Political Roundtable Part XI

[TGW]

Former NFL player gets shot and killed in a road rage incident, and the shooter doesn't get charged. That's good ol' American justice at work:

http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2016/12/ronald_gasser_suspect_in_joe_m.html

Ronald Gasser, the man authorities say shot and killed former NFL player Joe McKnight, was released from custody overnight without being charged, Jefferson Parish Sheriff's Office authorities said Friday morning (Dec. 2).

Gasser, 54, has not been formally charged, said JPSO spokesman Col. John Fortunato. Investigators are consulting with the district attorney's office on the decision whether to formally charge Gasser, Fortunato said.

As the investigation into McKnight's death continues, Fortunato asked anyone with information about the shooting to contact department homicide detectives at 504-364-5393.

McKnight, 28, was shot about 3 p.m. Thursday (Dec. 1) at the intersection of Behrman Highway and Holmes Boulevard in Terrytown. A witness, who declined to give her name, said she saw a man at the intersection yelling at McKnight, who was trying to apologize. The man shot McKnight more than once, the witness said. She said he shot McKnight, stood over him and said, "I told you don't you f--- with me." Then the man fired again, she said.

Authorities named the shooter as Ronald Gasser, 54, and said he stayed at the scene and turned his gun in to officers. Gasser was in custody and was being questioned, Jefferson Parish Sheriff Newell Normand said. The sheriff said McKnight did not have a gun, and deputies did not find a gun outside McKnight's vehicle.

Un-freakin'-believable.

[DCZards]

Trump's pick for Secretary of Education may be his worse cabinet decision. She's bad for children, families and public education.

[popper]

I think many people are grossly underestimating the heft of Trump's selections so far. I personally observed Wilbur Ross' skills over hundreds of hours as he negotiated very large and complicated deals against some of the best business and govt. minds to arrive at win/win solutions that stood the test of time. I was in awe of the man and his talents. I know a few other people that have had similar experience with some of his other choices.

IMO, these are very serious and accomplished people and will serve the interests of the country well. I would even venture to say that so far, this is the strongest team I've seen an administration put together in my lifetime. Although I voted for Trump, I never really supported or trusted him but did so for reasons having to do with the Supreme Court. I've been pleasantly surprised by his outstanding selections of Pence and the others on his growing team.

I think something like this is beginning to happen.

HONG KONG – Since the end of World War II, the hierarchy of economic priorities has been relatively clear. At the top was creating an open, innovative, and dynamic market-driven global economy, in which all countries can (in principle) thrive and grow. Coming in second – one might even say a distant second – was generating vigorous, sustainable, and inclusive national growth patterns. No more.

In fact, a reversal seems to be underway. Achieving strong inclusive national-level growth to revive a declining middle class, kick-start stagnant incomes, and curtail high youth unemployment is now taking precedence. Mutually beneficial international arrangements governing flows of goods, capital, technology, and people (the four key flows in the global economy) are appropriate only when they reinforce – or, at least, don’t undermine – progress on meeting the highest priority..........

http://blogs.cfr.org/renewing-america/2016/11/29/donald-trump-and-the-new-economic-order/

Any administration with Sarah Palin as a part of it automatically is disqualified from being strong.

I personally think his picks are HORRIBLE but of course we're on two sides of the spectrum. I see this administration dismantling core government programs and giving the rich/corporations huge tax cuts. Hell, it's already happened with Carrier....a clear loss from a negotiations standpoint. And all to save a mere 1,000 jobs. Pathetic so far.

I don't see us as on opposite sides of the spectrum TGW. I assume we both want pretty much the same thing (a strong, just and prosperous country). Regarding core govt. programs, wouldn't you agree that they need to be periodically evaluated to assess their efficacy versus rubber stamping them into perpetuity?

Regarding corporate tax rates, there is a bipartisan consensus that they are too high and need to be reduced in order for us to remain competitive. What rate do you think is best for the country and why?

I think the thousand Carrier employees and their families would strongly disagree with you that continuing their work in the U.S. is a clear loss from a negotiating standpoint. I'm glad our president-elect fought for them and their families.

