FBI investigation of Trump Russia ties continues now with an uncompromised leader ...

@Northwest: Yes let's lock up hillary.

@Northwest:

I'm still embarrassed that I was in attendance listening to those remarks with which I disagreed with at the time and continue to disagree. My intent was to frame it that a special independent prosecutor should investigate the Russia issues and that both parties at least in my opinion are happy to see Mr. Comey go. Mr. Comey should never have thrust himself into the political arena regardless of which was favored on any particular issue.

I thought the memo issued by Rosenberg supporting the Sessions memo was relatively fair.

As far as the Russia issue, my view is that it will end up as inconsequential which does not by any means intend to infer that it shouldn't be done.

It will be interesting how history will view the tweeting. While today it does seem kind of ridiculous often, maybe in the future it will be viewed as a humorous version of FDR's fireside radio chats ( I certainly don't predict that as the most likely outcome 😀 however. The concept of being able to communicate with the citizens unfiltered is a good one. The president often goes behind good sense, propriety, and or reasonsble subject parameters often.

@MasterLee:

Having Mrs Clinton exiled to private life as nun important is a sufficient negative consequence and one thet must really stick in her craw.

@Jackjjacksonjr: They all act like comey was the dc madam.

@Jackjjacksonjr: I am not questioning the Rosenberg memo. I totally agree with his reasoning. I was, however, incredulous when I read the President's cover page, using the Rosenberg memo to justify the firing.

This is the President who, not just during the convention, but more recently, kept doing disparaging tweets about HRC.

I'm all for Presidents reaching out directly to the people, in language the people understand, and with complete honesty, not self-serving PR.

I want the President to actually start addressing the real issues, and stop attacking the media as fake, simply for disagreeing with him. What it tells me, is that he uses thinks the 1st amendment is there for his personal use, but not everyone's else.

I built an app to follow his tweets, and I hope one of these days to see a single tweet, reflecting reality, instead of half-truths and PR.

@Northwest:

Interesting. It seems based on previous comments that you have a computer - tech background. I would enjoy that app it sounds like. Are you hoping to market it?

I agree. The real issues are what matters. Perhaps when the Senate creates a health care bill the President will be able to make substantive positive comments regarding it.

The same thing applies to proposed tax changes. The one pager released so far has not been very transparent or realistic.

@Jackjjacksonjr: You're using, right now, no matter what platform you're on, one of my software packages.

No, the app is a little toy, one of the startups I'm involved with, is using its older sisters.

[quote]proposed tax changes....or realistic.[/quote]

Yes, emphasis "realistic"

@Northwest:

On a positive note I did see an article when the CBO projected a 10% decerease in projected health care insurance costs in 2026.

A huge disappointment would be the nomination or Guiliani and Christie as the next FBI Director. I doubt even the republican majority would approve those two.

I'd like to see someone outside the FBI as the next Director. Not Gordy not that Sheriff Trump supporter from where, Wisconsin?

@Jackjjacksonjr: I didn't think the CBO report was out (based on the new plan that the House passed last week). Do you have a link?

I used to like Guiliani, but he's now so partisan, I no longer trust his judgment. I have not given up on Christie yet.

@Northwest:

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/10/cbo-score-on-house-obamacare-bill-will-be-issued-week-of-may-22.html

The article mentions some projections regarding the report and indicates the anticipated release date.

"CBO also estimated that in 2018 and 2019 average premiums for customers in the individual health insurance market would be 15 percent to 20 percent higher under the prior version of the Republican bill than they would be under current law.

But CBO found that "by 2026, average premiums for single policyholders in [that] market would be roughly 10 percent lower than under current law.""

@Jackjjacksonjr: I've seen this (not on CNBC), so the analysis is not out yet.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/05/10/news/economy/cbo-obamacare-gop-health-bill/

The 10% reduction is a somewhat meaningless figure, because it uses as a basis a law that was going to evolve, so it would be comparing apples to oranges. What would be more meaningful, is comparing it to what was projected to be proposed under the Hillary plan (ACA version 2).

I don't think the ACA was the right overall solution, but I think it was a good start toward eliminating some of the major issues: pre-existing conditions, and caps. In my heart of hearts, we would have a single risk pool for the entire country, that insurance countries can opt into, and then provide individual insurances policies. No one should die, because they cannot afford medical attention.

@Northwest:

I've come around to favoring a single payer system. My view I'd those that pay get a version of Medicare and those that don't get Medicaid.

Everyone covered in some form. By pay I mean taxes which replace employer based or private policies.

All the competing private plan rules, dupicstive administrstion, and shareholder and executive profits take unnecessary dollars out of the system. Never thought I would come to this viewpoint. However the bastardized ACA and whatever would amend or replace it has to cost more and provide less than signed payer.

Lifetime caps and pre existing conditions should remain things of the past. Those who want more than this new Medicare would have the option of trying to get more with supplemental insurance.

This isn't brain surgery. It's a question of blowing off health insurance company lobbyists.

@Jackjjacksonjr: Insurance companies seem to love the proposed plan, because it gives them a better opportunity to influence at the state level.