TPS

Yes, we would know if it happened. That doesn’t mean Stone didn’t claim it happened. Note, Stone’s tweet denial was simply “cohen’s statement is not true.” The issue, as you rightly suggested, is some of the media are jumping on it to support the Russia narrative.

You did claim he lied again about it--not from what I heard. Sorry to quibble. My perception of this is that Cohen is a lying scumbag, much like the guy he represented for 10 years.

I saw everything after about 11:30. Can't remember who asked questions again on it, but he went no further then what his statement stated. He did say Trump knew the email dump was coming, but that was due to Stone's alleged convo. Can't speak to the opening.

What I heard was Cohen say he was there when Stone called and told Trump he just got off the phone with Assange. That is not a lie. Stone is lying, but that's not what Cohen is referring to here. Sorry DR, but I think you're pushing it here to say Cohen is lying, unless you are saying Cohen wasn't in the room when when Stone called?

Here's what his prepared statement says: To be clear, I'm not saying it happened. Cohen is reporting what he heard Stone claim.

Stone claimed to talk to Assange, Cohen stated what Stone claimed. That's not a lie.

If it was a serious post, then I’d guess you’re praying for the rapture too...

That was funny.

I’m sure Native Americans agree with that logic...

I’ll make sure to only post from sources you trust then, like Breitbart... Now it's posted on my Libertarian site, so will you change your mind now? https://original.antiwar.com/cook/2019/02/22/how-the-rule-of-the-rabbis-is-fueling-a-holy-war-in-israel/

The point of your post, as has been made here many times, is that the top pay the most federal income taxes. That's not debatable. Why do they pay the most? That's where the money is. Since the top 10% of filers have almost 50% of agi, then of course that's where most of the revenue will come from. That was my point. In addition, I pointed out that income taxes are only one source of funding the federal government. Btw, I'm not sure what your data source is, but from just looking at a source that analyzed the 2015 tax data, $480K was the cutoff for the top 1% (AGI) of individuals, so I would think the cutoff for HHs is higher. Regarding this post, I'm not miffed at anyone, and I agree that we ought to pursue programs that help raise the earning's power at the bottom. If there were easy solutions, then I'm sure we'd be there already. That said, I would argue that many who are in those top brackets (esp the <1%) "earn" their pay from positions of power, not really the market. As TH3 mentioned about his CEO. The ratio of CEO pay to average worker pay in the US is an outlier in the developed world. CEOs and their Boards have a nice little gig going in the US, and even if they F%&K up a company, they get millions just to go away. So, yes, I do think we ought to tax those in the 0.1, 0.01,. and 0.001 brackets more. Last, as I've tried to argue in other posts, government has helped create trillions of dollars of wealth over time via spending in excess of its revenues (over $18 trillion to date), so the argument that it is confiscating wealth is not so clear cut. One little example, the majority of revenue received by the top 5 defense contractors comes from the government. The wealth that people associated with these companies have gained over time is mainly the result of government spending. Is the government confiscating their wealth or is it simply transferring back that which it helped create? This last question is for the dude....

I don't know anyone who says "get rid of" income inequality, but I do know a lot of people who think inequality has grown too extreme in this country. Really, the only people I've ever heard/read say everyone should have the same income are conservatives who somehow think that's what the left want.

First, When the top 10% has as much income as the bottom 90%, who do you think pays more federal INCOME taxes? Second, the federal government uses payroll taxes in the same way it uses income taxes, so focusing only on income taxes tends to slant the argument. Payroll taxes have exceeded payouts since the 1980s, and those taxes went to support all other government programs. If you're worried about the rich paying too much in federal income taxes, then support policies that reduce income inequality...

I'm not so sure about this. Last year, with less cap space, Beane spent $20 mil on the D-line. He doesn't want to have cap issues when it comes to re-signing players int he future, but I could see him spending $40 mil this year on 2 OL, a TE, and a WR.

Nice job. I doubt very much the Patriots started with a strategy of gaining comp picks--it takes time to get into the position they are now. The Bills still have holes to fill, and will be net buyers in FA again this year. Given their roster turnover, they also are a few years away from seeing a net loss of good players. I don't expect they will gain any decent comp picks for quite some time.

https://consortiumnews.com/2019/02/20/rule-of-the-rabbis-fuels-holy-war-in-israel/ this is a depressing piece related to the Israeli-Palestinian solution, or not most likely. The current election will determine if it's delayed or not. The moderate wings in Israel have joined forces to take on Netanyahu, saying they will split the PM position if they win. Netanyahu's response was to join forces with an extremist, right-wing group (like asking the kkk to join your ticket), and even aipac has criticized him. Christian zealots in the US are probably throwing end of the world parties preparing for the rapture...

It's been going on for awhile now, since the commodity bubble popped in 2014. The trade war didn't come at a good time for them.

Right up the Dude's alley....this is how ***** up the country is now. https://www.yahoo.com/news/coast-guard-lieutenant-accused-murder-plot-scale-rarely-seen-country-223900168.html

It's always nice when I find myself in agreement with libertarians... https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/02/18/the-first-rule-of-aipac-is-you-do-not-talk-about-aipac/ He's saying the same thing that many others are saying in her support, the truth about aipac's outsized influence on American politics.

Even the WSJ is coming around on deficits. https://www.wsj.com/articles/worry-about-debt-not-so-fast-some-economists-say-11550414860 there is one major error in the article, trying to compare the US with Greece and Italy--those countries do not have a central bank that controls and independent currency, and they have to live by the debt constraints imposed on EMS countries.

As I stated, two years ago a majority (of Israelis and Palestinians) wanted a peaceful solution, which means ALL Palestinians are not Hamas. https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2016/0822/Poll-Majority-of-Israelis-Palestinians-want-peaceful-solution with trump's support of making Jerusalem the capital of Israel and the continued stealing of Palestinian land by settlers, these numbers are now in the 40-50% range. the policy of Netanyahu's hardline government is making the situation more difficult, which is why you can find a significant number of "self-loathing" Israelis like the author of the editorial I linked to.

Read some polls instead of whatever biased media you currently read. A UN report stated Gaza could be uninhabitable by 2020 due to the Blockade. 65% of the population in Gaza is under 25, and they've known nothing but the blockade for most of their lives. Many of these people want to get on with their lives, and while Palestinian Politics have been dominated by two parties, there is an effort to counter that. Btw, care to provide a link to where the Palestinians currently state "they want all of Israel"?

Like most on the right, you want to lump all Palestinians (and Israelis) into a simple caricature. Palestinians and Israelis wanting a peaceful solution were a majority just 2 years ago, and there is still a significant (40-50%) in favor. As Israel continues to forcibly take more land for their settlers, I wonder why this number is dropping...?

I almost added that, someone would call this guy a self-hating Jew. Do you guys realize there's more than one political party in Israel?

Since you have trouble interpreting... from the article: “I am an Israeli Jew. Yet I oppose all anti-BDS legislation, and I support nonviolent boycotts, pressure to divest and sanctions to push Israel to cease its regime of state violence and inequality against the Palestinian people. That does not make me anti-Israel, nor an anti-Semite. In fact, I believe that equality and human rights for Palestinians would safeguard the interests of actual real Israelis on the ground much better than current U.S. policy toward Israel’s occupation does. American lawmakers who try to punish other Americans for supporting a Palestinian-led resistance to Israeli oppression manage to scapegoat both Jews and Palestinians, who should not be told how to resist their own oppression.” and his point: “This is exactly the problem. Politicians claim to be speaking on behalf of Israelis because they get support from the Israeli right, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and its proxies in the United States. Netanyahu helped turn Israel into a wedge issue during the Obama administration, when he all but endorsed Mitt Romney for president and addressed Congress in direct opposition to Obama’s Iran deal. AIPAC, whose ostensible mission is to “strengthen, protect and promote the U.S.-Israel relationship in ways that enhance the security” of both nations, by definition makes Israel exceptional. Its lobbying has ensured that Israel receives more foreign aid than any other country and that it remains the strongest military power in the Middle East. But it does so by bolstering the lawmakers that toe that line and ruining the careers of those that don’t.” The Israeli left, not just Americans, oppose the brutal policies of Netanyahu ‘s hard right government: Forcibly taking Palestinian land for Israeli settlers and repression of Gaza. criticizing Israeli policies and criticizing aipac’s influence is not anti Semitic.