View Full Version : US Politics Thread 2016-2020
Sailor Steve
08-22-18, 07:39 PM
Thanks for that link. It's important to actually show where things come from, not just call people names.
And now, a word from the President of the United States of America:
NO COLLUSION - RIGGED WITCH HUNT!Such elegance. :salute:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1032495180530835456
Skybird
08-23-18, 07:19 AM
And now, a word from the President of the United States of America:
Such elegance. :salute:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1032495180530835456
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." - H. L. Mencken
Jimbuna
08-23-18, 10:13 AM
US President Donald Trump has responded to speculation that he might be impeached by warning that any such move would damage the economy.
In an interview with Fox & Friends, he said the market would crash and "everybody would be very poor".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45285585
Could this be the first sign of a shift in his attitude/position? :hmmm:
Skybird
08-23-18, 10:31 AM
No, its just a very severe case of erdoghanitis major. The disease, which infests the brain and is literally impossible to be extracted from there once it has started to breed, has a very high intellectual lethality rate and is almost completely resistent to conventional drugs and therapies. Also highly contagious, even visual and accoustical contact alone can transmit the bug. Patients best are kept in life-long strict isolation in high security facilities without contact to the outer world, else the bug springs to temporary hosts and spreads again from there. Literature knows examples where whole nations got infested and declined with the bug staying inside the brains of the infested population for years to come.
Mr Quatro
08-23-18, 10:38 AM
We all know by now not to trust the polls, right? :o
Biden? Sanders? and Warren?
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign-polls/402960-poll-trump-trails-biden-sanders-warren-in-potential-2020-matchups
President Trump trails top Democrats in potential matchups of likely 2020 White House candidates, according to a new poll.
The Politico/Morning Consult poll released Wednesday found that Trump lags behind former Vice President Joe Biden and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders (I) by 12 points each.
The president also trails 4 points behind Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D) in the poll.
Again, are you suggesting that only one side does this? Politicians are by nature hypocrites. It's in the rule book....
You mean like the Clintons and the Podestas.:D
...
Ahh, the old reliable go-to "strategy": if one is unable to defend Trump on principles and facts, immediately bring up the "look at the other guys!" ploy. Unfortunately for Trump, and any others trawling in his wake, courts of law, and the law itself, doesn't allow "well, everybody else does it" as an exculpatory defense or mitigation. Maybe the Trumpers should stop getting their Pampers in a bunch, grow a pair, and at least make some rational, factual attempt to defend their guy without resorting to juvenile deflection attempts...
As I said before, if any of the Trumpers or the GOP have got any real spine, they would move to at least try to move to prosecute the Clintons, Obama, et al, instead of using tired smoke screens...
As a matter of fact, someone has been quietly going after 'The Swamp" in DC and has even scooped up a couple of Clinton/Obama associates:
In addition to the investigations of Mr. Manafort and Mr. Gates, who pleaded guilty in February to numerous financial crimes and became a cooperating witness in the special counsel investigation, Mr. Mueller’s team pursued three other investigations into lawyers and lobbyists who did work in Ukraine.
The cases involve Gregory B. Craig, who served as the White House counsel under President Barack Obama before leaving to work for the law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom; Tony Podesta, an influential Washington lobbyist whose brother, John D. Podesta, was chairman of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign; and former Representative Vin Weber, Republican of Minnesota, who joined the lobbying firm Mercury Public Affairs after leaving Congress.
None have been charged with any crimes. Mr. Mueller’s referral of those cases several months ago to federal prosecutors in New York was revealed in news reports on Tuesday.
Mueller’s Digging Exposes Culture of Foreign Lobbying and Its Big Paydays --
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/01/us/politics/fara-foreign-agents-mueller.html
Some may have noted that Trump lawyer Michael Cohen has been subpoenaed by the State of New York prosecutors in regards to the NY State criminal investigation of the Donald J. Trump Foundation, Trump's ostensible "charity" foundation, that seems to have benefited Trump more than any actual persons in need of assistance:
New York state subpoenas Cohen in Trump Foundation probe --
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/cohen-pleads-guilty-implicates-trump-in-hush-money-scheme/2018/08/21/9cc57440-a5a4-11e8-ad6f-080770dcddc2_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.c78aba5d5d68
There is a significance to the NY State investigation: if convicted of any criminality in relation to the conduct of business of the Foundation, Cohen could not depend on a Presidential Pardon (not that Cohen has a ghost of chance after what's happened this week) since Presidential Pardon power does not extend to State-level crimes, so Trump has no leverage on Cohen, or anyone else, who may be accused or convicted under NY State law. Equally significant is the fact, under the limits of the Presidential Pardon, Trump, if indicted, tried and convicted could neither pardon himself nor be pardoned by his successor(s). In the case of the Trump Foundation investigations, if Trump did the crime, he will do the time...
It should be remembered that Trump fired the former US Attorney for the Southern District of New York, well known as a very tough and capable prosecutor against corruption, who was just beginning an investigation into allegations of fraud, malfeasance, and possible money laundering, within the Trump Foundation. Trump had known of the investigation(s) into his Foundation prior to occupying the Oval Office and knew he was particularly vulnerable under the administration of the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York. In a scenario strikingly similar to Trump's attempt to co-opt James Comey over the DOJ's Russian investigation, by soliciting contacts and meetings with Comey, Trump tried to establish a relationship with the US Atty-NYSD that was not only highly unusual but also highly suspect. As with so many other such overtures by Trump, which left the targets of his efforts resorting to documenting/recording his contacts r refusing further contact, the US Atty-NYSD also rebuffed Trump with the result of Trump, who had originally asked the US Atty-NYSD to stay on after the election, firing the US Atty-NYSD abruptly. Another odd Trump "coincidence", eh?
Ex-US Attorney Preet Bharara tells the full story of Donald Trump firing him and gives his reason for why --
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/22/ex-us-attorney-preet-bharara-tells-story-behind-trump-firing-him.html
Which leads to handling of the rule of law..
Look no administration is without sin. Personally I am much more concerned about how an administration handles the rule of law. Corruption and politics are bedfellows but incompetence and political interference are inexcusable. If one of the Trump's campaign/Administration members, for example, Trump's personal lawyer acting on Trump's behalf or, say, Trump's campaign manger, among others, is indicted, pleads guilty, is tried and convicted, something is wrong. Who is ultimately responsible? The guy who is responsible is anything but quiet, trying to place blame on anyone but himself for the effects of his actions. I see a parallel to the sleaziest excesses and illegalities of the Nixon administration. Yes there is lots to complain about...
Then there's that private, undocumented, furtive meeting with Putin.:shifty:
Update and fixed that for you, no charge, since you are so concerned about the "Rule of Law" and all... :D
...not to also mention:
Corruption and politics are bedfellows but incompetence and political interference are inexcusable.
Inexcusable: what an apt description...
...
Well I am curious.... who would you suggest for the Dem candidate to run against Trump..oops.. I mean Pence.:D
Don't know, since its not my party and I don't 'subscribe' to any party. At this point I pretty much don't give a monkey's who might be considered in the running at this date, particularly since the 2020 Presidential election is over two years away and a whole lot may change by the actual election. I mean, look at the 2016 Election Season that started of with a Klown Kar of GOP candidates who didn't make the cut. By the time 2020's Election Season starts, I might start to take an interest in particular candidates of any party; I take the position of they have to sell themselves to me, provide me wait substantial, logical reasons to give them my vote; this is one of the advantages of being an Independent: I actually think for myself and not let a party or anyone/anything else do my thinking for me. I am, after all, fully grown, with reasonable intelligence, and with a right of having my own opinions and choices. I may be many things, but I will never be a lemming...
In the time since I started typing this, the news has come out that longtime Trump supporter and 'launderer' of Trump's dirty, tabloid publisher David Pecker (yes, that is his real name) has apparently struck an immunity deal with Federal Prosecutors regarding information on Trumps dealings with Cohen over hush money:
David Pecker, American Media Chief, Is Said to Have Immunity in Trump Inquiry --
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/23/us/politics/david-pecker-immunity-trump.html
The tabloid executive David J. Pecker has been granted immunity by federal prosecutors investigating payments during the 2016 campaign to two women who said they had affairs with Donald J. Trump, a person familiar with the investigation confirmed on Thursday.
Mr. Pecker is the chairman of American Media Inc., the nation’s biggest tabloid news publisher, best known for its flagship, The National Enquirer.
He is close to Mr. Trump and the president’s former lawyer and fixer, Michael D. Cohen, and had been integral to a campaign effort to help protect Mr. Trump from embarrassing stories about women as he ran for the presidency.
...
The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday night that Mr. Pecker was cooperating with prosecutors, and Vanity Fair published news of the immunity deal on Thursday.
The agreement adds another unusual aspect to a case never seen before in the annals of presidential campaign finance history. It means that a company that operates as a news organization is cooperating with federal authorities on an investigation that involves its work with a campaign.
...
“Holy ***, I Thought Pecker Would Be the Last One to Turn”: Trump’s National Enquirer Allies Are the Latest to Defect --
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/08/donald-trump-national-enquirer-allies-defect-david-pecker-michael-cohen
Poor Little Donny, lonelier and lonelier...
<O>
Just found this. I always enjoy when Trump's statements in interviews are held up to factual lights:
The 36 most outrageous lines in Donald Trump's Fox News interview --
https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/23/politics/donald-trump-fox-news/index.html
<O>
Skybird
08-23-18, 05:28 PM
Have not my glasses at hand - is that a tie or a loop Trump is wearing?
This has been very big news here in Southern California:
Duncan Hunter, GOP lawmaker and Marine vet, indicted on corruption charges --
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2018/08/21/duncan-hunter-gop-lawmaker-and-marine-vet-indicted-on-corruption-charges/
Duncan Hunter’s appalling greed and grubbiness --
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/republicans-should-send-duncan-hunter-packing/2018/08/22/da7f089c-a643-11e8-a656-943eefab5daf_story.html?utm_term=.0aaf083d4e3f
There has been a growing backlash against Hunter, particularly over this revelation:
Expenditures ranged from the mundane ($32.31 for family groceries) to the mind-boggling ($14,261 for a family Thanksgiving vacation in Italy). To hide the personal payments, prosecutors said family dental bills were listed as charitable contributions to “Smiles for Life,” tickets to SeaWorld were called an “educational tour,” and clothing purchases at a golf course were camouflaged as golf “balls for wounded warriors.”
...
For a Marine to do something like this is beyond the pale. Even the local Conservative radio show host are openly condemning Hunter and his deeds...
...and get this: he's been claiming on the radio reports here that the charges are "politically motivated", that he is a victim of a "witch hunt", and that the DOJ is the "prosecutorial arm of the Democratic Party"...
...Sound familiar?...
<O>
Skybird
08-23-18, 06:11 PM
What the dollar as the world's dominant reserve currency has to do with the trade deficit of the US. This is a bot translation.
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=de&ie=UTF-8&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.misesde.org%2F%3Fp%3D20310&edit-text=
The status of the US dollar as the dominant global reserve currency implies that the US economy suffers from persistent trade deficits and growing external debt. As the world piles up the American currency as reserves and uses the dollar as a key currency in international trade, the dollars that a country gains from its exports to the United States do not rewind as demand for US goods, but migrate to the United States as finance capital. The foreign central banks and international investors use the dollar surplus to buy US government bonds and bonds. At the end of 2017, the total debt of the US federal budget held by foreign and international investors was more than $ 6 trillion.
As the US dollar is overvalued in terms of purchasing power, American exports will inevitably become less competitive. Consequently, the United States is suffering from persistent current account deficits. Since the beginning of the 1980s, the United States has not achieved a significant surplus in the current account. In 2017, the US annual current account deficit was $ 500 billion, while at the beginning of the new century it temporarily exceeded $ 800 billion.
Over time, current account deficits accumulate and lead to a negative international investment position. These represent external debt for the US as a deficit country and foreign assets for the countries with a trade surplus. At the end of 2017, US external debt was around $ 8 trillion in net foreign assets.
(...)
The United States has a continuing trade deficit, not because of "unfair trade," but because the dollar serves as a global reserve currency. For example, while the purchasing power parity of the US dollar against the Chinese currency would be 3.5 yuan per dollar (https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=de&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=de&sp=nmt4&tl=en&u=https://data.oecd.org/conversion/purchasing-power-parities-ppp.htm&xid=17259,15700023,15700124,15700149,15700186,1570 0190,15700201&usg=ALkJrhjQ-CkbUZsfUgHKos52-wkrqZ9xJg) , the actual exchange rate at the beginning of August 2018 was 6.8 yuan per dollar (https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=de&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=de&sp=nmt4&tl=en&u=https://tradingeconomics.com/china/currency&xid=17259,15700023,15700124,15700149,15700186,1570 0190,15700201&usg=ALkJrhjR53Q01Ianl4z_u3MpcebajJd48w) . But China is just one of the most extreme cases. With few exceptions (especially Norway and Switzerland), the US dollar is overvalued (https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=de&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=de&sp=nmt4&tl=en&u=https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/ESR/Issues/2018/07/19/2018-external-sector-report&xid=17259,15700023,15700124,15700149,15700186,1570 0190,15700201&usg=ALkJrhhnH65bjoO-gNrcNV566jhqkr6mtQ) in terms of purchasing power parity against almost all other currencies.
Norway and Switzerland. Hear, hear.
That no new empire follows the American would also be in the well-understood interest of the possible candidates. A world empire is born and falls with the leading role of its currency. But in the ascent is already foreshadowed the fall. As the imperial superpower, through the dominance of its currency, can afford excessive levels of consumption, it undermines its own productive capacity in the long run, thus embarking on its own demise.
German original source: LINK (https://www.misesde.org/?p=20310)
Unfairness? :) Has nothing to do with it, Donny. But thanks for the entertainment you provide us with. The problem is - "made in the US".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45285585
Could this be the first sign of a shift in his attitude/position? :hmmm:
No, the leftist press has talked impeachment ever since he was elected. This is just the latest version of Democrat crap like they have been slinging without success for two years now. Nothing has stuck so far and I suspect that this will be no different.
I will say this for them though, the Dems sure can handle disappointment, well at least the ones not shooting up Republican congressmen or posing for pictures with severed Trump heads. When you think about it the rank and file have remained quite optimistic in the face of constant failure. What'll this be, like the 100th time their hopes for overturning the 2016 presidential election will be dashed? :)
After all ever since Trump announced his candidacy it's been a non stop succession of accusatory broadsides from the left, delivered with righteous fire and fury by a liberal press that has long since abandoned any pretense of objectivity. Each "major bombshell" is portrayed as the thing that finally brings him down and it gets the liberals hopes up, only to see Trump emerge from the smoke once again unscathed and delivering broadsides of his own. How absolutely depressing it must be!
em2nought
08-23-18, 08:20 PM
Almost every single day I see a few #WalkAway videos getting posted on facebook, and I'm pretty sure they're not Russian bots. :up:
When you think about it the rank and file have remained quite optimistic in the face of constant failure.It's quite easy to remain optimistic when the Special Counsel keeps proving the "fake news" to be actually quite true.
As for Democrats, let me remind you that for example the Special Counsel was set up because the Republican president fired the Republican FBI director which prompted the Republican Deputy AG (nominated by Trump, BTW) to appoint Robert Mueller, a Republican, to lead the Special Counsel, which I might add was supported also by the Republicans in the Congress.
Goddamn Democrats!:timeout:
u crank
08-24-18, 08:04 AM
Ahh, the old reliable go-to "strategy": if one is unable to defend Trump on principles and facts, immediately bring up the "look at the other guys!" ploy.
I'll try to stop doing that if you stop editing my posts with that ''Update and fixed that for you, no charge," thing that you do. :03:
I have the feeling that you consider me to be a Trump apologist.
Maybe the Trumpers should stop getting their Pampers in a bunch, grow a pair, and at least make some rational, factual attempt to defend their guy without resorting to juvenile deflection attempts...
I guess I'll have to use phrases like Trumpers, minions, evil GOP and post some Colbert and SNL videos to pass the smell test.
Ex-US Attorney Preet Bharara
As always there are two sides to every story.
And thus was born the powerful myth of Preet Bharara, martyred US Attorney.
https://www.thenation.com/article/flawed-legend-preet-bharara/
..the question still looms large as to whether the legend of Bharara is deserved. He has been strutting through the Trump era as some sort of Mr. Accountability. But is he morally justified in doing so?
But the glaring omission from this impressive list of successes has been his abject failure to prosecute any Wall Street bankers, traders, or executives for their roles in exacerbating the 2008 financial crisis in fraudulent ways. There was plenty of evidence—e-mails, documents, reports from bankers to the legal authorities—that some on Wall Street knowingly packaged up into securities billions of dollars of mortgages that did not meet the underwriting standards at various big banks, including Citigroup and JPMorgan Chase, and sold them off as supposedly money-good securities all over the world.
Such prosecutions are usually the preserve of the Southern District of New York. But Bharara abdicated that responsibility during his nearly eight years in office, despite having his face slapped on the cover of Time magazine, in 2012, with the headline, “This Man Is Busting Wall St.” He has never given a good explanation for his sins of omission, other than the bland defense that he would have brought prosecutions if he could have brought them. He has seen the evidence, his argument goes, and the rest of us have not. So back off.
“Bharara knew how to drain the Wall Street swamp,” Bill Black, an associate professor of economics and law at the University of Missouri–Kansas City, wrote on the Naked Capitalism blog in March 2017. “He had the facts, the staff, and the jurisdiction to drain the Wall Street swamp. Bharara refused to do so.”
Many Americans are still upset that the bad guys in the 2008 financial crisis were not prosecuted. That kind of thing probably contributed in some way to the election of Donald Trump. I wonder if Mr. Bharara has any self awareness of this consequence.
Bilge_Rat
08-24-18, 08:58 AM
Some may have noted that Trump lawyer Michael Cohen has been subpoenaed by the State of New York prosecutors in regards to the NY State criminal investigation of the Donald J. Trump Foundation, Trump's ostensible "charity" foundation, that seems to have benefited Trump more than any actual persons in need of assistance
well no, I actually know how charities work and what charity law says, since that is what I do in RL. Nothing that the Trump charity did, as reported in various lenghty articles, all of which I read, was illegal or out of the norm of what a "typical" charity does. Most of the bad press came from obviously anti-Trump journalists who had no clue how charities work or what is "legal" or were trying to put the worst possible spin on it.
The New York lawsuit is just the latest political stunt.
In the case of the Trump Foundation investigations, if Trump did the crime, he will do the time...
no, not even close. The worst you may see is a fine which to Trump will be the equivalent of a parking ticket. :arrgh!:
Catfish
08-24-18, 04:30 PM
[...] The New York lawsuit is just the latest political stunt.[...]
Of course. Lmao.
Platapus
08-25-18, 10:59 AM
Investigations against the political party you favor are political stunts
Investigations against the political party you oppose are a necessary function.
Catfish
08-25-18, 03:50 PM
Despite all, or because of all, i think the US legal framework is doing a pretty good job, all in all. Wait and see.
Skybird
08-25-18, 07:55 PM
Senator John McCain died.
Usually I would not mind the death of politicians. He volunteered for being a politician, and in my book that never is a compliment for anyone.
Still there was something around him that made me feel sympathy for this one, and a certain, cautious respect. It had not much to do with him being a political actor, it was something else.
Thus I say: Bon Voyage, Sir.
Jimbuna
08-26-18, 05:44 AM
Senator John McCain died.
Usually I would not mind the death of politicians. He volunteered for being a politician, and in my book that never is a compliment for anyone.
Still there was something around him that made me feel sympathy for this one, and a certain, cautious respect. It had not much to do with him being a political actor, it was something else.
Thus I say: Bon Voyage, Sir.
One of very few politicians I held admiration for.
Catfish
08-26-18, 06:02 AM
Hard to resist to say something against Trump here, just hope McCain's integrity and ideas live on.
You had deserved to be the president, and a better fate. Rest in peace, Sir.
Skybird
08-26-18, 06:12 AM
He probably had more integrity than Trump and all the crooks around him together will ever have. Trumps now infamous defamation of McCain told a lot about what there is to know about Trump.
Trump will hate to have a look in the newspapers or at the media today.
Platapus
08-26-18, 07:03 PM
Hard to resist to say something against Trump here, just hope McCain's integrity and ideas live on.
You had deserved to be the president, and a better fate. Rest in peace, Sir.
How history could have changed if he has selected someone else as his running mate.
He probably had more integrity than Trump and all the crooks around him together will ever have. Trumps now infamous defamation of McCain told a lot about what there is to know about Trump.
Trump will hate to have a look in the newspapers or at the media today.
He also was known for his quick temper and that was used by his political enemies in the '08 election, many of them now crying their crocodile tears over his passing, to cast him as an aging and increasingly unstable war hawk who would have an itchy finger on the nuclear trigger.
Skybird
08-27-18, 05:07 AM
Trump used the opportunity and added another glorious, really big, fantastic tweet to his already impressive collection of glorious, really big, fantastic tweets. He mastered the challenge with exceptionell craftsmanship not less of that niveau that exactly one got used to expect from him. Chapeau, Donny! You are great.
Mr Quatro
08-27-18, 01:31 PM
This is old news, but it is new to me that Clinton's emails were classified and she should have to testify to that fact and on top of that if she had of won she would not be allowed to hold office
due to the fact that you would need a security clearance of the highest order to be the POTUS.
Despite Comey Assurances, Vast Bulk of Weiner Laptop Emails Were Never Examined
https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/despite-comey-assurances-vast-bulk-of-weiner-laptop-emails-were-never-examined/
"There was no real investigation and no real search,” said Michael Biasello, a 27-year veteran of the FBI.
"It was all just show — eyewash — to make it look like there was an investigation before the election.”
Sailor Steve
08-27-18, 04:03 PM
...you would need a security clearance of the highest order to be the POTUS.
I'm not sure that's true.
No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
It says nothing about security clearances, or even convicted felons. They can't vote, but nothing says they can't run, or serve. Of course it might be hard to serve office if you're already serving time. That could bring up some interesting legal questions.
em2nought
08-27-18, 04:28 PM
Of course it might be hard to serve office if you're already serving time. That could bring up some interesting legal questions.
We could save a bunch on a security detail, and Airbnb the White House too. Win, win! :D
Platapus
08-27-18, 04:46 PM
The President does not have a security clearance in the same context as someone else with a security clearance.
By the very act of being elected, the president has the trust of the people (no laughing now!) and as such does not have a formal clearance as it is actually the president, through proxy, that authorizes anyone else to have clearance for classified information.
The same applies, to a lesser extent, to members of congress. Only select members who are involved in the most sensitive aspects have a security background check, but it is rather a formality as just like the president, it is assumed that because they were elected that they are trustworthy in the eyes of the citizens (I mean it! No more laughing!)
Staffers, however, do have the more traditional security clearances as it is the staffers who mostly handle the classified information for congress.
Platapus
08-27-18, 04:52 PM
I'm not sure that's true.
It says nothing about security clearances, or even convicted felons. They can't vote, but nothing says they can't run, or serve. Of course it might be hard to serve office if you're already serving time. That could bring up some interesting legal questions.
There is nothing preventing a member of congress from continuing to serve after a conviction or even during a jail term. They would be let out during congressional sessions though.
It would be up to the individual house whether to allow them to continue to serve as each house has the authority to expel a member of that house.
Technically, the senate has the authority to impeach a senator but that was only tired once. Expelling is much easier.
Is there precedent for a member of congress serving a term while serving a sentence?
As a matter of fact, there is. "Back in 1798, Representative Matthew Lyon of Vermont was convicted under the Sedition Act of insulting President John Adams and he was sent off to jail for a four-month term. While in prison, Representative Lyon managed a successful re-election campaign. And in 1801, Lyon cast one of the key votes that resulted in Thomas Jefferson becoming President in the House contingent election."
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/can-a-senator-serve-in-congress-after-a-conviction-in-court
Platapus
08-28-18, 04:29 PM
This needs to be engraved on a large piece of granite and placed in front of the US Capitol Building for all to see
We are three-hundred-and-twenty-five million opinionated, vociferous individuals. We argue and compete and sometimes even vilify each other in our raucous public debates. But we have always had so much more in common with each other than in disagreement. If only we remember that and give each other the benefit of the presumption that we all love our country we will get through these challenging times. We will come through them stronger than before. We always do." John McCain, 2018
Words that we on General Topics should remember
:salute:
An interesting article about Trump and Russia written before the disastrous Trump-Putin summit (can't believe I missed this back then)...
