The Serious Side - part 3

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Druze

I agree that what Amal spoke of in her U.N. speech is what most civilized Western countries want .. or most of the world for that matter.  Alternative news outlets play on people's fear.  And many people just accept those facts blindly.  It almost seems like they want to believe the worst.  

It's the tactics people are using or considering to use to wipe out ISIS that is up for debate.  Amal said it succinctly a few months ago about how you rid  the world of ISIS.  Banning groups of people or physically attempting to wipe out terrorists won't rid the world of terrorism.  How do you get rid of an "idea".  I'm paraphrasing what she said but that was the essence.

Carol, your comments last night were interesting and informative and reminds me that there is more going on in this world outside US borders that is equally important. I lose sight of that sometimes. My eyes went right to The Netherlands article this morning where without your post I probably would have just skipped it. It's one of the benefits of talking to Clooney fans from all over the world.

And I get so much more 'insider information' about what's going on in the States than just reading articles or watching reports in TV. So we all benefit from our discussions.

I agree. As much as I first came to COH because of George (and he's still the biggest part of why I come), the conversations we have about what's going on in the world are almost as important to me. The media in our country has become so polarized it's good to get the perspective of people looking at us from the outside.

It just struck me: so many of us here seem to share the same ideas and values. Is it because most of the people in the world think like us or is it that George attracts a certain kind of fan?

Really good point Lizzy. I think George's perspective on liberal politics, humanitarian endeavors and his generosity as a human being attract likeminded fans. He has been pretty outspoken as to what he believes and I think many of his more devoted fans are attracted to that whole package. Not just the handsome face and charming personality.

99% is still good.

Steve King, a congressman from Iowa, tweeted
"Wilders understands that culture and demographics are our destiny. We can't restore our civilization with sombody else's babies". He has endorsed Geert Wilders, head of the Far Right Freedom Party in The Netherlands.

King's tweet was retweeted by David Duke, the former head of the KKK.

For reference Iowa's population is 89% white and non-Hispanic.

Donna,
People in Germany who fear immigrants and refugees most, live in parts of Germany with hardly any immigrants and refugees. Which leads us to the conclusion that these fears are mostly not based on facts but o und prejudices and 'alternative facts'.

Same about the Iowa congressman and the population there.

In Saturday somebody took a selfie with a very good soccer player from Berlin and then posted it on behalf of his right-wing Party, with comments who weren't nice at all. The soccer player retweeted immediately, asking to delete this post because that's not what he thinks, believes and stands for. Really liked this reaction...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4307072/Bharara-fired-plan-investigate-Trump.html

Did Trump fire the 'Sheriff of Wall Street' to keep him from investigating foreign business ties? Preet Bharara posts cryptic tweet amid rumors that ethics watchdogs had called for a funding probe

• Congressman Elijah Cummings has said he is 'curious' about Bharara's dismissal 
  
  
• He said Bharara received a letter two days before being asked to resign that urged him to investigate Trump's foreign business ties 
  
  
• Bharara also cryptically tweeted on Wednesday that he knows how the 'Moreland Commission' must have felt
  
  
• The Moreland Commission was designed by Governor Cuomo in 2013, and then disbanded when it turned its sights to the Governor himself
  
  

By Anna Hopkins and Abigail Miller For Dailymail.com
PUBLISHED: 18:27 EDT, 12 March 2017 | UPDATED: 02:12 EDT, 13 March 2017

    

• [email=?subject=Read%20this:%20Did%20Trump%20fire%20the%20%27Sheriff%20of%20Wall%20Street%27%20to%20keep%20him%20from%20investigating%20foreign%20business%20ties?%20Preet%20Bharara%20posts%20cryptic%20tweet%20amid%20rumors%20that%20ethics%20watchdogs%20had%20called%20for%20a%20funding%20probe&body=Did%20Trump%20fire%20the%20%27Sheriff%20of%20Wall%20Street%27%20to%20keep%20him%20from%20investigating%20foreign%20business%20ties%3F%20Preet%20Bharara%20posts%20cryptic%20tweet%20amid%20rumors%20that%20ethics%20watchdogs%20had%20called%20for%20a%20funding%20probe%0A%0AUS%20Attorney%20Preet%20Bharar%20was%20terminated%20from%20his%20position%20on%20Saturday%20by%20the%20Trump%20administration%2C%20and%20has%20now%20tweeted%20suggesting%20that%20he%20was%20investigating%20the%20President%20prior%20to%20his%20dismissal.%0A%0Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%2Fnews%2Farticle-4307072%2FBharara-fired-plan-investigate-Trump.html%3Fito%3Demail_share_article-top%0A%0A%0AMost%20Read%20Articles%3A%0A%0ATerrifying%20moment%20a%20cruise%20ship%20carrying%20thousands%20of%20holidaymakers%20is%20hit%20by%2030ft%20waves%20on%20its%20way%20to%20Florida%C2%A0%0Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%2Fnews%2Farticle-4305992%2FNew-footage-inside-cruise-ship-battered-storm.html%3Fito%3Demail_share_article-top_most-read-articles%0A%0A%27Are%20you%20Harry%27s%20father%3F%27%20Princess%20Diana%27s%20former%20lover%20James%20Hewitt%20addresses%20rumours%20that%20have%20persisted%20for%20decades%20in%20rare%20interview%20ahead%20of%20the%2020th%20anniversary%20of%20her%20death%0Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%2Fnews%2Farticle-4306170%2FPrincess-Diana-s-former-lover-James-Hewitt-speaks-out.html%3Fito%3Demail_share_article-top_most-read-articles%0A%0A%27There%20comes%20a%20moment%20when%20he%20turns%20on%20you%27%3A%20Insiders%20dish%20the%20dirt%20on%20David%20Letterman%27s%20ugly%20attitude%2C%20including%20%27temper%20tantrums%2C%20self-hatred%20and%20calling%20Andie%20MacDowell%20the%20C-word%27%0Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%2Fnews%2Farticle-4306338%2FInsiders-dish-dirt-David-Letterman-s-ugly-attitude.html%3Fito%3Demail_share_article-top_most-read-articles%0A%0A]e-mail[/email]
   
