"Western Growers Association Blocking E-Verify Bill" https://t.co/W5oHAUUOxp They seem to have gotten to Profile-in-Courage Jeff Denham, even though he helped write the bill https://t.co/B0MnE3FW4u
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 24, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
Where’s E-Verify? https://t.co/hbmtHndhTt
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 24, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
Lively debate on construction wages in my notifications https://t.co/FHFmDHFqod Seems to be an issue people know about. Most say immigration has driven wages down. Not many fans of Peri's "complementarity" arguments.
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 24, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
Lively debate on construction wages in my notifications https://t.co/FHFmDHFqod Seems to be an issue people know about. Most say immigration has driven wages down. Not many fans of Peri's "complementarity" arguments.
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 24, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
Not restored all the way https://t.co/t2CEBnuVWb https://t.co/1PUom8weSb
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 23, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
Claim: Was $20/hr. Now $11/hr. https://t.co/x8QVMiBQQh
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 23, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
Spoiler: Difference is 5%. https://t.co/5habtOOMFQ
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 23, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
This excerpt, at least, does not back the Diaz-Balart/@frontlinepbs claim that House (with Ryan's help) was about to pass huge secret amnesty bill until Cantor was beaten. https://t.co/bAjOL8jOII Always suspected that was a bit of a fantasy (though beating Cantor nailed coffin)
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 23, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
Didn't the @NYTimes mean to say that it speculates that Charlie Savage was the author of this piece? https://t.co/c8ca4RzK2v
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 23, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
Why not? It's a free country, @FredWertheimer to the contrary notwithstanding. I do it all the time. https://t.co/PyLJi2Vnei
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 22, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
You mean the real collusion was the friends they made along the way https://t.co/OFWmXhbUQv
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 22, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
You have to wonder if any of the FISA judges feels snookered. (Not that "FISA abuse" is the big issue here. Big issue is if Mueller finds anything. Waiting. Hope he finishes before LA Olympics.) https://t.co/kYD0chATQU
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 22, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
What's the "lede": Nunes' behavior or DOJ behavior? Not a Nunes fan but he doesn't have power to get wiretaps on US citizens. (Note: his report was technically accurate as far as it went-DOJ didn't mention Clinton or DNC tho did cite anti-Trump purpose https://t.co/CODchJAHt6) https://t.co/xAlLleRdFt
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 22, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
You'd think the @NYTimes would tell readers that "what could become one of the biggest campaign finance scandals in recent years" would use the same theory as the oft-derided John Edwards prosecution, which failed https://t.co/twrtK9OZU2 https://t.co/T6qg2k0Naj See
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 22, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
If the @NYTimes tees stories up in coordination with the Clinton campaign, is that an illegal contribution to the campaign, Mr. Wertheimer? Asking for a friend https://t.co/T6qg2k0Naj
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 22, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
NYT: "raising thorny questions about when coverage that is favorable to a candidate strays into overt political activity, and when First Amendment protections should apply." https://t.co/T6qg2k0Naj Here I thought political activity was at heart of what the 1st Amendment protects
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 22, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
Bad Judgment from Scott and Rubio https://t.co/2YVjjfSC9T
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 22, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
"We must preserve not only the bodies of the unemployed from destitution but also their self-respect, their self-reliance, and courage and determination." FDR then proposed the WPA to replace "this business of relief." His concerns would seem to apply full force to the UBI.
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 22, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
"To dole our relief in this way is to administer a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human spirit. … I am not willing that the vitality of our people be further sapped by the giving of cash, of market baskets …"
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 22, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
FDR on UBI: "The lessons of history, confirmed by the evidence immediately before me, show conclusively that continued dependence upon relief induces a spiritual disintegration fundamentally destructive to the national fiber. " https://t.co/OzGGnceZhQ
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 22, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
Anyway, if there's no difference, why not give the FISA court the full story? Was DOJ worried they'd gag if they knew it was Hillary? They would at least have done a double-take, no?
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 22, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
2) The opposing candidate, unlike rando rich funder, was likely to be president soon. Another big extra reason not to disappoint her.
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 22, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
1) Any old someone just "looking for information" to discredit Trump could be a rich dilettante on a lark. Relatively easy for Steele to disappoint. But an opposing candidate likely desperate for some dirt, any dirt.
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 22, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
I'm new to this, but it seems to me there's a subtle but definitely non-trivial difference between 'speculating' the dossier was funded by someone "looking for information" to discredit Trump's campaign and disclosing it was funded by his opponent. https://t.co/jVMG3RUfp8
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 22, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
I'm new to this, but it seems to me there's a subtle but definitely non-trivial difference between 'speculating' the dossier was funded by someone "looking for information" to discredit Trump's campaign and disclosing it was funded by his opponent. https://t.co/jVMG3RUfp8
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 22, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey