Their proposal would actually increase the effective corporate tax rate over pre-Trump levels as it maintains some loophole cuts and adds more.
So they want to roll back all of the other aspects of Trump's tax cut, but are leaving out the last 10% of the corporate tax part. That seems pretty aggressive to me given the circumstances. But you're saying all the histironics over Trump's capitulation to Putin is calculated to divert attention from that?
No, what I said is that the histrionics about Putin are because they want to push a confrontational foreign policy and don't want to confront Trump on the damage his actual policies are causing. This is one example of how they could behave differently on that, not the sole reason they're obsessed with Putin.
Okay, but a lot of Democrats thought 35% was too high before Trump lowered it. I don't think that was so much a lack of will to stand up to Trump as it is they just think 25% is a better number...and I think @Ancalagon is talking about the Carried Interest loophole.
And therein lies the problem. They don't really disagree so much, their differences are basically tactical and they ultimately still serve the same plutocrats.
Not just donors, but anyone who happened to have contacted the DNC or certain Democratic politicians. The donors had things like their Social Security Number and credit card numbers exposed. That's fucking inexcusable. The only reason you do that is because you want to make people suffer. Shitballs, man, there was nothing revealed in the DNC hack that most people didn't already suspect or know. What the hack did, and Assange had to have known, if he understood anything about Americans, is give people a justification for not voting for Hillary. Our political system is hard-wired to make it impossible for a third party to get elected to the White House, so anyone who says that the leak could have somehow enabled a third party candidate to win is just fucking stupid. And not releasing detailed information on Trump is to ensure that he wins. The MSM in the US gave more coverage to Trump, and gave more favorable coverage to Trump, than to any of the other candidates combined. For fuck's sake, man, the MSM chose to cover an empty podium, rather than give air time to Bernie Sanders, because Trump was supposed to speak. We know what skeletons lurk in the Clintons' closets because the Republicans have been rummaging around in them since the 90s. They spent years trying to find something on Hillary over Benghazi and failed. Yet, there's tons and tons of dirt to be had on Trump, and Assange couldn't find any of it? Even though the GOP also got hacked? Come on.`
When it comes to Wikileaks, there is a fundamental difference between releasing leaked government records, which it could be argued the public has some right to see, and the stolen documents of a private individual or organization, of which there should be no expectation of public release. The only possible interest the latter served was either prurient or nakedly political. Of course, none of the chan-kiddies can tell the difference, since they think they should have the right to access a celebrity’s private nude photo collection as well.
Trump: says something stupid Trumpites: defend stupid thing said Trump: inverts stupid thing said Trumpites: *screech of tyres doing u-turns* Here's a tip for the Trumpeters, STFU for a week about any outrage over Trumps actions, mainly as that it gives him plenty of time to do a reverse ferret, and then you can just roll your eyes at the outrage rather than being caught pants down.
More hat and less cattle (but still plenty of bullshit, in that he'll say this and do fuck all about it) from Trey "BENGHAAAAAAZZZZZIIIIIII!!!" Gowdy:
