It's pretty much the only solution that makes any sense at this point. We're all paying for it right now anyway.

Not a Presidential power. Is it?

I actually agree with this, as bad as it would be for the economy. We cannot rebuild a middle class without people being able to build generational wealth and we cannot build wealth with healthcare structured as it is today (tied to employment, burdened by outrageous rent-seeking at every level, and at it's core, a 'get sick, now you're broke' model).

lol

In before everyone goes Bernie on the idiot's tax plan:

You can't argue with infographics trag

So im about to see some hella bank in my shit yo!

Oh my god





http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/2 ... ump-237669

There's a lot more where that came from.

Immediate leave from all Washington work for 3-4 weeks for foot surgery to correct a problem he's had for 12 years.

Defense Intelligence Agency: Michael Flynn never told us about his Russia payments
https://amp.businessinsider.com/michael ... ion-2017-4

"DIA did not locate any records of LTG Flynn seeking permission or approval for the receipt of money from a foreign source," the DIA wrote in a letter dated April 7.

The DIA letter appears to contradict a statement Flynn's lawyer released on Tuesday, after reports surfaced that Flynn had failed to disclose the $33,000 payment on his security clearance application - known as an SF86 - in January 2016.

"As has previously been reported, General Flynn briefed the Defense Intelligence Agency, a component agency of the Department of Defense, extensively regarding the RT speaking event trip both before and after the trip," said Robert Kelner, Flynn's lawyer.

But Flynn, who headed the DIA between 2012 and 2014, did not brief the agency on the thousands of dollars he received from RT to speak at the 10th anniversary gala, according to the DIA. In failing to disclose the payment, Flynn may have violated the Emoluments Clause of the US Constitution, which prohibits retired military personnel from receiving payments from foreign sources without advance permission.

The DIA warned Flynn in a letter dated October 8, 2014, against violating the clause, advising Flynn to "obtain advance approval from the Army" prior to receiving an emolument from a foreign government.

Word vomit

NYT: Justices Alarmed by Government’s Hard-Line Stance in Citizenship Case

WASHINGTON — Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. tried to test the limits of the government’s position at a Supreme Court argument on Wednesday by confessing to a criminal offense.

“Some time ago, outside the statute of limitations, I drove 60 miles an hour in a 55-mile-an-hour zone,” the chief justice said, adding that he had not been caught.

The form that people seeking American citizenship must complete, he added, asks whether the applicant had ever committed a criminal offense, however minor, even if there was no arrest.

“If I answer that question no, 20 years after I was naturalized as a citizen, you can knock on my door and say, ‘Guess what, you’re not an American citizen after all’?” Chief Justice Roberts asked.

Robert A. Parker, a Justice Department lawyer, said the offense had to be disclosed. Chief Justice Roberts seemed shocked. “Oh, come on,” he said.

The chief justice asked again whether someone’s citizenship could turn on such an omission.

Mr. Parker did not back down. “If we can prove that you deliberately lied in answering that question, then yes,” he said.

The exchange was among several moments of indignation and incredulity during the argument in Maslenjak v. United States, No. 16-309. Several justices seemed taken aback by Mr. Parker’s unyielding position that the government may revoke the citizenship of Americans who made even trivial misstatements in their naturalization proceedings.

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy had heard enough.

“Your argument is demeaning the priceless value of citizenship,” he told Mr. Parker. “You’re arguing for the government of the United States, talking about what citizenship is and ought to mean.”

Justice Sonia Sotomayor asked about the failure to disclose an embarrassing childhood nickname. Justice Elena Kagan said she was a “little bit horrified to know that every time I lie about my weight it has those kinds of consequences.”

Mr. Parker said the law applied to all false statements, even trivial ones.

Justice Stephen G. Breyer said it was “rather surprising that the government of the United States thinks” that the naturalization laws should be “interpreted in a way that would throw into doubt the citizenship of vast percentages of all naturalized citizens.”

Chief Justice Roberts added that the government’s position would give prosecutors extraordinary power. “If you take the position that not answering about the speeding ticket or the nickname is enough to subject that person to denaturalization,” he said, “the government will have the opportunity to denaturalize anyone they want.”

***CONTROVERSIAL OPINION ALERT***

Spoiler: show

The Simpsons are really bad now

that's not controversial