Slashdot Mirror


Valuable Republican Donor Database Breached -- By Other Republicans (politico.com)

Politico reports: Staffers for Senate Republicans' campaign arm seized information on more than 200,000 donors from the House GOP campaign committee over several months this year by breaking into its computer system, three sources with knowledge of the breach told Politico... Multiple NRSC staffers, who previously worked for the NRCC, used old database login information to gain access to House Republicans' donor lists this year. The donor list that was breached is among the NRCC's most valuable assets, containing not only basic contact information like email addresses and phone numbers but personal information that could be used to entice donors to fork over cash -- information on top issues and key states of interest to different people, the names of family members, and summaries of past donation history... Donor lists like these are of such value to party committees that they can use them as collateral to obtain loans worth millions of dollars when they need cash just before major elections...

"The individuals on these lists are guaranteed money," said a Republican fundraiser. "They will give. These are not your regular D.C. PAC list"... The list has helped the NRCC raise over $77 million this year to defend the House in 2018... Though the House and Senate campaign arms share the similar goal of electing Republican candidates and often coordinate strategy in certain states, they operate on distinct tracks and compete for money from small and large donors.

Long-time Slashdot reader SethJohnson says the data breach "is the result of poor deprovisioning policies within the House Republican Campaign Committee -- allowing staff logins to persist after a person has left the organization."

NRCC officials who learned of the breach "are really pissed," one source told the site.

73 comments

  1. No honor among thieves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    More Republicans in jail. I like it.

    1. Re:No honor among thieves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I saw the list. It was
      Koch
      Koch
      Koch
      Koch
      Koch
      Koch
      ...

    2. Re: No honor among thieves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > personal information that could be used to entice donors to fork over cash -- information on top issues and key states of interest to different people, the names of family members...

      Name of a family member is not exactly extortion material. I wonder what else is in here. Also, I wonder if top Democrats also have an extortion list.

      This is great, they are making the case to break up this duopoly on control of government.

    3. Re:No honor among thieves by hey! · · Score: 1

      Very few people, I think, have the sense that taking "proprietary information" is stealing; this is particularly the case for information that you yourself had a hand in creating.

      As an information technology, it is a point of professionalism to recognize the proprietary nature of data you have worked on, but I wouldn't expect most people to grasp this automatically unless they'd signed an NDA. In fact when it comes to list of clients, which in politics a donor amounts to, knowledge of that list and relationships with people on it are a key part of your negotiating position as an associate in a firm like a law firm or advertising agency.

      Then there is accessing a database you no longer are supposed to have access to, but again understanding the difference between having a password and having authorization is a distinction I wouldn't count on most people grasping, or if they grasp it, respecting. Anybody who handles proprietary information needs to be briefed on the limits of their authorization, but the fact that the user credentials were never revoked tells me the people managing this data don't have a handle on the problem that ex-staffers pose.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    4. Re:No honor among thieves by Aighearach · · Score: 2

      Even when they did sign an NDA, most people just consider it "a bunch of words the lawyers wanted."

    5. Re: No honor among thieves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it would be a lot of fun to get the Dem's list and run a diff.

    6. Re:No honor among thieves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "... In fact when it comes to list of clients, which in politics a donor amounts to, ..."
      Boy, are you naive. Donors are the Product. Key Politicians are the Clients. Whale lists like these go way back to the Reagan Governorship Era, and Consultants Spencer-Roberts, who first gained notoriety with their smear campaign against Goldwater... on behalf of Rockefeller. That was the end of the 11th Commandment: "Thou shalt speak no ill of a fellow Republican." Republicans now hate each other almost as much as they hate Democrats.
      Whale Lists were invented by Spencer-Roberts. They racked up huge leasing time on the then-innovative IBM 360, creating databases on Republican constituencies, and key voting points. Racism plays well in the South, (See the Southern Strategy.), whereas the West leaned more Libertarian on such issues as Drilling and Gun Control. And all the while, they were compiling lists of those who, if primed properly, would gush Money.

