Skip navigation

Monthly Archives: October 2018


TOTUS is deflecting as usual, the “stable genius” seems to have forgotten his part in these actions. the name calling, the “lock her up” shouts and the derisive words used by him at his rallies. This is typical of a consummate liar and miscreant. MA 

John Wagner 4 hrs ago
President Trump doubled down Thursday on blaming the media for the nation’s incivility, as suspicious packages sent by a suspected serial bomber continued to target Trump’s outspoken critics.
“A very big part of the Anger we see today in our society is caused by the purposely false and inaccurate reporting of the Mainstream Media that I refer to as Fake News,” the president said in a morning tweet. “It has gotten so bad and hateful that it is beyond description. Mainstream Media must clean up its act, FAST!”
Trump’s tweet was sent amid television coverage of police in New York swarming a block in Lower Manhattan after receiving reports of a suspicious package at a building where actor Robert De Niro has offices. The package was addressed to De Niro, who attacked Trump in June during a profane presentation at the Tony Awards.
Subscribe to the Post Most newsletter: Today’s most popular stories on The Washington Post
Investigators later found a package addressed to former vice president Joe Biden in a Delaware mail facility that was like the other pipe bombs found this week, according to a law enforcement official.
Trump also took aim at the media on Wednesday night, speaking at a political rally in central Wisconsin after a string of homemade bombs were sent to former secretary of state Hillary Clinton, former president Barack Obama and others.
During the rally, Trump was relatively subdued as he spoke, interrupted himself several times to point out that he was “trying to be nice” and took no responsibility for his own role in contributing to the country’s degraded civic discourse.
“The media also has a responsibility to set a civil tone and to stop the endless hostility and constant negative — and oftentimes, false — attacks and stories,” Trump said at the rally.
In an apparent swipe at Democrats, Trump also denounced those who “carelessly compare political opponents to historical villains” and who “mob people in public places or destroy public property.”
The president has long made the media a target of his ire, denouncing reporters as the “enemy of the people.”
The targets of suspicious packages in recent days have all been derided by Trump as well. After De Niro attacked him in June, Trump fired back on Twitter, calling him a “very Low IQ individual” who had taken “too many shots to the head by real boxers in movies.”
One of the undetonated devices was found Wednesday at CNN’s New York headquarters. It was addressed to former CIA director John O. Brennan. Since leaving the government, he has been an outspoken critic of Trump; he is an on-air analyst for NBC News and MSNBC, rather than CNN.
On Thursday, Brennan responded to Trump’s tweet with a scathing tweet of his own.
“Stop blaming others,” Brennan said. “Look in the mirror. Your inflammatory rhetoric, insults, lies, & encouragement of physical violence are disgraceful. Clean up your act. … try to act Presidential. The American people deserve much better. BTW, your critics will not be intimidated into silence.”
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) also condemned the president’s tweet.
“Rise up, America,” he said on Twitter. “The President of the United States is now blaming the attempted murder of Democrats on press criticism of him. I didn’t think his narcissism could sink to this ugly of a place. But it has.”
During an interview Thursday morning on Fox News, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders stressed that Trump has condemned the actions of the suspected bomber and said that he “could not have been more presidential” in addressing the crisis on Wednesday.
Asked by a Fox News host if Trump could go “the extra mile” to foster more civil political discourse, Sanders said: “Look, the president did exactly that last night.”
She argued that Trump has an obligation as president to point out differences in policy between the two major political parties.
“There is a major political, philosophical difference between Democrats and Republicans, and there’s nothing wrong with pointing those differences out,” Sanders said. “There is something wrong with taking that to a point of violence.”
Sanders also pushed back on a stinging statement by CNN World President Jeff Zucker hours after the package sent to Brennan led to the evacuation of the network’s staff from the Time Warner Center in Manhattan.
“There is a total and complete lack of understanding at the White House about the seriousness of their continued attacks on the media,” Zucker said. “The President, and especially the White House Press Secretary, should understand their words matter. Thus far, they have shown no comprehension of that.”
On Thursday, Sanders said she found it “absolutely disgraceful that one of the first public statements we heard from CNN yesterday was to put the blame and the responsibility of this despicable act on the president and on me personally when the person who is responsible for this is the person who made and created and put these suspicious packages in the hands and in the arms of innocent American citizens.”
Josh Dawsey and Felicia Sonmez contributed to this report.

btn_donateCC_LG

Please Donate


Ineptitude appears to be the mainstay of the current administration. We have members who bring their own opinions into play even when that opinion does not or will not benefit the country overall. From TOTUS down to the cabinet members there is a true disconnect regarding the effects of their ill planned and ill-considered actions. The act of  trying or continuing to convince Americans that the good things  they are doing for us is ludicrous at best and callous at worst. TOTUS is still continuing to govern by tweet as this gets his poorly conceived messages out in mass media before anyone with rational and reasonable intelligence can “vet” them. This gets his hardcore base to cheer but bodes poorly for the majority of Americans. It has been shown that on the National and International stages Bullying does not work. Moving the US towards isolation is move that will leave a dangerous void that could be filled by one of the less Democratic players.

