The long nightmare has just begun: Inauguration of a fraud.

[kmoney]

Swamp? What swamp?

In unusual vote that began before dawn, Congress kills rule forcing payment disclosures by companies

Rex Tillerson Tried to Get This Rule Killed. Now Congress Is About to Do It for Him

Should oil companies disclose payments to foreign governments? The GOP, and former Exxon CEO, think not.

The leader of the world’s most valuable company doesn’t typically fly to Washington to fight one obscure amendment to a 2,300-page bill, especially a motherhood-and-apple-pie-style amendment designed to prevent and expose corruption abroad. But back in 2010, ExxonMobil’s then-CEO, Rex Tillerson, was deeply worried about Section 1504 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street reforms, a bipartisan amendment that required drilling and mining companies to disclose any payments they make to foreign governments. So Tillerson and one of his lobbyists paid a half-hour visit to the amendment’s Republican co-author, then-Senator Richard Lugar, to try to get it killed.

Tillerson argued that forcing U.S. oil firms to reveal corporate secrets—such as paying foreign governments—would put them at a competitive disadvantage. He also explained that the provision would make it especially difficult for Exxon to do business in Russia, where, as he did not need to explain, the government takes a rather active interest in the oil industry. But Lugar believed greater transparency could help alleviate the “resource curse” of corruption that plagues so many mineral-rich countries, so he told Tillerson they would have to agree to disagree. Section 1504 stayed in the bill, the bill became law, and the disclosure requirement became an international example: France, Canada and the United Kingdom all went on to use it as a model for similar rules.

Today, seven years later, Republicans confirmed Tillerson as President Trump’s secretary of state, despite allegations that he’s too cozy with Russia. At the same time, the GOP is preparing to try to kill the disclosure rule created under Section 1504, despite warnings from international aid groups that the move would provide a wink-and-nod blessing to hidden corporate payments to petro-thugs. The House is expected to act this afternoon, and since the move relies on a special mechanism for reversing rules enacted late in a presidential term, Senate Republicans will need a mere majority rather than a filibuster-proof 60 votes to follow suit.

So after all of Trump’s promises to drain the swamp, an anti-anti-corruption bill pushed by Big Oil and his own top diplomat might be the first policy legislation to reach his desk.​

Thanks for posting that. I had tried to read more about this because I wasn't really understanding the need for this rule or how it would help prevent corruption. The part in bold helps a little bit. I often get frustrated with news about various regulations because if there isn't sufficient information about what the regulation does then it's hard to form an opinion.

Same goes for the stream protection rule in your next post. I'm generally in favor of environmental rules but some critics argue that there are already rules in place that cover it so this is an unnecessary rule that just adds an extra burden. I don't have enough info to know which is true.

 

[Town Heretic]

All the cuckservatives can hate Trump all they want

Waay too narrow a gate there, captain, but awfully Alt White of you to say so.

- it makes our job easier and exposes them

Oh, great. Another guy at TOL looking for work. :mmph:

The biggest reason for the Right losing in the first place is because of these people, not liberals.

No, the problem the right has is historical. History moves the social/political expectations and the hard right does its best to stop that from happening, to preserve the status quo. Now in many cases that preservation is embraced, but unfortunately for the Right it doesn't do the best job of picking and choosing, tending to hold onto everything, and if you're off on an important enough issue or issues, you begin to age. Your base is getting old and it's losing the battle for youth by a wide margin.

You think liberals and their insane, fanatical, lying, slandering crap just takes over on it's own?

I think part of the problem, one reason you're a dinosaur in need of EC gerrymandering to pull a technical coup on the American people is aptly summed in your approach to opposing ideology. It's hard to appeal to optimistic, enthusiastic kids with that sort of rabid demonization. And then you get a little power and what do you do? Off the top you've told Big Coal to start dumping in streams again and made it possible now for the mentally ill to start purchasing handguns.

You might as well be selling ad space on the walls of Congress for the DNC.

Now write something else to double down on my point about why you're losing the kids.

:nono: You retards usher the door.

That'll do. :thumb:

 

[Crucible]

I think part of the problem, one reason you're a dinosaur in need of EC gerrymandering to pull a technical coup on the American people is aptly summed in your approach to opposing ideology.

I'd rather have the EC decide on a virtually split country than on the basis of morons. A couple million people is not a large majority any more than a cup out of a bathtub- pooling people by lies and slander makes for a country built on lies and slander.

But that doesn't matter to you at all- you'll ride that small majority to the ends of the Earth because you don't care about a responsible democracy :wave2:

 

[Town Heretic]

I'd rather have the EC decide on a virtually split country than on the basis of morons

First it's funny that you likely don't know why what you just wrote was funny. Secondly, rather? You rather have to if you want to win nationally.

A couple million people is not a large majority

Around three million at last county. Larger than the populations of a great many towns and cities and, more importantly, a majority.

But I can just see you know, watching your local team lose by a fg and arguing that recording it as a win is fair given the relatively small difference in points and the indisputable fact that most of the members of your team came from some distance.

pooling people by lies and slander makes for a country built on lies and slander.

Which would be some point were it a) objectively true and b) demonstrably so. Being neither, it's mostly proof of what you're willing to say.

But that doesn't matter to you at all

No. How you feel about your irrationality doesn't matter to me in the least.

you'll ride that small majority to the ends of the Earth because you don't care about a responsible democracy

To bookend then, it's funny that you don't know why what you just wrote was funny. To which I'd add, and more than a little sad.

 

[Crucible]

Around three million at last county. Larger than the populations of a great many towns and cities and, more importantly, a majority.

It wasn't a sufficient recount, so that number is merely just an addition your liberal media just didn't have enough integrity to leave alone

A democracy isn't defined as 51/50 majority rule- a democracy defines it's rules on what is fair. And this country determined that you need a 75% vote to overturn the EC and it's purpose thereof, so there you go. Rent some billboards and get crackin' :wave2:

 

[ok doser]

While back on my Hitler notice...different part, same dead eye, humorless stare. Same sense that this is the face they'd make at the Chuckle Hut's open mic night.

View attachment 25259 View attachment 25260\
Given the alt right business, you have to wonder if someone at Time had the same idea.

makes me think of:

 

[annabenedetti]

Obama was a Dem and had eight years. Doesn't that count.

I think you may have misunderstood me. You said the Dems were whining, and by my response I meant that the GOP had had eight years to whine about Obama so now it seems fair for the GOP to understand that turn about is fair play. If they could do it for eight years about Obama, why wouldn't they expect the other side to do the same when the GOP holds the office? Seems kind of like the way politics goes these days. It's more polarized than I've ever seen it.

 

[annabenedetti]

Waay too narrow a gate there, captain, but awfully Alt White of you to say so.

One of the members of the alt-right reddit group was very upfront about the racism of alt-righters:

The community is part of the self-described alt-right, a fringe conservative movement with links to white supremacy. LetThereBeWhite, a moderator of /r/altright, posted a message to new subscribers to the subreddit (accessed via a cached version) saying that "the Alt Right is a racial movement and has always been a racial movement... The mainstream media was not lying to you when they said we are full of white nationalists, racial realists and fascists."



​

That's not a claim from outside the group - that's a declaration of identity coming from inside the group.


And "cuck" and "cuckservative" are about the dumbest words out there at the moment. Users of them sound like fourth-graders practicing their cussing so they can sound tough on the playground, but not quite getting the words right. Oh, but they're tough all right... :chuckle:

 

[annabenedetti]

I was going to reply to one of your Time Magazine/Bannon posts but this ties in to what I was going to say also...

