Yup. “Ha Ha stupid libtards, you brought it on yourselves, HARRY REID!!!1!” How about a little perspective? I didn’t agree with Reid doing it for presidential nominees at the time, but there was actually an argument for it given the prolonged obstruction and considering they are not lifetime appointments. There’s…

Yes

This article and your post remind me of an argument I had when the civil union vs marriage debate was happening. My premise was basically that there are two aspects to “marriage”, the contract portion, which should be cut and dry and what the part the government should be concerned with, and ceremony portion, which…

I’m over that. I would still like to see them, but at this point it’s just to satisfy curiosity. We don’t need them beyond electability considerations to determine if there are conflict of interests. Nothing is keeping the FBI from getting a hold of them at some point.

There was bad that could have been done by simple incompetence but ultimately good intentions. This is malicious. Whether it’s because of some libertarian, no government fever dream or something more sinister like being at the behest of Russia, it is intentional.

As much as I hate the tactic, I wouldn’t mind seeing a frivolous lawsuit campaign à la Sovereign Citizens or Scientology. Him being POTUS has to open up him or his businisses up to a wider range of suits. If there’s nothing legally keeping the president from maintaining conflicts of interest, then the least we can do…

TL;DR: Anti-Communist sentiment started as a side effect of our expanding foreign influence, and solidified when radical changes in other countries prompted our government to solidify it’s power by casting the ideology as a boogeyman.

“U up”

Imagine being Obama knowing your legacy will always be looked back at with the W and Trump administrations providing context.

Not at all. Supposedly they were on the fence for a few months about whether to release the info or not, and assumably how to. An op-ed was a terrible idea, and I doubt it was given any serious consideration, or put forth as forcibly as is trying to be represented, but I don’t think it’s outside the realm of reason…

Pretty much, but also, if the reporting is true, Republican “leaders” were presented with the information that Russia was interfering in our election, an attack against us, and chose to ignore it and quash going to the public with it. They were privvy to the same information Trump was, and knew he was stonefaced lying…

So given the urgency of the original ban that was oh so necessary to be implemented immediately so that extreme vetting could be set up, why did this new one need a new 120/90 day freeze? Shouldn’t they have been setting up their extreme vetting from the start, regardless of if there was a ban or not?

For sure. The decision is super questionable and I’m not gonna act like it doesn’t reek of coordination. It certainly should be taken into consideration with how he is acts currently--that is he better be dotting his i’s and crossing his t’s, but at the end of the day it’s all supposition. None of it plays out if…

With a great deal of uncertainty, I believe this was either being investigated or requests were sent requesting an investigation be opened out of Preet Bharara’s office before. . . you know.

It’s not totally far fetched. We already know Obama directed him to meet with congressional leaders in mid-September, and supposedly they had been on he fence for months with how to handle it.

I originally read it as the Anti-Decency Act. The weird part is I had already navigated two pages away before it struck me as odd and had to come back to check.

And she gets to the bill us for her legal counsel when she get subpoenaed and has to testify before congress instead of footing it herself.

I suppose “freaking pissy” is one way to describe how one would act when one of your main business partners walks away right after your company had some lean years and was on the brink of dissolving, and did so in a way that was akin to flipping everyone the bird, shitting on the floor, and yelling “you’re nothing…

“Yes, the planet got destroyed, but for a beautiful moment in time we created a lot of value for shareholders inflated our stock valuation and I got my bonus”

Yeah, but I don’t know if the Kushners are structured the same way. Maybe they are doing it for the same reasons, but for Jared and Ivanka it seems like a measure to allow them more leeway for questionable communications.