OK...What's Next?

[BookWoman56]

7 hours ago, bmasters9 said:

Exactly-- this is another reason why I voted third-party (Johnson). I feared that if I put that mark down on my ballot for Clinton, I would be accused of trying to take the Bible out of school, trying to make it illegal to be religious, and overall, trying to turn this nation into other than the "Christian nation" that many of the "Bible Lovin' God Fearing" types (as you very well put it) always thought it should be.

I have made a vow to myself, that if Trump and his administration try to force religious indoctrination into schools, I will not take it lying down. You want schools to teach Christianity? Fine, let's teach it exactly the same way we do ancient religions of Rome and Greece, as some quaint belief structure that any rational person today would laugh at, or the same way we do other modern world religions, simply describing its major tenets without advocating for it. You want to force kids to pray in school? Okay, but then they have to pray not only to your god, but also to Allah, and for good measure let's throw in Satan as well. To clarify, I have nothing against teaching about religion (using critical thinking skills to examine and compare different belief systems), but it is not a legitimate function of public schools to indoctrinate students with religion. If parents want religious instruction for their kids, they need to do that on their own damn time or send their kids to a private religious school. And yet, especially with Pence in place, I am afraid that the evangelicals are going to make a push to turn public schools into tax-supported religious schools with a side of actual academic studies. FFS, there is a reason we have separation of church and state, and that's because the state has no business getting involved in church stuff, and the church has no business getting involved in state affairs.

[aradia22]

So about Ivanka sitting in on meetings with foreign leaders... I've realized that I've gotten all distracted with the Hamilton stuff and stopped focusing on what shadiness might be happening in Trumpland. Then there's the Trump University settlement. People are talking about real vs. fake news. I don't think we've solved the problem of making sure the important stories are heard. 

[KIMBERLYANN11]

4 hours ago, BookWoman56 said:

I have made a vow to myself, that if Trump and his administration try to force religious indoctrination into schools, I will not take it lying down. You want schools to teach Christianity? Fine, let's teach it exactly the same way we do ancient religions of Rome and Greece, as some quaint belief structure that any rational person today would laugh at, or the same way we do other modern world religions, simply describing its major tenets without advocating for it. You want to force kids to pray in school? Okay, but then they have to pray not only to your god, but also to Allah, and for good measure let's throw in Satan as well. To clarify, I have nothing against teaching about religion (using critical thinking skills to examine and compare different belief systems), but it is not a legitimate function of public schools to indoctrinate students with religion. If parents want religious instruction for their kids, they need to do that on their own damn time or send their kids to a private religious school. And yet, especially with Pence in place, I am afraid that the evangelicals are going to make a push to turn public schools into tax-supported religious schools with a side of actual academic studies. FFS, there is a reason we have separation of church and state, and that's because the state has no business getting involved in church stuff, and the church has no business getting involved in state affairs.

They were, or maybe still are, looking at Betsy DeVos for Secretary of Education.  She sponsored a ballot proposal that would have decimated Michigan public schools with a voucher system that would funnel public money into religious schools.  The voters voted it down, back when Michigan voters had a brain.  Anyone who thinks she's a harmless RINO is sadly mistaken. 

Edited November 21, 2016 by KIMBERLYANN11
clarity

[jhlipton]

4 hours ago, aradia22 said:

So about Ivanka sitting in on meetings with foreign leaders... I've realized that I've gotten all distracted with the Hamilton stuff and stopped focusing on what shadiness might be happening in Trumpland. Then there's the Trump University settlement. People are talking about real vs. fake news. I don't think we've solved the problem of making sure the important stories are heard. 

There is speculation that Ivanka and her hubby will be running the WH while Trump does nothing.  She will almost certainly be Acting First Lady if nothing else.

This might actually be a Good Thing since she is smart and seems to be compassionate and understands maintaining a brand (which in America means looking out for everyone).

[Danny Franks]

1 hour ago, jhlipton said:

There is speculation that Ivanka and her hubby will be running the WH while Drumpf does nothing.  She will almost certainly be Acting First Lady if nothing else.

This might actually be a Good Thing since she is smart and seems to be compassionate and understands maintaining a brand (which in America means looking out for everyone).

I'm also pretty sure that is very, very against the law. No one elected either of these two. The only two candidates eligible to run the country are, god help everyone, Trump and Pence. If there is even a whiff that either of these two, or anyone else, are making or signing off on policy decisions, then Trump needs to be impeached and these two need to be charged with acting in breach of the constitution, or whatever the official term would be.

I understand it's also illegal for them to even hold positions at the White House, due to anti-nepotism laws. So Ivanka, Jared and however many other stooges there are bearing the Trump name need to be kicked out on their arses.

Quote

"A public official may not appoint, employ, promote, advance, or advocate for appointment, employment, promotion, or advancement, in or to a civilian position in the agency in which he is serving or over which he exercises jurisdiction or control any individual who is a relative of the public official."

That seems pretty clear to me.

The first lady thing? Well, whatever creepy fantasies Trump has, he can keep between him and his daughter.

Edited November 21, 2016 by Danny Franks

[fastiller]

1 hour ago, jhlipton said:

There is speculation that Ivanka and her hubby will be running the WH while Trump does nothing.  She will almost certainly be Acting First Lady if nothing else.

This might actually be a Good Thing since she is smart and seems to be compassionate and understands maintaining a brand (which in America means looking out for everyone).

It'd be fine for Ivanka to be 'acting first lady' as long as she & the entire Trump family are removed from running all companies they have any relationship with.  That includes her brothers, her husband, her in-laws, her mothers (all of them), etc...

As to @MulletorHater's suggestion re: the Constitution: YES!!! Do this.  Always have it on your person.

[Ocean Chick]

The only person in that entire cabinet who would want Christianity to be taught in schools is Mike Pence.  Trump is his own god, and Bannon has already been quoted as saying that Satan is one of his role models.  Newt definitely doesn't want Christian rules of monogamy to ruin whatever is left of his sex life.

And I think that Trump is determined to set up is own ruling dynasty, with Ivanka aiming to be the first female president.  That's why she and Jared are getting to sit in on meetings they have no business being in on, and Trump trying to get Jared the clearance to read all the papers and shite.  That way they are prepped whenever Trump decides to let go of the crown/dies.  Don't expect an election to actually happen in 4 years - there'll be a reason that they have to be cancelled (wars, or rumors of wars, civil unrest, martial law, The Orange Obscenity has a hang nail, etc).  That, or Donny Boy is actually expecting to dump the office, as he's realized that it's more work than he thought it would be, and he'll expect to skip right over Pence and hand the throne to Ivanka/Jared, so that he and his boys can continue to pick our pockets clean.

[random chance]

There are a lot of different Constitution phone apps for anyone who doesn't want to carry around a physical copy. I think I got that information on one of the threads here but I don't remember who posted it so, thanks whoever you are.

Would the Yamfuhrer's Nazi cabinet members really agree to be ruled by Ivanka? Isn't she Jewish?

For anyone looking to support a news outlet that won't normalize Trump, that's Slate's entire pitch: they won't normalize him and will hold him accountable. Details here.

[jhlipton]

1 hour ago, fastiller said:

It'd be fine for Ivanka to be 'acting first lady' as long as she & the entire Trump family are removed from running all companies they have any relationship with.  That includes her brothers, her husband, her in-laws, her mothers (all of them), etc...

Yeah, like that's going to happen.  Remember the number one rule in American politics: IOKIYAR (It's OK If You're A Republican).

[ari333]

What's next?

How long before rump wants his idiot face on every piece of money including the coins?

[izabella]

It's a start:

Clark introduces bill to ensure President-elect addresses conflicts of interest
http://katherineclark.house.gov/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=FE5B2F16-7591-41DC-9846-25FEA4D1CFA1

Quote

Washington, D.C. -- Congresswoman Katherine Clark has introduced legislation to ensure that U.S. Presidents are required to resolve any conflicts of interest with regard to financial interests and official responsibilities. Current law prohibits federal office holders from engaging in government business when they stand to gain profit. The President and Vice President are currently exempt from this statute. Clark’s Presidential Accountability Act removes this exemption and requires the President and Vice President to place their assets in a certified blind trust or disclose to the Office of Government Ethics and the public when they make a decision that affects their personal finances. This issue has been elevated to greater importance as concerns of conflicts of interest have surfaced in the first week of the President-elect’s transition period.

