The Office of DNI was created by Congress. Would be a shame if they just abolished it.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence has informed the House and Senate Select Committees on Intelligence that it'll no longer be briefing on election security issues, according to letters obtained by CNN and a senior administration official. Instead, ODNI will primarily provide written updates to the congressional panels, the official said.

The official added that other agencies supporting election security, including the Department of Justice, Department of Defense and Department of Homeland Security, intend to continue briefing Congress.
Still, the abrupt announcement is a change that runs counter to the pledge of transparency and regular briefings on election threats by the intelligence community.
It also comes after the top intelligence official on election security issued a statement earlier this month saying China, Russia and Iran are seeking to interfere in the 2020 US election, a warning that prompted some backlash from Democrats on Capitol Hill who have continued to push for the public release of more information about the nature of those efforts.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff on Saturday denounced the decision by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence -- first reported by CNN -- to no longer provide in-person briefings to members of Congress, including the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, on election security.

"This is a shocking abdication of its lawful responsibility to keep the Congress currently informed, and a betrayal of the public's right to know how foreign powers are trying to subvert our democracy. This intelligence belongs to the American people, not the agencies which are its custodian. And the American people have both the right and the need to know that another nation, Russia, is trying to help decide who their president should be," they said in a statement.

"The ODNI had requested the opportunity to brief the intelligence committees and the full US House of Representatives in mid-September and has now cancelled those briefings and said it would hold no others. This is shameful and -- coming only weeks before the election -- demonstrates that the Trump Administration is engaged in a politicized effort to withhold election-related information from Congress and the American people at the precise moment that greater transparency and accountability is required," Pelosi and Schiff added.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer on Saturday also called the decision not to provide briefings an "abdication of the Intelligence Community's duty" and said Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe "has made clear he's in the job only to protect Trump from democracy, not democracy from Trump."

"Our intelligence officials have said there's an active, ongoing assault on our democratic process from Russia. President Trump is simply using John Ratcliffe to hide the ugly truth from the American people - that the President is again receiving the help of the Kremlin," the New York Democrat said in a statement.
Former Vice President Joe Biden's campaign condemned the move and called on it to be reversed.

"For his administration to constrain the information being provided to the peoples' representatives in Congress as this national security threat multiplies -- especially given Donald Trump's unprecedented welcoming of these assaults on our democracy for his own gain -- is deeply alarming. This should be reversed immediately," spokesman Andrew Bates said in a statement Saturday.
An ODNI official defended the move Saturday, telling CNN that Ratcliffe "is committed to meeting our statutory responsibilities and keeping Congress fully and currently informed."
"For clarity and to protect sensitive intelligence from unauthorized disclosures, we will primarily do that through written finished intelligence products. We are concerned with unauthorized disclosures of sensitive information following recent briefings," the official said.

Bucky wrote:i'm not really sure there's any purpose to a debate. people will either see that biden has substance and trump has no clue, or that trump dominated biden.

but the people who have those opinions already know what they are anyway.

After all, YOU'RE A PUPPET. people actually say that trump won there.

Yep. And Biden’s going to have to spend all his time just factchecking Trump’s outrageous lies.

Houshphandzadeh wrote:are we going to have debates? Pelosi doesn't want to, and I'd assume that is in concert with the campaign

I think this is their way of getting Trump to lock into a debate. It feels like they are baiting him. Once Trump attacks Biden for trying to get out of the debate, he'll have to follow through with it when Biden accepts.

I think they want Trump to debate because they know he'll come off looking like an idiot and the contrast will be right there for everyone to see. It's not Biden who's slipping.

if it's so good for Trump, why is he the one ducking it? I think his faculties are much worse than people realize and he's not going to be able to come in there sniffing every two seconds this time. He cannot think off the cuff at all anymore without being an incoherent wreck. It's much different than '16

I haven't gotten mail since 8/19.

momadance wrote:I haven't gotten mail since 8/19.

Since you’re now public enemy #1 in your neighborhood your neighbors are probably stealing it.

momadance wrote:I haven't gotten mail since 8/19.

We're in a really bad spot here, with...

1. A criminal president who reasonably fears legal consequences as soon as he is out of office,

2. A party that was already skeptical of democracy, and now sees demographic and generational tipping points threatening its ability to rule and deliver the policies its older, white Christian base demands,

3. A global pandemic and shattered economy giving them lots of cover,

4. A media that the average American doesn't trust to report objective facts,

5. An opposition party and candidate with way too much faith in the robustness of the country's institutions and norms.

The incentive and opportunity to commit large scale election malfeasance are huge, and it honestly could be the end of American democracy. We really need Biden to run up some big numbers, because I doubt he or the Democrats have the strength or savvy to fight out any contested election scenario.

I truly think Biden is terrible, but the alternative is fascism. That's why I'm phonebanking and will canvass if it's allowed. Everybody here who can should be doing the same.

Slowhand wrote:

momadance wrote:I haven't gotten mail since 8/19.

