trump

A strong majority of Americans say Democrats should look to cooperate with President Trump to strike deals, according to the inaugural Harvard-Harris poll provided exclusively by The Hill.

The survey found that 73 percent of voters want to see Democrats work with the president, against only 27 percent who said Democrats should resist Trump’s every move.

You go! Keep digging!

I can't wait to see Justices Kennedy and Ginsburg replaced with two more Scalia clones. Your pain powers my laughter at the "progressive" failure to turn the US into Venezuela. :-D

Again. That's the difference between journalism and fake news, journalists do make mistakes, but, when it's done right, they correct them. Fake news, on the otehr hand, doesn't even pretend to try to get facts right; fake news simply lies right from the start.

I'm not sure what your anecdotes is intended to demonstrates. If you have to go back to 1932 to cite an example of uncorrected news reported from a major newspaper, I'd say that proves my point.

Here's one now - https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/15/us/politics/leaks-donald-trump.html

Interesting link to an article pointing out that until the leaks were about him, Donald Trump loved leaks. Not fake news, since the facts seem to be correct. At best you could say it's a case with some editorializing in the body of the article. But fake news is making up facts, not expressing opinions about facts.

Here are a few other sources that appear to say the same thing:
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballo...
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/15...
https://www.theguardian.com/co...
http://thehill.com/policy/nati...

Again. That's the difference between journalism and fake news, journalists do make mistakes, but, when it's done right, they correct them. Fake news, on the otehr hand, doesn't even pretend to try to get facts right; fake news simply lies right from the start.

I'm not sure what your anecdotes is intended to demonstrates. If you have to go back to 1932 to cite an example of uncorrected news reported from a major newspaper, I'd say that proves my point.

Here's one now - https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/15/us/politics/leaks-donald-trump.html

Interesting link to an article pointing out that until the leaks were about him, Donald Trump loved leaks. Not fake news, since the facts seem to be correct. At best you could say it's a case with some editorializing in the body of the article. But fake news is making up facts, not expressing opinions about facts.

Here are a few other sources that appear to say the same thing:
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballo...
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/15...
https://www.theguardian.com/co...
http://thehill.com/policy/nati...

because a Republican-controlled Congress was dead-set on doing nothing in order to obstruct Obama at all costs. This is, seriously, no shit, because the Republicans would be damned if they even APPEARED to be supporting a president that some still swore was not a citizen.

Yep... a registered Dem that was a liar... not to hard to predict.

He sure doesn't sound like a "registered Dem" when he was leading the "Lock Her Up!" chants at the Republican National Convention.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-...

Sorry, he's one of y'all.

Proof?

Slashdot customer service here again. I'm sorry you're having trouble seeing what's in front of your nose. I'll be happy to help you with that.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/11/...

http://thehill.com/homenews/se...

Would you mind taking a short survey about your experience with Slashdot customer service?

He flirts and hits on 10-15 year old girls regularly (often enough that there are multiple tapes of him doing it). He liked walked in on underage teenage girls naked changing and bragged about being the only man allowed to do it on the Howard Stern show. He had his staff try to encourage the underage teenage girls that were naked to flirt with him saying they were more likely to win the contests if they did. He talked about wanting to sleep with teenage girls on the Howard Stern show. In my opinion, that makes him a pedophile.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...

http://www.rollingstone.com/po...

http://www.politifact.com/wisc...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

http://people.com/politics/don...

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_...

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/mo...

http://www.tmz.com/2016/10/12/...

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-...

Still feeding the fake news and alternative facts I see. Sorry, you can't rewrite history. If you voted for President Pedophile, you voted for someone who lies and has no problem breaking the law, and if you did it because he made up a claim that his opponent broke the law all the worse. Kelly-Anne Conway just broke the law on Fox News last night by advertising for Ivanka Trump, but I don't see Republicans punishing her either. Most federal employees in the past get suspended or fired for what she did last night, but President Pedophile and Republican controlled congress are the only ones with the ability to punish her, and I don't see either doing anything. President Pedophile actually defended her after she broke the law.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ma...

https://www.bloomberg.com/poli...

The Clinton e-mails are one of the biggest lies Republicans, Breitbart, and Fox News told. Nothing was really deleted. Hillary first sent one copy of the hard drives to a law office and had them sort between all the personal stuff and professional stuff. They "deleted" the personal stuff off that copy of the data before handing it to the FBI. The FBI said that wasn't sufficient and issued a subpoena for all the data including the personal data. Then she handed a copy of all the data including the personal stuff. Once requested, the FBI got everything. The quote from the FBI was about "deleted" e-mails was that there were about a dozen business e-mails that hadn't been included with the first set of business e-mails handed over. There wasn't any crime, because nothing was actually deleted. The FBI also decided that the missing ("deleted") e-mails was not criminal because there was no evidence that it was done intentionally and there was nothing incriminating in them (incorrectly sorting 0.1% of the e-mails was probably accidental). It's not like we are talking about paper copies where there is only one copy of the papers and she shredded them. There were multiple copies of the data on different hard drives and backups.

Rice had her aides use personal e-mail accounts to send e-mails for her. Powell used a private e-mail account (believed to be AOL) for his secretary of state e-mails. Republicans only had a problem with Clinton doing the same thing Republicans had done. They also leave out that she requested a secure e-mail option from the NSA twice and was rejected; the NSA told her to send e-mails from her office computer when she spent most of her job traveling. She was just trying to do her job.

http://www.nytimes.com/interac...

http://www.politifact.com/trut...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

http://www.businessinsider.com...

http://thehill.com/policy/nati...

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02...

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/...

What kind of asshat are you? Your assertion is at the two year old level: no facts, no logic, just babbling. But Trumpholes like you live in a fact and logic free world, so this kind of stupid is normal for you.

Get your head out of your ass. You, Trump, and the other infantile right wingers are messing with some really nasty crap, and there could be hell to pay. If it was only you morons who had to pay the bill I think it would be just fine, but you are going to screw up everyone, including me. That gets my attention.

I and a lot of other people are really pissed. At least one pole says that 40% of the voting public thinks Trump should be impeached. He's been in less then a month and he has alienated a significant percentage of the voting public. This goes way beyond the kind of disapproval that happens during any president's term.

Trump is a danger to himself and others. At some point, and it could be really soon, he is going to completely defy the constitution, and our entire political system will be imperiled. You and the other degenerate shitheads who put him into office will have to decide if you support the constitution or are out and out fascists. I expect the latter, and that could lead the country into the pit of hell. It that happens I know who to blame.

Here are some of the jobs Trump will bring to America. Notice an important detail about where the workers are coming from, and Trump's explanation.

Admittedly it is wild speculation

And my wife is a medical doctor sitting on the couch next to me that works with H1Bs and knows the system. You seem to be talking out of your ass about something you know nothing about.

these immigrant doctors

How do you know they are immigrants? My wife worked with and went to school with a lot of second generation Americans. Most people assume they're immigrants as well.

More than a few were in their 50s and I don't see them doing 3-5 years of residency at that age

Agreed, they might have done their 3-5 years of residency when they were 30 or 40. My wife has a co-worker that redid his residency in his late 30s after he moved here from Egypt. Another (not an immigrant) that was a PA (physicians assistant) went back to med school and did his residency in his 40s.

paying the freight for fully licensed doctors

They don't. In fact the doctors likely don't even work 'for' the Urgent care clinic, they're contracted. A lot of doctors will moon light there to earn extra money.

What 'freight' are they paying for? This isn't IT.

it makes sure the MD workforce is kept small and salaries and patient costs high.

Brought this up to the Doctor. The workforce isn't being intentionally kept small. There is a massive doctor shortage: http://thehill.com/blogs/congr...

They're trying to expand the size of the workforce and they can't. We rely on those 'immigrants'

Additionally that's not how medicine works. This isn't IT. (However this is how most people on Slashdot seem to want IT to work.(

yet were passed off to patients as doctors

How did they do they do this? Did their shirt say "MD"/"DO' (or other letters to indicate the medical school)? Then they were licensed as a doctor and passed boards.

Did you assume they were a doctor? People assume my wife is a nurse because she's a female. I fail to see how that's the urgent care center 'passing them off as doctors'.

Some guy walks into the examination room with a dress shirt and tie and a white coat, you just think "doctor".

You think doctor. Nurse practitioners can wear dress shirts. Men can be nurses. Other professions wear white coats. Did they say they were a doctor?

their "doctors" *can't*

There is no "doctors". They are doctors or they are not.

I know "fake news" is getting us all worked up right now, but

"...fake news did not change the result 2016 presidential election, according to a study by researchers at Stanford and New York University released Thursday. ..."

Story: http://thehill.com/homenews/me...

Study: https://web.stanford.edu/~gent...

Like the "Russia hacked the election" story the original threat being discussed was specifically hacking of electronic voting machines. When that was proved ridiculous, the phrase was re-framed to something more vague, saying that Russia "manipulated" the results by media...you know, exactly like the Martin Sheen "dump Trump" video attempted to do (and failed). https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Try again?

Obama administration originally flagged 7 countries in Trump's order

It is neither bad,

sure it is.

nor illegal.

Remains to be seen. Judges have moved to block it pending an actual court case.

I have no problem saying this directly: I voted for him because I wanted him to do the things he is doing.

Wait you *wanted* to get fuck Have you never played chess? There is no deception in chess, but there are lots and lots of traps.ed over while he enriches his billionaire friends? Well, OK, I guess there's a fetish for everything!