  
• 
  

[size=32]135shares

[/size]






The head Democrat of the White House Oversight Committee has said he is 'curious' about President Trump's choice to terminate Manhattan US Attorney Preet Bharara.
Maryland Representative Elijah Cummings revealed that Bharara's dismissal came mere days after he received a letter from an ethics watchdog group on Wednesday urging him to investigate whether Trump's businesses were receiving funding from foreign governments.
Cummings said that the letter 'very well may' be connected to Bharara's termination, as Trump previously said he planned to keep him on as the US Attorney in Manhattan, where many of the president's businesses are based.
Now, Bharara has tweeted alluding that he was investigating Trump prior to his dismissal on Saturday.
Scroll down for videos  



+2
Bharara's termination followed Attorney General Jeff Sessions' move on Friday asking for 46 US attorneys nominated by President Obama to resign their posts

Bharara cryptically tweeted on Sunday 'By the way, now I know what Moreland Commission must have felt like' 
On Sunday he cryptically tweeted 'By the way, now I know what Moreland Commission must have felt like.' 
This was his first tweet since he announced that he had been fired by the Trump administration. 
Many have interpreted his tweet as a suggestion that he was investigating Trump or his administration for possible corruption. 
The Moreland Commission was established in 2013 by New York Governor Andrew Cuomo to investigate public corruption, with Bharara at the head. After the anti-corruption team turned their sights to Cuomo's office, the governor shut the commission down in 2014, reported the Blaze. 
It is believed that Cuomo shut it down because they were investigating him, and he ended up not being charged with any wrongdoing.   



+2
Maryland Representative Elijah Cummings, right,  said he is 'curious' about President Trump's choice to terminate Manhattan US Attorney Preet Bharara

Bharara tweeted on Saturday afternoon that he had been fired by the Trump administration 
Bharara refused to resign and said in a tweet on Saturday that he had been fired. 
'Just not very long ago, the president was saying that he was going to keep the U.S. attorney there in New York and then suddenly he's, I guess, changed his mind,' Cummings told ABC News.
His termination followed Attorney General Jeff Sessions' move on Friday asking for 46 US attorneys nominated by President Obama to resign their posts.  

RELATED ARTICLES

• Previous
  
  
• 1
  
  
• 2
  
  
• Next
  
  

• Anger at Republican congressman's tweet saying 'we can't...Trump's budget director claims Obama 'manipulated'...
  
  
• Poisoned by Putin? Dissident claims the Russian president...
  
  

SHARE THIS ARTICLE

Share

He said that serving as the US Attorney for Manhattan would 'forever be the greatest honor' of his professional life. 
Cummings continued by saying that Trump has every right within his power to dismiss US attorneys if it he wants to, but that he was 'curious' the decision to remove Bharara. 


[size=18]US Attorney Preet Bharara says he was fired by Trump admin




Loaded: 0%
Progress: 0%
0:00
Previous
Play
Skip
Mute

[/size]

Fullscreen
Need Text















Cummings said he believes Trump's decision to fire Bharara came after the Manhattan US Attorney received a letter urging him to investigate Trump's foreign business ties 
On Wednesday, the letter came from the leaders of the groups Democracy 21, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, and the Campaign Legal Center.

EMOLUMENTS CLAUSE

'No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

It read: 'A failure by your office to investigate these reports and to take appropriate action will leave the Nation exposed to foreign governments directly and indirectly providing payments and financial benefits to President Trump when those foreign governments may be seeking to influence Executive Branch policies and positions.'
Their belief is that President Trump's businesses have received funding from foreign governments, which is a violation of the emoluments clause of the Constitution.  
'There's a lot of questions coming up as to whether … President Trump is concerned about the jurisdiction of this U.S. attorney,' Congressman Cummings continued.
He also commented on the environment created by the Trump administration since taking office, which has been described as chaotic and uncommunicative. 
'There is an air of mistrust that's been brought on by President Trump himself and so many others,' he said.
'No doubt about it, when they ask about the emoluments clause and possible violations of it, and the US Attorney's relationship to that, I think that had something to do with it'. 
Read more:


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4307072/Bharara-fired-plan-investigate-Trump.html#ixzz4bCaitnRC 
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Mmm, this seems to have a bit of a nasty smell about it doesn't it?

What with that and Rex Tillerson seemingly not knowing when visiting ambassadors are in town but Jared Kushner does!?? And now off to Asia with no press on board. Absolutely nothing to do with cost. The press have to pay for their trips.

Also read somewhere that tourism is down by about a third since Trumpers got in.............

Totally agree with all your comments about this thread. It's an international world and we reflect that. Knowledge and understanding are so important.

Donnamaarie - The first thought that crossed my mind when I heard Bharara was fired was that he must have been getting close. Trump and Bannon cut him loose before he could put a case together, but we all know the evidence is there.

I'm wondering if he can somehow keep investigating in some kind of private capacity - or if there's some way a congressional committee can authorize him to continue his investigation. Trump is conducting a purge of anyone who might stand up to him and I don't think the Republicans in Congress have the guts to stop him.

... or if he's able to pass informations to the press or wikileaks.

Now there's an interesting thought!  Take a look at  this, Carol. @LouiseMensch.

The east coast of the US is bracing for a blizzard. Can't wait for Cheeto-in-Chief to tweet: "I told you global warming was fake news!"

PAN,
thanks for the link! Louise Mensch has really interesting tweets.
is there a proof that wikileaks is connected to Russia? I mean, I'd imagine that Putin is interested in destabilizing the States (just like Germany).

Sean Spicer:
President Trump didn't mean wiretapping when he tweeted wiretapping

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/03/13/politics/sean-spicer-donald-trump-wiretapping/index.html

Just imagine the next briefing with Spicer:
'Oh no, he didn't mean "I'm forced to push the red button!" when he tweeted it, this was just another word for: "I'm fed up!" I've no idea why we're on Defcon 5 and the whole world is on a war!'

Spicer: Trump didn't mean wiretapping when he tweeted about wiretapping
By Jeremy Diamond, CNN 
Updated 5:45 PM EDT, Mon March 13, 2017

Story highlights

• A week earlier Spicer said Trump's tweet "speaks for itself"
  
• But Monday, Spicer was open to providing an interpretation
  

[size]
(CNN)The White House on Monday walked back a key point of President Donald Trump's unsubstantiated allegation that President Barack Obama wiretapped his phones in Trump Tower during the 2016 election.
Namely, White House press secretary Sean Spicer said Trump wasn't referring to wiretapping when he tweeted about wiretapping.
"I think there's no question that the Obama administration, that there were actions about surveillance and other activities that occurred in the 2016 election," Spicer said. "The President used the word wiretaps in quotes to mean, broadly, surveillance and other activities."
Wiretapping is a narrowly defined surveillance activity that involves tapping into "a telephone or telegram wire in order to get information," according to Merriam-Webster dictionary.
Spicer also said that Trump was referring to the Obama administration broadly -- and not accusing Obama of personal involvement -- when he tweeted that "Obama had my 'wires tapped' in Trump Tower" and accused Obama of being a "bad" or "sick guy."
Spicer's comments came on the same day as the deadline for the Justice Department to provide evidence to the House Intelligence Committee to back up Trump's claim. The White House has so far refused to provide any evidence, and numerous former officials have denied the existence of any warrant to wiretap Trump Tower.
A week earlier, Spicer said Trump's tweet "speaks for itself" and declined to provide any further explanation.
But Monday, Spicer was open to providing an interpretation for Trump's tweet, saying the President told Spicer he was referring to means of surveillance beyond wiretapping in his tweets accusing Obama of doing just that.
Spicer doesn't reject concept of 'Deep State'
But in each of the four tweets Trump fired off leveling the accusation, Trump referred specifically to phone tapping -- and only used quotation marks in two of those.
"Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my 'wires tapped' in Trump Tower just before the victory," Trump said in his first tweet.
"Is it legal for a sitting President to be 'wire tapping' a race for president?" he asked in the next.
Then, Trump tweeted that Obama "was tapping my phones in October" and had stooped low "to tapp (sic) my phones during the very sacred election process."
But Spicer was not the only White House official to provide an alternative definition of the word "wiretap" despite Trump's clear language.
White House counselor Kellyanne Conway also addressed the wiretapping claims in an interview Sunday with the Bergen County Record, suggesting that other covert surveillance methods used by the CIA -- as revealed by Wikileaks last week -- could have been used in Trump Tower by the Obama administration.
5 memorable moments from Kellyanne Conway on "New Day"
"Do you know whether Trump Tower was wiretapped?" Bergen County Record columnist Mike Kelly asked Conway on Sunday.
"What I can say is there are many ways to surveil each other," Conway said, before suggesting that surveillance could take place through phones, TVs or "microwaves that turn into cameras."[/size]

All I want to know from these morons is: Who's the designated survivor and when can we put him to work?

Too funny . 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4310318/CBO-says-14m-people-lose-healthcare-2018.html

Congressional Budget Office says 14 million people will lose healthcare by 2018 under House Republican proposal - with 24 million forecast to lose coverage by 2026

• The Congressional Budget Office put out its report on the cost of the new House Republican healthcare law and found millions of people will lose coverage 
  
  
• Because the law no longer mandates that people buy insurance, 14 million will lose health insurance by 2018 
  
  
• Additionally, 24 million were forecast to lose coverage by 2026 thanks to the bill getting rid of subsidies and Medicaid expansion plans 
  
  
• The White House fought back against the numbers with HHS Secretary Tom Price saying he believed the plan would insure more people than Obamacare
  
  
• The CBO found that the Republican plan would reduce federal deficits, something House Speaker Paul Ryan played up 
  
  

By Nikki Schwab, U.s. Political Reporter For Dailymail.com
PUBLISHED: 16:37 EDT, 13 March 2017 | UPDATED: 19:26 EDT, 13 March 2017

    