      They lost on occasion; they made the switch to Ford too late in 1976. But by the 1980 Election, they were firmly in the Reagan camp again, and created that memorable phrase for him... wait, you don't remember it? America was just coming off the massive Inflation of the War Years, and Ford's "Whip Inflation Now!" hadn't worked, either as a Economic Plan or as a Campaign Slogan. It was felt that Reagan shouldn't get too specific on Policy issues, but he needed a good Slogan to kick things off. First was to shift the Inflation mess on Carter. And that is what Carter is remembered for now: Carter=Inflation. The best that could be said about Carter at the time was that he didn't make Inflation much worse. But for the 1980 Republican Primaries, Spencer-Roberts coined a Slogan for Reagan so utterly without meaning that it has gone into History... and so has been pretty much forgotten.
      Ronald Reagan, 1980: "...it's time to make America great again." Old tricks are the best tricks.

      The issue isn't thievery; the issue is Integrity. That the Republicans have lost any sense of Integrity, even among themselves, is only evidenced by the thievery. Goldwater may have been one mean old SOB, but he did have Principles of a sort.

    7. Re:No honor among thieves by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

      And here I sit with no mod points
      Thanks for the history lesson (sources would be nice)

    8. Re:No honor among thieves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you very much AutodidactLabrat.
      Sources:
      I'm sorry if this isn't online, I just have paper pulp products handy in the bookcase behind me.
      The story of Spencer Roberts and Reagan: "The Last Days Of the Late Great State Of California"; Curt Gentry. Gentry is better known by his utterly serious history of the Manson Family: "Helter Skelter". However, his "Last Days..." is a far better read, and is actually funny. Under a pseudonym, he tore Spencer-Roberts apart in an issue of Penthouse a few years after. Curt was a fine, funny, and decent Human Being, and I miss him.

      Spencer-Roberts, Roger Ailes, (Whom I didn't get to.), and the Southern Strategy is quite well laid out in Joe McGinniss' book "The Selling of A President", about Nixon; 1969. Ailes helped get Nixon elected, and in return, was eventually given Fox News. The Republican Stalwarts aren't mercurial, they are into it for the Long Game. Trump is just one of their current Tools.

      Hmmm.... xxxLabrat...
      Would you by any chance be one of Us? One of the original Labrats? Back in the Eighties I took great pleasure in sabotaging one of Teller's "Star Wars" plans. Oh, the Film Stripper idea for a Neutral Beam Weapon would have worked, but I was so clumsy in implementing it. Stupid me, teehee.
      I'm sorry; I did have to stalk you a bit before commenting further here. "Whirr chunk" and "Nitrogen bombardment with protons at 13-24 MeV in the fabled Northern Lights are our source for 14C" sort of rang a bell.
      Are you by any chance... actually a Ken?
      (The Kens and I used Slashdot two decades back to commit some little treasons. Dubna had to be kept up to date, and Dubna read Slashdot. Ghiorso insisted on us doing this.)

  2. Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 0, Troll

    There's a reason the term RiNO exists. Establishment "Republicans" are just globalists in disguise.

    1. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No true Scotsman would do such a thing!

    2. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by Camel+Pilot · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But at least they got the Estate Tax repealed and increased taxes on those lazy post-grad students.

      America was made great on the backs of people like Paris Hilton and Donald Trump Jr.

    3. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by hey! · · Score: 4, Informative

      There's a reason the term RiNO exists. Establishment "Republicans" are just globalists in disguise.

      To enforce the pretense of ideological and intellectual conformity.

      The earliest Presidential election I remember was Nixon v. Humphrey; back then there was a different term for Establishment Republicans than RINO. We called them "Republicans". People who are now non-Establishment Republicans were called "Dixiecrats".

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    4. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mod parent up!

    5. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck I assumed they just shared the list around anyway considering the fucking mountains of junk mail they send me.

    6. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by JoshuaZ · · Score: 1

      I would argue with you and normally also try to explain why globalism is good, but today I won't. Considering that the Republican Senators just voted for a tax bill which will saddle the US with an extra trillion dollars in debt and due tremendous damage to our basic research and other aspects, it seems like they really are acting like the caricature of "globalist" that some have, being willing to damage the US for their corporate overlords. Meanwhile, the people like me who are in favor of globalism for sanity and economic reasons don't have anything to do with this sort of crap.

    7. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I would argue with you and normally also try to explain why globalism is good, but today I won't...

      And yet you did, albeit in a really passive-aggressive low-testosterone way.

    8. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      Establishment "Republicans" are just globalists in disguise.

      In disguise? When did the Republican party start rejecting globalism? You speak like nationalism is the norm but that hasn't been true for many decades.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    9. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by Aighearach · · Score: 2

      Paris would have been a much better President.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      "Ratify Kyoto today!"
      "You can get married if you're straight or if you're gay."
      "If you're gonna put lipstick on a pig make sure that shiz matches her skin tone"
      "A proponent of clean energy"
      "Waterboarding is torture and global warming is totally not hot."

    10. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "But at least they got the Estate Tax repealed and increased taxes on those lazy post-grad students."

      Civics fail. This still needs to pass the house.

      Try again when you actually know how our system works and the bill has made it through all the way to being signed into law..

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    11. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by pots · · Score: 3, Insightful

      People who disagree with me are not real members of my tribe.

    12. Re: Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And, after reading the handwritten notes in the bill and applying the rules on real world examples.

      The little guy is going to get screwed while the guy with little hands and his ilk get richer.

    13. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by JoshuaZ · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      If you think that how people engage in snark says something about their testosterone level, or for that matter, if you think that someone's testosterone level is something worth remarking on or insulting people about, it says more about you than anyone you are talking to.

    14. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by Dutchmaan · · Score: 1

      Since when do YOU get to define what a republican is or isnt?

    15. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... Nixon v. Humphrey ...

      That may have been the last, or second-last election fought on 'for the people' issues. A current topic is how US politics changed in the 1970s: Carter and the Democrats adopted 'You chose the life you have'. Then former unionist Reagan and the Republicans adopted 'Saving rich people saves me'. Both camps ignored the reality of a cold, cruel world that makes life nasty and brutish. As a result, nobody was responsible for the under-achieving and poverty-stricken citizens.

    16. Re: Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ,because grad students should be paid minimum wage, damnit. I love your hypocrisy.

    17. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Last I checked 85% of Republicans support Trump. Republican, Conservative, Tea-partier, Trumper, they're all just convenient ways of letting people justify themselves. They all mean the same thing though.

    18. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dixiecrats are Democrats.
      Are you saying that Trump et al are Democrats?

      Because that makes no sense.

    19. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1, Informative

      You misunderstand me. I wasn't insulting you for having low-T, I was insulting you for being passive-aggressive and suggested low-T as a possible explanation. Though don't worry, this is a typical misunderstanding someone with low-T would make and it is an easily resolved issue with modern medicine.

    20. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 0

      Since a bunch of Liberal globalists like McCain started calling themselves Republican to trick people, so for awhile.

    21. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's like saying Slashdot moderators aren't representative of the Slashdot community. Clearly they are.

    22. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ((globalists))

    23. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by hey! · · Score: 1

      I say they are the same people who would have been Democrats forty years ago. Here in Massachusetts of all places they commonly fly the Confederate flag, something that would have been shocking back then in the cradle of abolitionism.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    24. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by JoshuaZ · · Score: 1

      Honestly, people like you frighten me. That you think that this is a reasonable or productive way to interact with other humans is insane. On the positive side, the fact that your comments have been modded up is an excellent way of reminding me not to feel positive when my actually productive comments are modded up, since it underscores how many people here have absolutely no understanding or appreciation for anything remotely resembling useful discussion.

    25. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      What's really amazing is how you can write so many words which claim to be in favor of substance, yet lack it entirely. Did you write all that with your eyes closed doing that weird euphoric face typical of people living in San Francisco?

    26. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It seems I'm the only person who remembers the last time this happened. They did it on purpose to evade federal laws about data protection, because technically this is a huge breach. But when your party is the same group "breaching" the data, you can skip a lot of the red tape by pretending it was an accident.

      I wouldn't doubt this is the same scenario.

    27. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      100% of people who attempt to use low testosterone as an insult have less testosterone than a 12 year old girl. Projection was invented by the right.

    28. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by Dutchmaan · · Score: 1

      well... you're basically a NAZI... see how easy it is to define what people "really" are.

