RealGM

dckingsfan wrote:A trillion here a trillion there - pretty soon it becomes real money. Eh - just ignore it - it will go away.

But GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, told reporters that he agrees with the president calling the impeachment probe a “lynching.”

“This is a lynching in every sense,” Graham said, defending the president. “This is un-American.”

Graham said the president’s use of the word in a tweet this morning is “pretty well accurate” in describing what Democrats in Congress are doing to the president by launching an impeachment probe.

“This is a sham, this a joke,” Graham said of the probe.

“I think lynching can be seen as somebody taking the law into their own hands and out to get somebody for no good reason,” Graham said.

“What does lynching mean? When a mob grabs you, they don’t give you a chance to defend yourself. They don’t tell you what happened to you. They just destroy you,” Graham went on.

Ruzious wrote:He is the most 2-faced man in the world. No surprise that shortly after he said he'd consider removing Trump from office, Graham says:

But GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, told reporters that he agrees with the president calling the impeachment probe a “lynching.”

“This is a lynching in every sense,” Graham said, defending the president. “This is un-American.”

Graham said the president’s use of the word in a tweet this morning is “pretty well accurate” in describing what Democrats in Congress are doing to the president by launching an impeachment probe.

“This is a sham, this a joke,” Graham said of the probe.

“I think lynching can be seen as somebody taking the law into their own hands and out to get somebody for no good reason,” Graham said.

“What does lynching mean? When a mob grabs you, they don’t give you a chance to defend yourself. They don’t tell you what happened to you. They just destroy you,” Graham went on.

Nothing he says surprises me anymore, but he does make me sick to my stomach.

Wizardspride wrote:

Read on Twitter

?s=19

Zonkerbl wrote:What a bunch of out of control lawless thugs Republicans are

daoneandonly wrote:And yet...

https://quillette.com/2019/07/09/democrats-control-americas-most-dangerous-cities-so-why-do-they-keep-passing-the-buck-on-gun-crime/

JWizmentality wrote:

daoneandonly wrote:And yet...

https://quillette.com/2019/07/09/democrats-control-americas-most-dangerous-cities-so-why-do-they-keep-passing-the-buck-on-gun-crime/

The governors for the state of the top 5 most dangerous cities in the USA are Republican, save for Michigan which has switched between Democratic and Republican control for the past few years.

montestewart wrote:

JWizmentality wrote:

daoneandonly wrote:And yet...

https://quillette.com/2019/07/09/democrats-control-americas-most-dangerous-cities-so-why-do-they-keep-passing-the-buck-on-gun-crime/

The governors for the state of the top 5 most dangerous cities in the USA are Republican, save for Michigan which has switched between Democratic and Republican control for the past few years.

Oh yeah, don't forget that the country containing the states in which are located those 5 most dangerous cities has a president who is an unintelligible lunatic. That's gotta count for something.

"But How Are You Going to Pay For It?”

KEVIN DRUM
Political Blogger


How much would Medicare for All cost if we made employers pay most of the bill, as they do now? Let’s take a horseback guess.

CMS estimates total health care spending in 2018 of $3.6 trillion.
About 55 percent, or $2 trillion, is covered by private sources, mainly corporations. The rest is already paid for by state and federal governments.
Of this, perhaps 20 percent would be paid by individuals in the form of copays. This is about the average for health care plans in other countries.
The total outlay for employers is therefore $1.6 trillion.
Approximately 112 million people are currently employed in large corporations.
That comes to $14,000 per employed person. Currently, large corporations pay about $10,000 per employee in health care costs.

There are several options left to us here:

We could make large corporations pay $14,000 per employee. They’d just have to suck it up.
We could keep them at their current rate of $10,000 and raise the remaining $400 billion elsewhere, perhaps from some combination of higher taxes on the wealthy and a small VAT.
We could make all but the very smallest employers pay a head tax. With a larger tax base, the cost per employee drops to $11,500 and there’s very little to make up.
This is rough, but it’s the basic lay of the land if we’re willing to make corporations continue to pay for health care at the same rate they pay now. They’d have no real beef since it would cost them nothing more and would free them from the overhead cost and hassle of dealing with health care. There’s also a strong chance that the head tax would rise more slowly than it does now, since government-run health programs almost invariably cap cost growth better than the private sector.

This is a slightly more detailed version of my post the other day asking, yet again, why Democrats don’t propose this as the funding mechanism for M4A. Other countries do this without a problem, and there’s no special reason we can’t do it too. It certainly makes it far easier to provide a cogent and popular answer when reporters ask, “But how are you going to pay for it?”

Ruzious wrote:

Zonkerbl wrote:What a bunch of out of control lawless thugs Republicans are

Anyone who doesn't understand that there was at least an implied quid pro quo simply does not have a functioning brain. Even without it, it would still be an impeachable offense. Again, this is obvious. And yet Republicans are still fighting this. At this point, there's no other option than concluding most Republicans are morons - not just below average - but knuckle dragging morons.

Zonkerbl wrote:Um, so who is supposed to determine what is true on Facebook? How would that work? Computer algorithm?