• [email=?subject=Read%20this:%20Congressional%20Budget%20Office%20says%2014%20million%20people%20will%20lose%20healthcare%20by%202018%20under%20House%20Republican%20proposal%20-%20with%2024%20million%20forecast%20to%20lose%20coverage%20by%202026&body=Congressional%20Budget%20Office%20says%2014%20million%20people%20will%20lose%20healthcare%20by%202018%20under%20House%20Republican%20proposal%20-%20with%2024%20million%20forecast%20to%20lose%20coverage%20by%202026%0A%0AThe%20CBO%20%20is%20projecting%20that%2014%20million%20Americans%20will%20lose%20their%20health%20insurance%20coverage%20by%202018%20if%20the%20House%20Republicans%20healthcare%20bill%20goes%20into%20place.%0A%0Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%2Fnews%2Farticle-4310318%2FCBO-says-14m-people-lose-healthcare-2018.html%3Fito%3Demail_share_article-top%0A%0A%0AMost%20Read%20Articles%3A%0A%0A%27I%20just%20shot%20and%20killed%20my%20two%20kids%27%3A%20Horrifying%20911%20audio%20reveals%20father%20told%20dispatcher%20he%20shot%20dead%20his%20twins%2C%2016%2C%20wounded%20his%20wife%20and%20was%20going%20to%20kill%20himself%20at%20their%20luxury%20home%0Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%2Fnews%2Farticle-4309066%2FDad-says-911-call-killed-twins-shot-wife.html%3Fito%3Demail_share_article-top_most-read-articles%0A%0AEXCLUSIVE%3A%20Sex%20tape%20featuring%20OC%20actress%20Mischa%20Barton%20is%20offered%20to%20the%20highest%20bidder%20among%20Hollywood%20porn%20companies%20-%20with%20the%20price%20for%20the%20x-rated%20video%20starting%20at%20%24500%2C000%0Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%2Fnews%2Farticle-4308838%2FMischa-Barton-sex-tape-shopped-Hollywood.html%3Fito%3Demail_share_article-top_most-read-articles%0A%0ADramatic%20moment%20fire%20crews%20use%20a%20hose%20to%20blast%20a%20father-of-six%20out%20of%20his%20car%20during%20a%20traffic%20stop%20before%20cops%20shoot%20him%20dead%C2%A0%0Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%2Fnews%2Farticle-4309510%2FThe-Latest-Police-Shooting-victim-pulled-knife-officers.html%3Fito%3Demail_share_article-top_most-read-articles%0A%0A]e-mail[/email]
   
  
• 
  

[size=32]727shares

[/size]






The Congressional Budget Office is projecting that 14 million Americans will lose their health insurance coverage by 2018 if the House Republicans healthcare bill goes into place. 
An even greater number, 24 million, are forecast to lose coverage by 2026, the non-partisan congressional scorekeeper said in a report today, as changes to subsidies and Medicaid go into effect.
Those numbers are in contrast to how many people are insured under the current healthcare law, the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. 
At the White House shortly after the announcement, Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price said, 'We disagree strenuously.'
'It basically says that we'll be back at pre-Obamacare status. That about 40 million people uninsured in this country,' Price said. 
'We believe the plan we're putting in place will insure more individuals than are currently insured,' Price continued. 'So we believe CBO simply has it wrong.' 
Keith Hall, who leads the CBO, was hand-picked to run the agency by Price, a former congressman who was chair of the House Budget Committee at the time. 
Scroll down for video 



+5
Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price said the White House 'disagreed strenuously' with the CBO's estimate that 24 million people would lose health coverage under the House Republican plan by 2026 



+5
House Speaker Paul Ryan (pictured) is one of the biggest proponents of the Republican plan, which was rolled out last week and passed through committees 



+5

Today before the numbers were released, President Trump held a 'listening session' with 'victims of Obamacare' in the Roosevelt Room of the White House

Earlier in the day, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer tried to sow doubt in the soon-to-be-released numbers from the CBO. 
'If you're looking to get a bull's eye accurate prediction to where it's going, the CBO was off by more than half last time,' Spicer told reporters at the briefing. 
Meanwhile, President Trump had hosted people to the White House today to tell Obamacare horror stories. 

Republicans were expecting the numbers from the Congressional Budget Office to not be so great, with House Speaker Paul Ryan saying yesterday that one can't compare the Republicans' new program to the existing one because the government will no longer be forcing Americans to buy health insurance.  
Talking to CBS News' John Dickerson, Ryan said he fully expected the CBO to say 'Not as many people will get coverage.'
'You know why?' Ryan asked Dickerson. 'Because this isn't a government mandate. This is not the government makes you buy what we say you should buy and therefore the government thinks you're all going to buy it.' 
The Affordable Care Act mandates that people get covered, or they must pay a tax penalty.
Republicans want to kill off this mandate as they seek to repeal and replace the law.
In the CBO's report, this is what accounts for the first big increase in those who would be uninsured by 2018.  


[size=10][size=18]Price calls Congressional analysis on healthcare 'unbelievable'




Loaded: 0%
Progress: 0%
0:00
Previous
Play
Skip
Mute

[/size][/size]

Fullscreen
Need Text












Citing the 14 million figure, the report says, 'most of that increase would stem from repealing the penalties associated with the individual mandate.' 
The legislation calls for swapping out the current Obamacare subsidies with tax credits, expanding health savings accounts and phasing out a planned expansion of Medicaid. 
Once these aspects of the law go into effect, that's where the number of uninsured Americans ticks up again. 
According to the report: 'Later, following additional changes to subsidies for insurance purchased in the nongroup market and to the Medicaid program, the increase in the number of uninsured people relative to the number under current law would rise to 21 million in 2020 and then to 24 million in 2026.' 
'The reductions in insurance coverage between 2018 and 2026 would stem in large part from changes in Medicaid enrollment—because some states would discontinue their expansion of eligibility, some states that would have expanded eligibility in the future would choose not to do so, and per-enrollee spending in the program would be capped,' the report continued. 
'In 2026, an estimated 52 million people would be uninsured, compared with 28 million who would lack insurance that year under current law,' the report added. 
That is nearly double. 
The CBO and the Joint Committee on Taxation found that the new law would reduce federal deficits by $337 billion over the 10 year period starting this year and concluding in 2026.
This money would be saved by tax dollars no longer paying for subsidies and because of the reductions in Medicaid.  
The healthcare market, the report said, will remain stable under the new plan. 
'Even though the new tax credits would be structured differently from the current subsidies and would generally be less generous for those receiving subsidies under current law, the other changes would, in the agencies’ view, lower average premiums enough to attract a sufficient number of relatively healthy people to stabilize the market,' the report said. 
As for the price of Americans' premiums, in 2018 and 2019, the CBO believed that premiums would rise by 15 to 20 percent more than what they would have cost under Obamacare, but by 2020, premiums would go down and be cheaper than what's expected under the Affordable Care Act. 
The initial price increase would be caused by people leaving the insurance market because they're no longer mandated to buy insurance. 
By 2020, the cost would be offset by grants to states from the Patient and State Stability Fund, which would defray the cost to insurers for those with high-dollar claims. 
Additionally, the Republicans' plan calls for killing regulations that require insurers to offer plans that cover a certain percentage of healthcare costs. 
This would bring the cost of premiums down too. 
Finally, the CBO tabulated that there would be a younger pool of people in the insurance market, which would also bring premium cost down.  
But for those Americans hoping to see savings, age will matter, the report says. 
The new law allows insurers to charge five times more for older enrollees than young ones. 
The current law holds this price disparity to three times the cost of a young person's insurance. 