    29. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      Zero to retard in two posts, not bad.

    30. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by Dutchmaan · · Score: 1

      ...unfortunately, I'll never be able to reach your level because I just don't think I can sink that low.

    31. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      That's the most euphoric "I know you are but what am I" I've ever heard. Did you write it while rolling your eyes while they were closed?

    32. Re:Senate Republicans Aren't Republicans by Dutchmaan · · Score: 1

      ..was that a retort?

  3. Drink! Girls! Feck! Arse! by BeerCat · · Score: 1

    "NRCC officials who learned of the breach "are really pissed,"

    And then they drowned their sorrows and got really pissed all over again.

    --
    "She's furniture with a pulse"
    1. Re:Drink! Girls! Feck! Arse! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... got really pissed ...

      Australia, is that you? Where; really pissed == drunk

  4. If you're not one of the 200,000 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Your solicitations will read something like, "Dear Jack. You and I both realize the importance of keeping our borders secure. But if Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, and George Soros have their way..."

    OTOH if you are one of the 200,000, it'll be more like "Dear Jack: Congratulations on [Jack's daughter] Sheri placing second in the state tennis tournament! ..."

  5. Goes without saying... by PhantomHarlock · · Score: 1

    There is no honor among thieves...on any side of the aisle!

  6. Republicans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are worse than Hitler.

  7. Test of the law by jargonburn · · Score: 1

    Sounds a lot like someone may have "knowingly accessed a computer without authorization or exceeding authorized access" per 18 U.S. Code 1030. The literal text of this statute and its successors (parts of the Patriot Act, as well as the CFAA) wouldn't seem to apply to non-governmental systems; however, in practice, pretty much any computer system (including phones) is now covered by it, due to the interstate nature of the internet.

    What's good for the goose...right? Maybe they'll be dumb enough to persec--i mean, prosecute them under the CFAA!

    1. Re:Test of the law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Sounds a lot like someone may have "knowingly accessed a computer without authorization or exceeding authorized access" per 18 U.S. Code 1030. The literal text of this statute and its successors (parts of the Patriot Act, as well as the CFAA) wouldn't seem to apply to non-governmental systems; however, in practice, pretty much any computer system (including phones) is now covered by it, due to the interstate nature of the internet.

      What's good for the goose...right? Maybe they'll be dumb enough to persec--i mean, prosecute them under the CFAA!

      They should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, including those that knowingly used the information. The only reason they probably won't be was that it was a republican. Were it a democrat they would have fired up the outrage machine and turned it up to the max.

  8. Those bastards by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 0, Troll

    But at least they got the Estate Tax repealed and increased taxes on those lazy post-grad students.

    America was made great on the backs of people like Paris Hilton and Donald Trump Jr.

    Yes, they increased taxes on post-grad students. Those bastards!

    And at the same time doubled the individual deduction for all taxpayers in the country.

    Those bastards!

    1. Re:Those bastards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, they doubled the standard deduction and eliminated all personal deductions. A family with two adults and two children will have a smaller standard deduction ($24K) than they have now. And if they have more kids they lose big time.

      Or if you're over 65 and get two deductions per person and the standard deduction now, even a couple loses.

    2. Re: Those bastards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Alleged tax cuts for plebes are temporary. Republicans don't cut government spending, they just shift the burden from rich people and taxes to poor people and "usage fees". Although this bill actually increases taxes on people making 75-250k.
      Also, property tax deductions are capped and temporary.

    3. Re:Those bastards by quantaman · · Score: 2

      No, they doubled the standard deduction and eliminated all personal deductions. A family with two adults and two children will have a smaller standard deduction ($24K) than they have now. And if they have more kids they lose big time.

      Or if you're over 65 and get two deductions per person and the standard deduction now, even a couple loses.

      It hardly seems fair to argue the details of the tax bill when the legislators themselves don't fully understand what they voted for.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    4. Re:Those bastards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The individual deduction increase was removed in one of the hand written notes, you dumbass.

    5. Re:Those bastards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they first eliminated the personal exemption. The $4000 PER PERSON you exempt on your tax forms. So a family of 5 loses $20,000 exemptions in return for a boost of ~$6000 extra deduction.

