If you’re not in the top 1 percent and able to get massive tax cuts simply because you’re rich, then you’re not worthy of any program that will make your survival any easier.
That is apparently where Donald Trump and the Republicans stand when it comes to programs designed to help the middle class and poorer Americans, programs like Meals on Wheels – a program that delivers meals to the elderly. According to the Trump White House, funding that help states offer Meals on Wheels benefits must be cut.
Listen to this White House Trump staffer explain why cutting funding to these fundamental programs make sense.
Video
Mulvaney said Meals on Wheels “sounds great” but it is “not showing any results”pic.twitter.com/4vF7LxEcrO
Where is the wall you may ask? Well it’s not up yet, But Donald Trump is already touting and patting himself on the back for what he calls, “an unprecedented 40 percent reduction in illegal immigration” at the southern border… the wall-less border that is…!
At a rally in Tennessee on Wednesday, Trump had this to say…
TRUMP: “And by the way, aren’t our borders getting extremely strong? … We’ve already experienced an unprecedented 40 percent reduction in illegal immigration on our southern border, 61 percent — 61 percent since Inauguration Day. Sixty-one percent; think about it. And now people are saying we’re not going to go there anymore ’cause we can’t get in, so it’s going to get better and better.”
THE FACTS: There’s not much evidence yet that Trump is driving down illegal immigration. It’s true that the number of border arrests dropped about 44 percent from January to February. But it’s too early to know if that will hold or what prompted it. Monthly and seasonal fluctuations are common.
Trump hasn’t expanded the ranks of the Border Patrol or any other immigration or border-security agency. His orders haven’t yet changed the way the Border Patrol operates and so far there is no evidence that more people are being deported. The wall he’s promised to build isn’t up.
The number of border arrests is the primary measure of the flow of illegal immigration at the border, though an imperfect one. If fewer people are arrested, that’s taken to mean fewer people are trying. Over recent decades, presidents have tried to have it both ways. They cite low arrest numbers to illustrate how their policies are dissuading people from crossing illegally. When arrest numbers are high, they say that’s because they’re being aggressive in enforcing the border.
The Republican congressman went on MSNBC and thought it was a good idea to accuse the host of spending too much time on Trump’s “wiretapping” claim. The Republican congressman told the MSNBC host that her network kept pushing the wiretapping story to boost their ratings.
It was then that host Katy Tur let loose on Rep. Mo Brooks. “You think it’s ratings?” Tur asked. “That’s why we’re talking about the president accusing another president or wiretapping him?”
The Alabama congressman complained that Tur had not spent enough time on an “important story” about the Federal Reserve raising its benchmark interest rate — even though she had covered it minutes earlier.
“Congressman, we led our newscast with that so thank you for pointing that out,” Tur replied calmly. “And secondly, there is a hearing underway on Capitol Hill talking about wiretapping and talking about information being searched or asked for by the FBI and from the DOJ. So, we are choosing to cover what is going on in Washington — and that is what is going on in Washington.”
“And my question to you is, because we are covering this, because that is what is going on in Washington, do you have a message to your president to say, ‘Hey, if you’re going to make an accusation, why not produce the evidence so that everybody’s not running around searching for the evidence when you say you have it?” the MSNBC asked, repeating her earlier question.
Brooks agreed that it was “incumbent upon President Trump” to share “whatever information he has about the prior administration wiretapping him.”
A video of Will Smith bungee jumping has taken the internet by storm. But it is not seeing Will Smith achieve a 20 year dream to bungee jump that is causing the internet to go bonkers, it is a still picture of Mr. Smith hanging upside down that has people talking.
In the photo, Will Smith bears a striking resemblance to Uncle Phill, Smith’s former co-star in The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air.
While promoting his new movie, Kong, Samuel L. Jackson called out the casting of the lead role in “Get Out”, questioning if the successful movie would be better received if the lead role was given to an African American actor “who really understands” racial issues, instead of British actor, Daniel Kaluuya, born in London to Ugandan parents.
“There are a lot of black British actors that work in this country all the time. I tend to wonder what would that movie have been with an American brother who really understands that in a way. Because Daniel grew up in a country where they’ve been interracial dating for a hundred years. Britain, there’s only about eight real white people left in Britain. … So what would a brother from America made of that role? I’m sure the director helped. Some things are universal, but everything ain’t.”
In an interview with GQ, Daniel, who played the lead role of Chris in “Get Out” – a movie that cost about $5 million to make while grossing over $100 million since its release – responded to Jackson’s criticism.
“When I’m around black people, I’m made to feel ‘other’ because I’m dark-skinned,” he said. “I’ve had to wrestle with that, with people going ‘You’re too black.’ Then I come to America, and they say, ‘You’re not black enough.’ I go to Uganda, I can’t speak the language. In India, I’m black. In the black community, I’m dark-skinned. In America, I’m British. Bro!”
Kaluuya went on to reference the racism that he and other black people have experienced in England, including police violence similar to events that have taken place in the U.S.
“I really respect African-American people. I just want to tell black stories,” he continued. “This is the frustrating thing, bro — in order to prove that I can play this role, I have to open up about the trauma that I’ve experienced as a black person. I have to show off my struggle so that people accept that I’m black. No matter that every single room I go to, I’m usually the darkest person there. You know what I’m saying? I kind of resent that mentality. I’m just an individual.”
The bill does bring down overall premiums in the individual market by about 10 percent by 2026 compared with what they would be under current law, the CBO found. But the CBO includes a big caveat: This would greatly differ based on age and income.
The CBO offers an example of a single individual with an annual income of $26,500.
If that person is 21 years old, he’ll largely benefit from the Republican health care bill. Under the Affordable Care Act (also known as Obamacare), he would on average pay $1,700 in premiums for insurance. Under the Republican plan, he would pay $1,450.
But if that person is 64 years old, he would be hurt by the Republican bill. Under Obamacare, he would also pay $1,700 in premiums for insurance. But under the Republican bill, he would pay $14,600 — more than half his annual income. That amounts to more than a 750 percent increase in premiums from Obamacare to the Republican bill.
Republicans are repealing Obamacare and millions of Americans will be left without healthcare once again. I guess this is their idea of “Making America Great Again!”
House Speaker and vocal proponent of the repeal and replace process, Paul Ryan, was asked to comment on home many people would lose their healthcare under the proposed GOP plan. Ryan could not answer.
“I can’t answer that question,” Ryan told CBS News’s “Face the Nation,” when asked how many people will lose healthcare coverage. “It’s up to people.”
“Here’s the premise of your question: Are you going to stop mandating people buy health insurance? People are going to do what they want to do with their lives because we believe in individual freedom in this country.”
The GOP last week unveiled two measures to repeal and replace ObamaCare. While the new plan would get rid of some components of ObamaCare, it would keep other parts in place.
Maybe it’s Alzheimer, or maybe it’s just selective memory. Whatever it is, Trump’s Attorney General is not being totally honestwith the American people.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions was forced to amend prior testimony to Congress this week, acknowledging that contrary to an earlier statement, he’d encountered the Russian ambassador to the United States twice in the last year.
Sessions appears to have left out a third instance in which they crossed paths.
In April of 2016, Sessions attended a VIP reception at a hotel in Washington, D.C., with President Donald Trump and roughly two dozen guests, including four ambassadors. One of them was Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. The cocktail meet-and-greet took place in a private room at the Mayflower Hotel near the White House. Shortly thereafter, Trump delivered a foreign policy speech in the hotel’s ballroom, where he called for improved U.S.-Russia relations. Kislyak was seated in the front row.
Who cares that almost three thousand people had just died in the biggest terrorist attack in America’s history? Not Donald Trump. His only concern after the buildings at the World Trade Center fell, was to make that point that his building was now the tallest in Manhattan.
Asked in a radio interview if his building suffered any damages during September 11th, Trump went on a rant explaining that his building is now the tallest in downtown Manhattan.
“Forty Wall Street actually was the second tallest building in downtown Manhattan, and it was, actually before the World Trade was the tallest, and then when they built the World Trade Center became known as the second tallest and now it’s the tallest…”
It’s all about the donald!
Audio
Here’s the disgusting audio of Trump on 9/11 bragging about how his building is now the tallest in Lower Manhattan: pic.twitter.com/4ufikWwOom
Republicans are on the fast-track to repealing Obamacare and throwing Americans off their life saving healthcare. But in the process of sticking it to middle class once again, Republicans are using their Obamacare replacement to give more money to rich people.
Republicans are giving away $400 million in tax cuts to CEOs of insurance companies, according to language buried deep in their proposed plan.
Democrats on Wednesday broadly blasted a proposed Obamacare replacement bill after learning the federal government would lose about $400 million in lost tax revenue over the next decade due to a sweet break for health insurers.
Rep. Sander Levin, D-Mich., said that the tax break related to executive pay underscores the fact that the Republican replacement bill is “the beginning of a huge giveaway to the very, very wealthy,” and the end of insurance coverage to millions of lower-income people.
“We’re starting off… with essentially a giveaway to insurance executives,” Levin said.
The proposed tax break, buried in cryptic language in the Republican plan, would allow health insurers to more fully deduct the value of their executives’ compensation on their taxes. That compensation can be as high as tens of millions of dollars, in the case of CEOs of insurers.
Sounds like a defamation of character lawsuit to me. Without any evidence, Trump has accused former President Barack Obama of wiretapping his phones during the 2016 presidential campaign. But knowing the easy-going ways of the former president, he would probably just allow Trump to bury himself with his dumb tweets.
An aide to Obama told the Wall Street Journal the former president had decided he would not respond to every one of the his successor’s tweets. But people familiar with Obama’s thinking told the WSJ he was livid after Trump posted several tweets early Saturday morning making serious accusations.
“Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my ‘wires tapped’ in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!” Trump first tweeted on Saturday, without evidence.
An Obama spokesman later responded:
“A cardinal rule of the Obama administration was that no White House official ever interfered with any independent investigation led by the Department of Justice,” said Kevin Lewis. “As part of that practice, neither President Obama nor any White House official ever ordered surveillance on any U.S. citizen. Any suggestion otherwise is simply false.”
Trump’s allegations have widened a rift between Trump and his predecessor, according to the report, who made an effort to be cordial during the transition.
Trump also reportedly believes that officials loyal to Obama have been behind the leaks coming out of the administration.
We use cookies to improve your experience on our site. By agreeing to this, we can analyze browsing behavior and unique IDs on this site. Declining or revoking consent may affect certain features.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
