News Burst: May 23, 2017 (Patreon)

I hope this News Burst finds you well! Not much new to report. Thursday’s episode is filmed; just need to edit it tonight and/or tomorrow. It’s a little different in that there’s no script, I have no bullet points, and kinda just shoot from the hip (the only other similar video is the Berkeley one, I’d say). I’ll be interested to see what you think of it.

Otherwise, I’ve been spending, like, way too much time at the beach playing chess. I’ve gone through three multi-year-long bursts in my life where I become addicted to the game, and I think I’m back in that place again. It’s all-consuming, it really is. Such a special game. And I'm not half bad at it. Erin's mom is coming to visit for a week, though, so I may have to cool my jets for a few. Family time, and all of that.

Anyway, be good!

Manchester Bombing Kills 22 People: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4535388/PM-says-terror-threat-level-critical.html

My Take: The article linked above leads to a pretty good -- and incredibly lengthy -- Daily Mail article with some of the newest information about the terrorist attack, along with details on who the bomber was, the status of the UK now from a terrorist perspective, the health of the surviving victims, and more. It’s worth taking some time out of your day to at least browse it, so as to familiarize yourself with these terrible recent goings-ons.

In case you somehow aren’t in the loop on this (which I’d find hard to believe for this audience), 22 people were killed outside of an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester, England. Dozens more were hurt, some seriously. The perpetrator of the bombing -- which was a suicide bombing -- was a British-born man of Libyan descent named Salman Abedi, who was 22 years old. Word is Abedi recently just came back to the UK after a trip to Libya, so it doesn’t take a brain surgeon to understand what’s going on there. Naturally, ISIS has claimed responsibility for the bombing, therefore owning responsibility for Abedi’s presumed radicalization.

The UK is still under alert for a possible imminent attack, with authorities uncertain if Abedi was acting alone, or if there are other perpetrators of other attacks still in the wild. I’m not going to spend too much more time talking about this awful tragedy, other than to say that Europe has itself a serious problem, and I’m curious when it’s going to try to come to grips with it. This is becoming so routine over there that it’s outright concerning. Radical Islamic Terrorism is a real thing, and real things have real consequences if left unchecked.

(Related Story | Fear Grips British Pop Fans: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-security-manchester-music-idUSKBN18J2YD)

Three People Testify Before Congressional Panels About Possible Trump-Russia Connections: http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/334846-five-takeaways-from-a-busy-day-of-russia-hearings

My Take: If not for the tragedy in Manchester, this obviously would have been a much bigger story. While three people testified about the purported connections between Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and the Russian government, and about all other manner of accused connections, the biggest of the bunch was undoubtedly ex-CIA chief John Brennan, who said, “there was a sufficient basis of information and intelligence that required further investigation by the bureau,” referring to the FBI (as the CIA typically deals with goings-ons outside of the United States, and not typically within it, with American actors). In other words, there's something to all of this. No surprise there.

The article linked above gives the five “takeaways” from the day’s proceedings, which are absolutely worth a gander. For me, there are two things worth noting, though. The first one is more abstract, but I think worth mentioning: I’m starting to think more and more that this doesn’t go all the way up the chain. I think it’s somewhat clear, with General Flynn taking the fifth, and with Carter Page and Paul Manafort also in the crosshairs, that something’s up with some of these guys. But I don’t know that it penetrates the administration’s highest rungs, and I’m almost certain Trump isn’t in on it. I have nothing to base that on; just my guess. Obviously, I could be wrong.

I think the bigger thing worth mentioning here is something Congressman Gowdy hinted at, however, and a drum that I think -- if we are to be perfectly fair -- bears repeat beating. There is still no evidence, whatsoever, that anyone seems to have in their possession that anything has happened. American intelligence agencies claim Russia trifled with the election, which I’d never dispute (and which I assume has happened in every American election since the 1920s at the earliest, and post-war at the latest), but when it comes to Trump’s connections to Russia, there’s nothing there yet. Where is the evidence? Why aren’t more people clamoring to see it?

Trump’s Mideast Trip Both Successful and Uneventful: http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/23/donald-trump-middle-east-visit-238733

My Take: Donald Trump went abroad for the first time in his presidency, but he wasn’t going to friendly territory like Canada, the UK, or Japan. He went to Saudi Arabia and Israel, countries that we have complicated relationships with. Saudi Arabia is clearly only a friend of ours (and the larger west) out of military and economic expediency, and their “moderate” stance when compared so many of their hostile neighbors. Israel is a good friend of America’s, but under the constant threat of policy vacillation as we bounce between Republican and Democratic administrations, which heavily complicates things (although everything should be more straight-forward now than with Obama).

This piece does a nice job of recounting how the trip was planned and what happened once he was there. It’s a nice little peek behind the curtain, and gives a small glimpse into the machinations of the Trump administration. A good read.

Trump’s Budget Both Spends A Lot and Slashes A Lot: http://thehill.com/policy/finance/334705-trump-releases-budget-that-slashes-government-programs

My Take: Finally, we’ve gotten a good, hard, concrete look at Donald Trump’s budget proposal, a proposal that, as usual with pretty much any president, will have little bearing on what Congress ultimately decides. Remember: Congress, and Congress alone controls the purse; the president can obviously have input that will be taken under advisement, but no budget is going to get through unless Congress approves of it, and that pretty much mans it’s going to have to write its own. Nothing new there.

Trump’s budget is making headlines for multiple reasons. First of all, over a 10 year period, it looks to cut non-defense discretionary spending by $1.5 trillion -- which isn’t nearly enough, if we want to start getting our deficit and debt under control -- and it’s looking to cut a similar amount from Medicare over that same stretch of time (Medicaid also gets hammered). For the in-and-outs, you can consult with the attached story above, as well as the links planted below, which give a decent look into the administration’s thought process when it comes to the all-important budget.

Not at all shockingly, many people -- especially those on the left -- are not happy with the budget, because it dices and slices a lot of government programs, some of them deemed essential by a lot of people. Then again, many Republicans aren't pleased, too. But I think the American people understand more than their Representatives and Senators let on. We need to get our spending under control, and frankly, this budget doesn’t go nearly far enough in doing that. Then again, I understand we need to take baby steps, so I’m not going to complain. And either way, this is political theater. Like I said, Congress has the ultimate say here, and they’ve already made it clear that they will produce their own bill that reflects their own policy prescriptions.

(Related Story | Trump’s Vaunted Infrastructure Bill Sneaks Into Budget: http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/23/infrastructure-transportation-trump-budget-238741)

(Related Story | Trump’s Budget Eliminates These 66 Programs Completely: http://thehill.com/policy/finance/334768-here-are-the-66-programs-eliminated-in-trumps-budget)

(Related Story | Republicans Give Trump’s Budget “Cold Shoulder”: http://thehill.com/homenews/house/334860-republicans-give-trumps-budget-the-cold-shoulder)