[NextIteration]

6 hours ago, KIMBERLYANN11 said:

They were, or maybe still are, looking at Betsy DeVos for Secretary of Education.  She sponsored a ballot proposal that would have decimated Michigan public schools with a voucher system that would funnel public money into religious schools.  The voters voted it down, back when Michigan voters had a brain.  Anyone who thinks she's a harmless RINO is sadly mistaken. 

They are looking at rotten Michelle Rhee and Eva Moskowitz (both corporatist Democrats) for Education as well.  Whatever we get - expect a voucher system and many many more corporate charter schools.

Here I thought my loathing of Arne Duncan couldn't get any worse.  I know it's selfish but thank go my kids are out of k-12 and now I'll only have to worry about how they are going to turn financial aid into a profit making piggy bank again.

Edited November 21, 2016 by NextIteration

[ari333]

22 minutes ago, izabella said:

It's a start:

Clark introduces bill to ensure President-elect addresses conflicts of interest
http://katherineclark.house.gov/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=FE5B2F16-7591-41DC-9846-25FEA4D1CFA1

A START!!!!!! Great! This may  not be impossible.

[Danny Franks]

1 minute ago, ari333 said:

A START!!!!!! Great! This may  not be impossible.

The thing is, Republicans are going to look terrible fighting against this. So it depends on whether they give a shit if America sees them as the bad guys. So far, they seem to have been happy (and right) to believe that their voters will forget the things they do when election time rolls around.

[ari333]

I wonder who will shoot Clark down, refuse support, and render the whole thing a lost cause

[izabella]

6 minutes ago, ari333 said:

A START!!!!!! Great! This may  not be impossible.

Yes, though I'm still waiting for any of the mainstream media to report on it.  NYT, WaPo, nothing.  Just the Boston Herald.

WaPo inserted a link to it, buried in a story about Trump's Washington hotel.  Needs to be front and center, not buried as a link!

Edited November 21, 2016 by izabella

[izabella]

6 minutes ago, ari333 said:

I wonder who will shoot Clark down, refuse support, and render the whole thing a lost cause

It's not likely to get through the House.

[ari333]

I thought for the longest time that the big complaint (from Rs) was that the media  "is so liberal." If so , why aren't all these negative R bits coming to light as headlines? Have things changes and I missed it?

[windsprints]

I called my district's congressmen asking that he support Katherine Clark's bill to ensure President-elect addresses conflicts of interest. It takes a minute; call your congressman.

[AntiBeeSpray]

13 minutes ago, ari333 said:

I thought for the longest time that the big complaint (from Rs) was that the media  "is so liberal." If so , why aren't all these negative R bits coming to light as headlines? Have things changes and I missed it?

Yea they always complain about that. Heck NPR and PBS used to be relatively balanced, but now they're more on the conservative side. So I don't pay attention to them nearly as much as I used to. I do every so often to see what the other side has to say, but a lot of times it just gives me a head ache.

[izabella]

14 minutes ago, windsprints said:

I called my district's congressmen asking that he support Katherine Clark's bill to ensure President-elect addresses conflicts of interest. It takes a minute; call your congressman.

Is your Congressman a Republican?  I'm assuming (hoping?) the Dems would support it, but without lots of Republicans supporting it, it won't pass the House.  Anyone with a Republican Congressional representative needs to have their Congressperson's office on speed dial the next four years.

[Padma]

They've GOT to hold him accountable. They've GOT to have some transparency over his finances.

I have zero confidence Republicans will let Clark's bill pass, but if they had an ounce of sense they would rein Trump in NOW before he gets in office and its too late.

[Nidratime]

1 hour ago, izabella said:

It's a start:

Clark introduces bill to ensure President-elect addresses conflicts of interest
http://katherineclark.house.gov/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=FE5B2F16-7591-41DC-9846-25FEA4D1CFA1

I can't believe the president and vice-president are exempt from these rules. Why have all previous presidents put their affairs in blind trusts? Is everything we’ve always relied upon to ensure the protection of this country only a manner of tradition and courtesy? If so, we're fools and deserve what we get.

[izabella]

1 minute ago, Nidratime said:

I can't believe the president and vice-president are exempt from these rules. Why have all previous presidents put their affairs in blind trusts? Is everything we’ve always relied upon to ensure the protection of this country only a manner of tradition and courtesy? If so, we're fools and deserve what we get.

