Happy 17 Donald! Ooops I meant 71! You 71yo newbie you!

WATCH what GOP did in the #Clinton investigation when witnesses refused to answer questions but didn

WATCH what GOP did in the #Clinton investigation when witnesses refused to answer questions but didn’t assert exec. priv. #SessionsHearing

https://twitter.com/OversightDems/status/874744557082116097


edit:

Question submitted by Madam45for2923

Question submitted by Madam45for2923

The possibility that Donald committed a federal crime by lying 2 Comey ab his connections 2 Russia

Did one phone call by Trump expand the investigation?

That is what Noah Feldman of Bloomberg argues in Comey Opens Door to Investigate Trump Dossier, which has a subtitle of “It's not clear the special counsel had authority to investigate the president personally. He does now.”

For background on Feldman, his bio on that page notes that he
is a professor of constitutional and international law at Harvard University and was a clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Justice David Souter.
Thus one may want to pay close attention to his legal analysis.

He begins by writing

Hiding in plain sight in former FBI Director James Comey’s testimony Thursday before the Senate Intelligence Committee is a potentially major new avenue for special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of Russia-related crimes: the possibility that President Donald Trump committed a federal crime by lying to Comey about his connections to Russia and activities on his 2013 visit there.

The key on this is the phone call where Trump, unsolicited, calls Comey and says that he had nothing to do with hookers — remember the allegation in the Steel dossier.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2017/6/9/1670236/-Did-one-phone-call-by-Trump-expand-the-investigation?detail=emaildkre

Journalists Resource Research on Today's News topics

Interesting website: https://journalistsresource.org/

Here some of their articles and links:


Fake news and the spread of misinformation
https://journalistsresource.org/studies/society/internet/fake-news-conspiracy-theories-journalism-research


Body camera footage suggests police treat black drivers with less respect
https://journalistsresource.org/studies/government/criminal-justice/police-body-cameras-black-drivers-respect

Public assistance seems to help drug offenders stay away from crime
https://journalistsresource.org/studies/government/criminal-justice/public-assistance-food-stamps-drugs-crime


A journalist’s murder may foreshadow political repression
https://journalistsresource.org/studies/society/news-media/murdered-journalist-political-repression-human-rights


MOre info on the website:

The site is run by faculty, staff and graduate students at Harvard Kennedy School as part of the Carnegie-Knight Initiative on the Future of Journalism Education. In addition to providing access to scholarly reports and papers on a wide range of topics, we author syllabi for educators and skills-based reference material.

Is the president breaking his oath to protect and defend the country from foreign attacks?

I was an FBI agent. Trump’s lack of concern about Russian hacking shocks me.
Is the president breaking his oath to protect and defend the country from foreign attacks?

by. Asha Rangappa is an associate dean at Yale Law School.

SNIP/
But as a former FBI counterintelligence agent, what I saw as the most explosive aspect of the testimony didn’t involve any legal violation of the U.S. code or questions about whether Comey had broken established Department of Justice protocols. Instead, it was the prima facie evidence that Comey presented that Trump appears unwilling to uphold his oath “to preserve, protect, and defend” the country — which puts the security of our nation and its democracy at stake. In the nine times Trump met with or called Comey, it was always to discuss how the investigation into Russia’s election interference was affecting him personally, rather than the security of the country. He apparently cared little about understanding either the magnitude of the Russian intelligence threat, or how the FBI might be able to prevent another attack in future elections.

When Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) asked Comey whether Trump had ever appeared concerned about Russian interference or how to stop it in the future, Comey’s answer was blunt: “No.” After a moment of reflection, he added, without prompting, that he had “attended a fair number of meetings on that with President Obama.” This contrast alone underscores Trump’s disregard for his fundamental duty, which is to ensure the security of the nation, its government and its citizens from foreign enemies.


It’s worth noting that there is unanimity among senior intelligence officials that the Russian interference in our election not only happened, but that it was extraordinary and unprecedented. In previous testimony, Comey described Russia as the “greatest threat of any country on earth,” and he warned Thursday that Russia is “coming after America,” regardless of party, “to undermine our credibility in the rest of the world.”

Former CIA director John Brennan testified to Congress in May that he was shocked that Russia had “brazenly interfered” in the election, so much so that he took the extraordinary step of directly confronting his Russian counterpart. He added that he believes that even in the election’s aftermath, “Russian intelligence services are trying to exploit what is going on in Washington now to their benefit and to our detriment.”

It does not require an FBI investigation to see that a president of the United States who finds no reason for concern in any of these assertions — and indeed considers them a “hoax” — cannot have the best interest of the country at heart.


The FBI takes its counterintelligence mission extremely seriously, although it’s usually less visible to the public than its law enforcement duties, which lead to arrests and criminal trials. Most of these activities, like the foreign agents they target, are by design covert, and they rarely see the inside of a courtroom. Many of the cases I worked as a counterintelligence agent involved foreign intelligence officers who used First Amendment and political freedoms in the United States to their advantage. This might involve disseminating propaganda by recruiting journalists (who did not realize they were spies) to write articles favorable to their government, or getting agents working on their behalf to lobby politicians for favorable policies toward their countries. (A rare glimpse into such a case that became public is the 2011 arrest of Syed Ghulam Nabi Fai, a lobbyist who pleaded guilty to conspiracy charges after the government accused him of being an agent for Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence Directorate.)