btn_donateCC_LG

Please Donate



Idiots Don't Know They Are Idiots - Dilbert by Scott Adams

btn_donateCC_LG

Please Donate


The Stable genius as always denies anyone is spying on him because he  is too smart(?) to be spied on. MA

By MATTHEW ROSENBERG and MAGGIE HABERMAN 1 hr ago

WASHINGTON — When President Trump calls old friends on one of his iPhones to gossip, gripe or solicit their latest take on how he is doing, American intelligence reports indicate that Chinese spies are often listening — and putting to use invaluable insights into how to best work the president and affect administration policy, current and former American officials said.
Mr. Trump’s aides have repeatedly warned him that his cellphone calls are not secure, and they have told him that Russian spies are routinely eavesdropping on the calls, as well. But aides say the voluble president, who has been pressured into using his secure White House landline more often these days, has still refused to give up his iPhones. White House officials say they can only hope he refrains from discussing classified information when he is on them.
Mr. Trump’s use of his iPhones was detailed by several current and former officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity so they could discuss classified intelligence and sensitive security arrangements. The officials said they were doing so not to undermine Mr. Trump, but out of frustration with what they considered the president’s casual approach to electronic security.
American spy agencies, the officials said, had learned that China and Russia were eavesdropping on the president’s cellphone calls from human sources inside foreign governments and intercepting communications between foreign officials.
On Thursday morning, Mr. Trump said this article was “soooo wrong!” and asserted that he used only government phones. He did not claim there were other factual errors in The New York Times’ reporting.

Donald J. Trump
✔ @realDonaldTrump

The so-called experts on Trump over at the New York Times wrote a long and boring article on my cellphone usage that is so incorrect I do not have time here to correct it. I only use Government Phones, and have only one seldom used government cell phone. Story is soooo wrong!
5:54 AM – Oct 25, 2018 “

The current and former officials said they have also determined that China is seeking to use what it is learning from the calls — how Mr. Trump thinks, what arguments tend to sway him and to whom he is inclined to listen — to keep a trade war with the United States from escalating further. In what amounts to a marriage of lobbying and espionage, the Chinese have pieced together a list of the people with whom Mr. Trump regularly speaks in hopes of using them to influence the president, the officials said.
Among those on the list are Stephen A. Schwarzman, the Blackstone Group chief executive who has endowed a master’s program at Tsinghua University in Beijing, and Steve Wynn, the former Las Vegas casino magnate who used to own a lucrative property in Macau.
The Chinese have identified friends of both men and others among the president’s regulars, and are now relying on Chinese businessmen and others with ties to Beijing to feed arguments to the friends of the Trump friends. The strategy is that those people will pass on what they are hearing, and that Beijing’s views will eventually be delivered to the president by trusted voices, the officials said. They added that the Trump friends were most likely unaware of any Chinese effort.
L. Lin Wood, a lawyer for Mr. Wynn, said his client was retired and had no comment. A spokeswoman for Blackstone, Christine Anderson, declined to comment on Chinese efforts to influence Mr. Schwarzman, but said that he “has been happy to serve as an intermediary on certain critical matters between the two countries at the request of both heads of state.”
Russia is not believed to be running as sophisticated an influence effort as China because of Mr. Trump’s apparent affinity for President Vladimir V. Putin, a former official said.
China’s effort is a 21st-century version of what officials there have been doing for many decades, which is trying to influence American leaders by cultivating an informal network of prominent businesspeople and academics who can be sold on ideas and policy prescriptions and then carry them to the White House. The difference now is that China, through its eavesdropping on Mr. Trump’s calls, has a far clearer idea of who carries the most influence with the president, and what arguments tend to work.
The Chinese and the Russians “would look for any little thing — how easily was he talked out of something, what was the argument that was used,” said John Sipher, a 28-year veteran of the Central Intelligence Agency who served in Moscow in the 1990s and later ran the agency’s Russia program.
Trump friends like Mr. Schwarzman, who figured prominently in the first meeting between President Xi Jinping of China and Mr. Trump at Mar-a-Lago, the president’s Florida resort, already hold pro-China and pro-trade views, and thus are ideal targets in the eyes of the Chinese, the officials said. Targeting the friends of Mr. Schwarzman and Mr. Wynn can reinforce the views of the two, the officials said. The friends are also most likely to be more accessible.
One official said the Chinese were pushing for the friends to persuade Mr. Trump to sit down with Mr. Xi as often as possible. The Chinese, the official said, correctly perceive that Mr. Trump places tremendous value on personal relationships, and that one-on-one meetings yield breakthroughs far more often than regular contacts between Chinese and American officials.
Whether the friends can stop Mr. Trump from pursuing a trade war with China is another question.
Officials said the president has two official iPhones that have been altered by the National Security Agency to limit their abilities — and vulnerabilities — and a third personal phone that is no different from hundreds of millions of iPhones in use around the world. Mr. Trump keeps the personal phone, White House officials said, because unlike his other two phones, he can store his contacts in it.
Apple declined to comment on the president’s iPhones. None of them are completely secure and are vulnerable to hackers who could remotely break into the phones themselves.
But the calls made from the phones are intercepted as they travel through the cell towers, cables and switches that make up national and international cellphone networks. Calls made from any cellphone — iPhone, Android, an old-school Samsung flip phone — are vulnerable.
The issue of secure communications is fraught for Mr. Trump. As a presidential candidate, he regularly attacked his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton, during the 2016 campaign for her use of an unsecured email server while she was secretary of state, and he basked in chants of “lock her up” at his rallies.
Intercepting calls is a relatively easy skill for governments. American intelligence agencies consider it an essential tool of spycraft, and they routinely try to tap the phones of important foreign leaders. In a diplomatic blowup during the Obama administration, documents leaked by Edward J. Snowden, a former contractor for the National Security Agency, showed that the American government had tapped the phone of Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany.
Foreign governments are well aware of the risk, and so leaders like Mr. Xi and Mr. Putin avoid using cellphones when possible.
President Barack Obama was careful with cellphones, too. He used an iPhone in his second term, but it could not make calls and could receive email only from a special address that was given to a select group of staff members and intimates. It had no camera or microphone, and it could not be used to download apps at will. Texting was forbidden because there was no way to collect and store the messages, as required by the Presidential Records Act.
“It is a great phone, state of the art, but it doesn’t take pictures, you can’t text. The phone doesn’t work, you know, you can’t play your music on it,” Mr. Obama said on “The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon” in June 2016. “So basically, it’s like — does your 3-year-old have one of those play phones?”
When Mr. Obama needed a cellphone, the officials said, he used one of those of his aides.
Mr. Trump has insisted on more capable devices. He did agree during the transition to give up his Android phone (the Google operating system is considered more vulnerable than Apple’s). And since becoming president, Mr. Trump has agreed to a slightly cumbersome arrangement of having two official phones: one for Twitter and other apps, and one for calls.
Mr. Trump typically relies on his cellphones when he does not want a call going through the White House switchboard and logged for senior aides to see, his aides said. Many of those Mr. Trump speaks with most often on one of his cellphones, such as hosts at Fox News, share the president’s political views, or simply enable his sense of grievance about any number of subjects.
Administration officials said Mr. Trump’s longtime paranoia about surveillance — well before coming to the White House he believed that his phone conversations were often being recorded — gave them some comfort that he was not disclosing classified information on the calls. They said they had further confidence he was not spilling secrets because he rarely digs into the details of the intelligence he is shown and is not well versed in the operational specifics of military or covert activities.
In an interview this week with The Wall Street Journal, Mr. Trump quipped about his phones being insecure. When asked what American officials in Turkey had learned about the killing of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul, he replied, “I actually said don’t give it to me on the phone. I don’t want it on the phone. As good as these phones are supposed to be.”
But Mr. Trump is also famously indiscreet. In a May 2017 meeting in the Oval Office with Russian officials, he shared highly sensitive intelligence passed to the United States by Israel. He also told the Russians that James B. Comey, the former F.B.I. director, was “a real nut job” and that firing him had relieved “great pressure.”
Still, Mr. Trump’s lack of tech savvy has alleviated some other security concerns. He does not use email, so the risk of a phishing attack like those used by Russian intelligence to gain access to Democratic Party emails is close to nil. The same goes for texts, which are disabled on his official phones.
His Twitter phone can connect to the internet only over a Wi-Fi connection, and he rarely, if ever, has access to unsecured wireless networks, officials said. But the security of the device ultimately depends on the user, and protecting the president’s phones has sometimes proved difficult.
Last year, Mr. Trump’s cellphone was left behind in a golf cart at his club in Bedminster, N.J., causing a scramble to locate it, according to two people familiar with what took place.
Mr. Trump is supposed to swap out his two official phones every 30 days for new ones but rarely does, bristling at the inconvenience. White House staff members are supposed to set up the new phones exactly like the old ones, but the new iPhones cannot be restored from backups of his old phones because doing so would transfer over any malware.
New phone or old, though, the Chinese and the Russians are listening, and learning.
Get politics and Washington news updates via Facebook, Twitter and the Morning Briefing newsletter.

btn_donateCC_LG

Please Donate


 

Philip Rucker, Ashley Parker 7 hrs ago

Analysis: Trump is at the top of his dangerous game

The great election-eve middle-class tax cut began not as a factual proposal, but as a false promise.

When President Trump abruptly told reporters over the weekend that middle-income Americans would receive a 10 percent tax cut before the midterm elections, neither officials on Capitol Hill nor in his administration knew anything about such a tax cut. The White House released no substantive information. And although cutting taxes requires legislation, Congress is not scheduled to be back in session until after the Nov. 6 elections.
Yet Washington’s bureaucratic machinery whirred into action nonetheless — working to produce a policy that could be seen as supporting Trump’s whim.

