PicToWord Games Answers - Game Solver | pictoword us politics answers level 1pictoword us politics answers level 1
PBS NEWSHOUR: Amalgamated columnist Mark Shields and New York Times columnist David Brooks joins Judy Woodruff to altercate the week’s news, including the Virginia governor’s race, suggestions by Donna Brazile that the Democratic primary chase was chic for Hillary Clinton, the GOP tax check plan and the Russia delving indictments.
["500px"]
Pictoword Fun 2 Pics Politics Level 15 Answers - Game Solver | pictoword us politics answers level 1"Those of us who are aggravating to break populists like Trump accept the disadvantage that our elites actually do stink. And this is an advantage," Brooks said during a altercation of accessible Clinton-DNC collusion.
"It was array of an accessible abstruse that the DNC was on Hillary Clinton’s side," Brooks said on Friday's NewsHour. "We saw it from the agenda of the debates all through the year. They didn’t appetite to accept them, because they didn’t appetite to accord Sanders the platform."
"This goes above what alike I absurd was the akin of collusion. It’s a appealing abject bread-and-butter takeover of a affair apparatus, adjoin the bylaws of that apparatus. It’s aloof not article a accustomed attack that respects institutions and how things should assignment should do. And so they colluded, apparently, according to Donna Brazile, in a appealing above way. And if you were a Sanders person, you accept every appropriate to be actually upset," the NYT columnist said.
Judy Woodruff: And now to the assay of Shields and Brooks. That’s amalgamated columnist Mark Shields and New York Times columnist David Brooks.
Gentlemen, acknowledge you.
Mark Shields: Judy.
Judy Woodruff: So, let’s allocution about Virginia, Mark. What does that chase attending like?Mark Shields:
Well, the chase on both sides, bodies are adage it’s a three-, four-, two-point lead.
The — one Republican said to me today they are adequate that the admiral was out of the country, because he was abashed that, if he got chat the chase was that close, he would alpha tweeting and admit himself aback into the race.
But, as we saw in John’s piece, the admiral is actual abundant a allotment of the piece. Ed Gillespie, a accepted Republican, a Republican Civic Committee staffer, became chair, became advisor to Admiral George W. Bush, is running, has got the lyrics of Donald Trump’s account playbook, but he doesn’t accept the music.
But the latest aeon afterwards John’s admirable allotment was that they’re now active on the football players admiration at the civic canticle and saying, angle up for America or Virginia.
I would say this, Judy. If, in fact, the Democrats lose on Tuesday in Virginia, that it will advance to — abutting to civilian war aural the Democratic Party.
Judy Woodruff: Whoa.
Mark Shields: It will be — there will be reprisals amid the Bernie — that Northam has run a actual conventional, array of alert campaign, and that will be — and Bernie Sanders — Tom Perriello, the — his primary adversary on the added side, there will be questions that he had — the Democratic Affair actually didn’t angle — and 2016 all over again.
Judy Woodruff: Abutting race?
David Brooks: Yes, it’s accepting close.
This is array of bad account for both parties.
Mark Shields: Yes.
David Brooks: First, Ed Gillespie, as Mark mentioned, is like the amount of the centermost of the Republican Party. He’s been about this boondocks a lot. We accept all accepted him. He’s aloof the accepted Republican.
And area the centermost of the Republican Affair is, that’s area Ed Gillespie is at that moment. And now it’s a Trump party. And he’s active on these Trump issues, MS-13, a assemblage in Northern Virginia that has dead some people, and so it’s abandon committed by actionable immigrants, the amount Trump issue.
It’s a attack that has some bread-and-butter opportunity, but a lot of it is about abhorrence of outsiders, so that amount message. So it’s a assurance the Republican Affair is acceptable the Trump party, and that if you appetite the run as a Republican, you accept got to run as a Trumpian, and you can do well.
He was appealing far aback a ages ago, 10, 15 points. And now he’s three to bristles credibility behind, and so it array of works.
["500px"]
Cheats for Pictoword - App Store revenue | pictoword us politics answers level 1For the Democrats, as Mark says, this is a state, as John reported, Clinton won by five. Trump is cool unpopular. And their guy, a appealing conventional, appealing acceptable candidate, can’t cull out a big win out of this? That would be a assurance for Democrats that, alike aback Trump is cool unpopular, they can’t get big turnout, and they can’t get big assembly amid African-Americans, which is why Eric Holder and bodies like that are there.
They can’t get big assembly from bodies who aren’t determined voters, and that the Democratic abject is not cool mobilized to vote. And that would aloof be a gigantic admonishing assurance for 2018.
Judy Woodruff: A admonishing assurance for 2018.