    6. Re:Those bastards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Obamacare destroyed the middle class? On what planet was that? Is that why they were staging sit-ins opposing its repeal?

      Conservatives: Delusional liars parroting whatever conspiracy theory is needed to cover the failures of their own ideology.

      enjoy your big "tax cut".

    7. Re:Those bastards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They really only seemed to care if the lead author had an R or D after his name. Everything else was mere details.

  9. This probably won't matter. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Politics or Humanity has momentum, we're heading toward something (who knows what). The domino's are falling and can't be stopped, I fear the next election results won't matter much. Let them fight over there trinket money sources we are all left out regardless.

  10. Is it really a breach if they had valid logins? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    I mean, their logins weren't deprovisioned. So they just kept logging in. How is that a "data breach"? I mean I get the legal definition, but this is a cockup, rather than hacking or something.

    1. Re:Is it really a breach if they had valid logins? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I mean, their logins weren't deprovisioned. So they just kept logging in. How is that a "data breach"? I mean I get the legal definition, but this is a cockup, rather than hacking or something.

      Just because the powers that be forgot to take the key back, does not mean it is not theft. If I took company IP with me and then after I quit or left sold it to a competitor, well, I'd likely go to jail for it and be in some very bad trouble.

      Still, it might be interesting to look at their employment contract...

  11. REPUBLICAN UPDATE HERE ---------- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HR McMaster

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H._R._McMaster
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_on_Foreign_Relations

    is just that. The Council on Foreign Relations is NOT AMERICAN. Not American interests either. Kudos on HR McMasters medals and badges, surely difficult and quite the worldly accomplishment while alive.

    Also another revelation... the new versions of Firefox won't let you install the AdBlock Element Hiding tool... but... but... wikipedia being the Jew-ass editor congregation that it is... has all sorts of begs and pleas for donations popping up and sliding all over... on... yes, wikipedia.

    all bad. I can't say HR McMaster is a bad person but that alliance with the CFR is no good. You found out too.

    1. Re: REPUBLICAN UPDATE HERE ---------- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ladies and gentlemen, the face of schizophrenia.

  12. Re: Is it really a breach if they had valid logins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "But her emails"

  13. This is fully illegal ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Staffers for Senate Republicans' campaign arm seized information on more than 200,000 donors from the House GOP campaign committee over several months this year by breaking into its computer system ... the data breach "is the result of poor deprovisioning policies within the House Republican Campaign Committee -- allowing staff logins to persist after a person has left the organization."

    Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, anybody? If I do this to a former employer, I go to jail ... and these Republicans will screech the loudest for it. If a teenager hacks a corporation by realizing you just need to change a value in an URL and you can read everything ... he'll go to jail.

    Now matter how you cut this, this is a criminal act. The Republicans are willing to lie, cheat, steal, commit fraud ... pretty much anything to get their hands on donor money. And they'll climb over one another's corpses to do it.

    Holy fucking hell, can this be made any plainer? This is, at core, the Republican party laid bare.

    And it sure as shit isn't pretty.

    I sincerely hope this jackass party of law and order is going to make sure the people who did this, and the people who benefit from it, will go to jail.

    Of course, when it comes down to their own bullshit, they seem to find ways to justify it and downplay the sheer douchery of it.

    And now, this group of people is going to pick the pockets of the rest of the country with a tax bill which enriches the wealthy and the corporations at the expense of everyone.

    Lying crooks, every single last one of them. America is truly fucked.

  14. Republicans died when they crucified The President by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..for daring to get a blowjob from someone other than his wife; as if he was the first President to ever get his cock sucked, nevermind how many of those wide-stance Republucans were cocksuckers themselves.

    If you cant respect the institution you'll respect nothing ultimately, as we see by their current President and his destruction of government for 1% tax giveaways.

    SAD.

  15. Bingo! and that's why... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    these would-be Republicans felt they had to hack into the database of the House Republicans who, being more-connected to the base, have better lists of better donors in the era of lots of small contributions. Senate Republicans are used to the old era of huge contributions from only the richest and then slavishly serving the whims of those donors. When Senate Republicans ask the base of the party (those little people in fly-over country) for money they generally are met with insults about their dishonesty, incompetence and failure. Most senate Republicans hate the base of their party and would happily run as Dems if that was a path to success in their states; they're basically just selfish self-absorbed careerists. Most of the base of the party would love to vote for other senators but they keep being offered the choice of either these establishment-preferred losers or leftwing Democrats. Several months ago it was reported that Mitch McConnell held a meeting with big donors and was told they were done funding his failures, so his boys are gettin desperate.

    For you Democrat readers: this would be like the Clinton wing of the party having to hack into and steal the contents of the Bernie Sanders supporter database.... nah... of course that sort of intra-party chicanery would never happen.

    Donald Trump is proving to be a gigantic human Rorschach test; everybody who sees him sees their own thing and the result is that large segments of both the Democrat and Republican parties are going into full insane meltdown mode, and long-time big-wigs in both parties are being outed as fakers. The Trump era is proving to be both lucrative and entertaining. People in both parties are fighting over agendas, fundraising, donor lists, preferred molestation styles, etc ... and I have been gleefully munching popcorn and watching them all imitate the demise of the green witch from Wizard of Oz ever since November 2016.

    1. Re:Bingo! and that's why... by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      Well said.

  16. you DO realize that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the vast majority of Americans do not have personal tax attorneys and do not itemize on their taxes, right?

    You actually posted nonesense: you claim they doubled the standard deduction (true) but then immediately claim a family of four will see a smaller standard deduction (huh?) and then claim they'll lose more if they have more kids, even though the new law increases the child deduction (wtf?). Where'd you get your bizarre selff-conflicting talking points - Nancy Pelosi? Hint: she's gradually becoming incoherent and you need a new source.

    Anybody who does not itemize and is not in the upper couple of percent will gain from these cuts, and a number of those who currently itemize will find that it's now both better and easier to just take the new much-larger standard deduction.

    The people most-likely to be screwed are the richest slice of the taxpayers who also happen to live in California, New York state, or Illinois where the loss of the ability to write-off their very high state and local taxes (the so-called "salt" deduction) combined with their high incomes will be painful. Of course, Trump did wanr that he had no interest in cutting the taxes of the wealthy, so he's being consistent here. Some of those with upper incomes will actually see an increase and the only rich who are getting a big cut are the synthetic-person corporations who will see a drop in the corporate taxes as those are lowered to be more globally-competative in an effort to spur domestic growth.

  17. That's not why they impeached Clinton by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I know this goes over the heads of idiots who are totally ignorant of history but here's the micro-summary:

    1. A core principle of Western Civilization since the signing of The Magna Carta is that the ruler is no longer above the laws he administers. Trash that idea, and you live under a tyrant who can make-up the laws and enforce them arbitrarily on a whim and human progress of centuries is erased.

    2. Bill Clinton signed a law into effect that said any American male accused of sexual harrasment could be dragged into court and made to testify under oath about his entire sexual history - he got popular with women voters for signing that law and as chief law enforcement officer of the US he oversaw the justice department that happily enforced that law on all the other men in America who ran afoul of it.

    3. Bill Clinton was accused of sexual harrassment and was dragged into court and forced to testify under the very law he signed and took political credit for... and he lied. His own justice department, acting on his authority, would jail any other man in America who purjured hi9mself in this way. The American people saw their president on national television violating the core principle of the Magna Carta and all government law that descneds from it. This was in many ways worse than Nixion since Nixon was at least not breaking the very laws he himselft signed into effect.

    THAT is why Clinton was impeached. The articles of impeachment do NOT cite a blow job as a cause, the cite his lies under oath in court in violation of the law he signed into effect and was responsible for upholding and enforcing.

    Learn some history, and try thinking a little deeper about government, principles, and precedents. By doing what he did, Clinton lit the match on a lot of the lawlessness we see rippling through government these days (on the part of both Republican AND Democrat politicians and officials) and even Democrats are finally starting to admit that they protected Clinton purely for political power at the time and that it was probably wrong.

  18. You are a tool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    D.C. is full of treachery and it is bipartisan.

  19. You're in more dire need of a blowjob.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..than anyone in the history of slashdot.