[size=18]Pulling healthcare bill 'only decent thing to do': Pelosi




Loaded: 0%
Progress: 0%
0:00
Previous
Play
Skip
Mute

[/size]

Fullscreen
Need Text












'Although average premiums would increase prior to 2020 and decrease starting in 2020, CBO and JCT estimate that changes in premiums relative to those under current law would differ significantly for people of different ages because of a change in age-rating rules,' the report said. 
While the White House complained about the CBO's estimate of the number of people who would lose insurance, Ryan pointed out the better parts of the report. 
'This report confirms that the American Health Care Act will lower premiums and improve access to quality, affordable care,' the House speaker said. 'CBO also finds that this legislation will provide massive tax relief, dramatically reduce the deficit, and make the most fundamental entitlement reform in more than a generation.'
'These are things we are achieving in just the first of a three-pronged approach,' Ryan noted.  
Price echoed that point, standing outside the White House today. 
'Apparently what CBO looked at is simply the bill that's pending before Congress. It didn't look at the regulatory reforms that we're going to put in place,' he said.  
 'It didn't look at all of the pieces of legislation that are also pending out there that we call on our friends on the other side of the aisle to help us reform the insurance market so that we can provide for greater choices and greater competition,' Price added. 
While the HHS secretary was correct in saying that Republicans will need at least eight Democratic votes in the Senate to push other healthcare reform bills through, the current piece of legislation is already in a politically tricky place and today's CBO numbers likely won't help. 
The plan for this bill was to pass it through a Senate process called reconciliation, which means only a simple majority are needed to get it passed. 



+5
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi wondered how Republicans could look their constituents in the eye when 24 million of them could lose health insurance 
However, conservative Republican senators have dubbed the House Republican bill 'Obamacare Lite,' calling the GOP peers to strip the tax credits out of the legislation, to further reduce costs.
Conservatives also want to see Medicaid phased out faster. 
Democrats have never wanted to have anything to do with this bill and today's news further cements that.  
'How can they look their constituents in the eye when they say to them 24 million of you are no longer going to have coverage,' remarked House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., Monday evening on Capitol Hill. 
When is was Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer's turn to speak, the New York Democrat played up the connection between Price and the head of the CBO. 
'Now, the Republican hand-picked head of CBO has confirmed what we Democrats have been saying all along, Trumpcare would be a nightmare to the American people, causing tens of millions to lose coverage and millions more seeing the costs of their healthcare go up,' Schumer said. 



+5
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called the bill 'Trumpcare' at a press conference today 
Of the 24 million who could lose healthcare coverage, Schumer added, 'That's un-American and that's wrong.' 
Schumer also picked up on CBO's statements about older Americans' healthcare expenses going up, as the new law would permit insurance companies to charge them higher rates, at least until the age of 65 when people would then be eligible for Medicare. 
'If there was ever a war on seniors, this bill, Trumpcare, is it,' Schumer said.  
Price said the GOP's plan is necessary to keep the market from collapsing in the five states where there is currently a solo insurer providing coverage. 
'You tell me that that's what the plan was,' he said of Democrats' health law. 
'The fact is that those folks have no choice whatsoever. The fed government has destined them to only have one opportunity to purchase coverage, and if that's not what they want, then tough luck. That's not our plan.'

I watched a town hall from West Virginia tonight. Most of the attendees were Trump voters. Many of them have Obamacare. The moderator and Senator Bernie Sanders explained that those who are at high risk to lose their health care or end up paying moreunder the proposed new legislation would be the very people in that room. Some of those people are or were coal miners. Their coal miners benefits would, if I'm not mistaken, be taken out of the new bill. No one in that room had a bad thing to say about their current health care coverage. There are going to be many disappointed and angry Trump supporters if Obamacare is taken from them.

This new bill is a crock. Plain and simple. It does not "fix" our health care system. It makes it much worse.
It may lower our deficit but it will be on the backs of older people and current Medicaid recipients.

But that's absolutely not new, Donna, we discussed it here on COH ahead of the elections, remember? So to mourn later on that they didn't know about it, doesn't help - since that's the problem with not informing yourself on different sources...

It's similar to the Brexit referendum where politicians operated with wrong numbers. I talked to friends in Britain about that ahead of the referendum, and they were furious that these politicians got away with these lies and that people wouldn't listen to those who told them about it.

I remember that a very smart guy we all know, once said in an interview: "Years ago we started with the same facts. We then interpreted them differently, but we all started with the same basics. We don't do this anymore."

