Ben Sasse questions whether or not Trump is recanting on his oath to uphold the Constitution. Need more of this. Need the 25th.

CalvinBall wrote:Ben Sasse questions whether or not Trump is recanting on his oath to uphold the Constitution. Need more of this. Need the 25th.

Sean Hannity Retweeted Ben Sasse
One of the biggest mistakes in my career was supporting @BenSasse Just useless.

The contrast to how Hannity tonight reacted tonight vs. if Obama tweeted like Trump is obviously enough to make the head explode. He would have (rightfully) lost his shit. And even without Obama making such statements one could think he might envision his chess game a second move ahead and recognize what giving the government the say over the airwaves re: truthfulness and partisan media might do to his career. But he's not even playing checkers.

Sean Hannity was not someone I respected in May 2015 or whenever the pre-Trump era started, but I did think he held some actually conservative beliefs that he would draw a line on. What an embarrassment he is.

Few Republicans in the media have managed to keep their integrity. Steve Schmidt, Nicole Wallace, Charlie Sykes, Tim Miller, Rick Wilson, Bill Kristol, Bret Stephens (although he claims he's not a Republican anymore), etc.

traderdave wrote:

Roger Dorn wrote:@realDonaldTrump Network news has become so partisan, distorted and fake that licenses must be challenged and, if appropriate, revoked. Not fair to public!

Translation:
If you are not pro-Trump, you gots to go.

Now this is out of Vanity Fair so it probably needs several grains of salt but:

"In recent days, I spoke with a half dozen prominent Republicans and Trump advisers, and they all describe a White House in crisis as advisers struggle to contain a president who seems to be increasingly unfocused and consumed by dark moods."

"It brought into the open what several people close to the president have recently told me in private: that Trump is “unstable,” “losing a step,” and “unraveling.”"

Honestly, if this stuff is actually true, these "prominent Republicans" should absolutely do the right thing for the country and get this guy impeached and removed from office. The party of "America First" should act like it.

A sense of disbelief and dread washes over me every once in a while when I see the term "the president" and realize it refers to Donald Trump. It's been 11 months since the election and I'm still not convinced the world is real.

jerseyhoya wrote:None of that is new, though it wouldn't surprise me if it was getting worse. He has zero self awareness/shame and the people close to him now are either doing it out of duty for country cause they're armed forces or blood relatives.

I don't think this story has a happy ending.

It didn't have a happy beginning. It's been dark and hopeless since his first phone call to raise the birther flag.

jerseyhoya wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:Ben Sasse questions whether or not Trump is recanting on his oath to uphold the Constitution. Need more of this. Need the 25th.

Sean Hannity Retweeted Ben Sasse
One of the biggest mistakes in my career was supporting @BenSasse Just useless.

The contrast to how Hannity tonight reacted tonight vs. if Obama tweeted like Trump is obviously enough to make the head explode. He would have (rightfully) lost his shit. And even without Obama making such statements one could think he might envision his chess game a second move ahead and recognize what giving the government the say over the airwaves re: truthfulness and partisan media might do to his career. But he's not even playing checkers.

Sean Hannity was not someone I respected in May 2015 or whenever the pre-Trump era started, but I did think he held some actually conservative beliefs that he would draw a line on. What an embarrassment he is.

You could pick up Hannity's brain with tweezers, if they were the kind of tweezers you use to position stuff to view with an electron microscope

ReadingPhilly wrote:

does he think stock market gains go against the national debt

Some would if he increased the estate tax and capital gains tax.

While we’re on the subject of taxes, does Trump not realize that if he gets rid of the mortgage interest deduction the housing market will go into a tailspin?

maybe he finally paid off his mortgage


has a real bill actually be introduced? the strategy appears to be to not introduce an actual bill so the proponents can say we don't know the details yet so why are you opposing something you don't know about.

not sure if he thinks it's true, but now there's 46% of the voting public who believe it

at this point about 35%

pacino wrote:

ReadingPhilly wrote:Debt after 9/11 skyrocketed, but the stock market is up (because of me alone) so "we" win quote

does he think stock market gains go against the national debt

Why yes, yes it does...

When he says this tripe it is amazing that people listen. I wish it would be as easy to interview "his people", neigh, his electoral pawns, and see how much better their lives are 10 months into this administration. Unfortunately I know that they completely get the blame game, and will blame some toxic concoction of Pelosi & McConnell in getting in the way of their Trump based get rich quick scheme all the while actively demonstration the fact that pawns sole purpose is risk leading to sacrifice for power.

JFLNYC wrote:While we’re on the subject of taxes, does Trump not realize that if he gets rid of the mortgage interest deduction the housing market will go into a tailspin?