Since you’re now public enemy #1 in your neighborhood your neighbors are probably stealing it.

My public enemy profile is immune from this neighborhood somehow. Except for my nextdoor neighbor who's a retired local cop known locally as "Rambo"

I'm really hoping the insiders who have come out over the last few days are a prelude to some recordings of the president saying and doing horrible things. I'm sure the russians are preparing some tape of hunter or Joe, so a real one of Trump would be helpful.

Didn’t help a whole lot last time around.

After taking questions from reporters, the president began signing autographs for some of those in attendance, quipping that they could sell them on eBay that night for $10,000.

I'd say that his ego is out of control, except for the fact that I think that there are some in his flock who are plenty stupid enough to pay, maybe not 10 grand, but maybe a lot more than it's worth for that autograph.

jerseyhoya wrote:

Gimpy wrote:Out of curiosity: would your game plan be the same if you lived in a swing state?

In DC your write in vote counts for who you write it in for, even if they aren't running. I think I'd vote for Mitt in any state where that was the case, even if it was potentially close. I'm so disenchanted with where my party is right now that it feels more expressive than just being another vote for Biden, and one vote is extraordinarily unlikely to change the outcome of the election, even in a competitive state.

Not sure what I'd do in a state without write ins. Inclination would be to vote Libertarian, I think. I very much want Joe Biden to be president because the alternative is Donald Trump, but I really don't want Joe Biden to be president. I don't know. Like 5 years ago me would be so disgusted that I was unwilling to acknowledge the system is imperfect and go with the lesser of two evils, but that was when I was sure the lesser of two evils would always be a Republican and it all sucks and I don't want to have to pick a side. If I was Kevin Costner in Swing Vote, I would eagerly pick Biden. But your vote is something of a self expression and not sure how I'd vote if I lived in PA and things looked really up in the air.

There's some great hypocrisy here on my part because I am really annoyed by Sanders types who are hesitant to back Biden, while I'm not doing so myself. But I'd be really happy if Amy Coney Barrett became an associate justice on the Supreme Court next year. I don't want to roll back the tax cuts or expand government healthcare or repeal the filibuster or make wild systemic changes. I want Biden to be president because he's not a moral cretin and he'll be competent at the basics of the job, but I don't really want any of the other things that will happen with him as president to pass. I dunno.

This is an honest post and you right to vote you is your personal choice and you can and should do whatever you want with it

I am also not an overly liberal person. I’m not a member of the democrat team though I have always voted democrat in GAs. I don’t support green new deal as the ability of our federal government to effectively execute on that would be close to nil. I am also not a fan of Bernie sanders though I think he’s an effective politician who gets people in their feelings, but has poorly outlined and unrealistic plans that are mostly attractive as abstract ideas but that he wouldn’t be able to efficiently implement. Finally I have no particular affinity for Biden and my gut is that he’s not particularly intelligent (cf Warren or Bloomberg for example who I think are quite smart - also think your boy Mitt is quite smart and could even be an effective chief executive under the right circumstances), he is quite a weak candidate objectively. I also despise Trump and would pay good money to be able to punch him once, full force, in the gut without legal consequence. This is all irrelevant subjective stuff but just for context

The thing that stuck out in your post to me was you saying “I don’t want to expand government healthcare.” I am curious to understand your justification behind that view of your concerns with a more mainstream (for developed countries) euro style health care model. I like my money as much as anyone else, I work hard for it and all things equal I would like to have my tax bill not go up significantly. So I get that this sort of reform would have tax consequences for me and others that are not ideal.

That said I think our country’s health care system is one of our greatest national embarrassments. For the wealthiest country in the world to routinely have its poor citizens still going deep into financial ruin based on medical bills is incredible to me. I understand there are other macro level forces that influence this other than just domestic policy (ie, the distributions of capital and wealth in a globalized capitalist system). But people should not be going bankrupt due to lack of health coverage (when the presumptive beneficiaries of this are private enterprises and their investors). It’s unjustifiable

Is the concern the potential negative impact on US business generally and the collateral effects of that? To me that is not a concern. Practically if you have watched what the federal reserve has done and said in terms of supporting business enterprises in the US, and the fact that interest rates will be a zero indefinitely, has and will continue to spur capital investment in the US more than any other capital market in the world. We are in a negative real interest rate environment and will continue to be for maybe the next decade. The fed is buying junk bonds and actively making sure there are no liquidity shocks in the credit or bond markets via treasury repos which in turn is creating a backstop (the Powell put) to allow companies to raise and borrow tons of money. Money will continue to pour into our stock market (both domestically and internationally) and if there are market downturns the fed will intervene further. Amazon will still be amazon even with higher taxes caused by universal health care. IPOs for new tech companies will continue to churn. Investors will continue to pay for growth companies even at extremely high valuations/multiples. PE and VC shops will continue to raise incredible war chests to invest in US tech. Innovation will continue. There is no amazon or apple or Facebook in Europe or Asia and there are no bond yields anywhere. Unless capital investors somehow get comfortable moving all their money Brazilian or Chinese equities under incompetent crony governments with a weak currency (Brazil) or rampant fraud (China) the US stock market and the growth story presented by US tech will keep the US capital markets the only real game in town. The US dollar remains the worlds reserve currency which favors our enterprises at a high level over enterprises in countries with less stable currencies. Those who fear inflation in US and significant devaluation of dollar may end up being right in the very long term m, will absolutely not be right any time soon as the bigger risk to growth in the short to medium term is actually deflation and though the dollar is weakening a bit, it’s not far off from all time highs in March still. TLDR our capital and corporate interests can afford the higher taxes and we should fucking pay for people’s health care and stop embarrassing ourselves