Carolhathaway - It isn't that these people didn't know - it's that they didn't want to know. They voted out of fear and frustration and never considered the consequences because they didn't think, they felt.

Now that the heat of the election cycle is wearing off their brains are starting to overrule their emotions and they're realizing they made a huge mistake. If they don't lose their health care it will cost a lot more and they haven't gotten the jobs they were promised so they can't afford to pay for it. They're scared because their futures are uncertain and they feel out of control. This is not what they expected from life. Sad.

You're right, Lizzy!
It was an election campaign driven by fears and feelings, surrounded by people telling them that Trump wouldn't do what he said he'd do.
Now that they see the consequences, they know what to fear ... Frightening!

Listen Im not defending the mindsets of those who voted for Trump. People believe what they want to believe. One man at the town hall last night said he voted for Trump only because Trump promised to bring coal jobs back. That's it. And he didn't really seem well informed about issues and admitted he didn't even follow politics.

A lot of Trump voters fall into this description. It's irresponsible of course and they don't realize the danger they have put our country in. What is equally as dangerous is that many of these same supporters aren't following what is going on in the White House right now. They aren't following the continuing stories of Russian hacking and possible collusion between the Trump organization and Russia, Trump's possible illegal financial dealings, his attempts at dismantling our government and all the lies he has told. But you know these voters are giving him a long leash and will let him get away with almost anything short of murder before they bail on him. The Republican Party won't bail on him either until Trump starts losing siginificant numbers of supporters. So our country will be in a precarious situation for some time to come.

Just read an op-ed piece in the NY Daily News calling for NY State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman to use NY state law to dissolve the Trump Organization. Apparently the authors of the article (one of whom is a law professor) feel the organization is in violation of NYS laws regulating corporations.

Should Schneiderman follow through on this the Trump empire, as run through the Trump Organization in NYC, would basically be dismantled. The various businesses would be put into receivership and kept running, but the money wouldn't go to Trump. I'm not a business person so I'm not exactly sure how this is done, but the fact that it CAN be done is the best news I've seen in a long time - IF anyone actually follows through.

Fingers crossed and prayers that AG Schneiderman sees the editorial and decides to act!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4305398/Ivanka-Trump-exception-dads-Buy-American-rule.html



[size=34]How Ivanka Trump's goods are an exception to dad's 'Buy American' rule - with 23 TONS of her namesake shoes arriving from China since the election
[/size]

• Donald Trump made inaugural pledge to buy American and hire American
  
  
• As he spoke at least eight shipments of Ivanka Trump-branded shoes, bags and clothes -- more than 53.5 tons -- were steaming towards America from China
  
  
• More than two tons of ladies' polyester blouses, 1,600 cowhide wallets and 23 tons of made-in-China footwear have arrived since November 8
  
  
• Chinese factory has already received an order for 10,000 shoes for next season
  
  

B
In his January inauguration speech, President Donald Trump made a seemingly straightforward pledge: 'We will follow two simple rules: buy American and hire American.'
His daughter is the exception: even as he spoke, at least eight shipments of Ivanka Trump-branded shoes, bags and clothes -- more than 53.5 tons -- were steaming towards American ports from China, according to US Customs bills of lading examined by AFP.
Trump uses his presidential pulpit to censure manufacturers -- both domestic and foreign -- for using overseas labor to make goods for American consumers, but the Ivanka-branded orders have kept rolling in.



+5
Both as a candidate and as president, Donald Trump has launched repeated fusillades against firms that manufacture abroad, vowing to punish them with massive tariffs. But Ivanka Trump-branded clothes continue to be made in China



+5
Ivanka often dons shoes from her namesake label, as she did last week
More than two tons of ladies' polyester woven blouses, 1,600 cowhide leather wallets and 23 tons of made-in-China footwear were among at least 82 such shipments that passed US Customs -- almost one per business day -- from Trump's November 8 election win through February 26, records showed.
The goods were made in China by three US companies holding licences to manufacture products for Ivanka Trump's fashion line: garment maker G-III, Mondani Handbags and Marc Fisher Footwear.
Marc Fisher told AFP it had no comment, while the others did not respond to requests.
The first daughter's business has come under scrutiny since major US department store chain Nordstrom announced in February it would stop carrying her products, citing poor sales.



+5
More than 1,200 shipments of Trump-branded products have flowed into the US from China and Hong Kong over the past decade, according to an examination of US import data last year by anti-Trump political action committee Our Principles 
[size=10]


[size=3]L[/size][/size]
That provoked a scathing attack from Trump and his advisers and even prompted senior counsellor Kellyanne Conway to urge Americans to go out and buy his daughter's products.
The Washington Post reported this week that many had done just that, with February proving a banner month for the brand, in terms of sales.
- 'Very hypocritical' -
More than 1,200 shipments of Trump-branded products have flowed into the US from China and Hong Kong over the past decade, according to an examination of US import data last year by anti-Trump political action committee Our Principles PAC.
During his campaign, Trump defended the licensing of the Trump name for goods made in China -- from shoes to ties to dress shirts -- as smart business.
But at the same time he frequently accused China of stealing US jobs through unfair trade practices and currency manipulation, while also slamming US firms such as Ford and Nabisco for off-shoring.



