Re: Civil Asset Forfeiture
 

forfeitures deter burglaries?

Re: Civil Asset Forfeiture
 

That would have been excellent, but I'm on Pacific time.

Re: Civil Asset Forfeiture
 

I'm going to go ahead and call bullshit. Your entire audience is on EST. Other than Flower, who is an hour behind, at least, so won't notice the difference.

Re: Civil Asset Forfeiture
 

My entire oeuvre is really about zoning, at bottom, and I write it all imagining Atticus as my reader.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

How long until Trump cans Mueller? I would have thought many months, but now I'm expecting to be surprised again.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Harder to do with him because Mueller is running a tight ship with absolutely no leaks. There's no pretext. Of course we all know that Trump can just make something up with the support of the entire Republican Party, but I think Trump is so stupid that he thinks things are going okay if he isn't hearing anything about it on Fox & Friends.

That said, he is absolutely going to fire Mueller as soon as Mueller makes any public move.

TM

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

With the dogs circling, I'd think he'd start pushing to repeal the inheritance tax, NOW!

Someone forgot the first rule of Fight Club
 

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer...-finances.html

eta: I will add that even when the government runs a very tight ship, nothing usually prevents someone who is contacted as part of an investigation from disclosing that fact. So someone who knows about the scope of Mueller's work and has the incentive to get Trump riled about it could be the source for that story, rather than someone working on Mueller's side.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

This post on libertarianism is old but makes a really excellent point.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

What to do when you're seated next to Trump.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

This is Hunter Thompson, but I imagine it coming from a sort of better version of Sebby:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DFMFnJjUMAMjNrD.jpg

Re: Someone forgot the first rule of Fight Club
 

God, I fucking love this.

No question. There just haven't been a ton of stories about Mueller's work no matter the source. And I think Trump takes this as a positive when it is probably the exact opposite.

TM

Re: Civil Asset Forfeiture
 

He's a racist redneck. Dixie garbage, nothing more or less.

I'll tangle with people here over Russia. I'd sooner eat sun-hardened dog shit than defend gilded trailer park Napoleons like Jeffrey Baueregard Sessions.

We won the Civil War, you fucking ugly little elf.

The man should be flogged with rusty bike chains, tied to a statue of Stonewall Jackson, and thrown in the gulf out of which his forebears climbed (and one assumes shed their gills*) 300 years ago.


_____
* I feel badly about denigrating marine life in this regard, but the image and geography work.

Re: Civil Asset Forfeiture
 

But his side won the Reconstruction.

Re: Civil Asset Forfeiture
 

Still, isn't there something more genuine about the old southern racists when compared to the new "America first" racists?

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

This seems inevitable. In fact, Sebastian has already spent considerable time drafting his "Much ado about nothing" response to the predictable, liberal hysteria, hair-on-fire outrage that will erupt in this echo chamber when it happens. (Hint: Imagine ordering a burger. Now imagine the burger is not made of anything.)

Sorry about the funk drought. Here is a sweet little old school number. Sarah Simpson with "I Kicked The Habit (Of Loving you)":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFTUzycBxC8

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Making fun of Sebastian is the new nothing burger.

Re: Watch out for the special sauce!
 

But let's be clear. There is more to the average nothing burger than there is to Sebastian.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I wonder if Sessions has already refused to order Rosenstein to fire Mueller. It can't be that Trump is all of a sudden furious about "beleaguered" Sessions' recusal such that he is undercutting him at every single turn (and most likely behind the release of the revelation that Sessions discussed the campaign-related matters with Russia--although, I'm not sure he's that savvy). In any case, he's clearly trying to push him out.

I fear we are about a week away from Attorney General Giuliani.* And I thought we couldn't do any worse than Sessions.

TM

*Annnnnnd here's the article: http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...ns-as-attorney

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Is the Senate about to get rid of the filibuster? Overruling the parliamentarian to pass the health care bill with 50 votes would essentially be that.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I think they plan to argue that they have gotten rid of the filibuster only for Republican priorities....

This is the world Sebby wants.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I guess the good news is that without the filibuster, a Democratic Senate could enact the job-training tax credits that Chuck Schumer dreams of. Just shoot me now.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Hi Hank!

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

You continue to conflate what a consumer spends with what the insurers spend. All of which ignores why I spoke well of HSAs which is cost to the employer. I know you know this, but you refuse to frame arguments with "who is the cost to?"

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Today in civil asset forfeiture:

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/DFhupPdXs...jpg&name=large

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I do? I thought I just posted a link to a tweet.

If they cost the employer less but are not good at controlling costs or providing care, are they a good idea?

P.S. I think I help run a smaller company than yours now. Crazy!

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

They can, because by raising the deductible the insurance gets considerably less expensive, the tax benefit then helps subsidize the deductible, and someone who doesn't spend their deductible at all or spends it on things that otherwise might not be covered (say, contact lenses or, if Rs have their way, birth control) feels like they came out ahead. However, they can be a royal pain in the ass to administer.

But yeah, anyone who thinks HSAs will control the underlying healthcare costs has been smoking something that makes Jeff Sessions very very angry. Still, they are a flavor of the day on healthcare plans, and from what I see the plans are pricing things to encourage them.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I'm conflicted. Seeing him exit a martyr trips my gag reflex... But through whatever means, Sessions' departure is an event warranting celebration!

Re: Civil Asset Forfeiture
 

Yes. Not all "America First" people are racists. Genuine Southern racists are all, well... racists.

There is within the notion of "America First" a percentage of people who simply believe that, in deciding any policy, we should put our interests in front of those of other foreign nations. This is not some wild form of bigotry, but a simple, logical understanding that a sovereign nation's primary duty is to itself. I can't call those America Firsters racists. To do that, we would have to label all of the other nations in the world which follow this logic bigots, xenophobes, and racists as well. We'd also have to throw most of the definition of "State" out the window.

Sadly, I fear this is a very small percentage of the America First crowd, the majority of it being xenophobes, racists, history-illiterate nativists, and general, garden variety imbeciles.

Andrew Sullivan's done a good job of explaining how one can assert a proper, rational, non-bigoted America First position. Also sadly, and predictably, offering clear thinking on the matter, his columns and statements on the subject are barely considered and have minimal influence in the debate. It's much more fun and cathartic to generalize and demonize.

Re: Civil Asset Forfeiture
 

Nah. Some might have trouble admitting it, but nah.

Exactly no one doesn't believe this. That some people either (1) do not see the U.S. interest in international relations/trade/influence, and/or (2) thinks that there is a group of people who do not believe this reveals that there is something else going on with anyone who feels the need to adopt the slogan.

Given this, why worry about the "very small percentage" at all?

Andrew Sullivan is prone to periodic bouts of racism, so, yeah.

Re: Civil Asset Forfeiture
 

Most, if not practically all, Americans think that in deciding any policy we should put our interests in front of those of other foreign nations. That's the easy part. The hard part is in recognizing that our long-term interests sometimes mean not putting our short-term interests in front of those of other foreign nations.

Re: Civil Asset Forfeiture
 

Agreed. But that's an entirely different discussion. And one that categorizes people based on economic literacy, rather than xenophobic or racist tendencies.

I'd prefer that discussion be the predominant one. It's a much more useful conversation, and it compels us to examine the economic stupidity of Trump's immigration and trade policies.

Re: Civil Asset Forfeiture
 

On 1, because there's an equally small but influential crowd that believes we should move toward a world government. These are silly and naive sorts who should be checked.

On 2, that's ludicrous. The man's only prone to racism if your lens is so sensitive, and your politics so infantile, that your points are barely worth considering.

Re: Civil Asset Forfeiture
 

It is an entirely different discussion, which is to say that people who say "America First" are not just expressing a disagreement about the weighting of long- and short-term interests.

Re: Civil Asset Forfeiture
 

I do not think there is anyone who thinks that we should move toward a world government for the sake of having a world government.

But there are clearly things that require and/or are enhanced by international cooperation. Things like trade, you know.

He's got some sort of timer that leads him periodically to write, "are black people genetically dumber than white people." Yeah, no racism there.

Re: Civil Asset Forfeiture
 

What you are describing is not the America First crowd but the traditional foreign policy realpolitick crowd, who are the core of the anti-America First group within the Republican Party.

The American Firsters have little or no concept of American interest, they are simply hostile to anything that is outside their small, white boys club (other than Coulter and Ingraham). Try to have a discussion with the America's Firsters on Iran, and you discover they know nothing about Iran, they aren't interested in learning, but they can tell you all you need to know, which is a bigoted screed. Think Tom Cotton.

Re: Civil Asset Forfeiture
 

Keep smoking that stuff and Sessions is going to come for you.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

[venting to no particular end]

Re: Civil Asset Forfeiture
 

That does not mean they are all racists and xenophobes. People who say "America First" have various definitions of the term. Many are bigots. But a not insignificant number are not.