Political Roundtable Part XIII

[AFM]

Man, really interesting to see Breitbart go HARD against the health reform bill. They are supporting Rand 100%--and not the President. I wonder if their values change with Bannon gone.
Alex Marlowe, the editor of Breitbart, said in an interview last week, that Bannon really hasn't been in contact with him at all since the election.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/03/21/exclusive-rand-paul-easily-35-no-votes-paul-ryans-obamacare-2-0-predict-pull-bill-start/

Read on Twitter

Looks like the bill is dead, as is.

[pcbothwel]

In nate's defense, it's hard being the only Trump supporter on this board.

I'm not a Fanatic about it, but I voted for him and dont regret it for a single second.

[pcbothwel]

Man, really interesting to see Breitbart go HARD against the health reform bill. They are supporting Rand 100%--and not the President. I wonder if their values change with Bannon gone.
Alex Marlowe, the editor of Breitbart, said in an interview last week, that Bannon really hasn't been in contact with him at all since the election.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/03/21/exclusive-rand-paul-easily-35-no-votes-paul-ryans-obamacare-2-0-predict-pull-bill-start/

Read on Twitter

Looks like the bill is dead, as is.

Someone deeply involved with procedures on the Hill can help me with this, but I'm confused about the stance of Freedom caucus wing.

There are restrictions on what can be in the 1st bill as it being passed through reconciliation (simple majority in Senate). But if they vote to simply repeal the ACA, wouldn't any new legislation have to pass with 60 votes?

[AFM]

In nate's defense, it's hard being the only Trump supporter on this board.

I'm not a Fanatic about it, but I voted for him and dont regret it for a single second.

Interesting. Not sure if Indu voted, but he's on the spectrum. I think we both wanted Rand, aware that's a fantasy though.

[FAH1223]

Man, really interesting to see Breitbart go HARD against the health reform bill. They are supporting Rand 100%--and not the President. I wonder if their values change with Bannon gone.
Alex Marlowe, the editor of Breitbart, said in an interview last week, that Bannon really hasn't been in contact with him at all since the election.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/03/21/exclusive-rand-paul-easily-35-no-votes-paul-ryans-obamacare-2-0-predict-pull-bill-start/

Read on Twitter

Looks like the bill is dead, as is.

Someone deeply involved with procedures on the Hill can help me with this, but I'm confused about the stance of Freedom caucus wing.

There are restrictions on what can be in the 1st bill as it being passed through reconciliation (simple majority in Senate). But if they vote to simply repeal the ACA, wouldn't any new legislation have to pass with 60 votes?

They're doing budget reconciliation to gut the ACA's taxes, consumer protections, fund for subsidies and Medicaid expansion. That just needs majority.

Provisions from the ACA like pre-existing conditions, coverage on parents plan till 26 and other popular measures will remain. To repeal and replace the ACA entirely they need 60 votes in Senate. 8 Democrats ain't going to do that and next year the GOP probably isn't going to win 8 Senate seats.

[FAH1223]

Watch on YouTube

[AFM]

Man, really interesting to see Breitbart go HARD against the health reform bill. They are supporting Rand 100%--and not the President. I wonder if their values change with Bannon gone.
Alex Marlowe, the editor of Breitbart, said in an interview last week, that Bannon really hasn't been in contact with him at all since the election.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/03/21/exclusive-rand-paul-easily-35-no-votes-paul-ryans-obamacare-2-0-predict-pull-bill-start/

Read on Twitter

Looks like the bill is dead, as is.

Someone deeply involved with procedures on the Hill can help me with this, but I'm confused about the stance of Freedom caucus wing.

There are restrictions on what can be in the 1st bill as it being passed through reconciliation (simple majority in Senate). But if they vote to simply repeal the ACA, wouldn't any new legislation have to pass with 60 votes?

They're doing budget reconciliation to gut the ACA's taxes, consumer protections, fund for subsidies and Medicaid expansion. That just needs majority.

Provisions from the ACA like pre-existing conditions, coverage on parents plan till 26 and other popular measures will remain. To repeal and replace the ACA entirely they need 60 votes in Senate. 8 Democrats ain't going to do that and next year the GOP probably isn't going to win 8 Senate seats.

FAH, did you catch the article I posted a few days back, written by Peter Schiff?

[FAH1223]

Someone deeply involved with procedures on the Hill can help me with this, but I'm confused about the stance of Freedom caucus wing.

There are restrictions on what can be in the 1st bill as it being passed through reconciliation (simple majority in Senate). But if they vote to simply repeal the ACA, wouldn't any new legislation have to pass with 60 votes?