+5
Donald Trump has repeatedly accused China of stealing US jobs through unfair trade practices, and vowed to bring jobs home
Since taking office, he has kept up the pressure, vowing to punish domestic and foreign companies that manufacture abroad with massive tariffs of as much as 45 percent.
His frequent fusillades have led some companies to second-guess decisions to build production facilities overseas.
In February, Japanese firm Nisshinbo Holdings, a leading global maker of automobile brake parts, dropped plans to open a factory in Mexico, saying it was due to Trump's trade policies.
But the president has been notably silent on his daughter's products, which are sold in American retailers like Macy's, Lord & Taylor and TJ Maxx.
G-III alone sold $29.4 million of the goods in 2015, and sales in the first nine months of 2016 were up $13.3 million over the same period the previous year, according to the company's public filings.
But rather than chide his daughter´s partners for making their products abroad, Trump instead lashed out at Nordstrom last month after it announced it would stop carrying Ivanka's fashion range.
'My daughter has been treated so unfairly by @Nordstrom,' he tweeted.
Christopher Balding, an expert on Sino-US trade relations at Peking University, called it 'very hypocritical to make (bringing jobs back to the US) a policy plank and manufacture her products in China'.



+5

But 'in their defence... she couldn't get those products manufactured in the US at a reasonable price point.'
However, a long-time garment industry executive who spoke on condition of anonymity told AFP simple products like polyester dresses could 'definitely' be made in the US at a similar price once savings from transportation and tariffs are factored in.
'The less labour involved in making the garment, the more they can compete with Asian manufacturers.'
- 'Tough policies' -
Late last month, Ivanka sat in on a White House meeting where her father discussed 'tough policies' to bring 'our jobs back'.
'Everything is going to be based on bringing our jobs back,' the president said, as he addressed a group of manufacturing moguls from a dozen American firms.
Following the meeting, a spokesperson for the Ivanka Trump brand told AFP the company has 'consistently expressed that we share industry leaders' interest in bringing more manufacturing opportunities to the US and are looking forward to being a part of the conversation'.
Just not yet: two days later, more than 5,000 Ivanka Trump polyester blouses arrived in Newark, New Jersey.
And at least one shoe factory in southern China has received an order for 10,000 shoes for next season, according to Chinese newspaper the Global Times.

Share or comment on this article

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4305398/Ivanka-Trump-exception-dads-Buy-American-rule.html#ixzz4bJXXMgv8 
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

annemarie - OMG! I am SHOCKED! SHOCKED, I tell you! Trump says one thing and does another! Can it really be true?! 

Seriously, I would NEVER knowingly buy anythig, stay anywhere, do anything that would put another penny in the pockets of these leeches.

Lol, Lizzy I wouldn't give them my money either not even on fire sale.

I also saw where Jared's family are dong business with China have some big deal happening.

Indeed. It's here

https://twitter.com/NickKristof?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

This man is a brilliant journalist and reporter

Here's the particular piece you want Kristof has posted

https://twitter.com/TimOBrien/status/841355204889083904

The way this family conducts itself is just beyond me. There has never been any real evidence to indict Hillary of anything during her many years in the public eye. But if something were ever revealed it wouldn't come close to the scams, illegal financial deals and coverups committed by Trumpster and his clan. Clinton is practically a saint by all accounts.

Kristof is good. I like his point of view. He's on cable news occasionally. And a friend of George's. I remember their trip together to Darfur years ago.

BTW another great Rachel Maddow piece from last night. Rachel seems to be spending almost every night discussing at length some aspect of the investigation between the Russians and Trump. It's all fascinating.

Last night's focused on Preet Bharara, Kushner, Wilbur Ross, Deutsche Bank and Trump.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKJiEae7TYw

Donna,
Rachel Maddox is really fascinating!
Wow, is that awesome!
How often is she airing? Really almost every night? She must have a huge team who does the research, and it's just fascinating (again, sorry, should use Thesaurus!) to see how she connects facts to get to the bottom of the issue.

Yep, she's great - and good at bringing the likes of Conway back to the question. Amazing the number of words that woman uses to say nothing.

This puts the whole healthcare thing in a nutshell:

https://twitter.com/davidaxelrod/status/841743350076080128

The White House had declined the request to show proof he is donating his salary.

And how do you say wiretap in Chinese....or long grass?????

annemarie - It's hard to supply proof of something that hasn't happened (and probably won't). Just like they can't prove the wiretapping thing. Spicer is just covering Trump's ass.

Bette Midler - and her wit - on Paul Ryan

https://twitter.com/BetteMidler/status/840741590742245376

Carol, to your question about Rachel's show, it is on five nights a week.  She always starts every show with a 20 minute segment.  She will start telling a story and many times the audience doesn't know where she is going with it.  But it's always on a timely subject.  It's  really interesting to listen to her set up the story.  She sets it up like a puzzle.  Slowly she will add piece after piece until there is that moment when it all comes together.  She is a terrific storyteller.

Yep I do think she has a great research staff that puts together these stories for her.  It's pretty impressive.

I remember when Kelly Anne Conway was on her show.  Rachel kept her feet to the fire.  She claimed on a later show that Kelly Anne had lied to her and was not too pleased.

party animal - not! wrote:Bette Midler - and her wit - on Paul Ryan

https://twitter.com/BetteMidler/status/840741590742245376

Bette has a great sense of humor, sometimes brilliant! I still have her first album, The Divine Miss M. Still love it!

So have I!!

Trump's decided to let us know what his tax returns were for 2005 (very random), but apparently Rachel Maddow came 'by them' first, possibly forcing his hand.

Except the cynic in me wonders if he planted and then released them to distract us from all the nasty figures about the health reforms...........?

PAN - It's not just the health care mess. It's his son-in-law and his family doing major business with China and getting HUGE loan forgiveness from them - and it's connected to Trump, too. It's the guttiing of the EPA. It's  his ties to Russia - which may be a distraction from his ties to China! It's so many things that it's hard to keep track, and I think that's exactly what he's hoping for. Maybe he thinks the more things there are to investigate no one will know where to start.