[montestewart]

Any administration with Sarah Palin as a part of it automatically is disqualified from being strong.

I know the government wastes lots of money already, but if Palin's appointed to anything, that would be taxpayer-funded trolling.

[DCZards]

I don't see us as on opposite sides of the spectrum TGW. I assume we both want pretty much the same thing (a strong, just and prosperous country). Regarding core govt. programs, wouldn't you agree that they need to be periodically evaluated to assess their efficacy versus rubber stamping them into perpetuity?

Regarding corporate tax rates, there is a bipartisan consensus that they are too high and need to be reduced in order for us to remain competitive. What rate do you think is best for the country and why?

I think the thousand Carrier employees and their families would strongly disagree with you that continuing their work in the U.S. is a clear loss from a negotiating standpoint. I'm glad our president-elect fought for them and their families.

Popper, what you see as Trump fighting for workers and their families others see as the President-elect buckling in to coporate America...and breaking a campaign promise. I suspect that this is not the first campaign promise that we'll see Trump flip-flop on.

Senator Bernie Sanders lambasted Donald Trump for giving Carrier tax incentives to keep 1,000 jobs in America.
The deal has widely been seen as a victory for Trump -- he mostly delivered on a campaign promise. But Sanders argues that Carrier and its parent company, United Technologies, are having the last laugh.

"In essence, United Technologies (parent of Carrier) took Trump hostage and won. And that should send a shock wave of fear through all workers across the country," Sanders said in an Op-Ed in The Washington Post on Thursday.

Sanders key point: If corporations want cushy tax cuts, all you have to do is threaten Trump and say "we're moving to Mexico."

"He has signaled to every corporation in America that they can threaten to offshore jobs in exchange for business-friendly tax benefits and incentives," Sanders wrote.

Sanders points out that wasn't what Trump told voters.

"After running a campaign pledging to be tough on corporate America, Trump has hypocritically decided to do the exact opposite," Sanders wrote.

[popper]

I don't see us as on opposite sides of the spectrum TGW. I assume we both want pretty much the same thing (a strong, just and prosperous country). Regarding core govt. programs, wouldn't you agree that they need to be periodically evaluated to assess their efficacy versus rubber stamping them into perpetuity?

Regarding corporate tax rates, there is a bipartisan consensus that they are too high and need to be reduced in order for us to remain competitive. What rate do you think is best for the country and why?

I think the thousand Carrier employees and their families would strongly disagree with you that continuing their work in the U.S. is a clear loss from a negotiating standpoint. I'm glad our president-elect fought for them and their families.

Popper, what you see as Trump fighting for workers and their families others see as the President-elect buckling in to coporate America...and breaking a campaign promise. I suspect that this is not the first campaign promise that we'll see Trump flip-flop on.

Senator Bernie Sanders lambasted Donald Trump for giving Carrier tax incentives to keep 1,000 jobs in America.
The deal has widely been seen as a victory for Trump -- he mostly delivered on a campaign promise. But Sanders argues that Carrier and its parent company, United Technologies, are having the last laugh.

"In essence, United Technologies (parent of Carrier) took Trump hostage and won. And that should send a shock wave of fear through all workers across the country," Sanders said in an Op-Ed in The Washington Post on Thursday.

Sanders key point: If corporations want cushy tax cuts, all you have to do is threaten Trump and say "we're moving to Mexico."

"He has signaled to every corporation in America that they can threaten to offshore jobs in exchange for business-friendly tax benefits and incentives," Sanders wrote.

Sanders points out that wasn't what Trump told voters.

"After running a campaign pledging to be tough on corporate America, Trump has hypocritically decided to do the exact opposite," Sanders wrote.

Sanders is simply wrong DCZ and that shouldn't surprise as he has zero business experience. Corporations don't bully strong presidents. The opposite is true, they kow-tow to them.

