Jim Jordan launches another absolutely useless probe. This time he targets the Fulton Co. DA

[AU9377 4,977]

He wants the DOJ to turn over any communication between the Fulton DA and Special Counsel Jack Smith.  He also requests all evidence against Trump discovered by the DOJ since Trump left the White House.  He knows damn well that he won't get either of those things.  As usual, what he does is theater and nothing more.

To be clear, there is nothing unethical if Fanni Willis did communicate with the Special Counsel.  They could share evidence or investigative findings. 

 

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/jim-jordan-launches-probe-georgias-fani-willis-ahead/story?id=102532160

[Gowebb11 9,337]

Congress has turned into a DA’s office. Investigations and indictments. It’s a shame they don’t actually legislate anymore. 

Edited August 25, 2023 by Gowebb11

[Mikey 16,635]

There's a good side to this. If the Republicans hadn't won the House, we American citizens would never have learned the depths of corruption and amount of bribery that went on in the Biden family. Hunter's laptop would have been "lost" somewhere in the FBI's basement, the numerous shell companies would never have been discovered and so many other things would have remained shrouded in secrecy. And just think, this is just getting started! Who knows how many more Biden scandals will be uncovered in the coming months?

[TitanTiger 20,499]

I miss the days when we mostly didn't put clowns in leadership roles.

[auburnatl1 4,979]

6 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I miss the days when we mostly didn't put clowns in leadership roles.

It’s always dicey to compare degrees of being a clown, but imo mjt is even crazier than trump. Like she should be institutionalized and not have a drivers license kind of crazy.  And she got 70% of the north ga vote.

Trump will be gone in 4-5 years one way or the other. But there’s always more clowns, some even spookier. My biggest concern is instead of a career path in the circus, now they’re getting votes. Lots of them.

 

[homersapien 11,393]

8 hours ago, Gowebb11 said:

Congress has turned into a DA’s office. Investigations and indictments. It’s a shame they don’t actually legislate anymore. 

Not while the Republicans control it. 

[homersapien 11,393]

22 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I miss the days when we mostly didn't put clowns in leadership roles.

 Don't enjoy self-parody? 

Gym, Lauren and Marjorie are the face of Republican decline.

(And I am leaving out quite a few more.)

[auburnatl1 4,979]

31 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Not while the Republicans control it. 

Side note. People may disagree with Reagan or Bush (the dad, the son was an idiot) but they weren't crazy. Ideological Republicans. Ironically, the term “Republican” actually means those that are against monarchies and autocrats. What old school republicans (ie me) obviously struggle with is the realization that there’s been a decisive coup within the party. You could argue why it happened (tea party, trump, reaction to ultra progressivism. ect) but the point is the Republican Party  died and is now is the very  dysfunctional Populist Party.  Which means there no longer the balance of left v right, it’s now (further) left v dysfunction. Result: a never ending “clown show”

Edited August 25, 2023 by auburnatl1

[Gowebb11 9,337]

33 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Not while the Republicans control it. 

The dems don’t legislate either. They fight with each other and govern through executive orders. They’re too scared to create  meaningful bills or go on record with a vote. Both parties are equally complicit and have been for awhile. 

[Didba 5,256]

26 minutes ago, Gowebb11 said:

The dems don’t legislate either. They fight with each other and govern through executive orders. They’re too scared to create  meaningful bills or go on record with a vote. Both parties are equally complicit and have been for awhile. 

Was the farm bill passed under Biden or Trump?

[Gowebb11 9,337]

Just now, Didba said:

Was the farm bill passed under Biden or Trump?

I’m speaking to a much more general point. Of course some legislation happens. But increasingly neither side is doing what they’re there for: drafting bills, followed by reviews and debates, followed by votes. Democracy can’t sustain on executive orders, name calling, and indicating and investigating. 

[homersapien 11,393]

23 minutes ago, Gowebb11 said:

The dems don’t legislate either. They fight with each other and govern through executive orders. They’re too scared to create  meaningful bills or go on record with a vote. Both parties are equally complicit and have been for awhile. 

I beg to differ:

https://www.npr.org/2023/01/01/1143149435/despite-infighting-its-been-a-surprisingly-productive-2-years-for-democrats

Despite infighting, it's been a surprisingly productive 2 years for Democrats

January 1, 2023

Democrats are about to hand over the House to Republicans, and the dynamic for President Biden and his party is at a turning point.

Looking back at the last two years, there was plenty of infighting among Democrats, even as they held control of both chambers of Congress. Biden was not able to pass the full scope of his social spending plan, for example; the expanded child tax credit did not get extended, and the president's student loan relief program is tied up in courts with an uncertain future.

And yet, Democrats still managed to pass major pieces of legislation, several with bipartisan support.

"The problem is that they oversold and underdelivered, even though what they delivered by any normal metric would have been pretty impressive," NPR political correspondent Mara Liasson said on a recent episode of the NPR Politics Podcast.

Democrats' accomplishments don't seem to be registering with the public — at least not yet.

Most Americans disapprove of the job Biden is doing. But voters did give Democrats strong midterms results, driven in part by the Supreme Court's blow to abortion rights and an aversion to more extreme candidates on the right.

It's also true that much of the legislation will take time to take hold — investments in infrastructure, for example, are not immediately apparent.

Biden heads into the next two years with a Republican-controlled House vowing to investigate his administration and his family. As Liasson put it: expect more investigation than legislation in the next two years. (Listen to the full conversation about Biden's agenda and how it's been received here.)

Whether or not Biden adds to his roster in the next half of his first term as president, he can already claim the following big ticket items:

The American Rescue Plan in response to COVID-19

One of Biden's first acts as president was to try to get the coronavirus pandemic under control by passing the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan.

The White House sent Americans in the low-to-medium income range a $1,400 payment to help fund basic necessities like rent and groceries. Biden also extended a $300 a week federal unemployment benefit for some 9.7 million people out of work at the time, temporarily expanded the child tax credit program, allotted $7.25 billion for small business loans and $128 billion in grants for state educational agencies.

Biden teamed up with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to administer and track COVID-19 vaccinations across the country.

The bill passed the Senate 50-49 and the House 220 to 211, both along party lines, before being signed into law by the president on March 11.

While the initiatives were broadly popular with voters, critics warned the rescue plan could actually make the country's economic outlook worse.

A bipartisan infrastructure bill

Biden signed a $1 trillion infrastructure bill into law in November 2021 that will repair the nation's roads, bridges and railways, bring high-speed internet to rural communities and more.

The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law includes: $284 billion for transportation needs, which includes repairing bridges and roadways, public transit and airports, electric vehicles and low emission public transportation; $65 billion for broadband internet; $73 billion for power infrastructure; and $55 billion for clean drinking water.

The legislation was a major bipartisan achievement, made possible by 32 Republicans — 13 in the House and 19 in the Senate — who crossed the aisle to ensure it passed. Former President Donald Trump had pressed conservatives to vote against the bill, but key GOP leaders Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky supported the legislation.

The first major gun-safety bill in decades

In wake of the mass shootings in Uvalde, Texas, and Buffalo, N.Y., — which together claimed the lives of 19 children and 12 adults — Biden signed into law the largest gun-safety bill to pass Congress in nearly 30 years. While historically significant, the bill was rather limited compared to what gun control advocates would have wanted.

Just before he signed the bill in June, Biden said that although the measure didn't achieve everything he had hoped for, the bipartisan piece of legislation would ultimately save lives.

"At a time when it seems impossible to get anything done in Washington, we are doing something consequential," Biden said.

Building semiconductors at home through the CHIPS Act

The CHIPS and Science Act of 2022 passed in August, which allocated roughly $53 billion in federal funding to manufacture semiconductor chips in the U.S. instead of relying on China to produce them.

According to the White House, the bill will "boost American semiconductor research, development, and production, ensuring U.S. leadership in the technology that forms the foundation of everything from automobiles to household appliances to defense systems."

Cellphones, laptops, gaming consoles, washing machines, automobiles — nearly all modern electronic devices — require semiconductors to function. And though the United States is major semiconductor manufacturer ($5 billion in 2020), it imports more than double what it produces ($12.5 billion in 2020), according to the Observatory of Economic Complexity.

Supply chain issues during the pandemic highlighted that heavy reliance, and Biden's bill aims to remedy that level of overseas dependence. It passed the Senate and the House through bipartisan efforts.

The Inflation Reduction Act

Not long after securing his seat in the Oval Office, Biden worked to pass the Build Back Better Act, a massive social spending bill to the tune of nearly $2 trillion. It included many promises Biden made on the 2020 campaign trail, such as major health care reform, universal pre-kindergarten and paid family leave, $550 billion dedicated to combatting climate change and more, paid for in part by increased taxes for corporations and the uber rich.

That original piece of legislature stalled, but after months of negotiations, resurfaced under a different name; the Inflation Reduction Act.

It took almost a year for Biden's ambitious package to pass through Congress, with Vice President Harris' vote breaking the Senate's 50-50 party line vote. It cleared the House in a 220-207 vote along party lines, without a single Republican voting in favor.

The bill aims to tackle inflation by reducing the federal deficit, promote production of certain goods and limit the cost of some prescription drugs, as NPR previously reported.

The package also includes:

•  $369 billion for a climate initiative to reduce greenhouse emissions and promote lean energy technologies.
•  $300 billion in new revenue through a corporate tax increase.
• $80 billion for the Internal Revenue Service to hire new agents, modernize its technology, audit the wealthy and more.
• A $2,000 annual cap for out-of-pocket prescription drug costs for those insured by Medicare.

Support for Ukraine's defense against a Russian invasion

The United States recently pledged another wave of support for Ukraine — over $44 billion — in its 2023 federal spending bill. When added to what the White House provided earlier in 2022, it brings America's total contribution to over $100 billion.

It's been over 300 days since Russian President Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine. Since then, President Biden and lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have provided continued financial, military and humanitarian aid to Ukraine, which appears to have kept Putin's army from steamrolling across the country despite its superior military capabilities.

Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelenskyy traveled to Washington just before Christmas to thank Biden and Congress for continued support. "Your money is not charity," he said. "It's an investment in the global security and democracy that we handle in the most responsible way."

In coordination with the trip, America promised nearly $2 billion in additional aid, as well as a Patriot surface-to-air missile defense system.

"The United States is committed to ensuring that the brave Ukrainian people can continue to defend their country against Russian aggression as long as it takes," Biden told Zelenskyy. "You will never stand alone."

There has been weakening support for Ukraine aid from some Republicans as the war creeps closer to the one-year mark, however, and getting more funding through could become increasingly difficult in the new year.

 

[Didba 5,256]

3 minutes ago, Gowebb11 said:

I’m speaking to a much more general point. Of course some legislation happens. But increasingly neither side is doing what they’re there for: drafting bills, followed by reviews and debates, followed by votes. Democracy can’t sustain on executive orders, name calling, and indicating and investigating. 

I gotcha, I was genuinely curious because it was the last major bill I remember being passed that actual had an impact on stuff. 

[AU9377 4,977]

6 hours ago, Mikey said:

There's a good side to this. If the Republicans hadn't won the House, we American citizens would never have learned the depths of corruption and amount of bribery that went on in the Biden family. Hunter's laptop would have been "lost" somewhere in the FBI's basement, the numerous shell companies would never have been discovered and so many other things would have remained shrouded in secrecy. And just think, this is just getting started! Who knows how many more Biden scandals will be uncovered in the coming months?

With any luck at all, they may stumble their way into actual evidence of corruption and illegal activity.  After all, even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Even though their purposes are much more transparent today than they were back when Bill Clinton was balancing the budget and the economy was booming, it is the same playbook.  They were hell bent on getting the Clintons over their investment in the Whitewater development back in Arkansas.  They failed there, but got lucky and found an intern with a dress she couldn't bare to have dry cleaned.  That was certainly a great way to trivialize the entire concept of impeaching a President.  The result was Clinton's approval ratings soaring to nearly 70% and the Democrats picking up seats in the midterms.  It also forced Newt Gingrich to resign as speaker. 

[auburnatl1 4,979]

34 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

.The result was Clinton's approval ratings soaring to nearly 70% and the Democrats picking up seats in the midterms.  It also forced Newt Gingrich to resign as speaker. 

You could also argue Newt changed Clinton into becoming a pragmatic, compromising moderate. The last one we’ve had in 23 years. And most moderates have had historically high approval ratings. Our system just struggles producing them. Ill get killed for saying this (and personally didn’t care for him) - but I’d quickly take him (not Hillary) back over the 2 options we currently have.

[Mikey 16,635]

11 hours ago, Didba said:

Was the farm bill passed under Biden or Trump?

Both. Trump, in 2018. Then a new one this year. Excluding extensions, a new farm bill is passed every four years regardless of which party is in the white house.

[AU9377 4,977]

9 hours ago, auburnatl1 said:

You could also argue Newt changed Clinton into becoming a pragmatic, compromising moderate. The last one we’ve had in 23 years. And most moderates have had historically high approval ratings. Our system just struggles producing them. Ill get killed for saying this (and personally didn’t care for him) - but I’d quickly take him (not Hillary) back over the 2 options we currently have.

He is really a brilliant man.  I had been in the young Republicans group at Auburn and by chance was asked if I wanted to ride over to Columbus to hear Clinton speak at the Sheraton when he was campaigning during the primaries.  He spoke for around 45 minutes and then worked the room.  Long story short, he ended up inviting a couple of us to meet people on his campaign staff, including James Carville. Within a week I was walking door to door with a couple other college students handing out literature and explaining to what Clinton called "people like us" why they should vote in the Democratic primary and for him.  He was certain that he could win southern states if he could get people to listen.  He was right.  He won Georgia, Arkansas, Louisiana, Tennessee & Kentucky and in 1996 he flipped Florida.

The man has weaknesses, as do most all of us, but there is no denying that he worked his way from a trailer park in Arkansas to being a Rhodes scholar at Georgetown and then Yale Law.  He is intense, but extremely likable and the unique ability to relate to people on a personal level regardless of their background. 

[DKW 86 7,430]

19 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

I miss the days when we mostly didn't put clowns in leadership roles.

Unfortunately, it is all we have these days.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

20 hours ago, auburnatl1 said:

You could also argue Newt changed Clinton into becoming a pragmatic, compromising moderate. The last one we’ve had in 23 years. And most moderates have had historically high approval ratings. Our system just struggles producing them. Ill get killed for saying this (and personally didn’t care for him) - but I’d quickly take him (not Hillary) back over the 2 options we currently have.

Yes, we have ended "big government".  We continue to privatize government functions.

And yet,,, the cost of government seems to be,,, utterly stupid.

The government of, by and, for,,, Wall St. 

[auburnatl1 4,979]

Ok, after the 687th time you’ve  said it finally realized that wall st is the bad Guys and big gov is the good. And that we’re all being  controlled and carefully manipulated by wall st (btw 50 yrs ago the common capitalist  conspiracy theory was directed at the Swiss banking consortium, so at least manipulation is built in America now). What country today best underscores this “balance” you want? I assume its European but which one? Or is it more FDR’ish, or further Marxist? 

Edited August 26, 2023 by auburnatl1

[AU9377 4,977]

22 hours ago, auburnatl1 said:

Ok, after the 687th time you’ve  said it finally realized that wall st is the bad Guys and big gov is the good. And that we’re all being  controlled and carefully manipulated by wall st (btw 50 yrs ago the common capitalist  conspiracy theory was directed at the Swiss banking consortium, so at least manipulation is built in America now). What country today best underscores this “balance” you want? I assume its European but which one? Or is it more FDR’ish, or further Marxist? 

I wouldn't say that Wall Street is the problem, but we do need to see more corporate involvement in something other than the bottom line.  We long ago reached a point that being profitable isn't enough.  Very profitable American corporations move their call centers to India not because they aren't profitable in the U.S., but because they can be more profitable by cutting their domestic labor costs. 

I have seen first hand a corporation build itself with the help of government training programs, become established, and then move operations to India all in the name of increasing their profit margins to please the board room and increase their stock prices.  The move has left highly trained employees jobless.  The frustrating part is that there is little that can be done to change that practice, outside of non monetary considerations on the part of corporate leadership.

[I_M4_AU 7,863]

18 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

I wouldn't say that Wall Street is the problem, but we do need to see more corporate involvement in something other than the bottom line

Haven’t we been doing that with ESG?  How has that worked?  Disney has lost market share and has detrimentally reduced its bottom line as has Anheuser Busch.  They both have high ESG scores, but are under preforming in terms of the bottom line.  The shareholder wants profits to enhance the value of their investment, organizations like Black Rock and Vanguard have gone to the ESG score and that is not a be-all end-all way to rank stocks.  The organization has to be well run.

 

26 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

I have seen first hand a corporation build itself with the help of government training programs, become established, and then move operations to India all in the name of increasing their profit margins to please the board room and increase their stock prices.  The move has left highly trained employees jobless.  The frustrating part is that there is little that can be done to change that practice, outside of non monetary considerations on the part of corporate leadership.

The airline industry have been flying aircraft to Honduras to have yearly maintenance performed since 2014 or so to get around high union maintenance costs.  Even high fuel costs and the cost of the fight crew expense is not enough to perform the maintenance in-house.  I’m not blaming the union workers for this, but the industry presented the union with alternatives and the union turned them down.

Calling Bangladeshi for customer service is not the best customer service experience, yet corporations keep on doing it.

The only way to bring them back is for the customers to complain until they listen.  We are a tolerant group.

Oh, as a famous lefty once said, those highly trained employees may need to learn how to code.

[arein0 970]

21 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

The shareholder wants profits to enhance the value of their investment, organizations like Black Rock and Vanguard have gone to the ESG score and that is not a be-all end-all way to rank stocks. 

That's not exactly true. Yes, Black Rock and Vanguard offer an ESG portfolio that invests in high ESG scores, but that is just one ticker of many. I'm a little ignorant on Black Rock, but Vanguard has a very wide range of portfolios that you can pick from. They only created that portfolio because there was a demand for it.

[I_M4_AU 7,863]

3 minutes ago, arein0 said:

That's not exactly true. Yes, Black Rock and Vanguard offer an ESG portfolio that invests in high ESG scores, but that is just one ticker of many. I'm a little ignorant on Black Rock, but Vanguard has a very wide range of portfolios that you can pick from. They only created that portfolio because there was a demand for it.

Like I said the ESG is not a be-all end-all and I didn’t say it was exclusive.  There was a demand for it?  How’s that demand going today?

[arein0 970]

18 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

Like I said the ESG is not a be-all end-all and I didn’t say it was exclusive.  There was a demand for it?  How’s that demand going today?

My apologies, I read your statement as Vanguard and Black Rock were moving towards ESG for their portfolios.

Vanguard's ESGV Assets Under Management is $6.6B so yes there is a pretty big demand for it.

https://ycharts.com/companies/ESGV/total_assets_under_management

That portfolio is up ~10% in the last Year and up ~18% YTD