I agree, Lizzy. I think it's exactly what his strategy is. He assumes everybody is gullible.........

Funniest thing is the two pages as 'leaked' or should I say 'delivered' to  Maddow have 'client copy' written on it!

http://time.com/4701747/donald-trump-rachel-maddow-taxes/

DONALD TRUMP
Donald Trump's 2005 Tax Return Reveals He Paid $38 Million in Taxes on $150 Million Income
Alex Altman
Updated: 10:05 PM Eastern | Originally published: 9:23 PM Eastern



President Donald Trump paid $38 million on more than $150 million in income in 2005, a White House official said Tuesday night.

The disclosure, which fills in a small data point in one of the big lingering mysteries looming over Trump's presidency, came just before the figures

The two-page form, which is labled "Client Copy," doesn't reveal the sources of Trump's income, which has been the primary reason for Democrats to call on Trump to release his returns

David Cay Johnston, a Pulitzer-prize winning investigative journalist and veteran tax reporter, was leaked Trump's 1040 tax form from 2005 and brought the document to Maddow.


[ltr]
View image on Twitter


[/ltr]

 Follow
Sahil Kapur 

✔@sahilkapur
[ltr]Here's a photo of the Trump tax returns that @maddow just displayed.

There's a stamp that reads "Client Copy."[/ltr]
9:36 PM - 14 Mar 2017

• 
  
  
   
  
• 
  
   2,1722,172 Retweets
   
  
• 
  
   3,0493,049 likes
  

"It came in the mail over the transom," explained Johnston, now the editor and founder of DCReport.org. The numbers, he said, "fit the things we know" about Trump's finances from other public records.

The document indicates that Trump, who defied decades of political convention by declining to release his tax returns during his campaign for President, paid a roughly 25% effective tax rate in 2005.

The document shows that Trump paid $5.3 million in taxes and another $31.2 million due to his obligations under the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), which is designed to ensure a baseline tax payment for some payers. During his campaign, Trump proposed scrapping that tax.

Trump's tax returns in the years since remain a mystery. Democrats have cited the absence of disclosure as an indication that Trump is hiding something. Nearly 1.1 million people have signed a White House petition urging Trump to "immediate release" his full returns.

The White House official denounced the disclosure of the 2005 return as an illegal act.

"You know you are desperate for ratings when you are willing to violate the law to push a story about two pages of tax returns from over a decade ago," the White House official said, noting that Trump had a responsibility to "his company, his family and his employees" to pay no more tax than he was legally obligated.

"Mr. Trump paid $38 million dollars even after taking into account large scale depreciation for construction, on an income of more than $150 million dollars," the official said, "as well as paying tens of millions of dollars in other taxes such as sales and excise taxes and employment taxes and this illegally published return proves just that."

During the presidential campaign, Trump proposed cutting taxes, especially for the very wealthy, reducing the current seven tax brackets to four: 0%, 10%, 20% and 25%. Trump’s tax reform plan is not expected to be brought up until after Congress completes its work on healthcare reform, an effort that has faced significant headwinds.

Trump’s income puts him in the highest of the current brackets, 39.6%, though it is normal for the very wealthy to pay a far lower effective tax rate. Former Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney paid a 14.1% effective rate in 2011.

Citing an ongoing audit for which he never supplied proof, Trump declined to release his recent returns during the campaign. Asked last week whether Trump would release his 2016 returns, Press Secretary Sean Spicer said: "“My understanding is he's still under audit and I'll follow up on the question.”

Every major presidential candidate in recent history has disclosed their returns, including 2016 Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. She and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, earned $10.75 million in 2015, and paid a 34.2% federal tax rate.

The disclosure, Maddow said, is "only a start."

I see this two ways. Either some anonymous person has access to Trump's returns and plans on releasing more in the coming months, including the more important schedule attachments which break down his finances in greater detail. On its own this 2005 return tells us nothing.

My other thought is what is the opinion of the press this morning. Trump released it himself to show he has been on the up and up and paid his taxes. Looks good to his supporters and is another distraction from the current news ... problems with the proposed health care plan. I wouldn't put it past him. He has conned the media soooo many times. This is classic Trump behavior.

I often question my own opinions thinking: "Can I, as somebody who doesn't live in the States, really dare to critisize the politics and politicians of other countries? I mean, I also critisize the politicians in my own country (and try to change things as well), but do I have so much insight and information about US politics and living in this country, that I know if certain decisions, laws and decrets are right or wrong?

Sometimes it's just a feeling. We're all educated in a certain was and share the same values. It's also about being able to feeling empathy for others or not. To be able to imagine how it must feel not to know if you can afford the medical treatments once you're ill, to lose your job and not knowing if you can keep your house, to have to leave your country due to a war and having to find a new one far away.
Sometimes it just needs humanity...

Donnamarie wrote:
My other thought is what is the opinion of the press this morning.  Trump released it himself to show he has been on the up and up and paid his taxes.  Looks good to his supporters and is another distraction from the current news ... problems with the proposed health care plan.  I wouldn't put it past him.  He has conned the media soooo many times.  This is classic Trump behavior.

If true, you can be sure this is the year that shows him in the best light!  Also only the pages that give cursory information.  You would think a leaker would leak the whole thing if they had access.

Donna,
I also think that Trump released it himself. Otherwise the anonymous source had sent his whole return, not just two pages, and not just for one year which itself - without having his whole return and without being able to compare it to previous and following years can't tell US anything, especially not about his businesses in detail which would allow us to know if there are any conflicts of interests.

Not just a manipulative distraction he's now furiously tweeting about, but this too.....

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/mar/14/donald-trump-tax-return-leaked-alternative-minimum