One such option now under discussion by administration officials is a symbolic nonbinding “resolution” designed to signal to voters ahead of the elections that if Republicans hold their congressional majorities they might pass a future 10 percent tax cut for the middle class. And House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady (R-Tex.) said Tuesday that he would work with the White House and the Treasury Department to develop a plan “over the coming weeks.”
The mystery tax cut is only the latest instance of the federal government scrambling to reverse-engineer policies to meet Trump’s sudden public promises — or to search for evidence buttressing his conspiracy theories and falsehoods.
Subscribe to the Post Most newsletter: Today’s most popular stories on The Washington Post
The Pentagon leaped into action to both hold a military parade and launch a “Space Force” on the president’s whims. The Commerce Department moved to create a plan for auto tariffs after Trump angrily threatened to impose them. And just this week, Vice President Pence, the Department of Homeland Security and the White House all rushed to try to back up Trump’s unsupported claim that “unknown Middle Easterners” were part of a migrant caravan in Central America — only to have the president admit late Tuesday that there was no proof at all.
“Virtually no one on the planet has the kind of power that a president of the United States has to scramble bureaucracies in the service of whim,” said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania. “Whatever Donald Trump wakes up and thinks about, or whatever comes to mind in the middle of a speech, actually has the reality in that it is actionable in some odd sense.”
Consider Trump’s ongoing commentary this week about the caravan of Central American migrants traveling toward the U.S. border with Mexico.
The president tweeted an unsubstantiated warning Monday morning that “criminals and unknown Middle Easterners are mixed in,” and later repeated it. His claim received extensive news coverage, but administration agencies did not immediately provide information supporting it.
By the day’s end, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders told reporters Trump “absolutely” has evidence that there are Middle Easterners in the caravan — but she cited only a statistic that each day 10 suspected or known terrorists try to enter the United States illegally.
Though Trump’s claim was not about suspected terrorists specifically, he and his administration seemed to imply — again with no evidence — that his hypothetical “Middle Easterners” may have intentions to commit terrorism.
Pence sought to back up his boss’s claim, saying Tuesday morning in a Washington Post Live interview that it is “inconceivable that there are not people of Middle Eastern descent in a crowd of more than 7,000 people advancing toward our border.”
But just hours later, Trump admitted to reporters during an Oval Office event that he has no evidence to support the claim about the caravan.
“There’s no proof of anything,” Trump said, “but there could very well be.”
Daniel A. Effron, a professor of organizational behavior at London Business School who studies the psychology of lies, said political leaders such as Trump can make falsehoods seem true through imagination and repetition.
“When falsehoods feel familiar, one concern is you don’t actually know what’s true and what’s false,” Effron said. “There’s a lot of information to keep track of, and you use familiarity as a cue to what’s true. The other concern is when you’re invited to imagine how something could be true, you actually know that it’s false, but you don’t necessarily think it’s unethical to say.”
Simon Blackburn, a retired philosophy professor at the University of Cambridge and author of the book “Truth,” said, “If you control the agenda efficiently, then there’s no possibility of independent inquiry, and I think that’s what Trump is a genius at.”
Trump has a pattern of catching his aides off guard with random policy announcements that are rooted more in his imagination and desires than any organized administration initiative.
Trump has sometimes issued directives publicly if he believes his subordinates are not executing his agenda forcefully enough or taking his wishes seriously. “He thinks, ‘Hey, if I say it on Twitter, then these guys will have to follow,’” said one former White House official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to candidly share the president’s process.
In July 2017, Trump revealed in a tweet his decision to ban transgender individuals from serving in the military. His social media missive preempted a policy review with several options that he was set to receive from administration officials. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and his underlings scrambled to react and reconcile the president’s sudden demand with the military’s practices and protocols.
The Pentagon was also forced to develop a “Space Force” after Trump announced last spring that he wanted to create a sixth branch of the military. The president initially said it was conceived as a joke, but “Space Force” has become a frequent chant at his campaign rallies, and he has tasked Pence with overseeing the initiative.
Trump also sent military leaders reeling in January when he said in a meeting with Pentagon brass that he wanted a grand military parade like the one he had gleefully witnessed in Paris on Bastille Day — complete with soldiers marching and tanks rolling down the boulevards of Washington.
Pentagon officials took his desire as a presidential directive and worked reluctantly to stage a parade for this fall, but Trump backed off plans in August, citing cost concerns and blaming local officials in Washington.
After winning the electoral college in 2016, Trump falsely claimed he only lost the popular vote against Hillary Clinton because of widespread voter fraud — leading to a formal commission on the issue chaired by Pence. The panel was eventually disbanded after it became mired in lawsuits and only managed to hold two meetings.
Trump has set off similar surprises in trade, one of his signature political crusades. Incensed that his initial tariffs were not bending Canadians, Japanese and Europeans to his demands, Trump in June threatened to impose import duties on all foreign auto imports before a government plan was ever put together.
The threat, which he had repeated numerous times and once referred to as the “mother lode,” prompted the Commerce Department to move forward with a review and spooked U.S. allies.
Trump’s pledge to cut taxes, which he first floated Saturday, followed a familiar pattern.
The president has been boasting for days about an imminent tax cut, despite the lack of legislation so far — as well as any concrete details of the plan shared by any of the people who would need to be involved.
At a rally Monday night in Houston, Trump said, “We’re going to be putting in a 10 percent tax cut for middle-income families. It’s going to be put in next week.” He added, “We’ve been working on it for a few months,” and singled out Brady, who was seated in the audience and responded with a sign of affirmation.
Trump went on: “This is for middle-income people, all middle-income people, a big tax, 10 percent. We’ll be putting it in next week.”
Meanwhile, racing to respond, administration officials began discussing a far more modest step of asking Congress to eventually vote on a nonbinding resolution for a 10 percent tax cut in the future.
But no decision has been made, and for the most part, lawmakers and senior administration officials are trying to temper expectations and deflect questions over a tax plan that, as of now, exists only in the president’s telling.
Though the president has a tremendous capacity to create his own reality, Jamieson said, the challenge lies in the execution.
“It is infeasible to say we’re going to have a middle-class tax cut before the November elections unless Congress agrees to come back into session,” she said. “But there is a sense of reality about it when someone describes it in the terms that Trump described it. That is, the Republicans don’t stand up and say, ‘No, we haven’t,’ ‘No, we aren’t,’ and ‘No, we won’t.’ ”
By virtue of his position, Council of Economic Advisers Chairman Kevin Hassett probably would be involved in crafting administration policy on taxes. Yet he told reporters Tuesday that he could not answer questions on the matter.
“Right now, the person who’s discussing the 10 percent tax cut for the White House is the president,” Hassett said, “and so you should go to the press office and to the president if you want more information on that.”

philip.rucker@washpost.com
ashley.parker@washpost.com
Damian Paletta and Erica Werner contributed to this report.

btn_donateCC_LG

Please Donate



Comedian Niecy Nash mocks BBQ Beckys and Permit Pattys with new ‘hotline for racists’
Suzy Byrne 4 hours ago

Niecy Nash is trying to eliminate the BBQ Beckys, Permit Pattys, and Cornerstore Carolines of the world.
While these nicknames for white people who exhibited racist behavior are all rather cutesy, what they’ve done — calling the cops on black people just living their lives — is a real problem and one we’ve seen magnified thanks to social media. So the comedian and actress is having some fun with the topic, while also making very valid points, in a new satirical infomercial she made with the New York Times.
In the bit, the Emmy-winning star and “advocate for not calling 911 on black people for no goddamn reason” announces the launch of the hotline 1-844-WYT-FEAR, which she says is “revolutionizing the way racist white people cope with black people living life near them.” Basically, you call the number instead of the police and she promises it will “save you all the headaches of being filmed and outed as a racist douche.” She describes the hotline as “a real number for real white people who should mind their own damn business.”
Answering the phones at the hotline — a number that really works if you want to give it a whirl — are people who “have been living while black in America their entire lives.” They amusingly address concerns of white callers: I see a black person outside my house. “That is actually your neighbor Michael.” There’s a black person on a boat. “Our records show that is actually his boat. Yeah, I know — black people have boats too now.”

While it’s certainly funny, it’s also shockingly real. One of the people answering the phones is Darren Martin, a former Obama aide, who had the police called on him, claiming a “burglary in process,” as he moved into his new Upper West Side apartment in Manhattan in April. And footage included shows the real Permit Patty and others who called police on black people who weren’t doing anything wrong. The article along with the segment lists 39 known instances, from just this year, “when someone called the police to complain about black people doing everyday activities.”
And Nash points out in the video that considering black people “are more likely to be arrested, convicted, and serve longer sentences” than white people for similar crimes, “calling 911 for non-emergency situations is really just a dick move.”

btn_donateCC_LG

Please Donate


Across the country the GOP has been stridently back pedaling on their efforts to kill the ACA by flat out lying about their support for the Previous conditions portion. If you look at the debates every GOP candidate will emphatically deny their support on the repeal while asserting that they are for the existing conditions which exists solely in the ACA. They are touting a bill that will (they say) include pre existing conditions but the other stuff as shown in this politico article:https://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/04/gop-health-care-bill-details-explained-237987. This is a long read but educational and worth the time. The ACA is not Perfect!- I repeat “the ACA is not perfect!”. Since Congress refused to take this on in a bipartisan manner the ACA was never fully realized. The GOP is doing what consummate liars always do and that is deflect the truth while throwing the issue back as an issue of the opposition. It is indefensible for the GOP or Trump’s base ignore facts and take on the “pseudo facts”  as truth while the Party continues to burden ALL of us with their self serving activities. The Tax Reform has given us a Trillion dollar deficit which they will if we let them take it from so called “entitlements” (their words) like Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security (the retirement that most of us have worked for over 40 to 50 years and are “entitled to”). It is important that we all understand that no party, right left or center is perfect but when anyone of them does damage to the voters then we need to replace them!

btn_donateCC_LG

Please Donate


POLITICS 10/22/2018 04:27 pm ET

By Jonathan Cohn
The Republican Party’s assault on the Affordable Care Act continued Monday as the Trump administration found yet another way to undermine the law’s insurance rules.
Health care has become a defining issue of next month’s midterm elections, and Republicans across the country, including President Donald Trump, are promising voters that they care deeply about protecting people with pre-existing conditions.
But Monday’s rule change almost certainly means that, overall, people with serious medical problems are likely to have a harder time finding coverage ― and, ultimately, paying their medical bills.
Under guidance from the Department of Health and Human Services that takes effect immediately but likely won’t affect insurance markets for another year, state governments will have new leeway to request waivers from some of the federal health care law’s core requirements.
That includes requirements affecting which benefits insurance plans cover, as well as requirements on who gets financial assistance and how much, and how the people choosing insurance can use that assistance.
It’s a complicated set of changes, but it means that some residents of states seeking the waivers could end up with easier access to cheaper, skimpier health plans, providing an alternative to those who cannot afford to pay for comprehensive coverage that the Affordable Care Act has made available.
The Trump administration is touting this possibility as proof that it is improving choice and affordability ― and, in the words of Seema Verma, the Trump administration official in charge of overseeing federal health programs, that it is working to “mitigate the damage of Obamacare.”
Verma, who addressed reporters in a conference call Monday, insisted that the new rules would not hurt people with pre-existing conditions. In so doing, she echoed claims that Trump and countless Republican candidates for federal and state office have made with increasing insistence over the past few weeks, as their longstanding support for repealing the Affordable Care Act has become a clear, possibly fatal political liability.
But this latest regulatory change is a reminder that the GOP has never given up on its goal of wiping “Obamacare” off the books, and that people with serious medical problems are likely to suffer as a result.
Comprehensive coverage will be more expensive for those who need it most.
Sabrina Corlette, research professor, Georgetown University
The less generous plans that Verma and the Trump administration are touting, and that Monday’s rule change will favor, frequently leave beneficiaries exposed to catastrophic costs if they get seriously sick or injured, precisely because they leave out benefits that people need when they have serious medical problems. Often, the buyers of these plans aren’t even aware of the limits until it’s too late, because deciphering the fine print of these plans is so difficult.
And people who want or need comprehensive insurance ― say, because they have diabetes or are cancer survivors ― are likely to have a harder time getting such coverage, because of how the markets will change.
“This new guidance allows states to set up parallel insurance markets that may be able to attract healthy people with plans that have lower premiums but fewer consumer protections, leaving ACA plans with a sicker pool and higher premiums,” Larry Levitt, senior vice president at the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, told HuffPost on Monday.
Levitt called the regulatory change “a major end run around the health law.”
The change raises the stakes on the 2018 midterms, because it means, among other things, that state officials, many of whom appear on this year’s ballot, will have even more power to shape (and reshape) their health care markets.
“Some states will keep working to expand coverage to the uninsured and keep it affordable and adequate, [and] in other states we’ll see a race to deregulate, with the result that comprehensive coverage will be more expensive for those who need it most,” Sabrina Corlette, a research professor at Georgetown University, said.
The GOP’s Obamacare Sabotage Campaign
Monday’s announcement represents the latest in a series of GOP efforts to accomplish through regulation what Republicans could not accomplish through legislation when they tried, and just barely failed, to pass legislation that would have repealed the Affordable Care Act outright.
These steps include dramatic cuts in funding for enrollment outreach and promotion, as well as a change in federal regulations that will allow people to hold on to limited-benefit, “short-term” plans for nearly three years. That change, along with repeal of the individual mandate’s financial penalty for people who don’t have comprehensive coverage, makes these short-term plans a more viable alternative for people.
These plans typically cover a lot less than the sorts of plans available through the Affordable Care Act. They may have weak coverage of prescriptions, if they have any at all, and leave out mental health altogether. Usually they do not cover pre-existing conditions and are often not available to people who have them.

Seema Verma, the Trump administration official who oversees federal health programs, says Monday’s rule change will give states more flexibility. The question is how much flexibility, whether it’s consistent with the law and ultimately how it would affect consumers.
All of this means the plans come with low premiums. But Monday’s announcement means that the less generous plans could become cheaper still ― and thus more attractive ― because states would have authority to redirect financial assistance. Today, the Affordable Care Act’s tax credits are available only to people who buy comprehensive coverage.
This guidance suggests the federal government will allow states to “target” assistance differently, as Verma confirmed Monday, which could mean giving people more assistance if they buy short-term or other alternative plans ― and less assistance if they stick with comprehensive coverage.
States have always had some flexibility to request these sorts of waivers, of course. But when the Obama administration was in charge, it set clear limits on state action. To get waiver approval, states had to demonstrate that residents wouldn’t end up with worse coverage as a result.
The Trump administration guidance means that it can interpret the law’s rules more loosely, in ways that will effectively let people move into less comprehensive coverage ― even though that means more exposure to medical bills.
“The guidance under Obama… meant that a state’s plan couldn’t result in fewer people enrolled in affordable, comprehensive coverage,” Corlette explained. “This new guidance is saying that so long as people in the state have ‘access’ to [comprehensive] coverage, it doesn’t matter what they actually do… If un-insurance spikes or there’s a big movement to [less comprehensive plans] a state won’t get dinged for that.”
Corlette noted that the Obama administration insisted that state waivers not hurt certain vulnerable populations, including those with severe medical needs. “This is saying that so long as things work out in the aggregate, then it’s OK if certain subpopulations are harmed,” she said.
Obamacare’s Problems And Two Visions For Fixing Them
The high cost of insurance, even with the Affordable Care Act in place, has been a major source of discontent with the law, especially among people in relatively good health who were able to purchase insurance previously ― and who had to pay more after the law took effect, because insurers for the first time were covering bills from people with severe medical needs.
The majority of consumers get tax credits that discount premiums, sometimes so deeply that coverage is basically free, and that’s one reason that the number of people without insurance has fallen to historic lows while access to care appears to have improved. But plenty of middle- and upper-income people are stuck paying more ― and in some cases coverage is now flat-out unaffordable.
Many of these people remember, angrily, the promise from President Barack Obama that they could keep their old plans if they liked them. And in states like Iowa, which have some of the highest rates for unsubsidized customers, GOP state officials have been among the most aggressive in seeking ways to weaken or eliminate the Affordable Care Act’s rules.
Officials in both parties have said this is a major problem they want to address. Democrats have proposed a variety of options, all of which entail some combination of bolstering the Affordable Care Act’s financial assistance, using government to control prices and creating new public plans that can offer alternative coverage.
Republicans have rejected all of those options, arguing that they would entail too much taxation, spending or regulation ― and ultimately do more harm than good. Their preferred strategy is to roll back the law’s existing regulations and, in many cases, reduce financial assistance. Monday’s action is consistent with that approach.
In fact, although Verma said a major goal of Monday’s guidance was to give states more flexibility, the guidance states explicitly that state waiver applications should “foster health coverage through competitive private coverage… over public programs.”
Some of the administration’s decisions have actually made it easier for people to buy comprehensive coverage, although by all accounts that was not intentional. In particular, the administration’s decision to yank some of the subsidies that insurers get under the law ended up making coverage more affordable for some buyers, because it meant they were eligible for more financial assistance. But the administration has not stopped trying ― and that includes through the courts.
At the moment, a federal judge in Texas is considering a lawsuit against the Affordable Care Act that GOP officials in 20 states launched. The Trump administration, rather than defending the federal law as administrations normally do in such circumstances, filed a brief in support of the plaintiff’s claim about the law’s constitutionality.
Last month, consumer and patient advocates launched a lawsuit of their own, arguing that some of the Trump administration’s rule changes violate the Affordable Care Act’s coverage guarantees. It’s not clear whether the changes the administration announced Monday will provoke similar lawsuits, or how vulnerable the rule change could be.

btn_donateCC_LG

Please Donate


 

By Daniel Lippman and Gabby Orr 2 hrs ago

 

Early voting points to huge turnout

At his rallies, President Donald Trump argues that the midterms are about one person — Donald Trump. “Get out in 2018,” Trump told a crowd in Missouri last month, “because you’re voting for me!”

Privately, the president says the exact opposite.
According to two people familiar with the conversations, Trump is distancing himself from a potential Republican thumping on Election Day. He’s telling confidants that he doesn’t see the midterms as a referendum on himself, describing his 2020 reelection bid as “the real election.” And he says that he holds House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell responsible for protecting their congressional majorities.
According to one person with knowledge of these talks, Trump has said of Ryan and McConnell: “These are their elections … and if they screw it up, it’s not my fault.”

Other sources said Trump is sure to lash out at perhaps his favorite bogeyman of all — the media — for allegedly opposing him.
It’s not all pre-emptive finger-pointing: Trump expresses greater confidence than most pundits about his party’s chances of maintaining its House majority and expanding its control of the Senate. And he credits McConnell for motivating GOP voters by holding the line on Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation.
But in the event of an electoral blowout, Trump is poised to shift the blame a mile down Pennsylvania Avenue.
“Look for the White House to say something like, ‘Paul Ryan chose to be a lame duck speaker instead of leaving, which cost Congress the chance to do several things before November,’” said an aide to one GOP member who speaks with the president often.
A Democratic wave would be especially awkward for a president whose brand is success, and who boasts that his record in office is unmatched by any of his modern predecessors.
Already, hints of a distancing strategy have started to creep into Trump’s public comments, even as he continues to crow at rallies that the midterms are a “referendum” on his first two years in office. Trump told the Associated Press recently that some of his supporters have said to him, “I will never ever go and vote in the midterms because you’re not running.”
Inside the White House, aides are resigned to the fact that Trump — as he has often done — will follow his gut on how to message any Democratic takeover of the House on Nov. 6. Those around Trump are anticipating lots of unfiltered, early-morning tweets casting blame on everyone but the president.
“It would be a lot of shooting from the hip in early morning Twitter,” said a well-placed Republican source, who added that the White House seems to lack clear plans for post-election messaging.
The themes are already predictable.
“The arc is gonna be he wasn’t on the ballot, and people didn’t fully appreciate his policies and [candidates] didn’t tie themselves enough to him,” said a person close to the president, who was among several sources to say Trump will likely blame the media as well.
While lashing out would be a Trumpian response, it would also be a break from recent presidential precedent. After losing the Congress to Democrats midway through his second term in 2006, a humbled George W. Bush conceded that he’d taken a “thumpin’,” pushed out an unpopular Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and vowed to find “common ground” with Democrats.
Four years later, after a Tea Party wave swamped congressional Democrats two years into his first term, with Republicans picking up 63 House seats for the biggest midterm gain by either party since 1938, Barack Obama took “direct responsibility” in remarks afterward. Calling the moment “humbling,” Obama vowed to “do a better job.”
Although White House officials are aware of those precedents, Trump may not care about them. And he alone will decide how to spin the midterm results, with his aides following his lead. The White House declined to comment on the record for this story.
“Despite whatever [way] they may want to spin it … he’s going to drive the train on this and the White House is gonna fall and say the president did everything he could, but unfortunately he’s not on the ballot and so people weren’t as excited,” said the person close to Trump.
Before he was president, Trump had a philosophy on whether leaders should accept blame: “Whatever happens, you’re responsible. If it doesn’t happen you’re responsible.”
But once in office, Trump, backed up by his communications team, has shifted blame for setbacks to others — especially Congress.
After efforts to repeal Obama’s health care law stalled in Congress last July, the president blamed “a few Republicans” for holding up the process, despite creating considerable confusion on Capitol Hill with his own mixed signals on healthcare reform. White House press secretary Sarah Sanders echoed Trump’s line, saying it would be “absolutely ridiculous for Congress to try to place the blame on the president for the inability to get their job done.”
And when Trump’s endorsement of Roy Moore failed to carry the Alabama Senate candidate to victory last December, the president claimed he was pressured into backing the wrong candidate. Those around him reinforced his claim.
“There does need to be a recognition of the lousy political advice @POTUS has been getting and it needs to change,” Tony Fabrizio, a top Republican pollster involved in Trump’s 2016 campaign, wrote on Twitter at the time.
“We’re in a completely different dynamic now where we know President Trump will be perfectly comfortable in a finger-pointing exercise,” said a former senior George W. Bush aide, who claimed his boss, by comparison, “was perfectly fine with owning and taking some of the heat off the Hill leadership” after the 2006 midterms two years before Bush left office.
A former senior Obama administration official, who recalled cringing when the ex-president used the term “shellacking” to describe the results of the 2010 midterms, said the White House “took stock” of the situation afterward and determined Obama could continue chipping away at his agenda through “either executive authority or working at the state and local level.”
“I only cringed because it was so true … We were shellacked,” this person said, adding that Obama nevertheless displayed “a willingness to accept responsibility and not wallow in defeat.”
Should Trump buck that trend by refusing to bear any blame, some Republicans said they would be disappointed — albeit not surprised.
“The president’s rhetoric is what’s actually energized the left, so it would be hard to put it on Congress if we lost the House,” a senior GOP aide told POLITICO. “But it’s just classic behavior on the part of this president to not shoulder the blame if things go bad, and to definitely take responsibility if things go right.”
Still, some of Trump’s most steadfast allies say he would be justified to turn his ire toward congressional Republicans if November becomes a bloodbath for the party in power. They claim he has done “everything possible,” like holding back-to-back-to-back campaign rallies last week, to assist GOP candidates battling for their seats or seeking to upset Democratic incumbents.
“I think [Trump] has done everything that has been asked of him from the Republican Party to … help campaign and raise money wherever they have needed it,” said ex-Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski. “President Trump and Vice President Mike Pence has answered that call every time.”

The liar continues, looking at his private statements, TOTUS is already throwing the Congress under the bus. One of his other lies is that the migrant group has criminals and unknown Middle Easterners among them with no proof and has not considered assisting the countries they are fleeing from  to correct their problems with more U.S. aid so that  those fleeing can remain in their respective countries. Totus’ focus is purely on himself not America or any other country .MA

btn_donateCC_LG

Please Donate


In case you didn’t notice the “Lyin’ President is stumping for several Lyin’ politicians. Where or when will the Lyin’ end. Save a few we have no honest politicians! Apparently it’s considered “OK” to lie to constituents rather than do an honest “days’ work. This seems to be normal now. There was a time when honesty was a virtue rather than anomaly it seems to be presently. Many of the mainstream (well known) politicians are just flat our liars! If you are a constituent who agrees with  or likes the representative then the lies are ok with you (apparently) so you cast your vote for them much like bread on the water, hoping for something better which never comes if the truth is told. When an elected official has to resort to lies to gain how can one trust their actions once in office. It is well to remember that dual personalities occur only in people who have a psychological disorder termed Schizophrenia or more commonly split-personality. It follows that if a person lies to get elected, that behavior will continue once they have taken the seat. Be cautious of the entertainment value of lies and insults as this is a clear indicator of poor performance for constituents and the whole country.

btn_donateCC_LG

Please Donate