[DCZards]

I don't see us as on opposite sides of the spectrum TGW. I assume we both want pretty much the same thing (a strong, just and prosperous country). Regarding core govt. programs, wouldn't you agree that they need to be periodically evaluated to assess their efficacy versus rubber stamping them into perpetuity?

Regarding corporate tax rates, there is a bipartisan consensus that they are too high and need to be reduced in order for us to remain competitive. What rate do you think is best for the country and why?

I think the thousand Carrier employees and their families would strongly disagree with you that continuing their work in the U.S. is a clear loss from a negotiating standpoint. I'm glad our president-elect fought for them and their families.

Popper, what you see as Trump fighting for workers and their families others see as the President-elect buckling in to coporate America...and breaking a campaign promise. I suspect that this is not the first campaign promise that we'll see Trump flip-flop on.

Senator Bernie Sanders lambasted Donald Trump for giving Carrier tax incentives to keep 1,000 jobs in America.
The deal has widely been seen as a victory for Trump -- he mostly delivered on a campaign promise. But Sanders argues that Carrier and its parent company, United Technologies, are having the last laugh.

"In essence, United Technologies (parent of Carrier) took Trump hostage and won. And that should send a shock wave of fear through all workers across the country," Sanders said in an Op-Ed in The Washington Post on Thursday.

Sanders key point: If corporations want cushy tax cuts, all you have to do is threaten Trump and say "we're moving to Mexico."

"He has signaled to every corporation in America that they can threaten to offshore jobs in exchange for business-friendly tax benefits and incentives," Sanders wrote.

Sanders points out that wasn't what Trump told voters.

"After running a campaign pledging to be tough on corporate America, Trump has hypocritically decided to do the exact opposite," Sanders wrote.

Sanders is simply wrong DCZ and that shouldn't surprise as he has zero business experience. Corporations don't bully strong presidents. The opposite is true, they kow-tow to them.

Popper, you're making an assumption that Trump is a "strong president" when he hasn't even served one day in office. We've already seen Trump flip-flop on Obamacare, the Wall and gay/lesbian rights. I wouldn't call that a sign of strength.

[nate33]

Former NFL player gets shot and killed in a road rage incident, and the shooter doesn't get charged. That's good ol' American justice at work:

http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2016/12/ronald_gasser_suspect_in_joe_m.html

Ronald Gasser, the man authorities say shot and killed former NFL player Joe McKnight, was released from custody overnight without being charged, Jefferson Parish Sheriff's Office authorities said Friday morning (Dec. 2).

Gasser, 54, has not been formally charged, said JPSO spokesman Col. John Fortunato. Investigators are consulting with the district attorney's office on the decision whether to formally charge Gasser, Fortunato said.

As the investigation into McKnight's death continues, Fortunato asked anyone with information about the shooting to contact department homicide detectives at 504-364-5393.

McKnight, 28, was shot about 3 p.m. Thursday (Dec. 1) at the intersection of Behrman Highway and Holmes Boulevard in Terrytown. A witness, who declined to give her name, said she saw a man at the intersection yelling at McKnight, who was trying to apologize. The man shot McKnight more than once, the witness said. She said he shot McKnight, stood over him and said, "I told you don't you f--- with me." Then the man fired again, she said.

Authorities named the shooter as Ronald Gasser, 54, and said he stayed at the scene and turned his gun in to officers. Gasser was in custody and was being questioned, Jefferson Parish Sheriff Newell Normand said. The sheriff said McKnight did not have a gun, and deputies did not find a gun outside McKnight's vehicle.

Un-freakin'-believable.

We don't know enough to have an informed opinion so it's pretty absurd for you to be so outraged. There is just one "unnamed" witness account. Did that witness actually talk to the police, or just a reporter? Was there reason to believe the testimony was credible? Did the forensics back up her testimony? Presumably, forensic experts would be able to tell if the man was shot while on the ground.

Also, failure to take the shooter into custody does not mean he won't eventually be tried. The shooter waited around at the scene for the police to arrive and then peacefully turned over his gun. Since he didn't run when he had the opportunity, maybe the cops felt he wasn't a flight risk so there was no need to arrest and imprison him at this time.

[nate33]

I personally think his picks are HORRIBLE but of course we're on two sides of the spectrum. I see this administration dismantling core government programs and giving the rich/corporations huge tax cuts. Hell, it's already happened with Carrier....a clear loss from a negotiations standpoint. And all to save a mere 1,000 jobs. Pathetic so far.

I don't consider $600 of lost tax revenue per year per job saved to be a "clear loss". I think it's a huge bargain. Those employees will surely pay more than $600 in income taxes every year, not to mention the multiplier effect that will permit hundreds, maybe thousands of additional service jobs to remain in the area, all of whom will continue to pay income taxes. And there's the money saved by not having to pay these people welfare.

If all it costs is $600 in tax credits to add a $60,000 a year job, I'd make that deal a million times over.

[Induveca]

I don't see us as on opposite sides of the spectrum TGW. I assume we both want pretty much the same thing (a strong, just and prosperous country). Regarding core govt. programs, wouldn't you agree that they need to be periodically evaluated to assess their efficacy versus rubber stamping them into perpetuity?

Regarding corporate tax rates, there is a bipartisan consensus that they are too high and need to be reduced in order for us to remain competitive. What rate do you think is best for the country and why?

I think the thousand Carrier employees and their families would strongly disagree with you that continuing their work in the U.S. is a clear loss from a negotiating standpoint. I'm glad our president-elect fought for them and their families.

Popper, what you see as Trump fighting for workers and their families others see as the President-elect buckling in to coporate America...and breaking a campaign promise. I suspect that this is not the first campaign promise that we'll see Trump flip-flop on.

Senator Bernie Sanders lambasted Donald Trump for giving Carrier tax incentives to keep 1,000 jobs in America.
The deal has widely been seen as a victory for Trump -- he mostly delivered on a campaign promise. But Sanders argues that Carrier and its parent company, United Technologies, are having the last laugh.

"In essence, United Technologies (parent of Carrier) took Trump hostage and won. And that should send a shock wave of fear through all workers across the country," Sanders said in an Op-Ed in The Washington Post on Thursday.

Sanders key point: If corporations want cushy tax cuts, all you have to do is threaten Trump and say "we're moving to Mexico."

"He has signaled to every corporation in America that they can threaten to offshore jobs in exchange for business-friendly tax benefits and incentives," Sanders wrote.

Sanders points out that wasn't what Trump told voters.

"After running a campaign pledging to be tough on corporate America, Trump has hypocritically decided to do the exact opposite," Sanders wrote.

Sanders is simply wrong DCZ and that shouldn't surprise as he has zero business experience. Corporations don't bully strong presidents. The opposite is true, they kow-tow to them.

Well said Carrier's parent company United Technologies has 6.7 billion in government contracts. According to multiple outlets, this was the stick that got Carrier to back off.

Save 65 million or risk 6.7 billion? Not a tough choice. This tactic will work for hundreds of companies, cutting off federal bids and/or existing contracts for major outsourcers is a no brainer for a CEO.

I love this approach, Corporate boards typically answer to no one but themselves. But having barriers to enter federal bids will indeed keep a lot of jobs in the US, and likely even bring some back.

1. Eliminate x employees for outsourcing, you lose access to renewal of federal contracts (or something similar)
2. Grow your manufacturing/US employee base by reducing offshore workers and get a tax break repatriating money.

Great start in my opinion, it's the type of deal only a businessman could construct. He can look at the other side of the table and see their concerns or legal angling, unlike an Obama or Clinton. He'll likely be employing a major corporate law firm for these negotiations.

Bravo, even if it's 1000 jobs it's a great test-case.

[Induveca]

I personally think his picks are HORRIBLE but of course we're on two sides of the spectrum. I see this administration dismantling core government programs and giving the rich/corporations huge tax cuts. Hell, it's already happened with Carrier....a clear loss from a negotiations standpoint. And all to save a mere 1,000 jobs. Pathetic so far.