Regarding healthcare, we’re in the midst of a pandemic and millions of people lost their healthcare because it was tied to their jobs. How is our current healthcare system a good idea?

Nationalized healthcare wouldn’t even have the biggest impact on the poor in my opinion, I think it would have the biggest impact on small business owners.

If I own a small business with a handful of employees, I’m paying for my own coverage and I’m offering a healthcare plan that, relative to what a big company that has better buying power due to having more employees, is likely more expensive for both the employee and me. Alternatively, my spouse may be working a job somewhere just for benefits.

momadance wrote:I haven't gotten mail since 8/19.

Moved to a new house in June and made sure to set up mail forwarding from the old place. Never received a single piece of forwarded mail until it started coming last week. But that was a recently sent letter. I've made peace with the idea that two months of mail is probably just gone.

complaints about the PO are starting to surface on my facebook feed and they're all blaming the PO and the system there rather than what Trump has done. I really don't understand what the Hell is wrong with the US. I think we are legit broken. 30 years of lying and building mistrust in gov't is really coming to fruit.

Monkeyboy wrote:complaints about the PO are starting to surface on my facebook feed and they're all blaming the PO and the system there rather than what Trump has done. I really don't understand what the Hell is wrong with the US. I think we are legit broken. 30 years of lying and building mistrust in gov't is really coming to fruit.

They understand the PO is being run by a corrupt Trump crony?

Stay_Disappointed wrote:

Monkeyboy wrote:complaints about the PO are starting to surface on my facebook feed and they're all blaming the PO and the system there rather than what Trump has done. I really don't understand what the Hell is wrong with the US. I think we are legit broken. 30 years of lying and building mistrust in gov't is really coming to fruit.

They understand the PO is being run by a corrupt Trump crony?

They appear to know nothing about it. They are in a bubble, I guess. It's so disheartening because these are people who voted Trump last time and showed regret after Trump started acting like a crazy person as president. But I now seeing them coming home to roost back with the GOP. We are so polarized that even someone like Trump will get most of the GOP to vote for him. It's insane. I guarantee I would not have voted for Obama in 2012 if he was 1/10 as incompetent as Trump. I would have gone 3rd party or voted for Mitt and hoped for MA Mitt.

joe table wrote:lots of words, some of which I'm too dumb to understand

TLDR our capital and corporate interests can afford the higher taxes and we should fucking pay for people’s health care and stop embarrassing ourselves

I'm not as opposed to single payer or some other nationalized healthcare as I think most Republicans are, but it would very much not be my preferred solution to our current (not great!) situation on healthcare. I think moving to a nationalized system would be bad in both the short and long term, but we might enjoy some medium term benefits. My sense is there would be a tremendous amount of upheaval in delivery of care as the system updated to the new set up. In the medium term we'd experience broader coverage and less complicated access, while taking advantage of the muscle memory of everything that existed in the before times. In the long term I worry a lot about innovations in care and attracting the highest level of people like we are now into the industry.

All of this said, I agree the current set up is really quite bad and am not convinced single payer isn't preferable to it. In order for markets to work, you need to have prices that dictate behavior/decision making. As a consumer in the healthcare market, with my employer paying for my heath insurance, I have zero incentive to make any decisions around price. And beyond that, I don't even know what the cost of anything is. I think the better course of action would be to make healthcare more open to market forces to try to stem the obscene upward pressure on costs, while government maintains a role ensuring a safety net for the most vulnerable.

There are a lot of things I think I know a lot about. Healthcare policy is not one of them. There are a lot of political issues I have unshakable opinions on. Healthcare policy is not one of them. But I'm not super excited to try to move to Medicare for All or anything like that. I think we have a lot of structural things set up here where that transition will be painful/bad, and there will be seriously negative long term impacts too.

I also believe the switch would be a disaster in the short term, but only because half the people in our governing bodies would make sure it was a complete disaster. The deaths of the poor would be a feature, not a bug.

Put a mini computer in my pocket, accessible to all things anywhere all in like a decade.

But we cannot figure out healthcare because it might be hard long term and there’s a lot of infrastructure already established.

Yeah, ok.