Don't flog me, but did I just hear this right?

[sarah FAILIN]

I was half listening to Stein stammer on CNN but when it started I thought the host said the 2nd campaign Mueller was looking at beside Trump was Clintons. Is this true?
Again, please don't shoot me I'm hoping someone else has another answer.

[guillaumeb]

1. I heard that the GOP intends to look at the Clinton campaign in 2018.

Yes, another investigation.

[sarah FAILIN]

2. This is insanity.

Down is up, up is down

[guillaumeb]

3. Agreed, it is insane.

But 32% of voters still like Trump.

[sarah FAILIN]

4. The ones I know are starting to wake up

The tax plan is more than they expected.

[guillaumeb]

5. On the GOP tax plan:

Speaking personally:

In 2016, the standard exemption for a married couple was $12,600.
The personal exemption was $4,050 per person. So, for a family of 3, that becomes a combined exemption of $24,750.

So under the new law, my former $24,750 drops to $24,000. That translates into an additional $750 in my income being subject to taxes.

For a family of 4 or more, add an additional $4,050 for each qualified dependent.

So a family with 3 children will see an additional $12,150 in income being subject to taxes.

Surprise, Trump voters!!!!!!!!!!! Enjoy your tax increase.

[Kirk Lover]

6. Between this and their health care you damn skippy a blue tsunami is a coming.

[sarah FAILIN]

7. They were looking at the child credit like it was above the personal exemption

That is 2k per kid. My coworkers would be losing slightly less than 3k in deductions counting the child credit.
A family north of us just had sextuplets..6 on top of the 3 they already had. Someone said aren't they lucky to get 2 k for each of their kids. When I proved what the current exemption is, nobody said anything else. That family will lose over 15k in deductions alone

[Captain Stern]

18. I don't think that's how it works.

Deductions, whether standard or itemized, and the exemptions that will be gone, are subtracted from your gross income to determine the amount of your income that is subject to income tax. Credits are applied directly to the amount of tax that you would owe after exemptions and deductions are taken into consideration.

So, a family that has six children actually subtracts $12,000 from their tax liability. If their total tax liability before taking the credits is less than $12,000, they can actually get a 'refund' of $1,400 which would essentially mean they paid zero income tax, and got money.

[sarah FAILIN]

8. Forgot the best part..

I figured all their deductions then did my own and I as the only dem was the only one doing better with the new plan

[guillaumeb]

12. The law of unintended consequences.

I would let your co-workers know about this.

[BumRushDaShow]

9. You are supposed to make up for that with tithing... err

"charitable deductions".

[guillaumeb]

13. With a median income around $42,000,

how much can any worker give?

[BumRushDaShow]

14. Believe it or not

but I remember seeing stats that often the bottom income brackets actually gave higher percentages of their income to charity/house of worship than the higher brackets.

After the last recession, the stats were pretty stark and telling -

In a report released today, the Chronicle of Philanthropy found that Americans who earned at least $200,000 gave nearly 5% less to charity in 2012 than in 2006.

Higher-income people tend to give proportionately less during tough economic times, says Stacy Palmer, editor of the Chronicle of Philanthropy. “The downturn was a shock to so many of them, and they’ve been nervous and cautious,” she says.

<...>

Unlike their wealthier counterparts, low- and middle-income Americans — those who made less than $100,000 — gave 5% more in 2012 than in 2006, the Chronicle found. The poorest Americans — those who took home $25,000 or less — increased their giving by nearly 17%.

“Lower and middle-income people know people who lost their jobs or are homeless, and they worry that they themselves are a day away from losing their jobs. They’re very sensitive to the needs of other people and recognize that these years have been hard,” Palmer says.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/katiasavchuk/2014/10/06/wealthy-americans-are-giving-less-of-their-incomes-to-charity-while-poor-are-donating-more/#1de131d11264

[Captain Stern]

19. In your example, there's not a tax increase.

You're correct in pointing out that the elimination of the personal exemptions more than cancels out the benefit of the increased standard deduction, and that disparity widens with each additional child. However, you seem to be ignoring that the tax credit for each child increases from $1400 to $2000. That means that after you calculate how much tax you owe, you subtract $2000 (instead of $1400) from that amount to get your final number.

The new tax bill is not a good thing, but this example isn't a reason why. Bottom line is that most people are going to pay less in federal income taxes over the next few years, but it's going to cost our country far more than it's worth.

[guillaumeb]

20. True, if your dependents are under 18.

Otherwise it is an increase in the amount of income subject to taxation.

[Nevernose]

10. Its hilarious!

They are launching, according to what I heard on CNN from a GOP asshole, an investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails.

Her fucking emails!

But her emails! Lock her up!

And I find the whole thing literally laugh out loud funny. Ridiculously absurd. Absurdist absurd.

Not absurd funny like Monty Python, unfortunately. It’s absurd funny as in a Waiting for Godot “life is meaningless, if there IS a God he’s a useless dick, the only rational decision is suicide which is inherently NOT rational, and look at those two assholes running in circles but at least they’re doing something” sort of funny.

Granted, maybe not a humorous outlook to most people and certainly not a happy kind of ironic situation...

[smirkymonkey]

17. Honestly, WTF?

Haven't they already gone through this issue with a fine-toothed comb? What possible reason could their be for this? Hillary is not in office, she is not running for office - you are right, this is ridiculously absurd!!

All I can think of is that stirring up Hillary hate is what gets their base motivated. It's absolutely insane!

[R B Garr]

21. +1, and this all is heating up now that Franken is leaving! They just were

gifted with a carte blanche go-ahead with all their kooky crusades because one of their most critical questioners has been disabled. It's party time for the GOP. No questions asked, just run your show!

It is absurd, the whole thing is just a big effing sick joke. But Hilllary!

[lapucelle]

11. At this point, it's speculation,

although it wouldn't be surprising based on right wing disinformation about the Steele dossier and the fact that Republicans need a distraction, and nothing distracts like a fake Clinton scandal.

It could be, however, that they are investigating an entirely different campaign that took place in 2016. I'm hoping it's Dana Rohrabacher's reelection run.

[wishstar]

15. Senate Intelligence Committee is looking at potential Stein collusion with Russia

and the funding of Steele Dossier by Clinton Campaign.

Has been all over the news this week that Sen. Burr announced they were looking at 2 other campaigns besides Trump's and specifically the Stein campaign. Here is Dec 19 article"


By The Washington Post
WASHINGTON - The Senate Intelligence Committee is looking at the presidential campaign of the Green Party's Jill Stein for potential "collusion with the Russians," a sign that the panel's probe is far from over, even as allegations swirl that the House Intelligence Committee's investigation is racing to a close.

Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., told reporters Monday that the Senate Intelligence Committee has "two other campaigns that we're just starting on," in addition to the panel's ongoing probe of alleged ties between the Trump administration and Kremlin officials. One of those he identified as Stein's; Burr has indicated previously that the committee is also looking into reports that the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign paid for research that went into a dossier detailing allegations of Donald Trump's 2013 exploits in Moscow.

Stein was present at a 2015 dinner in Moscow that was also attended by Trump's former national security adviser, Michael Flynn, whose contacts with Russian officials have been a chief focus of congressional investigators and Special Counsel Robert Mueller's probe. Flynn and Stein were photographed at the same table as Russian President Vladimir Putin, who sat next to Flynn and across the table from Stein."

http://www.syracuse.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/12/jill_stein_russia_collusion_senate_investigation.html

[sarah FAILIN]

16. Thank you

I took it to mean they were accusing Clinton of collusion too. I'm glad I misunderstood but I wonder if they meant to confuse people on that.
I don't care if Clinton personally counted and hand rolled pennies she had been saving since she was a kid to pay for the oppo research, that is not an issue for me.