At the aforementioned time, Mark, in the aftermost brace of days, we accept been audition addition assurance of a big fissure, bisect central the Democratic Party, this book by Donna Brazile, a arresting amount in the Democratic Party, above armchair of the party, wrote, in effect, that because there was this banking accord with the Clinton campaign, which was acknowledging the Democratic Affair affliction for money, that the primary acclamation aftermost year was chic in Clinton’s favor.
Mark Shields: She did. And it’s a austere allegation fabricated by a austere person, Donna Brazile.
Could not appear at a worse time for the Democrats, on the eve of the Virginia, aloof as David is talking about, breeding interest, activity and turnout, this is annihilation — will do annihilation but.
But I will say this, Judy. It has the arena of actuality about it. Donna Brazile was apparent herself for accepting accustomed questions afore a agitation aback she was at CNN to Hillary Clinton. She’s a actuality of astronomic talent.
I think, if anything, this is array of cri de coeur, a account of what she believes, and to appear clean.
But I will say this, that it’s proof, added than annihilation else, to me of how little Barack Obama cared about the Democratic Affair or about politics. He was abundant at accepting elected. He got a civic majority alert in a row. Cipher had done that aback Eisenhower. He was abrogation the affair $24 actor in debt, therefore, accessible to Hillary Clinton’s assembly of big givers.
Bernie Sanders didn’t accept big givers, as we know.
Judy Woodruff: And Admiral Trump now, David, is adage the Democratic Affair should be investigated, the Clinton attack should be advised by the Justice Department, the FBI.
David Brooks: Yes, I don’t apperceive about that.
But those of us who are aggravating to break populists like Trump accept the disadvantage that our elites actually do stink. And this is an advantage — archetype of that.
It was array of an accessible abstruse that the DNC was on Hillary Clinton’s side. We saw it from the agenda of the debates all through the year. They didn’t appetite to accept them, because they didn’t appetite to accord Sanders the platform.
But this goes above what alike I absurd was the akin of collusion. It’s a appealing abject bread-and-butter takeover of a affair apparatus, adjoin the bylaws of that apparatus.
It’s aloof not article a accustomed attack that respects institutions and how things should assignment should do. And so they colluded, apparently, according to Donna Brazile, in a appealing above way. And if you were a Sanders person, you accept every appropriate to be actually upset.
Mark Shields: Aloof accomplish one quick point.
And that is, the acumen I say Admiral Obama, any time you accept a civic affair and the White House, the aforementioned party, the White House controls that civic party. The civic affair was a actually — extension…
Judy Woodruff: That’s typical.
Mark Shields: Typical.
I mean, Donald Trump controls the Republican Civic Committee today. That’s consistently the case.
And Admiral Obama aloof didn’t like politics. He didn’t like the aggregation of politicians. The Democrats absent 979 accompaniment aldermanic seats, 63 House seats, 12 Senate seats. In 19 states, they absent ascendancy of both houses of assembly and the governorship during his time.
["500px"]
Pictoword Free: Fun 2 Pics Guess What's the 1 Word (iPhone ... | pictoword us politics answers level 1He didn’t go out and recruit. He was abundant himself, but not abundant for — he didn’t like the business. He didn’t like the aggregation of politicians.
Judy Woodruff: A altered affectionate of economics, David, and that is taxes.
The Republicans did appear out this week, yesterday, with their tax reform, tax cut proposal. What does it say to you about what the Republicans in Congress and the admiral appetite appropriate now?
David Brooks: Well, they accept a eyes for what business taxes should be, which is to lower the rates. And I anticipate there’s a — our accumulated ante are cool high. And to allure basic to this country, it would advice to lower the rates.
They accept no eyes of what alone tax ante should be or how we should tax individuals. Their bill is array of a collection of affective ante the ante about randomly. They accept no eyes of how to assure families. There could accept been a abundant bigger adolescent tax credit.
And then, assuredly — and this is what anybody — the point anybody is making, but it happens to be accurate — they accept no eyes about the budgetary bloom of this country in the continued term.
I alone anticipate there are some pieces of this legislation that I like, capping the mortgage absorption deduction. There are some things I don’t like. I don’t anticipate acid the ante the way that they do is cool important. But it’s all askew by the $1.5 abundance aperture they’re activity to draft in the deficit.
And until they can break that problem, you’re not actually ambidextrous actively for this country.
(CROSSTALK)
Mark Shields: I accede actually about the $1.5 abundance deficit, Judy.
And it is activity to be financed, as we know, from the Republican votes in the House and the Senate, by cuts in Medicare and Medicaid, the actual constituency that Donald Trump apprenticed to be the best of.
And, no, it’s — I would say it had its bigger day yesterday. I actually do. I mean, I anticipate it’s not article that stands the aurora actual able-bodied or scrutiny. It starts with 25 percent approval abutment in the country. That’s the everyman that any presidential action aback George W. Bush’s blighted attack to privatize Social Security in 2005, which died afterwards 10 months.
Judy, what these bodies balloon is the 1986 Tax Ameliorate Act began in 1982 with Bill Bradley and Dick Gephardt and Bradley-Gephardt. And it includes bodies of the aptitude of Jim Baker and Dick Darman at the White House.
Steve Mnuchin and Gary Cohn are not Dick Darman and Jim Baker. And it had 430 assemblage afore the House Ways and Means Committee and 26 canicule of markups.
These bodies anticipate they’re activity to do it on the fly, on the run? They’re actually delusional.
Judy Woodruff: So, both of you are saying…
(CROSSTALK)
David Brooks: Dan Rostenkowski. There was a lot of austere talent.
Mark Shields: Dan Rostenkowski, Bob Packwood.
David Brooks: But what’s — it’s not activity to pass.
Like, they abuse bodies in the dejected states. You’re activity to get rid of accompaniment and bounded deduction, and that that is activity to actualize massive opposition. The realtors, philanthropies, apprentice debt, there’s all sorts of things that are politically abundance fields.
The catechism to me is, does it actually die or do they abatement aback to some bound tax cut, aloof so they can say they anesthetized something?
["500px"]
Pictoword Fun 2 Pics Politics Level 12 Answers - Game Solver | pictoword us politics answers level 1Judy Woodruff: They anesthetized something.
David Brooks: And I would bet — I don’t apperceive if I would bet, but I doubtable they will try to abatement aback to article plausible, maybe aloof the accumulated rates. I don’t apperceive what else. But they will try to abatement aback to aloof simple, abate tax cut.
Judy Woodruff: Mark, I appetite to about-face us bound actuality at the end to Robert Mueller’s investigation, Russia investigation.
They angry out some indictments this week, and not absolutely surprising, Paul Manafort, the above Trump attack managers, his associate, Rick Gates, and again an absorbing appeal accord with a younger, about alien actuality on the Trump campaign.
Was this a cogent move advancing from the appropriate counsel, or what? How do you see this?
Mark Shields: I anticipate it’s significant, Judy.
This was a man that was the accountable of acute vetting, Paul Manafort, that Donald Trump applies to everybody. He was alone activity to get the best, and he chose him to be the administrator of his presidential campaign. So, I mean, that gives you the abstraction of the acute vetting that went on.
And I anticipate they are grave and austere charges. But the key to this accomplished allegation to me was the Papadopoulos indictment. Cipher in Washington, and accounted — maybe David has bigger rumors than I do — cipher anytime had mentioned this arrest or this plea. It came as a big surprise.
And now, you can brainstorm the agitation inside. For the accomplished two-and-a-half months, this is somebody who’s already pleaded and may actual able-bodied accept been in conversation. So, I anticipate it’s a — you can see it from the president. He keeps talking about witch-hunts, they are activity to get rid of Jeff Sessions.
There is a agitation and an all-overs that’s endemic.
Judy Woodruff: How do you apprehend it?
David Brooks: Yes, everyone, aback the indictments came down, went to DEFCON 9 about here. I went to DEFCON 2 or 3.
Like, Manafort actuality a affectionate of abject operator, that is not absolutely banderole account here. The Papadopoulos affair is the accessible door. And what’s on the added ancillary of that door, we don’t know. So, maybe it leads to something. Maybe it doesn’t advance to something.
He wasn’t a above player. To me, the catechism I consistently ask, what did Donald Trump do? Is there article that this is pointing to Donald Trump did article himself? That is an administration-changing event. But we haven’t gotten anywhere abreast that so far.Judy Woodruff:
We don’t apperceive the acknowledgment to that question.
David Brooks: No.
Judy Woodruff: David Brooks, Mark Shields.
Mark Shields: What did the admiral not know, and aback did he not apperceive it?
Judy Woodruff: Aback did he not apperceive it?
Thank you both. Mark Shields:
Thank you.
["500px"]
Pictoword Answers | pictoword us politics answers level 1["500px"]
Pictoword Answers | pictoword us politics answers level 1["500px"]
Pictoword Fun 2 Pics Politics Level 6 Answers - Game Solver | pictoword us politics answers level 1["500px"]
Pictoword Fun 2 Pics Politics Level 10 Answers - Game Solver | pictoword us politics answers level 1["500px"]
Pictoword US Politics Answers – DailyAnswers.net | pictoword us politics answers level 1["500px"]
PicToWord Answers – Level 18 - PicToWord Answers - Pictoword ... | pictoword us politics answers level 1["500px"]
PicToWord Answers – Level 3 - PicToWord Answers - Pictoword Cheats ... | pictoword us politics answers level 1["500px"]
PicToWord Answers – Level 9 - PicToWord Answers - Pictoword Cheats ... | pictoword us politics answers level 1