END SNIP/



more...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/06/10/i-was-an-fbi-agent-trumps-lack-of-concern-about-russian-hacking-shocks-me/?utm_term=.f9a9afe984ca

Obamacare appears to save a Millennial's life every day

Obamacare appears to save a Millennial’s life every day

By David Trilling

One provision of the Affordable Care Act – the health legislation popularly known as Obamacare – allows young people, aged 19 to 25, to be covered by their parents’ health-insurance plans. The provision is called dependent-care coverage and prior to September 2010, when it came into effect, this age group had one of the highest uninsured rates in the United States. Around 30 percent of these young men and women were uninsured, compared to 16 percent of all Americans, on average.

A new study looks at how this single provision may save hundreds of lives a year.

An academic study worth reading: “The Affordable Care Act’s Dependent-Care Coverage and Mortality,” in Medical Care, 2017.

Study summary: When the ACA dependent-care provision came into effect, coverage rates for this age group rose significantly; 6.6 million individuals gained insurance, according to Census Bureau data.

Chandler McClellan, a health economist at the U.S. government agency that works on substance abuse and mental health, wanted to know if this policy change saved lives — in part, as a way of assessing the value of health insurance coverage for policymakers.

He used government data on causes of death from 2008 to 2013, a period that included the adoption of the ACA, and chose individuals aged 19-30. This allowed McClellan to compare the affected group (those aged 19-25) with a natural control unaffected by the coverage expansion: those aged 26-30.

McClellan focused on disease-related mortality, since these conditions are often treatable, yet he also considered other causes of death “to fully examine the potential effects of the dependent coverage provision.”

His findings suggest that, with insurance, young people are going to the doctor more and getting treatment for conditions before they become fatal.

Key takeaways:

The dependent-care provision was associated with a 6.1 percent decline in disease-related deaths after the provision went into effect – about 30 fewer deaths per month or 357 per year – among Americans aged 19-25.
“Most of the lives saved are due to reductions in deaths related to cardiovascular, cancer, and other disease-related causes.”

The dependent-care provision did not significantly impact deaths from other causes, such as accidents, which remain a more frequent cause of death for this age group. Federal law requires emergency rooms to treat emergencies regardless of one’s insurance. McClellan found no change in death rates from trauma, suggesting “that it is the health insurance expansion that is driving the reduction in disease-related deaths.”

In both age groups, men, white people and non-Hispanics make up a larger share of deaths.

“Men experienced the largest reductions in overall disease-related and cancer-related mortality, with 8.1 percent and 12.2 percent reductions, respectively, while cardiovascular deaths [such as heart attacks] among women fell by 11.7 percent.”

White people, overall, experienced a 14.6 percent decline in cardiovascular mortality.
McClellan expects “larger declines in mortality later” because medical care has a cumulative effect; “chronic diseases become better managed” when people have health insurance.

Though the author cautions that he cannot prove causality, he says he cannot identify other factors that explain these results.


more... https://journalistsresource.org/studies/government/health-care/obamacare-millennials-save-lives-death

About Tulsi's Gabbard, we needs to discuss!

She did some actions and has some history that needs to be discussed.

In Sharing Memos, Comey Did Nothing Wrong as a Former Official and Everything Right as a Whistleblow

In Sharing Memos, Comey Did Nothing Wrong as a Former Official and Everything Right as a Whistleblower



Snip/

The notion that Comey confessed to something untoward yesterday by acknowledging that he shared memos with a confidant and directed their disclosure to press sources is getting quite a bit of traction, particularly in conservative media. Trump’s personal lawyer, Marc Kasowitz, accused Comey of “leaks of [] privileged information” and went so far as to suggest that “the appropriate authorities” might determine there was criminal conduct worthy of investigation. Kasowitz has now indicated that he plans to file a complaint with the Justice Department’s Office of the Inspector General on Comey’s disclosure of the memo. (It’s not clear what the result of such an investigation would be given that Comey is no longer a government official.)


There’s just one problem with this line of critique: Comey didn’t actually do anything wrong. In fact, there is nothing to suggest his actions were illegal, unethical, immoral, or otherwise inappropriate.

Let’s start with a bit of background. On February 14—the day after National Security Advisor Michael Flynn had been forced to resign—President Trump had a disturbing, and possibly criminal, conversation with the FBI Director. After pointedly dismissing other advisors and senior officials from the Oval Office, Trump told Comey, “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.” Comey told the committee that he “took [this comment] as a direction” to drop the investigation into Flynn and memorialized his alarming conversation with Trump in an unclassified memo, sharing the details with FBI senior leadership. The group was “shocked” and “troubled” but, without any way to corroborate the one-on-one conversation, they struggled with what to do about it.


Article continues: https://lawfareblog.com/sharing-memos-comey-did-nothing-wrong-former-official-and-everything-right-whistleblower