You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: US Politics Thread
FBI, 5 other agencies probe possible covert Kremlin aid to Trump
WASHINGTON
The FBI and five other law enforcement and intelligence agencies have collaborated for months in an investigation into Russian attempts to influence the November election, including whether money from the Kremlin covertly aided President-elect Donald Trump, two people familiar with the matter said.
The agencies involved in the inquiry are the FBI, the CIA, the National Security Agency, the Justice Department, the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network and representatives of the director of national intelligence, the sources said.
Investigators are examining how money may have moved from the Kremlin to covertly help Trump win, the two sources said. One of the allegations involves whether a system for routinely paying thousands of Russian-American pensioners may have been used to pay some email hackers in the United States or to supply money to intermediaries who would then pay the hackers, the two sources said.
The informal, inter-agency working group began to explore possible Russian interference last spring, long before the FBI received information from a former British spy hired to develop politically damaging and unverified research about Trump, according to the sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the inquiry.
Full article:
- Smoking Guns
- Rep: 330
Re: US Politics Thread
So many in the US are dying to drug abuse so I see why the govt would be hesitant to legalize something so dangerous. I get it. It is a tough call. Pot and shrooms, sure. Alcohol, okay. Heroin? Meth? There is no getting fucked Up in moderation on that stuff. Those are very dangerous drugs.
Re: US Politics Thread
Legalizing ALL drugs is too far for me. Heroin, speed, meth, wet/PCP that sh!t fucks people up. Just look at opiod pills & bath salt issues. Some people like to or want to get f'ed up, and do so because of the easy access. Legalizing it would only keep easier access. Might work in Amsterdam, but America is massive compared to there and would be difficult to monitor & enforce. I don't see who would use heroin recreationally either so don't see much tax benefits, only addicts commiting crime to score.
I say legalize and tax weed. The money raised in taxes AND saved in not fighting it would help fight off heroin, coke, meth etc. Plus, the ability to score weed might keep some away from the harder drugs. Whereas now, they're all illegal so what's the diff, might as well do it.
If heroin became legal in Nevada, I wouldn't then be more inclined to use it.
Me neither, now. A 19 year old me 'could be' a different story.
Re: US Politics Thread
Single payer is the only option that will make the Dems happy. But get used to waiting for major surgeries etc. would be good for basic Shit. But waiting period like Israel and Canada. If you have a cold in Canada or Israel, you are good. If you need your knee replaced or a lung transplant you may be waiting a while. Would be a huge cultural shift.
No... nothing inherent to a single payer system will lead to longer waiting periods. Yes, people won't be able to pay their way to the front of the line anymore, BUT on average the waiting times, when a single payer system is implemented properly (i.e. with proper competition between the health providers), will be the same.
Yes, the UK and to a lesser extent Canada have longer waiting times, but that's a result of funding cuts by the government. In other words the government cannibalizing the income from the single payer system to cover other holes in the budget. When properly funded, a single payer system is as efficient, if not more efficient than a fully privatized system. Merely by virtue of economies of scale, the single insurance provider (i.e. the government) would be able to negotiate lower prices for drugs and treatments, greater accessibility, better coverage, etc...
- Smoking Guns
- Rep: 330
Re: US Politics Thread
Smoking Guns wrote:Single payer is the only option that will make the Dems happy. But get used to waiting for major surgeries etc. would be good for basic Shit. But waiting period like Israel and Canada. If you have a cold in Canada or Israel, you are good. If you need your knee replaced or a lung transplant you may be waiting a while. Would be a huge cultural shift.
No... nothing inherent to a single payer system will lead to longer waiting periods. Yes, people won't be able to pay their way to the front of the line anymore, BUT on average the waiting times, when a single payer system is implemented properly (i.e. with proper competition between the health providers), will be the same.
Yes, the UK and to a lesser extent Canada have longer waiting times, but that's a result of funding cuts by the government. In other words the government cannibalizing the income from the single payer system to cover other holes in the budget. When properly funded, a single payer system is as efficient, if not more efficient than a fully privatized system. Merely by virtue of economies of scale, the single insurance provider (i.e. the government) would be able to negotiate lower prices for drugs and treatments, greater accessibility, better coverage, etc...
The demand for surgery will go up if every American gets it for free. Waiting lines will have to happen. My Canadian and Israeli friends both say they like their insurance but you have to schedule out in advance a surgery etc. Maybe you are correct and it is budget cuts. Right now in the US there really are no lines.
Re: US Politics Thread
For the record, it would be political suicide for a party here in the UK to move towards privatization of our health care system. It's a big voter... "no, "no" by everyone left and right of the political spectrum.
If it's serious, you'll get scene to quick. Some of the stories put about it tend to be sensationalist and in the extreme.
I waited 24 hours for an MRI last year, but it wasn't like their was a serious condition. It was a precaution.
Current issues in this country tend to be the fact that the current government aren't big on spending money on it and it's under went cuts.
One of the main tag lines used by the Brexteers during the referendum was the suggestion that if we left the EU, we could send £350 million a week extra to the NHS. It was nonsense of course, but it was enough to convince some of those naive to believe things wrote on buses.
Re: US Politics Thread
Disagree. The Tory scum can't wait to dismantle the NHS. Jeremy cunt is doing his best to hollow it out & leave it's bones to be picked over by the private sector, yanks or mates of Tory backers. The right wing press are in cahoots shaming it every chance they get with the typical gusto they reserve for bullish scare tactics.
The public, in general, do seem to be on the side of the NHS but the divide and conquer assault is well underway in this regard too. Daily Mail brigade will be turning the tide.
Re: US Politics Thread
Disagree. The Tory scum can't wait to dismantle the NHS.
I agree, but the polls actually suggest the general public... i.e English don't believe the Tories actually would.
Any fallout from Brexit in a few years will be an excuse to follow through. It wouldn't be till after the next election though that the fuckers seem certain to win given the Daily Mail ect.
- Smoking Guns
- Rep: 330
Re: US Politics Thread
This production is badass. Guns N Roses should have played. 3 Doors down sounds damn good. Good sound on CNN.
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: US Politics Thread
My favorite was the CNN story on how if Trump is killed tomorrow an Obama cabinet appointee will be President. And they wonder why Trumo calls them garbage. Can you imagine if Fox ran that story in 2009?