They're doing budget reconciliation to gut the ACA's taxes, consumer protections, fund for subsidies and Medicaid expansion. That just needs majority.

Provisions from the ACA like pre-existing conditions, coverage on parents plan till 26 and other popular measures will remain. To repeal and replace the ACA entirely they need 60 votes in Senate. 8 Democrats ain't going to do that and next year the GOP probably isn't going to win 8 Senate seats.

FAH, did you catch the article I posted a few days back, written by Peter Schiff?

Nah what he say

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

[FAH1223]

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

[montestewart]

In nate's defense, it's hard being the only Trump supporter on this board.

I'm not a Fanatic about it, but I voted for him and dont regret it for a single second.

You voted for Nate?

"At the present time, I have no plans to run nor interest in running for the office of the President of the United States."

nate33, December 2015

It was so obvious. Why didn't I see it? In a close election, write-in votes for nate shaved just enough points from Clinton in key states to turn that whole election around. You'd think Trump could at least throw him a bone, maybe President of the United States Institute of Peace or Director of the Office of Thrift Supervision.

[sfam]

Yeah, I really don't get this. Why not just start withdrawing from our overseas military installations, reduce the military and get out of the UN.

Instead they are going to defund stuff that isn't even a rounding error and won't help the deficit one iota.

Remind me how getting out of the UN a good thing?

It isn't - but we can't really afford it now. I would rather see that cut than things like Meals on Wheels.

I'd rather cut extraneous defense spending. That's where the money is. Does next generation air craft carriers help us against ISIS? I could go down the line. Defense spending is largely just middle class welfare.

And again, defunding the UN will cost us far more in instability and coin. Pennywise, pound foolish.

[sfam]

In nate's defense, it's hard being the only Trump supporter on this board.

I'm not a Fanatic about it, but I voted for him and dont regret it for a single second.

What would lead you to regret the vote?

[sfam]

Man, really interesting to see Breitbart go HARD against the health reform bill. They are supporting Rand 100%--and not the President. I wonder if their values change with Bannon gone.
Alex Marlowe, the editor of Breitbart, said in an interview last week, that Bannon really hasn't been in contact with him at all since the election.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/03/21/exclusive-rand-paul-easily-35-no-votes-paul-ryans-obamacare-2-0-predict-pull-bill-start/

Read on Twitter

Looks like the bill is dead, as is.

Someone deeply involved with procedures on the Hill can help me with this, but I'm confused about the stance of Freedom caucus wing.

There are restrictions on what can be in the 1st bill as it being passed through reconciliation (simple majority in Senate). But if they vote to simply repeal the ACA, wouldn't any new legislation have to pass with 60 votes?

This whole approach is fantasy, as Paul as correctly pointed out. Say they get through the reconcilliation part, and the White House does "Phase 2" regulations roll-back. Phase 3 is everything non budgetary, and requires a 60 vote threshold in the Senate. Meaning 8 democrats need to come on board. NO democrats will come on board, so we are in essence left with phase 1 only.

[sfam]

Watch on YouTube

I'm curious. Do you actually watch RT? If so, why?

[sfam]

Read on Twitter

But he fired all the US attorneys. You could conceivably come up with cases in all 50 states they were investigating that would have been bad for them.

[sfam]

In nate's defense, it's hard being the only Trump supporter on this board.

I'm not a Fanatic about it, but I voted for him and dont regret it for a single second.

Interesting. Not sure if Indu voted, but he's on the spectrum. I think we both wanted Rand, aware that's a fantasy though.

Popper seems a Trump supporter, not sure he voted.

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

But he fired all the US attorneys. You could conceivably come up with cases in all 50 states they were investigating that would have been bad for them.

What you say makes sense other than the fact Trump asked Preet to stay on

Perhaps the administration had second thoughts....or perhaps they were informed about what/who Preet was investigating.

[sfam]

Read on Twitter

But he fired all the US attorneys. You could conceivably come up with cases in all 50 states they were investigating that would have been bad for them.

What you say makes sense other than the fact Trump asked Preet to stay on

Perhaps the administration had second thoughts....or perhaps they were informed about what/who Preet was investigating.

I'm willing to believe as nasty a thing as you can come up with regarding Trump. But the fact that he asked someone to stay on and then fired all of them points far more that Trump doesn't have a plan and is winging it daily. It may be he fired all of them for this one dude, but I think its far more likely he fired all of them because he couldn't think of any other way to "fight back" and change the narrative.

That's a pretty horrible reason to implement changes BTW.

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter