Archived threads in /news/ - Current News - 90. page

>>136378

They make their own rules – and break them. Essentially, they argued they can make any decision they want on a candidate – or interpret their own rules anyway they wanted – and there was nothing anybody could do about it.

Before this, DNC lawyers actually tried to argue that Sanders supporters knew going in that the system was rigged, so they had nothing to complain about. This time, they made the same argument:

“The Court would have to find that people who fervently supported Bernie Sanders and who purportedly didn’t know that this favoritism was going on would have not given to Mr. Sanders, to Senator Sanders, if they had known that there was this purported favoritism.”

cont.

>>136379

The DNC Charter MEANS Something. The lawyer representing Sanders supporters said that the DNC Charter – which governs how the Democrats will pick a presidential candidate – is an inherent and important part of democracy in America, not just some political rhetoric.

“People paid money in reliance on the understanding that the primary elections for the Democratic nominee—nominating process in 2016 were fair and impartial,” Jared Beck said.

“And that’s not just a bedrock assumption that we would assume just by virtue of the fact that we live in a democracy, and we assume that our elections are run in a fair and impartial manner. But that’s what the Democratic National Committee’s own charter says. It says it in black and white. And they can’t deny that.”

He added, “Not only is it in the charter, but it was stated over and over again in the media by the Democratic National Committee’s employees, including Congresswoman Wassermann Schultz, that they were, in fact, acting in compliance with the charter. And they said it again and again, and we’ve cited several instances of that in the case.”

cont.

>>136380

DNC Doubles Down. Defending their bias, the DNC’s lawyers even argued at one point that the words “impartial” and “evenhanded” – words used in the DNC charter – were words that a court couldn’t properly interpret.

Beck responded: “I’m shocked to hear that we can’t define what it means to be evenhanded and impartial. If that were the case, we couldn’t have courts. I mean, that’s what courts do every day, is decide disputes in an evenhanded and impartial manner.”

The judge said he would make a ruling sometime in the future. We will have to see. If this lawsuit moves forward, it would involve a discovery process that would likely expose Wasserman Schultz and Democratic operatives to their actions and deeds that show even more slimy behavior than we’re already aware of.

FIN

>>123988
He should have taken a better looking one.

>>123994
i guess he figured nobody would miss someone that ugly

>>123988
>abduct's
that teacher should have taken you

Fun fact: There are parts of The Russian Army on the Eastern frontier which have to eat dog food pellets for lack of budgeted money for food.

>>136703
Fun Fact: You're talking with your ass, we eat better than you do.

>>136703

Source?

>>136563
fuck offffffff

>>136563
Who? This is not news. Not only is this story from over a month ago, nobody fucking cares. Stop running this board with your shoddy threads, asshole.

>>136567
*ruining, goddammit.

>Throughout the 90s Manning also worked for pro-life organization the National Right to Life Committee and in 2003 edited the 300-page book Back to the Drawing Board: The Future of the Pro-Life Movement in which she said the movement was "not winning" against pro-choice advocates.

>An essay in the book by retired Notre Dame law professor Charles E. Rice called the principle behind contraception and legalized abortion "agnostic secularism" and said it was what “underlay the Nazi extermination of the Jews."

>Another essay in the collection by Canadian psychotherapist Philip Ney argued the trauma of an aborted baby is "transmitted across the placental barrier by hormones" and that any future children the mother bears may carry "existential guilt" about their dead sibling that might lead them to "violence" and "terrorism."

>In an interview about the book with NPR in 2003 Manning said “contraception doesn’t work” and that women taking the pill will eventually get pregnant. If taken correctly, however, contraceptive pills are proven to be 99 percent effective.

>Views like these were cited when she didn’t get a legal analysis, writing, and research position she applied for at the University of Iowa College of Law in 2006. A letter by the school’s Associate Dean Jonathan C. Carlson to the school’s dean worried “people may be opposed to Teresa serving in any role, in part at least because they so despise her politics (and especially her activism about it).”

>Manning sued the school, alleging their hiring practices discriminated against her political beliefs. In 2015 a jury found that the university had not discriminated against Manning after several professors testified that she said she would not teach analysis, which was a key part of the job.

>She has since been working as an adjunct professor teaching legal research and writing at the conservative Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University, and as a writing specialist at the Virginia Tech Carilion School of Medicine and Research Institute.

>Critics immediately voiced concerns at Trump’s decision to appoint Manning. “Teresa Manning has made a career out of denying women their right to reproductive health care services,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, in a statement Monday. “It’s unconscionable and insulting that a vocal opponent of essential health care services has been tapped to lead the nation’s family planning program.”

>Northup added that by picking Manning, President Trump showed he is prioritizing “an extreme agenda over women’s health and well-being.” Manning will be working alongside anti-abortion advocate Charmaine Yoest, who Trump appointed assistant secretary of public affairs at HHS on April 28.

>“This is the fox guarding the hen house, and women with low incomes will pay the price. It is a cruel irony to appoint an opponent of birth control to oversee the nation’s only federal program dedicated to family planning,” said Dawn Laguens, executive vice president of Planned Parenthood, in a statement calling on Trump to withdraw Manning’s appointment.

>“We are at the lowest rate of unintended pregnancy in 30 years and a historic low for teen pregnancy because of access to birth control,” Laguens said. “Someone who promotes myths about birth control and reproductive care should not be in charge of the office that is responsible for family planning.”

>>136551
I can't figure out if it's Reince or Bannon who is actually making these picks.

>>136514
>>136514
If only the catholic church had more power in these type situations

>Boteach apparently didn’t realize what he was showing the world, and his tweets simply remarked about how Bannon is a “stalwart friend of the Jewish State” and has a “love of Israel.”

>The rabbi visited the White House for Israel’s Independence Day and posted photos with several other political figures, including Sen. Ted Cruz and Vice President Pence — but none of those pics revealed more secrets.

>The White House did not comment on the photos.

>This is at least the second time Trump’s possible plans have been leaked thanks to poorly placed photo ops.

>In November, Trump met with Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who was being considered for a position in the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. The two posed for a photo outside of Trump’s New Jersey golf course — and Kobach accidentally held one of his planning pages in front of the camera.

>The picture revealed some of Kobach’s plans if he worked for Homeland Security, which included “extreme vetting” for immigrants and a halt on accepting Syrian refugees.

>Kobach was never offered a White House position, and a judge last month ordered him to turn over the notes as part of a lawsuit over Kansas’ strict voting laws.

>>136449
Note that each section is a list of pledges, so they're not really reveals. They're all campaign promises that were stated during Trump's speeches. The only difference is that they're more specific, such in the cases of "triple" or "5000".

>“Build the border wall and eventually make Mexico...”
would then read the equivalent to, if not, "pay for it".

If anything, I weep for the whiteboard in how long those notes must've been up there if he's slowly checking them off. It's ruined.

>>136449
good to see a real culture of security in the white house

>>136398

It’s the lack of gun control in Indiana and surrounding states that’s to blame here, as criminals are getting guns from out of state and bringing them into the city.

>>136401
Wrong, gun control will not stop a willing criminal, it will only hurt the law abiding citizen.

not good

Well Russia that's your problem now . its funny that they would use the argument of creating a problem only to bask in the glory of fixing it when they are the arbiter of that same practice . Afghanistan . Chechnya. Dpr. Its like Al-Qaeda in the US . world leaders want to play hard ball and have no for site . get out of crimera and my election and ill turn the water back on . pussy

>>136069
>>nice source Vladamir

>Most Presidents spend a lifetime studying their political heroes and take solace in accounts of their administrations and trials when they are under pressure. Rarely a week went by without President Barack Obama referencing Lincoln, and George W. Bush was a voracious reader who powered through presidential biographies in a marathon reading contest with Karl Rove.

>But Trump gives no sense that he is widely read or has deeply researched the men who had his job before him -- a fact that chills critics who argue he has little understanding of the crucial position to which he was elected. Trump's recent comments about how hard it is to enact laws in Congress and apparent unfamiliarity with details of his own health care reform plan have also raised doubts about the depth of his understanding of Washington and the presidency.

>When he's talking about history, Trump often leaves the impression that he is discovering facts and events for the first time, marveling at them like a newcomer.

>That may be one reason why his historical analogies often come across as off key or at odds with the facts.

Does it Matter?

>But Trump's historical missteps also raise another question. Does it matter that the President of the United States seems to lack knowledge and understanding of the key events of his nation's past and the principles that underpin them?

>On the one hand, it's doesn't seem too much of a stretch to believe that the US President should know, or might benefit from, the insights and stories of the presidencies that unfolded before he became commander-in-chief.

>But on the other, no one voted for Trump because they thought he was professorial -- in fact his spontaneous, simplistic way of speaking may have come as a relief to some voters who grew tired of Obama's discursive, intellectual style.

>In what became a cliche of the 2016 election, Trump's voters often said that the reason they flocked to the reality star and real estate magnate is that he was prepared to say things, free of the constraints of political correctness, that they had long yearned for a presidential candidate to say.

>Those voters seem unlikely to reject Trump just because of a few strange remarks about Andrew Jackson and probably care little that he eschews the intellectualism of many of his predecessors. In fact, anti-intellectualism and excoriating political elites in the US was at the center of his upstart political project.

>And while he might not be book smart when it comes to history, Trump did manage to build a business empire and personality cult around himself that offered him notoriety and a life in the public eye that he seemed to crave.

>He had the political intelligence as well -- more than any professional politician in last year's election -- to understand and give voice to the frustrations and complaints of a group of heartland voters who felt disenfranchised and ignored by a modern economy built by Washington elites.

>He's also not the only President to face questions about his intellectual heft or basic knowledge. Ronald Reagan was often mocked as dumb and unseasoned, yet had one of the most successful presidencies of the 20th century.

>Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. is said by most historians to have been referring to Franklin Roosevelt when he diagnosed the Democratic president as having a second-class intellect but a first-class temperament.

'Why was there a Civil War?'

>But Trump's interpretation of history, which is often rudimentary and not anchored in fact, takes the debate about presidential knowledge and understanding to a new level.

>Critics say that it is a sign of a worrying lack of intellectual curiosity, preparation and an unwillingness to submit to accepted truths that contradict his own version of reality.

>Trump's interview with Zito was also revealing because it went on to cover the idea of leadership, and the President appeared to be drawing a parallel between him and Jackson.

>"Why was there the Civil War? Why could that one not have been worked out?" Trump told Zito.

>"I mean, had Andrew Jackson been a little bit later, you wouldn't have had the Civil War. He was a very tough person, but he had a big heart."

>The fact that Trump admires Jackson because he was tough and had a big heart appears to equate with Trump's view of himself and the idea that a President of sufficient personality and muscle could have averted the epochal events -- like the Civil War. Jackson was a revered general, was outspoken and aggressive and was the first President elected from west of the Alleghenies, giving him a heartland heritage with which Trump, who has repeatedly shown his admiration of great military men, may identify.

>The President visited Jackson's home in Tennessee, the Hermitage, in March to lay a wreath on the former President's 250th birthday and also drew links between their visions on trade.

>"He imposed tariffs on foreign countries to protect American workers. That sounds very familiar. Wait 'til you see what's going to be happening pretty soon, folks," Trump joked.

>Trump also brought a portrait of Jackson into the Oval Office after he was inaugurated, and It's not surprising he should identify with someone who is a hero of his political guru, Steve Bannon.

>Bannon told The Washington Post in January, that Trump's inaugural address put him in mind of the 7th President.

>"I don't think we've had a speech like that since Andrew Jackson came to the White House," Bannon told the paper. "But you could see it was very Jacksonian. It's got a deep, deep root of patriotism there."

>How far that $8 billion would go to ensuring that people with pre-existing medical conditions remain covered is not clear. The Upton legislation doesn’t set down any rules for who states would make eligible for the pool, how much care would be covered, or how much individuals could be asked to spend themselves on premiums.

>The number of states that opted to create high-risk pools would also influence how far the $8 billion in additional funding would stretch. But a 2010 estimate made by conservative health economists at the American Enterprise Institute, suggested that an adequate high risk pool program for the country would cost between $15 billion and $20 billion a year. More liberal groups have estimated far larger numbers.

>But with Mr. Upton and Mr. Long back on board, Republican leaders appeared ready to call another vote, after the collapse of their measure in March. Victory is far from assured. Another Republican from a Democratic-leaning district, Representative Carlos Curbelo of Florida, seemed to indicate he was leaning against the American Health Care Act, as the Republican legislation is known, although he stood ready to be persuaded by Mr. Upton.

>And pressure from health care providers, disease advocacy groups and others remains intense. The advocacy arm of the retirees’ lobby AARP tweeted that the Upton amendment was an “$8 billion giveaway to insurance companies; won’t help majority of those w/preexisting conditions. We remain opposed.”

>Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the House minority leader, said the money would be a small fraction of what is needed.

>“It’s time for the Republicans to abandon their moral monstrosity and pull this bill,” she said.
...

>If the effort fails, it will greatly weaken the president’s hand on Capitol Hill and cast a shadow across the rest of his legislative agenda, especially the deep tax cuts and rewrite of the tax code that he has proposed — and promise to be no easier to tackle than health care.

>Mr. Upton, the former chairman of one of the House committees that drafted the American Health Care Act, has a long history of negotiating with Democrats on health care measures, and his support could prove crucial.

>He said on Tuesday that the latest version of the health care bill “torpedoes” protections for people with pre-existing medical conditions.

>Trying to win their votes on the health bill, Mr. Trump met Wednesday with Mr. Upton and Mr. Long. Representative Michael C. Burgess of Texas and Representative Greg Walden of Oregon, the current chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee who succeeded Mr. Upton as the head of that powerful panel also attended the meeting. The deal-making appears to have worked.

>Last-minute spending increases and special provisions in 2009 and 2010 to win over Senate Democrats to the Affordable Care Act had outraged some conservatives who fumed at “the Cornhusker kickback” and the “Louisiana Purchase.” But so far, the Upton amendment has prompted no such anger on the Republican side.

>Republican leaders now hope to get the bill through the House by Thursday, before lawmakers go home again and face pressure from constituents. Party leaders are facing an onslaught of advocacy groups and Democratic attack ads saying the bill would harm the nation’s most vulnerable citizens. Even a late-night talk show host, Jimmy Kimmel, joined with an emotional appeal.
...

>A tearful Mr. Kimmel on Monday night told the story of his infant son, Billy, who was born with heart defects and had surgery. Mr. Kimmel pleaded with Congress not to undermine the Affordable Care Act’s ban on discrimination against people with pre-existing conditions.

>After Mr. Kimmel’s monologue went viral, former President Barack Obama weighed in on Twitter, writing: “Well said, Jimmy. That’s exactly why we fought so hard for the ACA, and why we need to protect it for kids like Billy.”

>House Republican leaders are also fighting against the clock. The House is scheduled to be in recess beginning on Friday and is not set to return until May 16. Republicans who are on the fence are likely to get an earful from their constituents.

>“I think it’s imperative that we have a vote before we leave for a week,” Representative Mark Meadows, Republican of North Carolina and the chairman of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, said on Tuesday.

>Republicans were clearly divided over the adequacy of the bill’s protections for people who are sick or disabled. At the heart of the debate is an amendment to the repeal bill proposed by Representative Tom MacArthur, Republican of New Jersey. The amendment, which won over the Freedom Caucus last week, would give state governments the ability to apply for waivers from the existing law’s required “essential health benefits,” such as maternity, mental health and emergency care, and from rules that generally mandate the same insurance rates for people of the same age, regardless of their medical conditions.

>With a waiver, states could permit insurers to charge higher premiums based on the “health status” of a person who had experienced a gap in coverage. To qualify for a waiver, a state would have to have an alternative mechanism, like a high-risk pool or a reinsurance program, to provide or subsidize coverage for people with serious illnesses.
...

>>135977
Have the full CBS Face the Nation interview (if you can view it in your country):

http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/president-trump-an-interview-on-his-first-100-days-in-office/

he's privy to intelligence reports that probably informed his opinion. it's actually a smart assessment

>>135977
likely nothing, because of this >>135998

>journalist
Oh is that what they're calling heroin addicted IRC trolls and "Anonymous spokespersons" nowadays. Wow, standards have fallen in the era of fake news.

>>135515
Kill yourself.

You'd think anonymous would care more about one of the only good journalists directly aligned with their interests.

So far, McDonald has made it to Chicago, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Detroit and Baltimore, among others. He even flushed Riegel’s ashes in the toilet of his hotel room inside the Rogers Center in Toronto.

McDonald has also established strict rules, such as that a game must be in progress when he puts a bit of the ashes into the toilet from a small plastic bottle, which he’s wrapped in old Mets ticket stubs.

Now, there’s only enough ashes for McDonald’s final stop: Durham Athletic Park in North Carolina, where the movie “Bull Durham” was filmed.

“They give tours of the old park that they were still using when they filmed the movie in the 1980s still there, (so I’m) going to try and do that one there,” he said.

>>136386

Aren't there laws against desecrating bodies?

>>136399
Full size corpses yes. Not sure how they apply to ashes.

>The Obama administration placed standards on school lunch nutrition in 2010 when it passed the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act. During that time, Michelle Obama was seen by many as a leading advocate in the fight against childhood obesity. She started the Let’s Move! campaign, which sought to encourage children to take part in more physical activity and help provide healthier food options in schools in under-served communities.

>The percentage of U.S. children with obesity has more than tripled since the 1970s, causing long-term physical and emotional distress for children, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

>Children with obesity are at higher risk for having asthma and Type 2 diabetes. Many are bullied and, as a result, are likely to suffer from depression and self-esteem issues.

>In 2014, the standards were met with challenges in Congress led by the School Nutrition Assn., which has called the regulations too rigid, and House Republicans who supported the powerful lobbying group’s efforts.

>But according to the Department of Agriculture, 97% of schools across the country are implementing the school nutrition standards set by the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act.

>The changes announced Monday are seen by some as undermining a bipartisan breakthrough.

>“Michelle Obama started a conversation with every mom and dad in America on what they were feeding their kids in a way that didn’t cast judgment,” said Scott Faber, senior vice president from the Environmental Working Group, which specializes in research and advocacy.

>“Nothing will change that legacy, but unfortunately today’s actions will delay and undermine Obama’s food policy legacy,” he said.

>Politicians and public health advocates have also criticized the rollbacks.

>Reps. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) and Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) condemned the Trump administration’s change to nutrition standards for school meals across the country.

>“Just days into his new job as Secretary of USDA, Secretary Perdue has decided to put special interests ahead of the health of America’s children,” DeLauro said in a statement.

>“The USDA and President Trump have now decided to roll back much of the progress we have made in the fight against rates of childhood obesity and malnutrition,” DeLauro said. “This interim final rule by the USDA is a slippery slope that will completely undermine school breakfast and lunch programs and the USDA should immediately reverse course.”

>McGovern said the country should build on the progress made rather than “turn our backs” on youths who rely on the meals.

>“This isn’t about flexibility; it’s about making kids less healthy,” McGovern said. “Just because President Trump thinks fast food is a balanced meal doesn’t mean we should lower our standards for our kids.”

>The Alliance for a Healthier Generation has worked with more than 35,000 schools to reduce the prevalence of childhood obesity.

>“We would not lower standards for reading, writing and arithmetic just because students found them challenging subjects and we should not do it for school nutrition either,” Howell Wechsler, the organization’s chief executive, said in a statement.

The old meals wouldn't be so bad if they actually allowed recess time for kids.

I think it's down to like 10 minutes now?