Werthless wrote:Isn't it common knowledge that Russia at least tried to affect the election? Facebook is releasing a tool that enables you to check whether you liked any fake news generated from a Russian troll farm. It happened. How effective they were is in question, sure.

there are leftists that refuse to believe it, let alone Trumpies. the majority of people of course believe facts laid out in front of them, but there's a vocal minority that refuses.

Conyers may be OUT

good

What, now he’s gay, too?

I can't imagine Bob Brady can possibly last until November 2018; feds just searched his house

be cool to get someone progressive to primary him

How exciting, the Pennsylvania Societypolitical shindig will be held in Manhattan again

Lots of losers are going

CalvinBall wrote:Conyers may be OUT

This is the right move. I suspect Pelosi is working behind the scenes trying to convince him to resign or get others in his caucus to put pressure on him. She'll get it done.

JCT not buying the economic growth argument in the tax bill- economy already running at full steam, any additional attempt to boost it will only increase inflation

If it ain’t broke why fix it? Trump pandering to the minority’s of poor slobs who got left behind while the rest of us are actually doing pretty well

Moore up in a few new polls...basically if you are a Republican just vehemently deny any accusations...only Dems admit wrongdoing and pay the political price

Not sure any of paid much a political price at this point

Werthless wrote:Isn't it common knowledge that Russia at least tried to affect the election? Facebook is releasing a tool that enables you to check whether you liked any fake news generated from a Russian troll farm. It happened. How effective they were is in question, sure.

weird that the facebook thing only goes to august 2016 or something like that. Are they afraid to tell us just how much was going on in the lead-up to the election?

bernie will be in reading on sunday.

This article is bonkers.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/11/28/u ... 9A3u?amp=1

Big surprise that trump appointed judge rules in favor of trump in the cfpb case.

One imagines most judges would have ruled the same way, but it is good that #theresistance that is so concerned about norms and the rule of law is going all out on this CFPB farce.

What's the farce?

CalvinBall wrote:What's the farce?

A seemingly determined belief that Donald Trump is not the president of the United States and the head of the executive branch of government.

jerseyhoya wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:What's the farce?

A seemingly determined belief that Donald Trump is not the president of the United States and the head of the executive branch of government.

I think there was a serious question of law whether the FVRA or Dodd-Frank Act ruled when it came to immediate vacancies. I did not read the recent ruling, but I do not think it was a farcical challenge.

slugsrbad wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:What's the farce?

A seemingly determined belief that Donald Trump is not the president of the United States and the head of the executive branch of government.

I think there was a serious question of law whether the FVRA or Dodd-Frank Act ruled when it came to immediate vacancies. I did not read the recent ruling, but I do not think it was a farcical challenge.

There's some ambiguity, though I think the idea that absence or unavailability would extend to a resignation seems ridiculous, especially given the nature of her appointment. The board's GC sided with the admin.

On the other hand you have the institutional Democratic Party standing with this English person like she's a martyr rather than a prop in Cordray's OH D-Gov primary campaign, and 'serious' people like Norm Ornstein tweeting shit like this:

Norman Ornstein‏ @NormOrnstein
No surprise-- a Trump judge, chosen by the luck of the draw, has ignored the clear language of Dodd-Frank and kept Mick Mulvaney wrongly in charge of CFPB. Who knows what deep damage Mulvaney will do until the DC Circuit can right this wrong

Spoiler alert: if CFPB general counsel sided with the administration, chances are that was the stronger argument. And if this goes up the line the courts are going to side with Trump on this, probably pretty heavily if not unanimously.