I heard an interview about Bannon with someone from Time and one thing I thought was interesting is that Bannon was critical of how banks got off the hook during the financial crisis. His father's retirement took a major hit and the banking CEOs got off clean. I think they even said Bannon used to be a Democrat. I just looked him up on Wiki and it says his parents at least were Democrats. His criticism of the banking industry could make him more in line with someone like Bernie. It is also evidence that Bannon's influence with Trump only goes so far. Bannon may not be on board with the Dodd-Frank reversals or some of the appointments that Trump has made. Bannon's influence is more on the foreign policy/immigration side.

Beyond that, the person being interviewed also said that he doesn't see Bannon as being a white supremacist or anti-semite but that Bannon has used their energy and motivation.

Hi kmo, thanks for your replies, I want to answer this more later on tonight, I've had a pretty busy day and not finished with it yet. I've got more about Bannon and I just need to find it but as I recall, he was quite upfront about Breitbart being the voice for the alt right. He has to be aware of what they are and what they stand for, so I think there's more there than simply his using their energy and motivation. I'll be back later tonight with some more on that and also on the coal mining regulations, and I appreciate your thoughts.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Repented.

 

[Town Heretic]

It wasn't a sufficient recount,

Talk to the winner, who sent a flock of lawyers to make certain that it wasn't larger while insisting on a wide ranging fraud with no factual support.

A democracy isn't defined as 51/50 majority rule- a democracy defines it's rules on what is fair.

Guess how it does that. lain:

And this country determined that you need a 75% vote to overturn the EC and it's purpose thereof, so there you go.

When I contest that he failed to win the EC you'll have something

 

[Crucible]

Guess how it does that. lain:

In the Founding Father's time, democracy was defined as all parties present at a congregation- or a moot of sorts- to discuss the next leadership.

Are you really prepared to say they dictated that by a rigid 51/49 vote?

:chuckle:

 

[Town Heretic]

In the Founding Father's time, democracy was defined as all parties present at a congregation- or a moot of sorts- to discuss the next leadership.

Are you really prepared to say they dictated that by a rigid 51/49 vote?

The easy rebuttal is, "Oh NOW you're comfortable with a minority telling you what to do."


More seriously, I support the Republic and hardened restrictions that protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority and makes the undoing of that a Herculean task. And when it comes to the president representing the people I support a system where that voice is best heard and represented, subject to those same restraints. But to answer the point directly, I'm more prepared than I would be to see the country under the dictates of the 49.

 

[Ktoyou]

I just can't get myself to say "President Trump ".

You said it, radiclib :loser:

 

[Crucible]

The easy rebuttal is, "Oh NOW you're comfortable with a minority telling you what to do."

This government was founded by a bunch of educated conservative white guys- this country is now being ransacked by people who hate educated, conservative white guys.

I'm sorry your perspective is so flawed- how is it that you're 40 or 50 something, and tomorrow is my 29th birthday lain:
Instead of the young learning from the old, the old are learning from the new- stop defending college hipsters, and listen to our ancestors.

 

[Crucible]

I just can't get myself to say "President Trump ". In Obama, we had a REAL President, like him or not . I can't believe he's no longer President.

:rotfl:

 

[ok doser]

sounds like someone needs a puppy

 

[Town Heretic]

This government was founded by a bunch of educated conservative white guys

Sure. That's who had the power here.

- this country is now being ransacked by people who hate educated, conservative white guys.

No, but I understand you feel that way.

Instead of the young learning from the old, the old are learning from the new

The young almost always believe that until they outgrow it.

- stop defending college hipsters, and listen to our ancestors.

College educated men, like our founders, would know better than to rest their assumptions on an appeal to tradition. Absent reason, that's just a bad habit.

 

[ok doser]

College educated men, like our founders, would know better than to rest their assumptions on an appeal to tradition. Absent reason, that's just a bad habit.

time was, college educated men understood that all knowledge, all wisdom derives from God and the tradition of His revealed Word


today's "educated" man rejects that and instead relies on his own "reason"

 

[Crucible]

Town Heretic is serving two masters.

No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one and love the other; or else, he will hold to the one and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.