I don't consider $600 of lost tax revenue per year per job saved to be a "clear loss". I think it's a huge bargain. Those employees will surely pay more than $600 in income taxes every year, not to mention the multiplier effect that will permit hundreds, maybe thousands of additional service jobs to remain in the area, all of whom will continue to pay income taxes. And there's the money saved by not having to pay these people welfare.

If all it costs is $600 in tax credits to add a $60,000 a year job, I'd make that deal a million times over.

I've been begging for a corporate minded president for decades, it makes sense. Nate you laid the logic out perfectly, the MSM may focus on tax cuts but as you correctly point out the benefits of continued income tax, no welfare and secondary and tertiary service businesses remaining viable is a home run.

[AFM]

Here's a relevant article for anyone interested
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-01/details-behind-trumps-deal-carrier-revealed

It's $636 a year per job

[Induveca]

Read on Twitter

Whatever the angle is....ugh. Go away.

Time for some union/busing mayhem. Will be interesting they attracted a few hundred at their speeches....will the "thank you" tour suddenly attract thousands?

[popper]

Breathtaking.

An Untold Number Of Immigration Applications Never Received Background Checks


KATHRYN WATSON
Reporter
1:33 PM 12/02/2016

Federal immigration officials are halting all scheduled naturalization ceremonies because their digital information system failed to run background checks on an untold number of applicants, according to an email obtained by House Committee on the Judiciary Chairman Rep. Bob Goodlatte.

The scope of the problem — including how many naturalization applications in the Electronic Immigration System (ELIS) that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) officials already approved without proper background checks — is unclear………..

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/12/02/an-untold-number-of-immigration-applications-never-received-background-checks/#ixzz4RiJgp2tJ

[dckingsfan]

Trump's pick for Secretary of Education may be his worse cabinet decision. She's bad for children, families and public education.

Meh. I like her.

That looks like a union poster. I have heard her speak. She is for school competition, school choice, charter schools...
She is enemy #1 of education school unions. Of course you don't like her.

Given that this is a states issue and we need more than one choice - I think she could be pretty good.

[nate33]

Read on Twitter

Whatever the angle is....ugh. Go away.

Time for some union/busing mayhem. Will be interesting they attracted a few hundred at their speeches....will the "thank you" tour suddenly attract thousands?

LOL

Clinton couldn't attract more than 300 people during the campaign unless she had Beyonce or Bon Jovi alongside her.

[dckingsfan]

Any administration with Sarah Palin as a part of it automatically is disqualified from being strong.

I don't understand Palin. I really don't see what she could possibly offer.

[nate33]

Any administration with Sarah Palin as a part of it automatically is disqualified from being strong.

I don't understand Palin. I really don't see what she could possibly offer.

For whatever reason, Sarah Palin has a very loyal following of religious-right middle-America types. Palin's early endorsement of Trump in Iowa was a big deal and may have been crucial to Trump winning the primary. Trump is loyal to the people who are loyal to him. While I don't want Palin to be put into a position that she cannot handle, I understand Trump's desire to try and reward her if he can find a role for her that is suited for her talents.

I don't think Palin is sophisticated policy wonk, but I also don't think she is as incompetent as the media makes her out to be. You don't work your way up from mayor of a town in Alaska to VP candidate by accident.

[AFM]

Any administration with Sarah Palin as a part of it automatically is disqualified from being strong.

I don't understand Palin. I really don't see what she could possibly offer.

Have you ever seen the early 21st century classic, Who's Nailin' Palin? starring the venerable Lisa Ann? One of her mid career highlights, IMO. There are a few positions in there I had never seen prior.

[TGW]

Sanders is simply wrong DCZ and that shouldn't surprise as he has zero business experience. Corporations don't bully strong presidents. The opposite is true, they kow-tow to them.

LOL....sorry that's a good one.

Bernie Sanders is 100% right. He may have zero experience as a businessman, but has dedicated his career to supporting the little man.

Trump saving 1,000 jobs was a case of missing the forest for the trees. He opened up a can of worms, and is already "kow-towing" to corporations.