Yes, all previous presidents respected the office and the country and the gravity of the position, and wanted to avoid conflict of interest.  But now, we have a president who has used loopholes and obfuscation to avoid paying taxes, so we will absolutely see him taking advantage of every loophole possible to enrich himself and his family at the expense of our country.

[ari333]

This  is getting more nauseating by the minute.

[Padma]

Wow, he summoned all the heavy hitters of the media to an off-the-record meeting at Trump Tower.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-network-anchors-meeting_us_583333f6e4b058ce7aac3fc0

I'll bet no one was aggressive with him at all, since he is reissuing press credentials and probably put them all on notice that if they don't "play nice" they could be frozen out.  (Any "unfriendly" press won't be called on anyway.) I wonder if Breitbart will get credentialed? I'll guess "yes".

How long before legislation that restricts the press?

[Duke Silver]

Don't worry folks, Reince Priebus has been all over the place, assuring people that Drumpf & Klan will "dot every i & cross every t" to ensure all "laws" are followed.  Of course, laws ≠ ethical constraint.  We are going to be bled dry by this corrupt administration, and strangely enough, that isn't even at the top of my concerns.  Neo-Nazis/white supremacists/the alt-right (whichever euphemism one wishes to use to describe that scum are ECSTATIC about this administration.  THINK ABOUT THAT.

[windsprints]

By all means let's consider putting someone in charge of security who can't even think to put papers in a folder.

https://t.co/S7OUfGDm1N

[partofme]

On 11/19/2016 at 0:29 AM, Pixel said:

I read that survey, but no way would I fill it out. I'm not giving my name to the GOP. 

I used a fake name.  Said not important to pretty much everything listed.

[fastiller]

3 hours ago, random chance said:

There are a lot of different Constitution phone apps for anyone who doesn't want to carry around a physical copy. I think I got that information on one of the threads here but I don't remember who posted it so, thanks whoever you are.

 

I noted it on one of my posts in one of the now-defunct threads.

I have the APP by Ken Hunt installed on my Android and I refer to it almost daily.  It's got tons of great other things like the Emancapation Proclamation, the Articles of Confederation, the Declaration of Independence, MLK's I Have A Dream, the Miranda Warning.  Also: a little bit about the timeline of the creation of the Constitution and typos within and failed amendments.  

[MulletorHater]

37 minutes ago, Duke Silver said:

Don't worry folks, Reince Priebus has been all over the place, assuring people that Drumpf & Klan will "dot every i & cross every t" to ensure all "laws" are followed.  Of course, laws ≠ ethical constraint.  We are going to be bled dry by this corrupt administration, and strangely enough, that isn't even at the top of my concerns.  Neo-Nazis/white supremacists/the alt-right (whichever euphemism one wishes to use to describe that scum are ECSTATIC about this administration.  THINK ABOUT THAT.

My contempt for Rancid Preibus has reached an all-time high.  As Huffington Post noted, he's nothing but the Normalizer-in-Chief.  Watching him dismiss concerns about Coral Caligula's numerous conflicts of interest and the Muslim registry sickens me.

[Rapunzel]

18 hours ago, ruby24 said:

I just called Paul Ryan's office to support the ACA. I hope everyone is doing that! The number is 1-202-225-0600. You press 2, listen to the propaganda message against it, then press 1 to support the law.

I've tried several times this morning and line has been busy - hopefully that is a good sign. Will keep trying.

[Hanahope]

So, I'm wondering if the House will impeach Trump if/when his business conflicts of interest are just too much.  Would they rather have Pence in charge, someone who's at least a rational politician and not likely to cause WW3 with a tweet?  Or would they prefer to have the media and public distracted by stories of Trump's tweet wars with SNL, Hamilton, etc., and thus they (and Pence) can implement their hard-right agenda without anyone paying attention?

[NextIteration]

6 minutes ago, Hanahope said:

So, I'm wondering if the House will impeach Trump if/when his business conflicts of interest are just too much.  Would they rather have Pence in charge, someone who's at least a rational politician and not likely to cause WW3 with a tweet?  Or would they prefer to have the media and public distracted by stories of Trump's tweet wars with SNL, Hamilton, etc., and thus they (and Pence) can implement their hard-right agenda without anyone paying attention?