I'm not blaming you for what he is doing,

So your call "Obama did it! Obama did it!" was just for giggles then?

scramble to keep up

This is a pretty predictable playlist, it's hard to "keep up" when I'm already ahead.

And no, a trap does not imply deception.

Yes it does, otherwise, people wouldn't enter a trap.

Have you never played chess? There is no deception in chess, but there are lots and lots of traps. ... so you willingly fell into the traps? Or you didn't notice them because they were well hidden. In other words, you were deceived.

So, what is your proof that Trump is fascist?

Start here:

http://www.wehuntedthemammoth....

Then there's this straight out of literally Hitler's playbook ("The Criminal Jew"):

http://thehill.com/homenews/ad...

I've given you examples of actual, real fascism

No, you've brought up other things that other people did. The reason for that is you know deep down that Trump is indefensible and so your only way to excuse his behaviour is to try to divert attention to other people. It's perhaps a good way of deceiving yourself but it won't work on me.

Anyway now we both know what Trump is really like, and it's clear to me that if you examine your thoughts deeply you will reach the same conclusion, because otherwise there is no rational reason for you to make the arguments you are making. You don't have to worry about losing face on the internet so there's no need to admit it here. Just do the sensible thing next time you're in the polling booth, eh? That's the great thing about anonymous elections, you can save face in public but do the right thing where it counts.

Is this what the majority wants?

The majority seems to want to have a temporary "Muslim ban":

http://thehill.com/policy/defe...

Admission of refugees has usually been opposed by strong majorities:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fac...

Did you not notice the large numbers who voted for Trump who did so because he wasn't Hillary and not because they actually like Trump?

Both candidates were disliked, but Trump's personal unfavorability was even higher than Hillary's. That is, if anything, people voted for Hillary more because of identity and personality, whereas they voted for Trump more on issues.

Or what about noticing that Trump didn't actually get a majority of votes?

Popular vote tells you nothing about what the majority of voters want.

In this case, because of high unfavorability ratings for both candidates, Republican voters in secure states like California could simply express their dislike for Trump by not voting; if the same voters were transported into a swing state, they probably would have supported him. And Hillary's entire popular vote margin is accounted for by coastal California. (In fact, many Republican voters in California don't even bother voting at all anymore because it's a waste of time.)

From the SMH Key phrase.

In the 40 years to 2015, not a single American was killed on US soil by citizens from any of the seven countries targeted - Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen - according to research by the conservative-leaning Cato Institute.

When the Cato Institute is calling you out on racist policies you know you're up shit creek.

The real irony here is that Trump and his alt-right claque are banning travellers from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen and justifying it by citing 911 but the countries that the 911 terrorists came from are not on the list, especially Saudi Arabia and the UEA and keep in mind these are the same countries whose citizens are covertly funding ISIS. On top of that Trump set up a series of shell companies to handle a hotel deal in Saudi Arabia and he did it after his bid for president: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-... at the same time as he was lambasting Clinton for taking donations from the Saudis.

My favourite parts:

"They [Saudis] buy apartments from me, ... They spend $40 million, $50 million. Am I supposed to dislike them? I like them very much.”

"I would want to protect Saudi Arabia, ... But Saudi Arabia is going to have to help us economically. They were making, before the oil went down ... they were making $1 billion a day.”

So rich countries that can make tribute payments to the Trump regime and whose citizens are financially benefitting Trumps companies are not destined for 'the list' even though these countries are financing terrorist organisations that attack and kill US citizens but others including some that are actually fighting ISIS in Syria make the list. I suppose Trump supporters have a hard time spelling 'hypocrisy'.

My personal feeling is that neither one will stop them. I think people severely underestimate the lengths that this administration will go to to see this through.

That's probably because polls suggest that this is what Americans actually want. E.g.:

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-...

Now, you can argue that the majority of Americans are deluded fools, but that's the way the cookie crumbles in a democracy.

A global nuclear exchange ends civilization as we know it in minutes while climatic changes are something that we can adapt to

Climate change makes wars and conflicts more likely. (That's a Pentagon assessment.) More wars make escalation into a nuclear exchange more likely.

I do love how the denialist positions has evolved from "There is no warming!" to "Ok, there's warming, but it's not human caused!" to "Ok, there's warming and we're causing it, but we'll just adapt!"

It's not just the USDA.

It's also the EPA and the Department of the Interior. Tweets containing non-controversial scientific facts were deleted this afternoon.

http://thehill.com/policy/ener...

http://www.miamiherald.com/new...

Don't be alarmed, it is for your own good. War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.

Really Potsy....http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2017/01/09/russia-trump-election-flawed-intelligence/

Care to explain why the DNC did not allow the FBI to examine the servers that were hacked. http://thehill.com/policy/nati...