I have always expect that WHEN he maneuvers this, that there will be an offset that is unimaginably favorable to real estate investors where rental properties would offset any profit in some way. Some sort of mixed depreciation where any income derived was just pure profit, and there would be negligible taxation on the property itself, or some other mind numbing, self serving thing.

As to the pending implosion of the mortgage market for private, citizen owned property to house something like a family, aside from it not being anything that Donald and his ilk care about, YOU will have to stand up a company and transfer your assets to it to maximize you ability to survive in a somewhat normal context.

Depending on the insanity of the tax plan, that might be your best option anyway. You employer pays your private company which owns all your assets. Your stipend would pay out at a low level shielding you. Good plan, right.

Doll Is Mine wrote:Few Republicans in the media have managed to keep their integrity. Steve Schmidt, Nicole Wallace, Charlie Sykes, Tim Miller, Rick Wilson, Bill Kristol, Bret Stephens (although he claims he's not a Republican anymore), etc.

It's just been exposed what Republicans have always been. The veneer has been removed.

JUburton wrote:

Doll Is Mine wrote:Few Republicans in the media have managed to keep their integrity. Steve Schmidt, Nicole Wallace, Charlie Sykes, Tim Miller, Rick Wilson, Bill Kristol, Bret Stephens (although he claims he's not a Republican anymore), etc.

It's just been exposed what Republicans have always been. The veneer has been removed.

most of the people on that list didn't have integrity to lose.

thephan wrote:

JFLNYC wrote:While we’re on the subject of taxes, does Trump not realize that if he gets rid of the mortgage interest deduction the housing market will go into a tailspin?

I have always expect that WHEN he maneuvers this, that there will be an offset that is unimaginably favorable to real estate investors where rental properties would offset any profit in some way. Some sort of mixed depreciation where any income derived was just pure profit, and there would be negligible taxation on the property itself, or some other mind numbing, self serving thing.

As to the pending implosion of the mortgage market for private, citizen owned property to house something like a family, aside from it not being anything that Donald and his ilk care about, YOU will have to stand up a company and transfer your assets to it to maximize you ability to survive in a somewhat normal context.

Depending on the insanity of the tax plan, that might be your best option anyway. You employer pays your private company which owns all your assets. Your stipend would pay out at a low level shielding you. Good plan, right.

Before you consider doing something like that you should consult your accountant and/or attorney. Putting your primary residence in a corporation is pretty much universally viewed as a bad idea. First, you’d have to pay transfer taxes. Second, your mortgage company could call the loan. Third, you’d lose any homestead and any other exemptions granted to certain classes of individuals. And you’d lose your capital gains exemption when you sell. Then there are other issues, e.g., having to pay rent to the corporation. If you pay too much, the corporation could make a profit, which would be taxable. If you pay too little, the IRS could consider the difference between rent actually paid and market value as taxable personal income to you.

People buy more expensive homes knowing they can deduct mortgage interest. If the deduction were reduced or eliminated, millions would pay more in taxes (any increase in the standard deduction wouldn’t cover the difference) and the value of all those homes would decrease significantly overnight.

JFLNYC wrote:
People buy more expensive homes knowing they can deduct mortgage interest. If the deduction were reduced or eliminated, millions would pay more in taxes (any increase in the standard deduction wouldn’t cover the difference) and the value of all those homes would decrease significantly overnight.

This might be an interesting element in the politics here--people who live in "flyover country" mostly (I mean I haven't actually checked median home prices, but it's a sports message board) live in homes that are cheap enough they don't pay enough mortgage interest to itemize. So, if the standard deduction remains unchanged or goes up a bit, those homeowners won't see any loss from the mortgage interest tax deduction. When you throw in older people on the coasts who have either paid off their mortgage or are at the end of their mortgage payments and are basically paying down the principle, well, now you see how the politics could work.

Just checked median home price in Arkansas--114,000. Texas, 170k. CA--363k. So there you go.

And honestly, if it in fact does reduce home prices, that might actually help young people buy their first home.

It’s no coincidence that blue, coastal states would take the greatest hit from a Republican tax reform proposal. As they say, it’s not a bug, it’s a feature.

I’m all for making it easier for younger people to buy a home. What’s holding them back is primarily wage stagnation and college debt. It would be preferable to address those issues. Taking away a significant portion of the wealth of older homeowners who have accumulated that wealth over many years seems like a particularly unfair and draconian way to address the issue.

JFLNYC wrote:It’s no coincidence that blue, coastal states would take the greatest hit from a Republican tax reform proposal. As they say, it’s not a bug, it’s a feature.

I’m all for making it easier for younger people to buy a home. What’s holding them back is primarily wage stagnation and college debt. It would be preferable to address those issues. Taking away a significant portion of the wealth of older homeowners who have accumulated that wealth over many years seems like a particularly unfair and draconian way to address the issue.

Now we are having a Republican party.