The answer is no - they are all about at the bottom line all about the SCOTUS picks because in the end - that will keep them safe for at least another generation or two - with their upholding of Heller, continued dismantling of voting rights, overturning of marriage equality rights, upholding of Citizens United and overturning of Roe v Wade.

Yet one more thing that progressive purists that are white privileged assholes, never gave two fucks about.

Edited November 21, 2016 by NextIteration

[EyewatchTV211]

I called my congressman about Clark's bill. I've been trying to call the DOJ to ask them to audit the vote, but it's been nonstop busy signals. Guess I will try an email just in case I never get through.

[Rapunzel]

16 hours ago, Keepitmoving said:

Yeah, they don't have to show up.   It's about the SOTU, and the union coming together to listen to our leader address the country. It's respect for the House, the president is invited I believe by the speaker to address the nation. Well, that orange chimp has zapped the unity and respect right out of me. I listened to Bush Jr., and I always go back to him because that was too a controversial win with Gore. But I watched his inauguration and I listened to his SOTUA, every time because he was respectful and not cruel. He didn't act like he was doing us any favors by being president, it was his honor. But I won't be listening for this klan/nazi administration, fuck no. I will make that distinction, this "ain't" some sore loser shit, given the racial history in this country, the ultimate sin of slavery, to Jim Crow, to institutionalize racism that continues and this is the vile shit that the Rust Belt put into the Oval Office, yeah, OK. Fuck them, I hope if their towns have any left to lose, they lose it and fast. Those who didn't vote for Trump in those areas, I hope they are spared somehow, I'm not wishing any ill on them, good luck. But if you don't care about the kind of history I'm talking about that would make one not vote for Trump, then I can't care about his so called economic message and draining of the swamp, please. 

 And any democrat who wants to play nice and meet him half way, if I have the opportunity to vote for that democrat, I will vote them out of office. I'm tired of democrats and their bullshit, I'm with Michael Moore totally, obstruct, obstruct and if we find any of them voting with Trump and the republicans they are out. They might not have the votes, but their votes had better be on record as "NAY." This is exactly what the republicans did, they cleaned their own house first. 

I definitely don't plan on watching Trump's inauguration, his speech, his first SOTUA, or any public address he makes. I hope a lot of people do not tune in for his inauguration address and that it ends up being the lowest rated ever. Same with the SOTUA. This man needs an audience, he needs attention and he needs the spotlight. He needs to believe he is loved an adored. If we all refuse to tune into his inauguration, SOTUA, etc. and give him embarrassingly low ratings, it will most definitely bruise his ego and he'll go off on a Twitter rant (or lie and say it was the best, most watched, most loved speech in the history of the world - ever. So much better than any that Lincoln or FDR ever gave). Either way, let's not give this crybaby, misogynist, bigoted piece of shit any ratings and make it clear that we have no intention of listening to his hate speech, regardless of what spin he may try to put on it.

[jhlipton]

2 hours ago, izabella said:

Is your Congressman a Republican?  I'm assuming (hoping?) the Dems would support it, but without lots of Republicans supporting it, it won't pass the House.  Anyone with a Republican Congressional representative needs to have their Congressperson's office on speed dial the next four years.

My Three CongressWomen (sounds like a TV sitcom, doesn't it -- but my old Senator (Barbara Boxer),  my new Senator (Kamala Harris), my continuing Senator (Diane Feinstein) and my re-elected Representative (Linda Sanchez) are all pretty solid Dems.  I consider myself VERY lucky.

(I did contact Fienstein and Boxer to ask why they voted for the veto over-ride of the dumbass 9/11 Sue-The-Saudis bill but never got an answer.)

[EyewatchTV211]

2 hours ago, windsprints said:

By all means let's consider putting someone in charge of security who can't even think to put papers in a folder.

https://t.co/S7OUfGDm1N

And the bottom of the paper addresses: voter roll purge, NVRA amendments, other voting law changes

Homeland Security how? Ugh.

AND CAN WE PLEASE INVESTIGATE THE VOTES??? New information: Outagamie County, WI - 4 precincts hv more votes for prez than ballots cast Hortonville, more votes than reg voters. 1paper precinct=HRC win

If you live in these states, CALL and get people you know to call: Democrats up and down the ballot should demand an election audit in WI, MI, FL, NC & PA. Especially PA, which has a D gov. They are not.

Edited November 21, 2016 by VMepicgrl

[Duke Silver]

https://twitter.com/davidmackau/status/800815261267980288

Quote

The US Holocaust museum has released a statement calling on all Americans to "confront racist thinking and divisive hateful speech" 

 

[EyewatchTV211]

More specifics related to why we need to challenge the vote: http://m.dailykos.com/stories/2016/11/20/1602092/-HRC-Campaign-Please-challenge-the-vote-in-4-States-as-the-data-says-you-won-NC-PA-WI-FL

http://crooksandliars.com/2016/11/fair-election-serious-questions-arise - I hope they DO challenge. Not sure why they are just considering it. 

Edited November 21, 2016 by VMepicgrl

[Duke Silver]

Video from the Pro-Trump Nazi rally included in this Atlantic article:

https://twitter.com/andrewmcgill/status/800823669500936192

**There's so much I wish to express after viewing things like that, but I'm guessing it would get me banned.  I'm not normally a violent person, but I'm also not a shrinking flower.  This is what Drumpf supporters voted into office.

[EyewatchTV211]

This seems to have snuck by without much coverage http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/lgbt-workplace-discrimination-ndaa_us_573cd273e4b0aee7b8e8e176

And Trump is proposing getting rid of overtime pay. Hope no one here relies on that. Too bad for the 20 million who do. :-(

[windsprints]

removed, should not post when upset.

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims... but accomplices”

― George Orwell

His supporters are his accomplices.

Edited November 21, 2016 by windsprints

[Duke Silver]

https://twitter.com/BrendanNyhan/status/800493448793038848

Quote

Important for everyone to see how many scholars/journalists who study illiberal/authoritarian regimes are deeply alarmed about US right now

https://twitter.com/voxdotcom/status/800833689068470272

Quote

Bernie Sanders said he would work with Donald Trump. Then he saw his infrastructure plan. http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/21/13708244/bernie-sanders-trump-infrastructure-plan?

 

Quote

Sanders’s tone changed; he tweeted that the president-elect’s plan for infrastructure is a “scam,” proving just how difficult working with a Trump administration will be in practice

[NextIteration]

Any Democrat that supports anything that follows tRump's thinking should be drowned from so-called  swamp.  But no, tRump is inviting every fucking lobbyist in to play.

No matter how unethical.

But his idiot supporters will continue to support shit against their own self  own interest.  They are all gung-ho about dismantling the FLSA. Heilmann and many other's are screwed, as is the American public.  Consolations to all the  young women that experienced this heinous behavior,.

I know all about the men's movement - these folks are so proud to represent them.

[windsprints]

https://twitter.com/drewharwell/status/800837269502365696

Quote

Ivanka, head of Trump business empire, joined dad in talks with leaders of Japan & Argentina http://bit.ly/2fLOXdl http://wapo.st/2fLNp2U

 

Edited November 22, 2016 by Lisin
Removed twitter embed

[Duke Silver]

What world are we living in?

https://twitter.com/colinjones/status/800822032535470080

It's video, Re: alt-right.  Just watch if you want.

[EyewatchTV211]

https://delbene.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/delbene-introduces-bill-prohibit-religious-registry

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Padma said:

They've GOT to hold him accountable. They've GOT to have some transparency over his finances.

 

But...they don't. Those congressmen have to be reelected and when they go home to wherever they're from and if they aren't seen as sufficiently pro-Trump, and trust me, voting for any sort of legislation that holds his grift accountable will be perceived as a slight against their Orange Overlord, these guys will be primaried by some other purist loon and they will lose. They aren't in Congress to serve the will of the people - they're in Congress to serve the will of their checkbooks and retirement accounts. 

There will be absolutely no checks and balances on this guy. None. Zero. They will let him get away with anything and everything. There is no recourse. We need to get used to that idea -- for at least two years, and likely many more.

Edited November 22, 2016 by Guest

[izabella]

2 hours ago, Duke Silver said:

https://twitter.com/BrendanNyhan/status/800493448793038848

https://twitter.com/voxdotcom/status/800833689068470272

 

I keep wondering why it's being called the "infrastructure" plan.  Why isn't it being called his first corporate tax cut, the first corporate tax cut of many in his future plans?