Will Trump Be Meeting With His Counterpart - Or His Handler?
A Plausible theory of mind-boggling collusion. --
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/07/trump-putin-russia-collusion.html
<O>
This needs to be engraved on a large piece of granite and placed in front of the US Capitol Building for all to see
We are three-hundred-and-twenty-five million opinionated, vociferous individuals. We argue and compete and sometimes even vilify each other in our raucous public debates. But we have always had so much more in common with each other than in disagreement. If only we remember that and give each other the benefit of the presumption that we all love our country we will get through these challenging times. We will come through them stronger than before. We always do." John McCain, 2018
Words that we on General Topics should remember
:salute:
In time when the US desperately needs real leaders and leadership, it is a shame to have lost such a leader as John McCain and his lucid, eloquent grasp of the real values of this country...
Allow me to add this to yours: :salute:
<O>
Jimbuna
08-29-18, 08:45 AM
:haha:
Mr Quatro
08-30-18, 09:45 AM
Trump is going to blow a fuse someday over his vanity thinking that the whole world is against him. In a way it's sad to see :yep:
CNN fires back at Trump, stands by controversial story: ‘CNN does not lie’
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/08/29/cnn-fires-back-at-trump-stands-by-controversial-story-cnn-does-not-lie.html
A full-blown war of words between the first family and CNN broke out late Wednesday on Twitter, with the cable network mounting an unprecedented attack on President Trump in a jarring official statement defending a widely questioned story -- and the president delivering a withering counterattack.
The statement from CNN came after the president mocked Watergate legend Carl Bernstein, who co-wrote the disputed report that Trump’s former lawyer was prepared to give damning information about the president to Special Counsel Robert Mueller.
CNN continues to stand by the story despite growing skepticism.
AVGWarhawk
08-30-18, 12:54 PM
Trump is going to blow a fuse someday over his vanity thinking that the whole world is against him. In a way it's sad to see :yep:
CNN fires back at Trump, stands by controversial story: ‘CNN does not lie’
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/08/29/cnn-fires-back-at-trump-stands-by-controversial-story-cnn-does-not-lie.html
To be honest, the "news" showing Trump in a negative light is outlandish. Yesterday CNN headlined this, "Trump touts Puerto Rico response as 'fantastic' despite nearly 3,000 dead"
https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/29/politics/trump-puerto-rico-fantastic/index.html
Trump is somehow responsible for 3000 dead? Well, no but the headline points to that direction. CNN was never a friend of Trump and vise-versa but headlines like this are misleading.
The business I'm in I have seen other concocted headlines and stories from the media. I have lost faith in those bringing us the news. It's opinion journalism at best.
Bleiente
08-30-18, 02:31 PM
We should rethink.
The President is just a puppet, but Trump is better suited than any of his predecessors.
This explains his approach and distracts us from the actual goals.
That fits - we are cheated. :o
If anyone knows the series "Preacher", now the Jesus in the third season is representative of Trump. :03:
Platapus
08-30-18, 02:54 PM
Breaking Gnus
Elements of the Virginia and Maryland National Guard were called into DC to respond to a crowd of people attempting to breech the fence around the White House.
After several hours of negotiation, the Trump Administration personnel were convinced to go back to their offices. :D
Breaking Gnus
Elements of the Virginia and Maryland National Guard were called into DC to respond to a crowd of people attempting to breech the fence around the White House.
After several hours of negotiation, the Trump Administration personnel were convinced to go back to their offices. :D
:haha:
Wouldn't that qualify as the National Guard imposing cruel and unusual punishment on US citizens?...
<O>
Platapus
08-30-18, 03:08 PM
To quote our Dear Leader, "They knew what they were getting in for".
Subnuts
08-30-18, 03:15 PM
Breaking Gnus
You didn't say anything about wildebeests in this post. :hmmm:
Trump's progress as chronicled by Time Magazine covers:
https://78.media.tumblr.com/031898aa661803b40e542240ec7280d6/tumblr_pdx4f9tvMk1qhm37i_500.jpg
https://78.media.tumblr.com/06ab9e324d7bb5b1237c2268798586c5/tumblr_pdx4f9Gt2j1qhm37i_500.jpg
...and the latest Time Cover:
https://78.media.tumblr.com/3d452e1cf329a47da75dc770a45943d2/tumblr_pdx4f9lWdZ1qhm37i_500.jpg
<O>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRHj-FE_Jvg
<O>
That fits - we are cheated. :o
There is no we. He is our president not yours, and he continues to do a great job at pissing off all the right people.
https://i.imgur.com/wKnKpIT.jpg
Trump's (and the GOP's) biggest problem is Trump is pissing off the majority of American voters, much as was evident when he only got 46.1% of the total vote; in fact, as bad a candidate as Hillary Clinton was, she still beat him by 2.1% (48.2% total). Of the voters who did vote for Trump, 21% of those have said they would not vote for Trump again, leaving Trump, and the GOP with about a mid-30% base, not a bell-ringing number. And it continues to get worse:
Donald Trump’s Approval Rating Has Plunged and so Have Republicans’ Midterm Chances, New Poll Indicates --
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-approval-rating-republicans-midterms-1103829
Trump has gotten so twisted by his obsession with his (un)popularity polls, he has even screwed up by boasting about a poll finding that was actually the opposite of what he claimed:
READ: Donald Trump Tweets ‘Over 90% Approval Rating…Within the Republican Party and 52% Overall’ --
https://secondnexus.com/news/trump-tweets-approval-disapproval-rating/
The responding tweets in the above article are very funny... and very true...
<O>
Platapus
09-04-18, 04:18 PM
Trump is such a victim. :wah:
"He's just a poor boy, from a poor family..."...
<O>
em2nought
09-04-18, 07:46 PM
If Trump asked his deplorables to arm themselves and lay siege to D.C. they would. Would certainly make things interesting, two could play at this game. :D Unless an "algorithm" deleted his tweet. LOL
Should have caught them while they were all at McCain's funeral.
You mean all 2 of the Deplorables would be available at the same time?...
<O>
An interesting Op-Ed piece in the New York Times today from a reputed Senior Official of Trump's White House:
I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration --
I work for the president but like-minded colleagues and I have vowed to thwart parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/05/opinion/trump-white-house-anonymous-resistance.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage
The Times has links on the page where questions can be asked regarding how the Times' vetting process on the Op-Ed piece was done...
All in all, this and Woodward's book on top of the many, many reports of the gross dysfunction of the Trump White House and, particularly, Trump, himself, paints a picture of a "social experiment" gone horribly wrong. Oh, well, President Pence might be able to remedy the situation...
<O>
I am just wondering...is now the main job of the president to 'piss' on the 'right' people ?
Skybird
09-06-18, 03:21 AM
Imo, its a sign for that system works not instead of that it works if such a failure of a man is allowed to unfold damage until the end of his term(s) and then he gets fired. That the system works would be illustrated by that it prevents the falure unfolding trhe poissible maximum of damage and ends the person in question's term before the end of his regular term.
Nobody needs an ambulance once the patient is dead. The ambulance must arrive before he is dead.
Its a meltdown of the political system, imo. And it will reach far beyond Donny's term. Donny will go one day - the parties still will be there.
If Trump asked his deplorables to arm themselves and lay siege to D.C. they would. Would certainly make things interesting, two could play at this game. :D Unless an "algorithm" deleted his tweet. LOL
Should have caught them while they were all at McCain's funeral.
That is the most ignorant post you have ever made, and you have made a ton of them,lol If you armed yourself and went up against a well armed and determined enemy, you and Trump would be running neck and neck for the rear!! Get back on your meds!!:D
You mean all 2 of the Deplorables would be available at the same time?...
<O>
Only if both of them were out on bail at the same time,LOL
Mr Quatro
09-06-18, 10:23 AM
That is the most ignorant post you have ever made, and you have made a ton of them,lol If you armed yourself and went up against a well armed and determined enemy, you and Trump would be running neck and neck for the rear!! Get back on your meds!!:D
How cruel of you to comment like that :o
If Trump asked his deplorables to arm themselves and lay siege to D.C. they would. Would certainly make things interesting, two could play at this game. :D Unless an "algorithm" deleted his tweet. LOL
Should have caught them while they were all at McCain's funeral.
I see nothing wrong with this observation
Meanwhile the WH is in lock down stage as someone inside is venting his anger and views ... I also see the POTUS as a strange person, but surely the Lord is in charge.
Washington needs our prayers not our scorn :yep:
em2nought
09-06-18, 10:56 AM
Meanwhile the WH is in lock down stage as someone inside is venting his anger and views ...
Or, in their desperation, the fake mainstream media has created another "story" out of thin air. :hmmm:
you and Trump would be running neck and neck for the rear!!
Most of us are too fat to run so we'd either win, or die in place à la the Alamo.
...
but surely the Lord is in charge.
Washington needs our prayers not our scorn :yep:
I learned a long, long time ago the old adage is true: "God helps those who help themselves". When your house is on fire, you could pray to God the fire will go out, or you can use your God-given wits and hands and seek a way to put out the fire yourself. I am still grieving, near 40 years on, the loss of a young friend from cancer when she was only 19 years old; her father was a Baptist minister who put all of his faith in God and refused to allow his daughter to seek "ungodly" medical treatment and she died a very painful death. If patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel, then blind faith over reason is the refuge of those who will not face the truth. In the case of the disaster that is Trump, you are essentially saying prayer will solve the problem of a deceitful, dishonest, amoral, and criminal leadership. History has proven those who stood by the side and prayed for relief are the very most often the one's who suffer the greatest. We have mechanisms in place in this country to remedy our problems and I put more faith in them than I do prayer...
BTW, the phrase "God helps those who help themselves" goes way back to the Ancients and one of the earliest rendering of the sentiment ca. 409 BC is:
"No good e'er comes of leisure purposeless; And heaven ne’er helps the men who will not act."...
Or, in their desperation, the fake mainstream media has created another "story" out of thin air. :hmmm:
...
I tend to think the story has more truth than fiction: it would be suicidal for the NYT to run such a piece without being extremely cautious and circumspect about the source. For such a high-profile news outlet to take such an extraordinary step without the most thorough of vetting is inconceivable...
As a historic touchstone, I am old enough to have lived through the Nixon Watergate scandal and, in that case, there was an informant, code named Deep Throat, used by the Washington Post to drive their investigations into the corruption and criminality in the White House. At the time, the same arguments were brought up of Deep Throat being a fiction of the Post or that the informant had no actual knowledge or connection to or with the Nixon Administration. The identity of Deep Throat was kept secret by the Post reporters Woodward and Bernstein (yes, the same Woodward who has just written and released Trump's new least favorite book, Fear), as part of their journalistic responsibility to protect their source until the family of Deep Throat revealed his name, which was confirmed by Woodward and Bernstein. It turned out Deep Throat was actually the #2 official at the FBI at the time, Associate FBI Director Mark Felt. I'm not saying the exact same situation holds in the present case, but there is a strong precedent to consider...
...
Most of us are too fat to run so we'd either win, or die in place à la the Alamo.
I never knew Crockett, Bowie, Travis, et al, were prime candidates for Weight Watchers... :hmmm:
...and I don't think Trump would be there at all, if it came to a fight...
"bone spurs", you know... :03:
<O>
According to a Danish journalist who works for a news program
Said that USA is in a constitutional crisis that has not been seen since the Watergate case.
Know that there are people in the White House who oppose Trump.
Can you call that constitutional crisis?
Markus
u crank
09-06-18, 04:48 PM
I tend to think the story has more truth than fiction: it would be suicidal for the NYT to run such a piece without being extremely cautious and circumspect about the source. For such a high-profile news outlet to take such an extraordinary step without the most thorough of vetting is inconceivable...
I have no doubt it is true. In fact I would say we will know who the "senior Trump administration official" is shortly. How that person expected to remain anonymous is hard to understand.
If Trump and others believe that there is a deep state at work in the US Government I can't help but wonder if this will deepen the paranoia or lessen it.
Any member of the administration legitimately concerned about reigning in the president’s outbursts—and doubtlessly there are a number of them—would never have sent an article guaranteed to generate more White House chaos and paranoia.
It would make no sense. Trump, after all, is already dealing with interminable leaks. The piece will only further confirm his suspicions that a Fifth Column is undercutting the presidency, which will make him less likely to listen to advisors.
http://thefederalist.com/2018/09/06/new-york-times-anonymous-op-ed-pushes-electoral-sabotage/
Then there is this from David Frum in the Atlantic. Frum by the way is a fervent never Trumper.
Impeachment is a constitutional mechanism. The Twenty-Fifth Amendment is a constitutional mechanism. Mass resignations followed by voluntary testimony to congressional committees are a constitutional mechanism. Overt defiance of presidential authority by the president’s own appointees—now that’s a constitutional crisis.
What would be better?
Speak in your own name. Resign in a way that will count. Present the evidence that will justify an invocation of the Twenty-Fifth Amendment, or an impeachment, or at the very least, the first necessary step toward either outcome, a Democratic Congress after the November elections.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/09/this-is-a-constitutional-crisis/569443/
Guess some people value that Government paycheck more than the fate of their nation.
Skybird
09-06-18, 06:13 PM
The mere fact that somebody thinks the situaiton is so desperate that he must go this way with the editorial, and that workers in the WH must cheat on a so-called president in order to save the country from bigger harm, means that these persons do not have the trust anymore that the established mechanisms that should safeguard against something like a Trumpnami and provide prtection to country, people and the constitutional order. Its a system meltdown, like I said just yesterday. The system has failed.
Technically, this kind of cheating can be seen as treason, and Trump's Pretorians will play this card as their argument, Trump himself already has done so. But then, technically the plots to assassinate Hitler, a democratically elected leader who raised by fully obeying the rules of the constitution and made sure his actions were in conformity with the laws, were treason as well, and still both the attempts and the possible success were morally legitimate.
To oppose, disobey and confront the Trumps of this world, no matter their names and nationality, should be seen as a moral imperative for every thinking man of mental sanity and reasonability. When you face evil and stupidity themselves, indifference and arranging yourself with them and aiming at compromises, are no longer morally upright options. It may secure your survival for some time - but you better don't look in the mirror anymore.
Guess some people value that Government paycheck more than the fate of their nation.
Or else the whole story is just more fake news like EM just said.
Mr Quatro
09-06-18, 06:32 PM
Or else the whole story is just more fake news like EM just said.
When large sums of money are involved there will always be suspected and suspicious reasons. :yep:
I strongly believe that if you can have debates on who should run for POTUS and debates on who should be the POTUS ... :yep:
Then they should allow debates on if the person that won the nomination should stay the POTUS like they do with other countries that allow a vote of confidence even submarine captains are being recalled due to a lack of confidence in their ability to perform their assigned duties ... why not the POTUS? :yep:
I have no doubt it is true. In fact I would say we will know who the "senior Trump administration official" is shortly. How that person expected to remain anonymous is hard to understand.
If Trump and others believe that there is a deep state at work in the US Government I can't help but wonder if this will deepen the paranoia or lessen it.
http://thefederalist.com/2018/09/06/new-york-times-anonymous-op-ed-pushes-electoral-sabotage/
Then there is this from David Frum in the Atlantic. Frum by the way is a fervent never Trumper.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/09/this-is-a-constitutional-crisis/569443/
Guess some people value that Government paycheck more than the fate of their nation.
...or, perhaps, they realize the real value of staying on in order to try and get the truth out and to try and mitigate whatever damage may be done by the Trump Miss-Administration. Its always easy to just walk away when faced with a conflict of conscience, but if the conduct, morality, and ethics of the US system of governance is indeed important to a person who is in a position to affect and defend lawful values, then it would be a bigger act of cowardice to to quit than to stay. It is the whistle-blower who is far more loyal to the greater organization than those who either stay quiet to save their own paychecks or those who walk away leaving an untenable mess behind. Its kind of like saying the Colonists should have just kept quiet and not question or criticize the excesses or failures of the Crown (which was held by a truly mad man), ostracizing those who did speak out or seek to mitigate the Crown's actions. Basically, it would have made our current form of government impossible...
Back during the Vietnam War, particularly during the Nixon years, Nixon sought to wrap his policies in The Flag and his followers took up the slogan "America: Love It Or Leave It", a slogan that was countered by "America: Love It And Save It". Nixon, his minions, and his criminality has gone, but those he and his pack railed against are still here. Now we have another president with his own catchy little slogan to lure in the rubes: "Make America Great Again". For the growing vast majority of Americans, you know, that very large group of voters who did drink his Kool-Aid and vote for him, we didn't ever think America was not great. We know there are problems, but we also realized the solution was not the snake-oil 'remedies' of Trump and those backing him. Half-assed, ill-conceived, poorly planned and/or executed efforts don't really solve anything, particularly when the sole purpose of such gross missteps seems to be the self-aggrandizement and self-enrichment of the Yellow Lump currently in the Oval Office. "Make America Great Again"? Don't need to: it already is great and will remain so once we make the major improvement of dumping Trump...
As far as the fate of the nation, well, we survived a Civil War a couple of World Wars, a Cold War, a couple of unsuccessful impeachments, the resignation, in disgrace, of a President (occasioned by the exercise of press freedoms and the acts of people loyal to a the nation and national values, and not the butt sitting in the Big Chair in the Oval Office), and any number of other crises, a good many of which, at the time, had people saying the fate of the nation was at risk; but, you know what, the Nation is still here and I have faith it will weather the dumping of Trump and his minions. Oddly, myself, and an awful lot of other citizens, actually prefer our Oval Office occupant to not be a raving loon with the morals of a carny sideshow conman and an ethical vacuum to his actions. Trump hug the flag all he wants and try to hide behind faux 'patriotism' all he wants, but, as time goes on, fewer and fewer citizens are buying his Bandini...
http://themoderatevoice.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/180717_600-1.jpg
<O>
u crank
09-06-18, 07:06 PM
The mere fact that somebody thinks the situaiton is so desperate that he must go this way with the editorial, and that workers in the WH must cheat on a so-called president in order to save the country from bigger harm, means that these persons do not have the trust anymore that the established mechanisms that should safeguard against something like a Trumpnami and provide prtection to country, people and the constitutional order. Its a system meltdown, like I said just yesterday. The system has failed.
In a Democracy opinion does not overrule elections and the rule of law. When they do you have a problem.
To oppose, disobey and confront the Trumps of this world, no matter their names and nationality, should be seen as a moral imperative for every thinking man of mental sanity and reasonability.
Yes you are correct.The question is how should this be done? In the US there are Congressional elections every two years. There are Presidential elections every four years. There is freedom of expression and freedom of the press. Protests against the government are legal. Anyone can run for office. All those rights and freedoms have not been exhausted.
The system did not fail this person, the anonymous source. This person failed to take advantage of the possibilities available. If necessary he/she should have resigned their position and went to the media with the story. That would be showing the courage of your convictions. Instead what they did do was create another crisis when one was not needed.
Buddahaid
09-06-18, 07:10 PM
I still think he'd benefit by dropping Twitter. Every tweet he makes is always fodder for the press, and wonder if that's the end all of it after all. One could likely write an app that responds to within 98% fidelity of what Trump writes. Presidential trolling?
:ping:
u crank
09-06-18, 07:28 PM
...or, perhaps, they realize the real value of staying on in order to try and get the truth out and to try and mitigate whatever damage may be done by the Trump Miss-Administration.
These statements are alarming, of course, because of the "senior" level status of the government official purported to have written them.
But they are also alarming because an anonymous, unelected government appointee is substituting his or her judgment for that of the duly elected leader of a constitutional republic.
In truth, this appointee has a duty to resign his or her post and report whatever egregious behavior he or she has personally seen to Congress and the Special Counsel Robert Mueller. That's appropriate behavior in an orderly republic, as opposed to this political and policy vigilantism that runs contrary to the remedies created for us by the founding fathers.
Set aside whether you love or hate Donald Trump and his policies. Is it right for unelected people to make decisions for him? Is this a signal we want to send the rest of the world, that constitutional order has fallen apart in the world's most durable democracy? Because that's precisely the destabilizing effect this op-ed will have on America's standing in the eyes of our friends ... and our enemies.
Our democracy is based upon us all agreeing to abide by the results of the Electoral College in presidential elections, and that goes for everyone -- including people who work for the federal government in unelected capacities.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/06/opinions/how-dare-a-senior-trump-official-arrogantly-subvert-an-elected-president-jennings/index.html
u crank
09-06-18, 07:38 PM
I still think he'd benefit by dropping Twitter. Every tweet he makes is always fodder for the press, and wonder if that's the end all of it after all. One could likely write an app that responds to within 98% fidelity of what Trump writes. Presidential trolling?
:ping:
I'd be in favor of breaking his thumbs. But gently of course. :D
So according to the article we have an organized group of senior government officials conspiring with each other to subvert the authority of the elected President, :hmmm:
...but there's no such thing as a deep state, nah.
Catfish
09-07-18, 02:12 AM
I may have said this a hundred times already.
Initially, the 'deep state' is what some politicians called the right wing conspiracy with influential and rich people from big business and politicians supporting arms manufacturers and vice versa (this "industrial military complex" already Eisenhower spoke about), following their own secret agenda regarding starting wars, managing political relations to other countries, and unchallenged american access to worldwide resources. Along with secretly observing anyone who was thought to be opposing them, being 'left', and neutralising them if need be.
"For the real deep state it seems that the men and women responsible for executing U.S. foreign policy are uninterested in the views of the many Americans who actually pay for the nation’s wars, and the Americans who fight them."
That Trump and his yes-men now turned this term upside down and (ab)use it for bullying anyone disagreeing with them is as ridiculous as it is wrong.
The deep state does not exist (https://www.thenation.com/article/that-deep-state-you-keep-hearing-about-it-doesnt-exist/)
Trump's 'deep state' (https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/how-we-got-trumps-clash-deep-state)
This has nothing to do with Trump's idea of a 'deep state', lies and accusations.
If there is anyone left in this government with enough conscience and belief in a higher authority and moral than in Mr. Trump, may god help him in his efforts.
@August...so all is fake news...Bob Woodward, NyT, all the secretaries who have left/were fired for the very same reasons , e.g. Tillerson.
And all words, sorry, tweets from Trump are the truth..I see
Sorry, you only have to watch him on TV, read his tweets, realize what 'knowledge' he has from internal or external affairs....then you do not come to the same conclusions ?
The right wing movement (I am not talking about conservatives because Trump is not a conservative, else he would respect common values) in Germany and the US is pretty the same: The root cause is not Migration or economics in general... it is just plain hate and the complete inability to differentiate and searching for comprimises... We have seen what consequences could arise from this in the last century.
Mr Quatro
09-07-18, 09:55 AM
In the case of the disaster that is Trump, you are essentially saying prayer will solve the problem of a deceitful, dishonest, amoral, and criminal leadership.
No, I am saying that prayer is seeking God's perfect will. Prayer is not telling God what to do, but this forum has rules about witnessing so I will let it go. :yep:
I'm sorry your young friend lost her life to cancer ... stuff like that happens everyday. God gets the blame or gets the glory, uh?
I respect you and your views vienna keep up the good work ... :up:
Sailor Steve
09-07-18, 09:57 AM
"America: Love It And Save It".
The counter-phrase I liked at the time was "America: Change It or Lose It."
The problem I have is that while I agree with those who point out that Trump has a much bigger problem in himself than he does with any "enemies", I also agree with those who point out that a lot of the rhetoric from The Left really is just spite. This is the biggest witch-hunt I've seen since The Right went out of their way to get Clinton.
Then they should allow debates on if the person that won the nomination should stay the POTUS like they do with other countries that allow a vote of confidence even submarine captains are being recalled due to a lack of confidence in their ability to perform their assigned duties ... why not the POTUS? :yep:
The system we have now was put there for a reason. The Founders intentionally made it difficult to change leaders for light or transient causes. Once the President is in place it must be proven that he has committed crimes against the country itself. Just because his popularity waxes and wanes is not good enough reason to remove him from office.
Debates are not part of the electoral process. There is no provision in the Constitution for convincing people to vote for one candidate or the other, just as there is no provision for the People to vote for President at all. They made it so the States elect the President, and later the States made it so the people voted for the Electors who in turn elect the President. Popularity has nothing to do with it.
Mr Quatro
09-07-18, 10:51 AM
Debates are not part of the electoral process. There is no provision in the Constitution for convincing people to vote for one candidate or the other, just as there is no provision for the People to vote for President at all. They made it so the States elect the President, and later the States made it so the people voted for the Electors who in turn elect the President. Popularity has nothing to do with it.
True, but they do play a role in the battle for what we think.
OPINION
The History of Presidential Debates
https://observer.com/2016/10/the-history-of-presidential-debates/
The first debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump was a record breaker, attracting over 84 million viewers. The second debate attracted an even larger audience.
Perhaps Hillary Clinton injected some deliberate sarcasm into Sunday night’s debate when she referred to President Lincoln. While the debates between Mr. Trump and her are the low point in presidential debates, they now have their place in history as the most well viewed and entertaining ones. However, the presidential debates between Mr. Lincoln and Mr. Douglas remain the most famous debates in American history.
Political debates have become an integral part of the American election process. In many cases, they represent the best opportunity for voters to see the candidates up close and learn about their opinions on the key issues.
I have since reconsidered my first thoughts for a recall as other countries have due to the majority rules problem in America, but a debate today could surely show the American people if Trump is sane or not.
I'm glad he won ... Clinton would be impeached for sure based on the reported hacked Clinton emails by China alone that resulted in the untimely deaths of many CIA agents within that country :yep:
em2nought
09-07-18, 04:49 PM
a debate today could surely show the American people if Trump is sane or not.
If Trump had said GDP growth would reach a 4.2% pace during his administration everyone would have called him insane. I think I prefer Trump's brand of "sane" to "status quo", "low energy", "I'm with her", "feel the bern", or "spare change". :03:
I would have preferred it to come in a "Ross Perot" wrapper though. lol
@August...so all is fake news...Bob Woodward, NyT, all the secretaries who have left/were fired for the very same reasons , e.g. Tillerson.
Well it's either fake news or it's evidence of the existence of the deep state that some here dismiss as a crazy conspiracy theory.
Put your Trump hatred aside for a moment and consider what this anonymous NYT writer is saying here. This letter claims that there is a shadowy group of high level government officials who have taken it upon themselves to usurp the authority of the President of the United States, the elected leader of our country whenever they feel like it. You and many here in my country seem fine with it because it's against a President you don't like but what happens if one of these anonymous officials feels that the President should push the nuclear button on North Korea and decides to do it for him? You still going to be ok with it then?
If this isn't just another piece of fake news, and that remains a definite possibility given the people publishing it, then it is a huge threat to my country. The faster we can get these subversives out of there the better so I see a high turnover as a good thing.
And all words, sorry, tweets from Trump are the truth..I see
Sorry, you only have to watch him on TV, read his tweets, realize what 'knowledge' he has from internal or external affairs....then you do not come to the same conclusions ?
Apparently not.
The right wing movement (I am not talking about conservatives because Trump is not a conservative, else he would respect common values) in Germany and the US is pretty the same: The root cause is not Migration or economics in general... it is just plain hate and the complete inability to differentiate and searching for comprimises... We have seen what consequences could arise from this in the last century.
I think you have a misguided viewpoint. Trump is not right wing, nor is he left wing, he's a business man with what I believe is a genuine desire to help his country. Unfortunately he's running into a lot of resistance from the establishment political class trying to do it.
One other thing, I don't know how it is in your country but the only ones here (with any political power) that are preaching the politics of hate and division is the left. To our Democrats people are white or black or straight or LGBTQ4tuesday!X or whatever little box they can think up to categorize and segregate them so they can play one group off against each other.
Skybird
09-08-18, 03:09 AM
In a Democracy opinion does not overrule elections and the rule of law. When they do you have a problem.
Thats neither an exhaustive decription of hre basics of "democracy" (which doe snot exist in the Greek ancient understanding anywhere in the world anyway - , nor a description that would not also fit other systems.
Yes you are correct.The question is how should this be done? In the US there are Congressional elections every two years. There are Presidential elections every four years. There is freedom of expression and freedom of the press. Protests against the government are legal. Anyone can run for office. All those rights and freedoms have not been exhausted. And having the money to run especially for the higher ranking offices certainly never is an issue... As I see it, the campaign mode in the US never ends, but runs four years per four year. Every two years there are major elections of any kind, affecting the WH office, Senate, Congress. And campaigning is anything but an argument for poltics. its hilarious BS, and unscrupulkously promsing the Blue down from the sky.
Very big problem. It corrupts what so far may have remained of politics.
The system did not fail this person, the anonymous source. This person failed to take advantage of the possibilities available. If necessary he/she should have resigned their position and went to the media with the story. That would be showing the courage of your convictions. Instead what they did do was create another crisis when one was not needed.
The system has failed, and thats why this person thinks falling back to these desperate means is the only option left. The system fails your whole nation and people. The safeties it included to protect itself, get worked around, eroded. In the thread on Germn poltics I recently mentioned Jaspers findign on how the takeover worked in Germany, in the 30s. By law and roder. And in the name of protecting the constitution. You can see the same corrision being used by Erdoghan in Turkey. He travelled in on the sailbook named democracy. And what has it given Turkey? A de facto dictatorship of a corrupt family clan and the ultra-orthodox religious, and the deconstruction of the - former - constitutional order.
What you want is that the anonymous source volunteers for standing up against the wall and does not move, so that he or she can be easier shot. How stupid you think this person is? He or she said they do a job - trying to sabotage the worst of all stuff Trump spits on his table. Damage containment. Different to do if you hand yourself over.
There is a reason why reporters and journalists protect their sources as best as they can. Else it would be the end of - especially investigative - journalism and free press. What is left then, is propaganda and agitation the kind of which Trump lives from.
ikalugin
09-08-18, 06:11 AM
I’m really bewildered at the number of smart people who think a politburo of unelected bureaucrats stealing **** off the presidents desk is admirable and the right way to run our democratic government at this time. - a quote from the internet
Catfish
09-08-18, 06:12 AM
^ You should introduce this in Russia :03:
u crank
09-08-18, 07:09 AM
Thats neither an exhaustive decription of hre basics of "democracy" (which doe snot exist in the Greek ancient understanding anywhere in the world anyway - , nor a description that would not also fit other systems.
Nor was it meant to be. I simply made a statement which I believe is true. Yes you can have an opinion in a Democracy but that opinion does not overrule elections and the rule of law.
Every two years there are major elections of any kind, affecting the WH office, Senate, Congress. And campaigning is anything but an argument for poltics. its hilarious BS, and unscrupulkously promsing the Blue down from the sky.
Statements like this make me wonder about your understanding of the US political system. The election of the House of Representatives which occur every two years does not 'effect the WH office'. Only one third of the Senate is up for election every two years. Presidential elections are held every four years. Though this system is not perfect it works well to check executive and legislative power. A good example would be the 2010 midterms when the policies of President Obama were sternly rebuked by the people. President Trump may suffer the same fate in November.
The system has failed, and thats why this person thinks falling back to these desperate means is the only option left. The system fails your whole nation and people. The safeties it included to protect itself, get worked around, eroded.
That is a bold statement but where is the proof. Can you give some concrete examples? What exactly do you mean?
The US has had a peaceful transfer of power for over 200 years. Even during a civil war. I expect it will continue.
What you want is that the anonymous source volunteers for standing up against the wall and does not move, so that he or she can be easier shot. How stupid you think this person is?
That's pretty dramatic but fortunately not true.
He or she said they do a job - trying to sabotage the worst of all stuff Trump spits on his table. Damage containment.
This person was hired, not elected, by the Trump administration to do a job. That would not be in the job description. You and others are assuming that this person, who is an employee, knows what is best and can be trusted while remaining anonymous. Excuse me for being a little skeptical. Let's ask a simple question. Has this person ever confronted Trump face to face with their concerns and criticisms? Course we don't know but my guess is no. Instead they go behind his back which only increases the Presidents' distrust. It is sad but also very silly.
They do not know what to do so they act in a hysterical or overly dramatic fashion. This plays well on CNN and MSNBC but gives Trump exactly the narrative he needs.
A perfect example of this is Sen. Cory Bookers' performance at the Supreme Court nomination hearing. It is hard to take people like this seriously. I've said it before and I'll repeat it. Progressives/Democrats/liberals have no clue about what to do about Trump.
It shows.
Platapus
09-08-18, 07:30 AM
Over the past decade, it appears that we have had a serious ( in my opinion) degradation of professionalism.
Being a professional is not just being paid for something, but it is also voluntarily abiding by a set of ethics of that profession even if they differ from your own.
But more and more we read stories about people violating the ethics of the profession they voluntarily joined because of personal feelings.
I only see this getting worse.
Anyone who has read my posts here knows that I don't approve of Trump as our president. I think he is a buffoon and emotionally unsuited for the position. But, at the same time, I am upset that professionals (so called professionals) in his administration are doing such things.
1. If you don't approve of what Trump is doing, then resign from your Trump administration position
2. If you feel that Trump is doing something illegal, then there are multiple appropriate venues for reporting such suspected illegal activities.
But what you should not be able to do is stay in a Trump Administration position, garnering the benefits (financial and other) of that position, while at the same time sabotaging that administration.
That is not what a professional does nor is that how professionals should act. It is dishonorable conduct.
But I am seeing more and more examples of people who should be professionals allowing their personal feelings affect their professional conduct.
I don't like Trump as our president
I want Trump out of office as soon as possible
I never want Trump to have any type of federal political power ever again
But, what is happening to Trump by people in his administration is not right.
Trump normally gets no sympathy from me, but on this one instance. He has it.
I want a Trump Administration to end... but this is the wrong way.
Jimbuna
09-08-18, 07:35 AM
^ :up:
Mr Quatro
09-08-18, 09:14 AM
Quote:
I’m really bewildered at the number of smart people who think a politburo of unelected bureaucrats stealing **** off the presidents desk is admirable and the right way to run our democratic government at this time.
- a quote from the internet
President Trump said that didn't happen and that if it did happen that person would've been fired immediately.
The truth in the news has always been suspected and now even more ... the truth is now up to us to discern and I for one do not have the time to do the necessary investigation into the truth.
I will wait for this op-ed person to reveal himself to make any further decisions, but these are very serious times, uh?
Skybird
09-08-18, 09:15 AM
Germany has had two examples in just 2-3 generation where democracy was fully abused - right by following its paper rules down to the last letter and paragraph.
The same happens currently in several countries, Turkey being just my most used example. The letters of the country'S laws followed down to the last dot above the i.
I understand the American election system, u_cranck, its not as if it were Cricket rules. And every two years major parts of the institutionalised national political leadership level - consisting of POTUS-Senate-Congress - gets re-elected. Every two years a huge share of office holders campaign for getting re-elected. Which means that practically this leadership level and thus the nation is to huge part in a notorious campaigning mode. And politians in campaign mode - don't get me started. You know my song.
You play the Vulcan here by acting innocently and sober, fact-oriented. But I think we both know that you know very damn well what I am abaut and what I said and meant, don't you.
I agree on one thing, your indication about the left not knowing about Trump. I would say it deifferently, and alreay have said itg int hse words in the past: Trump not os much is strong by himself, but due to the weakness of the kleft, and the fact that the Demcratrs still are unable to produce a challenger/candidate accpetable for protest voters whop voted for Trump.
However, due to the change in demograohy and ethnic mix, more and more gfuture voters - as long as they care to vote at all - will vote left and will want socialist policies, hoping they financially get something out of it. The traditional conservative white audience of the Republicans, is dying out.
And that will show. Without manipulating the system, they will find it harder and harder to win elecitons in the future, if they do not turn their policies, like Merkel has pushed our former conservative party into all-embracing mainstream socialism as well. Trump'S triump may be just the last resistence of an old lion whose best days already are over. Republican condidates will either adapt to their new voters cnaging demands, or lose. Mind you, by pure ballot count, Trump already was defeated by Clinton: it was gerrymsandeirng what saved him, and Russian interference (I take that as granted, yes). And politicians who seem to be far more left than Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama, have become popular amongst the young. There seems to be a left scene that even is left of Bernie Sanders.
I remind of this:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=2565644&postcount=5217
A tinsoldier's pride in standing upright and tall, will not adress any of these problems, nor does it mark a noble or honoruable character. Any soldier - literally as well metaphorically seen - should be very picky whom he stands up for and stays loyal to. Kadavergehorsam, a word that knows no 1:1 translation in English, paves the way to the worst and most malicious deeds committed and accepted in the name of the good and light. Loyalty to oaths and obedience to superiors must know limits.
I see only one word in this
disloyalty
This person male or female and where ever this person work in the White House and what ever this person works with has an
Loyalty to the country and the people who have chosen the sitting President, who is Mr. Trump, and that is important.
If this person have some problems with this then this person should have resigned.
This is how I see it.
Markus
A tinsoldier's pride in standing upright and tall, will not adress any of these problems, nor does it mark a noble or honoruable character. Any soldier - literally as well metaphorically seen - should be very picky whom he stands up for and stays loyal to. Kadavergehorsam, a word that knows no 1:1 translation in English, paves the way to the worst and most malicious deeds committed and accepted in the name of the good and light. Loyalty to oaths and obedience to superiors must know limits.
Of course there is no 1:1 translation Skybird. We're not Germans :03:.
Americans barely tolerate properly constituted authority, let alone be some kind of mindless regimented robots who will kill or die at the whim of a prince or dictator.
Interesting piece from another Trump official who tells quite a different story:
When I challenge the president, I do it directly. My anonymous colleague should have, too.
By Nikki Haley
September 7 at 3:09 PM
Nikki Haley is U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.
We have enough issues to deal with in the world, so it’s unfortunate to have to take time to write this, but I feel compelled to address the claims in the anonymous “resistance” op-ed published this week in the New York Times. The author might think he or she is doing a service to the country. I strongly disagree. What this “senior official in the Trump administration” has done, and is apparently intent on continuing to do, is a serious disservice — not just to the president but to the country.
I, too, am a senior Trump administration official. I proudly serve in this administration, and I enthusiastically support most of its decisions and the direction it is taking the country. But I don’t agree with the president on everything. When there is disagreement, there is a right way and a wrong way to address it. I pick up the phone and call him or meet with him in person.
Like my colleagues in the Cabinet and on the National Security Council, I have very open access to the president. He does not shut out his advisers, and he does not demand that everyone agree with him. I can talk to him most any time, and I frequently do. If I disagree with something and believe it is important enough to raise with the president, I do it. And he listens. Sometimes he changes course, sometimes he doesn’t. That’s the way the system should work. And the American people should be comfortable knowing that’s the way the system does work in this administration.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/when-i-challenge-the-president-i-do-it-directly-my-anonymous-colleague-should-have-too/2018/09/07/d453eaf6-b2ae-11e8-9a6a-565d92a3585d_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.ea65b2796e1d
u crank
09-08-18, 12:32 PM
I understand the American election system, u_crank, its not as if it were Cricket rules. And every two years major parts of the institutionalised national political leadership level - consisting of POTUS-Senate-Congress - gets re-elected.
If you insist. POTUS - President of the United States. Presidential elections are every four years.:D
...don't get me started. You know my song.
Yes I do. I've heard it before and I am not requesting that you to sing it again.
Mr Quatro
09-08-18, 12:41 PM
Nikki Haley is on the list of the op-ed mystery writer the NY Times has published that is contributing to this mess, but I don't think it is her.
She does have political ambitions however :yep:
Here's a good list of suspects for the inside job of hatchet person :o
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/politics/who-wrote-the-resistance-op-ed/?utm_term=.6373926b9060
Pretty much everyone has a theory about who wrote that bombshell anonymous New York Times op-ed. We know from the Times only that it was a “senior administration official” — a broad label that could include scores of White House or executive branch aides. Top Trump officials have publicly denied they were behind it, though such denials should be considered carefully given their enraged boss and a precedent for them from administration officials
Skybird
09-08-18, 01:36 PM
If you insist. POTUS - President of the United States. Presidential elections are every four years.:D
As I said, you play the innocent sober Vulcan, but you understand damn well what I tell you, being very selective on what you pick for somebody's reply and what not. And I did not speak of presidential elections exclusively.
Every TWO years, you Americans vote. Every TWO years you vote all seats in Congress, and every TWO years you vote for one third of all seats in Senate. Every four years, presidential elections make it even more complex. Maybe you are election-addicts.
Or did you mean to say that Congress and Senate do not count for you?
Forgive that a foreigner must explain this to you, but you seem to not know your own system (or you should sue your former school for the low quality of math classes they provided you with).
I do not even count the votings necessary when an office holder stands back, dies, must be replaced. Then the votings for city mayors, local parliaments...
The last full campaign for POTUS lasted almost 600 days. Candidates announce their intention usually in springtime one year ahead of the presidential election. Wowh. Thats over one and a half year.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/10/us-election-longest-world/501680/
https://text.npr.org/s.php?sId=450238156
u crank
09-08-18, 02:12 PM
As I said, you play the innocent sober Vulcan, but you understand damn well what I tell you, being very selective on what you pick for somebody's reply and what not. And I did not speak of presidential elections exclusively.
I'm not a Vulcan and quite often not sober. I am not being selective. They are your words not mine. You mentioned POTUS and two years in the same sentence. Try proof reading your stuff before posting.
Forgive that a foreigner must explain this to you, but you seem to not know your own system (or you should sue your former school for the low quality of math classes they provided you with).
In case you didn't notice I am not an American. So forgive me, a foreigner, for explaining it to you. You're welcome.
Skybird
09-09-18, 04:15 AM
You mentioned POTUS and two years in the same sentence. Try proof reading your stuff before posting.
Well.
And every two years major parts of the institutionalised national political leadership level - consisting of POTUS-Senate-Congress - gets re-elected.
I thought this was a pretty accurate account of the recent Supreme Court nomination craziness and more to the point the Legislature not doing it's job.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=206&v=IlAHS6pT5A4
Senator Ben Sasse is one of the GOP Senators I still have respect for (the ranks took a severe blow with the passing of Sen. John McCain") and have always appreciated his views, even on the odd occasions, where I didn't agree fully. It is interesting his name, and his stance on the confirmation hearings has been brought up; Sasse has, for a long time, voiced his dissatisfaction with the GOP as it stands today; yesterday, he said this in a televised interview:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1ZEaMvvR4g&feature=youtu.be
If Sen. Sasse would like to join those of us who are free of being told what we should think, free of obligation to rote regurgitation of party lines, and free of crass political constraints, if he would like to join the very large, and very growing, voting segment of us Independents, he is more than welcome. We need people who actually think about matters seriously and put that thought into their actions. We need people who are not just "Party Lemmings"...
<O>
Democrat crazy egged on by his party leadership attempts to murder a Republican congressman in front of his family
https://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/article218224930.html
U.S. House of Representatives hopeful Rudy Peters was “minding his own business with his family” at his campaign booth during the Castro Valley Fall Festival just before 4 p.m. when a man came up and began insulting Peters’ political party and the president, Sgt. Ray Kelly, a spokesman for the Alameda County Sheriff’s Office, told McClatchy. That’s when the interaction grew violent: The man making disparaging comments, Farzad Fazeli, 35, became “aggressive,” pulled out a switchblade and tried to attack Peters, the sheriff’s office said. Kelly said Fazeli may have also thrown a glass mug at the candidate.
Read more here: https://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/article218224930.html#storylink=cpy
Democrat crazy egged on by his party leadership attempts to murder a Republican congressman in front of his family
The article makes no mention of his political leanings.
Nice try though. :yeah:
The article makes no mention of his political leanings.
Nice try though. :yeah:
That's because you only read that one article and you hate us so much that you only see what you want to see Dowly. His political leanings are as clear as the other liberal nut who shot up those republican congressmen playing baseball last year.
The fact is the left is promoting and fomenting violence and their crazy fringe is responding. Deal with it.
Bilge_Rat
09-13-18, 12:31 PM
Senator Ben Sasse is one of the GOP Senators I still have respect for
<O>
not surprised you agree with him, Old man. :D
Ben Sasse is a dead man walking, either he has already decided not to run again in 2020 or he will be beaten in the primary. With the iron grip that Trump has on the GOP, those that cross him are pushed out like Corker or Flake.
of course as you get closer to 2020 you may see that Sasse all of a sudden starts to see new qualities in Trump and his agenda...:haha:
p.s. - notice that despite all his anti-Trump rhetoric, he is still a solid yes vote on Kavanaugh.
em2nought
09-14-18, 12:20 AM
p.s. - notice that despite all his anti-Trump rhetoric, he is still a solid yes vote on Kavanaugh.
https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/2/1362599_02bcdea730.jpg
That's because you only read that one article [..]
You are right, I only read that one article since that is the one you posted. After having read others, it does appear that he might indeed be a democrat supporter.
I stand corrected. :salute:
em2nought
09-14-18, 01:26 PM
After this storm, I am not looking forward to anything and everything in North & South Carolina being blamed on Trump for the next two years. :rolleyes:
Buddahaid
09-14-18, 01:30 PM
Comes with the job. Trump just isn't good at taking criticism and fans the flames into a nice roaring fire every time.
Another one of Trump's "best people" pleads guilty and begins cooperation with the Special Counsel.
(https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/manafort-plans-to-plead-guilty-to-second-set-of-charges/2018/09/14/a1541068-b5c9-11e8-a7b5-adaaa5b2a57f_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.dee0625c160b&wpisrc=nl_most&wpmm=1)
Manafort will cooperate with Mueller as part of guilty plea, prosecutor says (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/manafort-plans-to-plead-guilty-to-second-set-of-charges/2018/09/14/a1541068-b5c9-11e8-a7b5-adaaa5b2a57f_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.dee0625c160b&wpisrc=nl_most&wpmm=1)
Flipping Manafort gives Mueller a cooperating witness who was at key events relevant to the Russia investigation — a Trump Tower meeting attended by a Russian lawyer, the Republican National Convention and a host of other behind-the-scenes discussions in the spring and summer of 2016.
Another one of Trump's "best people" pleads guilty and begins cooperation with the Special Counsel.
(https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/manafort-plans-to-plead-guilty-to-second-set-of-charges/2018/09/14/a1541068-b5c9-11e8-a7b5-adaaa5b2a57f_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.dee0625c160b&wpisrc=nl_most&wpmm=1)
Manafort will cooperate with Mueller as part of guilty plea, prosecutor says (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/manafort-plans-to-plead-guilty-to-second-set-of-charges/2018/09/14/a1541068-b5c9-11e8-a7b5-adaaa5b2a57f_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.dee0625c160b&wpisrc=nl_most&wpmm=1)
"Best people"? :haha:
He was fired after just 2 months and long before the election. What he's been convicted of has nothing to do with Trump or the 2016 Presidential campaign.
This is what, like round 100 for the Trump haters? You should know by now that it is just going to be another dry well.
Bleiente
09-15-18, 03:21 PM
ZENSUR by Bleiente
em2nought
09-15-18, 03:30 PM
Of course every good elitist knows that the flyover state occupants are illiterates who shouldn't even be allowed to vote. :doh:
He was fired after just 2 months and long before the election.He joined the campaign in March 2016 and resigned in August of same year.
What he's been convicted of has nothing to do with Trump or the 2016 Presidential campaign.That's true. It is the cooperation part that is more interesting. For the SCO to accept the plea deal Manafort must've had something of substance to provide to the investigation.
He joined the campaign in March 2016 and resigned in August of same year.
But he was only made Campaign Manager at the end of June. Before that he was an unpaid volunteer.
That's true. It is the cooperation part that is more interesting. For the SCO to accept the plea deal Manafort must've had something of substance to provide to the investigation.
We'll see but the plea deal was for, in his lawyers words: "conduct that dates back many years", ie long before his involvement with the Trump or the campaign. I'm betting that this will be just another disappointment in a long line of them for the Trump Haters.
But he was only made Campaign Manager at the end of June. Before that he was an unpaid volunteer.I don't see how that matters. He was important enough to be present at the Trump Tower meeting along with Donnie Jr. and Kushner prior to becoming CM.
We'll see but the plea deal was for, in his lawyers words: "conduct that dates back many years", ie long before his involvement with the Trump or the campaign.Yes, that's correct, but his cooperation is not limited to those crimes.
Your client shall cooperate fully, truthfully, completely, and forthrightly with the Government and other law enforcement authorities identified by the Government in any and all matters as to which Government deems the cooperation relevant.Source: Manafort Plea Agreement (https://www.justice.gov/file/1094151/download) pg.6
Mr Quatro
09-16-18, 11:37 AM
Don't get me wrong Dowly ... I think your analizes are really good especially when going up against vienna, but how do you or did you get so good in US Politics being from Finland?
Are you close to the border with the USSR :D
Yes, that's correct, but...
Ok, but I say you're grasping at straws and you're gonna get disappointed again.
Don't get me wrong Dowly ... I think your analizes are really good especially when going up against vienna, but how do you or did you get so good in US Politics being from Finland?I've got retard powers.
Ok, but I say you're grasping at straws and you're gonna get disappointed again.
Eh, you're the one clinging to the charges he plead guilty to, instead of the much more important issue of him now cooperating with the Special Counsel. The Trump Tower meeting being the first issue Mueller will likely ask him about and if Donnie Jr. lied about it in his testimony, then that's one more indictment hitting ever closer to Trump himself. Will he let his son go down or will he try to prevent that by going after Mueller?
Catfish
09-17-18, 04:23 AM
Trump is nor lying, nor is he mentally unfit. Seems he is a victim of sympathetic audience control, which works in reverse. The audience controls him, as long as it is perceived as supportive. No joke.
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/07/30/trump-lies-reversals-rudderless-unprincipled-leader-psychologist-column/848728002/
Explains a lot i think.
I've got retard powers.
Eh, you're the one clinging to the charges he plead guilty to, instead of the much more important issue of him now cooperating with the Special Counsel. The Trump Tower meeting being the first issue Mueller will likely ask him about and if Donnie Jr. lied about it in his testimony, then that's one more indictment hitting ever closer to Trump himself. Will he let his son go down or will he try to prevent that by going after Mueller?
Like I said we'll see but your boy has had Manaforts 2nd banana Gates in his cooperation pocket for months and nothing has yet emerged from it.
Like I said we'll see but your boy has had Manaforts 2nd banana Gates in his cooperation pocket for months and nothing has yet emerged from it.That the public hasn't heard anything re:Gates' cooperation doesn't mean a thing. Mueller is under no obligation to prosecute the moment he finds evidence of a crime.
That the public hasn't heard anything re:Gates' cooperation doesn't mean a thing. Mueller is under no obligation to prosecute the moment he finds evidence of a crime.
OK but expect to be disappointed.
Bleiente
09-17-18, 01:57 PM
:haha:
Catfish
09-17-18, 02:51 PM
Someone should send Trump a rose.
not surprised you agree with him, Old man. :D
Ben Sasse is a dead man walking, either he has already decided not to run again in 2020 or he will be beaten in the primary. With the iron grip that Trump has on the GOP, those that cross him are pushed out like Corker or Flake.
of course as you get closer to 2020 you may see that Sasse all of a sudden starts to see new qualities in Trump and his agenda...:haha:
p.s. - notice that despite all his anti-Trump rhetoric, he is still a solid yes vote on Kavanaugh.
A couple of things:
Don't equate respect with or mistake it for total agreement with an individual, group, or idea; it is very possible to respect someone without necessarily being in total agreement; I respect anyone who appears to have given their stance considered, mature thought and who is not mindlessly regurgitating a party line or exhibiting lemming behavior. Ben Sasse, like Barry Goldwater and John McCain before him, is his own person and I say more power to him...
Your statement about Sasse making an about face regarding Trump in Sasse's 2020 reelection bid is a bit laughable. First, there is no guarantee Trump will be around, politically, in 2020 nor that Trump will have any serious influence if he is still in office. Things have steadily gone downhill for Trump and continues to get worse; in 2020, Trump would be not an asset, but a liability. Then there is the matter of Sasse's own political stature in his home state; Sasse won his seat in 2014 by defeating the DEM candidate in Nebraska with a total of 64.4% of the vote to the DEMs 31.5%, a whopping margin of 32.9%, a very, very substantial victory. Sasse really doesn't need Trump; in truth, to keep Nebraska in the GOP fold, the GOP and Trump will be more in need of Sasse...
The yes vote for Kavanaugh is just one and, most likely not the deciding one, so it is what it is; besides, with the way things are going for this SCOTUS nomination, the GOP and Trump should be grateful for the vote all...
"Best people"? :haha:
He was fired after just 2 months and long before the election. What he's been convicted of has nothing to do with Trump or the 2016 Presidential campaign.
This is what, like round 100 for the Trump haters? You should know by now that it is just going to be another dry well.
Hmm, the old Trumpian "Well, he was not a very important part of my circle..." deflection. Let's see about Manafort and his connection to Trump:
From Wikipedia --
...
Chairman of Donald Trump's 2016 campaign
In February 2016, Manafort approached Donald Trump through a mutual friend, Thomas J. Barrack Jr. He pointed out his experience advising presidential campaigns in the United States and around the world, described himself as an outsider not connected to the Washington establishment, and offered to work without salary. In March 2016, he joined Trump's presidential campaign to take the lead in getting commitments from convention delegates. On June 20, 2016, Trump fired campaign manager Corey Lewandowski and promoted Manafort to the position. Manafort gained control of the daily operations of the campaign as well as an expanded $20 million budget, hiring decisions, advertising, and media strategy Like most hires in the Trump campaign, Manafort was not vetted.
On June 9, 2016, Manafort, Donald Trump Jr., and Jared Kushner were participants in a meeting with Russian attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya and several others at Trump Tower. A British music agent, saying he was acting on behalf of Emin Agalarov and the Russian government, had told Trump Jr. that he could obtain damaging information on Hillary Clinton if he met with a lawyer connected to the Kremlin. At first, Trump Jr. said the meeting had been primarily about the Russian ban on international adoptions (in response to the Magnitsky Act) and mentioned nothing about Mrs. Clinton; he later said the offer of information about Clinton had been a pretext to conceal Veselnitskaya's real agenda.
In August 2016, Manafort's connections to former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych and his pro-Russian Party of Regions drew national attention in the US, where it was reported that Manafort may have received $12.7 million in off-the-books funds from the Party of Regions.
On August 17, 2016, Donald Trump received his first security briefing. The same day, August 17, Trump shook up his campaign organization in a way that appeared to minimize Manafort's role. It was reported that members of Trump's family, particularly Jared Kushner who had originally been a strong backer of Manafort, had become uneasy about his Russian connections and suspected that he had not been forthright about them. Manafort stated in an internal staff memorandum that he would "remain the campaign chairman and chief strategist, providing the big-picture, long-range campaign vision". However, two days later, Trump announced his acceptance of Manafort's resignation from the campaign after Steve Bannon and Kellyanne Conway took on senior leadership roles within that campaign.
Upon Manafort's resignation as campaign chairman, Newt Gingrich stated, "nobody should underestimate how much Paul Manafort did to really help get this campaign to where it is right now." Gingrich later added that, for the Trump administration, "It makes perfect sense for them to distance themselves from somebody who apparently didn't tell them what he was doing."
...
BY God, Agust is right: by the above description, all Manfort did was go on coffee (or covfefe) runs... :har:
Here's a good timeline of Trump's connections to Manafort (and their connection to some others in the Trump circle)...
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/10/a_timeline_of_paul_manafort_s_relationship_with_th e_trump_world.html
It should be noted that Manafort and Trump had continued contact after Manafort resigned as Trump's Campaign Manager and that Trump's legal team and Manafort's legal team had an information sharing agreement (now voided by Manafort's plea agreement) all during the time after the appointment of Mueller as Special Counsel, you know, kinda of like collusion regarding the SC's investigation...
...
We'll see but the plea deal was for, in his lawyers words: "conduct that dates back many years", ie long before his involvement with the Trump or the campaign. I'm betting that this will be just another disappointment in a long line of them for the Trump Haters.
The plea deal also requires Manafort to testify, under oath, and provide any supporting evidence connected with the testimony, on any and all matters either prior to his tenure with Trump, during his Tenure, or after. The very fact he was a participant, along with Trump Jr. and Trump's son-in-law Kushner, in the Trump Tower meeting shows he was much more than a sideline benchwarmer on the Trump team and connects the Trump team to, and on its face, act of criminal conspiracy with a foreign power that actually does fall under the purview of Mueller's investigation. Considering that Mueller has gotten indictments on about a couple of dozen subjects of the probe, has actually gotten a conviction against the one hold out (Manafort) who, until last Friday wouldn't take a plea, and has actually gotten guilty pleas against about 8 of those involved in the Trump circle, I would safely venture a guess the one who is really disappointed is President Chump:
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/2/20/17031772/mueller-indictments-grand-jury
Yes, most likely very, very disappointed...
... and very scared. Mueller has run a surprisingly tight ship and has maintained not only his trademark poker face throughout, he has, in a city known for "leaks" has been watertight. It must be frustrating for Trump, who thrives on 'insider' information, to have neither any clue as to what the SC is planning nor the means to get a foothold on any information...
That the public hasn't heard anything re:Gates' cooperation doesn't mean a thing. Mueller is under no obligation to prosecute the moment he finds evidence of a crime.
Absolutely true. From what has transpired thus far, it appears the SC is building his case(s) from the ground up, placing certain persons and events in an order to lay a solid foundation for the next level up in action(s). For example, the Cohen plea deal has Cohen not only admitting his participation in a scheme to violate US Law regarding campaign financing, it also has him naming Trump as participant, as yet unindicted; the Manafort plea deal has Manafort not only admitting his participation in the infamous Trump Tower meeting in a conspiracy to violate US Law regarding collusion with a foreign power against the interests of the US, he also admitted to the content and purpose of the meeting and the participation of Trump Jr and Kushner; it should be noted if, as Trump's own attorneys have stated, that Trump, himself, dictated the statement, released under Trump Jr's name, in an effort to obfuscate the true nature of the meeting and to sidetrack pending investigation, then Trump would be open to obstruction of justice, criminal conspiracy, etc. ...
It appears what the SC has done, and is doing, is getting all the low level lackeys to all agree on who was the Chief who was actually calling the shots...
OK but expect to be disappointed.
Nah, I don't think the American people will be disappointed: we'll be too busy celebrating...
... but don't worry: we'll at least offer you a beer to cry into... :03: :haha:
<O>
the Manafort plea deal has Manafort not only admitting his participation in the infamous Trump Tower meeting in a conspiracy to violate US Law regarding collusion with a foreign power against the interests of the US, he also admitted to the content and purpose of the meeting and the participation of Trump Jr and Kushner;Huh? I don't think that's correct? Granted, I've only briefly gone over the plea deal document, but I don't recall him talking about the Trump Tower meeting?
***
In stunning move, Trump declassifies documents related to Russia probe (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/extraordinary-move-trump-declassifies-documents-related-russia-probe-n910486)
A statement by the White House press office said Trump had directed the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), the Department of Justice and the FBI to declassify about 20 pages of a highly sensitive application for surveillance against Carter Page, a one-time Trump foreign policy aide.
The documents Trump is releasing reflect a specific request, down to the page numbers, made by the Republican members of the House judiciary and intelligence committees this summer. Justice and intelligence officials had resisted releasing the information on the grounds that it was too sensitive.
I wonder how it'll backfire this time. :hmmm:
Mr Quatro
09-18-18, 10:27 AM
Today is September 18th ... does it look like Mueller's investigation is going to be over in time for the mid term elections early in November?
I don't think so and if it were to end ...what effect would the findings have on the GOP in the mid-term elections?
Huh? I don't think that's correct? Granted, I've only briefly gone over the plea deal document, but I don't recall him talking about the Trump Tower meeting?
***
You are correct: it is incorrect and I apologize. I had heard a report on the radio analyzing Manafort's allocution (for which, unfortunately, I haven't been able to find a transcript) and the point was raised about the charges and allegations not included in the formal agreement, including likely charges of criminal conspiracy related to the Trump Tower meeting; the reporter commented that, given how the plea agreement and, particularly, the allocution were/are defined, the ability of Manafort to obfuscate or deflect on the nature and content of the meeting is, for all practical and legal purposes, nil; the reporter further noted he can't deny the participation or its nature of either Trump Jr. or Kushner, if asked directly by the SC or during testimony before a Federal Grand Jury. I made that post, and the statements therein, while trying to do two other tasks at the same tome and somehow conflated the two sources. Again, I apologize and I thank you for the good catch... :up:
***
In stunning move, Trump declassifies documents related to Russia probe (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/extraordinary-move-trump-declassifies-documents-related-russia-probe-n910486)
I wonder how it'll backfire this time. :hmmm:
A really bad outcome for the Trump camp would be the documents will fully back up the position of the FBI, the SC, and other related entities that all the proper means and methods were actually followed and all the "i's" were dotted and all the "t's" were crossed, resulting in a huge embarrassment for the Trumpers, although, knowing their derailed trains of thought, they'll concoct some sort of 'Deep State" conspiracy to try and deflect; maybe they should put Alex Jones on retainer right now... :haha:
The worst case for the Trumpers would be if the previously redacted or otherwise withheld parts of the filings actually cast a broader light on the actions, connections, and/or illegal activities yet to be disclosed, say something like emails, letters, wiretap transcripts, etc., that would further ensnare the participants in the scandal(s). There's and old law school and trial lawyers' saying: “You never ask a question on cross examination to which you do not know the answer to.” The maxim would hold well in the case of the redacted documents; only a relatively few people outside of the Justice Dept. actually know what the whole contents of the FISA warrants and their supporting evidence contain. The US Senate Intelligence Committee members, both DEM and GOP, know the contents, but have wisely declined, thus far, to move to release the information; the US House Intelligence Committee members also know the contents, but only to varying degrees: GOP Chairman Nunes has been furtively concealing some of the information from the DEM Committee members and has shown a very obvious devotion to protecting Trump at all costs. This has included releasing what should have been classified, sensitive information selectively in order to reinforce both his position and Trump's. However, Nunes appears to be wearing blinders in his selection of what to disclose and further seems to have that curious blindness and deafness Trumpers seem to have, you know, the type were, when presented with actual facts, they shut their eyes tight, put their fingers in their ears while shouting "Don't see, don't hear it!! Na-na-na-na, Its not happening!!". The big problem is, there are so few of the and so many, many more reasonable adults who are looking and listening...
I'm also still analyzing the Manafort plea filings and I'm impressed at the depth of detail in Mueller's filing of case information. You know, it seems a good court filing is far more elucidative than any quantity of semi-literate, barely intelligible Tweets...
Again, Dowly: Thanks for the catch...
<O>
In yesterdays weekly episode of The World according to Trump on our Danish News Channel
The host in the studio asked the Journalist in USA
Are we getting close or further away from Trump and perhaps a impeachment.
The Journalist sad.
No one knows.
If we are further away or closer
and if we are closer we do not know if it is Trump or some from his family who's behind.
(I could have forgot some of it)
In this episode they were talking about Manafort and his agreement with the prosecutor.
Markus
We, here in the US, don't know either; its all very much open to speculation...
Way back in the Presidential Election thread, when Trump was elected by the Electoral College, I said I did not believe Trump would be impeached, and I still stand by that prediction. Trump, when he started his run was, as usual, completely ignorant of what he was getting into and the possible (probable) effects the mere act of running for President would entail. He was and is still is a person of secrets and concealments. I think he somehow thought the office of President would be a shield or barrier against the possibility of having his dirty laundry made public; oh, how wrong he was (as usual). If anything at all, running for President just opens up a person's life in ways unimaginable. Trump has, over his life, had an awful lot of shady, possibly illegal dealings, associations with disreputable characters, and more than the usual share of depraved immoralities. Being in such a state, it would be very unwise to subject one's life to inspection. His big problem is that a greater majority of his transgressions and criminality are probably true and he is now finding himself having to face an accounting. The really big downside, in Trump's world, would not necessarily be being impeached, it would be facing legal action that would most probably result in the forfeiture and/or loss of his precious assets, something brought into a stark reality by the extent of the forfeiture of assets by Manafort as part of his plea deal, totaling, in real property and financial holdings (up to and including loss of a life insurance policy) an estimated USD $46,000,000. If Trump's dealings and/or his questionable tax returns result in legal action, Trump could lose far, far more than he expects. Add to possible governmental fines and levies the likelihood those holding his massive debts would also be disinclined to continue supporting him and call in his notes and/or start civil proceedings to recoup. Basically, Trump could easily lose all of his 'empire' even if he isn't impeached but is tried after leaving office. Given how highly Trump holds his little kingdom and his public persona, if enough pressure is asserted by the SC's investigation, Trump may pull a "Nixon" and make a deal : "I'll resign if you don't pursue legal action against me and leave me with a good chunk of my assets"...
...of course, Trump will then leave office , have someone write a book for him claiming he was a"victim" of "deep states" and "lying media", hit the lecture circuit (for a 'huuuge' fee), and then, like Oliver North, become another poster child of the Far, Far Right (for a 'huuuge' fee)...
An interesting BTW about Manafort's USD $46,000,000 forfeiture: combining that 'huuuge' amount with other forfeitures, fines, fees and back taxes collected from some of the other persons who have already plead guilty, adding in possible future assessments, it would appear Mueller's investigation could actually turn a bit of a profit after costs. Certainly puts a very significant dent in the Trumper's whining and deflections about the 'wasteful' cost of the SC's office...
<O>
I wonder how Trump declassifying the documents is seen from a legal standpoint? Obviously, as the POTUS he has the authority to declassify documents, but what if his intent is to interfere, in this case in an investigation where he himself is a subject of investigation?
Trump's own tweet in which he quotes Peter King gives us an idea what the documents will be about:
“What will be disclosed is that there was no basis for these FISA Warrants, that the important information was kept from the court, there’s going to be a disproportionate influence of the (Fake) Dossier. Basically you have a counter terrorism tool used to spy on a presidential...
....campaign, which is unprecedented in our history.” Congressman Peter King Really bad things were happening, but they are now being exposed. Big stuff!https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1042030988518408194
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1042031772433883136
Doesn't seem to be much new, the political nature of the Steele dossier was made known in the FISA application as the HIC Dems showed after the release of the Nunes memo, so that's old news.
Whatever the documents will show, it certainly doesn't send a very encouraging message to anyone thinking of working with the US intelligence, since they can't be sure if someone like Trump will just go ahead and potentially reveal them.
u crank
09-19-18, 08:55 AM
Whatever the documents will show, it certainly doesn't send a very encouraging message to anyone thinking of working with the US intelligence, since they can't be sure if someone like Trump will just go ahead and potentially reveal them.
That might be true. But I wonder how many people will hesitate to get involved in future Presidential campaigns because of what happened in this past election?
Skybird
09-19-18, 09:51 AM
You'd be surprised how many people just will not care, because for them politics is just about "our guy" being the last man standing, no matter what. Crowds accept surprisingly big damage to their own interests just to avoid needing to realise that "their guy" is a piece of garbage. Because that would tell them something unpleasant about themselves. And the greater their investments into "their guy" and his fame and glory, the less motivation there will be in the future to question him or said investments - because that would mean to risk that past investments were thrown out of the window. Conclusion: we must invest even more to prevent that there will ever be judgement day coming and all our earlier investments go lost. And so: from bad to worse, from worse to worst.
Its a known pattern in politics and sociology, sociologists even have their own name and model for it.
Another argument on the long list of arguments speaking against "democracy" and general elections for just every Peter and Paul. Voting is like hooliganism in Britain. Males meeting on weekends to trade kicks and strikes and beat each other up, do not do it because they have personal anger at the other individual. They do it for some archaic tribal totem-fetishism. Who has the longest - thats what it comes down to. This ground is ours. Us and Them. And politics show that.
Not even the Vulcans would be able to clean up this mess. Its archaic behaviour on so deep-rooting instinct level that I would not mind to call it animalistic.
Or as Freud said: civilization is only a very thin layer of paint on the surface, all too easily being scratched off.
Its politics and the political caste that must be ended. Else we will end like the Easter Islanders, from the hands of politicians, by the use of politics.
Also, we are too many.
Mr Quatro
09-19-18, 10:04 AM
This is one great country that allows you to say what you want, when you want without fear of being poisoned :o
You'd be surprised how many people just will not care, because for them politics is just about "our guy" being the last man standing, no matter what. Crowds accept surprisingly big damage to their own interests just to avoid needing to realise that "their guy" is a piece of garbage. Because that would tell them something unpleasant about themselves. And the greater their investments into "their guy" and his fame and glory, the less motivation there will be in the future to question him or said investments - because that would mean to risk that past investments were thrown out of the window. Conclusion: we must invest even more to prevent that there will ever be judgement day coming and all our earlier investments go lost. And so: from bad to worse, from worse to worst.
Its a known pattern in politics and sociology, sociologists even have their own name and model for it.
Another argument on the long list of arguments speaking against "democracy" and general elections for just every Peter and Paul. Voting is like hooliganism in Britain. Males meeting on weekends to trade kicks and strikes and beat each other up, do not do it because they have personal anger at the other individual. They do it for some archaic tribal totem-fetishism. Who has the longest - thats what it comes down to. This ground is ours. Us and Them. And politics show that.
Not even the Vulcans would be able to clean up this mess. Its archaic behaviour on so deep-rooting instinct level that I would not mind to call it animalistic.
Or as Freud said: civilization is only a very thin layer of paint on the surface, all too easily being scratched off.
Its politics and the political caste that must be ended. Else we will end like the Easter Islanders, from the hands of politicians, by the use of politics.
Also, we are too many.
I do not always agree with Skybird but that summarizes it very good...The meta concern for me is if Western democracy will "survive" in the long end against systems like the Chinese one.
I am still a bit optimistic seeing the current struggle as related to the transformation to the digital revolution and its negative consequences for quite a large portion of citizens and especially workers.
But what really concerns me is the culture shift....not only in the US but also in my country and Europe in general, which is reflected also in this forum thread.
People do not arguing anymore about who has the best concepts, improving their lives, society and in general the world like it was in former times. They blame each other like if the other be would be a criminal, having no respect and no intention to find together solutions.
But this is a prerequisite to make a democracy work. How could it be happen that we have forgotten this ?
ikalugin
09-20-18, 03:46 PM
Meanwhile US sanctions China over the S-400 buy.
u crank
09-20-18, 04:07 PM
But what really concerns me is the culture shift....not only in the US but also in my country and Europe in general, which is reflected also in this forum thread.
People do not arguing anymore about who has the best concepts, improving their lives, society and in general the world like it was in former times. They blame each other like if the other be would be a criminal, having no respect and no intention to find together solutions.
But this is a prerequisite to make a democracy work. How could it be happen that we have forgotten this ?
Excellent point. :up:
Platapus
09-20-18, 06:36 PM
But this is a prerequisite to make a democracy work. How could it be happen that we have forgotten this ?
I would like to take the time to repost something that I feel is pertinent to this question
We are three-hundred-and-twenty-five million opinionated, vociferous individuals. We argue and compete and sometimes even vilify each other in our raucous public debates. But we have always had so much more in common with each other than in disagreement. If only we remember that and give each other the benefit of the presumption that we all love our country we will get through these challenging times. We will come through them stronger than before. We always do." -- John McCain, 2018
"... give each other the benefit of the presumption that we all love our country"
This is what is lacking in our country now. People are starting to believe that the opposing political side is the enemy and that they hate the country and that only their side loves their country
Both sides love their country and want only the best. We may, and should, disagree on the means, but not lose sight that we all love our country and want to make it better.
Nice thoughts Platapus but I fear we have moved beyond such unity platitudes. The cultural schisms between left and right in this country have grown too large and it's only a matter of time before the chasm engulfs us.
Nice thoughts Platapus but I fear we have moved beyond such unity platitudes. The cultural schisms between left and right in this country have grown too large and it's only a matter of time before the chasm engulfs us.We don't agree on much, but this I can get behind. The divide has definitely been getting worse and worse. :doh:
On a more light-hearted note, someone is retweeting slightly changed versions of Trump's tweets as "President Clark (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgan_Clark)" of Babylon 5.
https://twitter.com/realMorganClark
:haha:
em2nought
09-21-18, 02:29 AM
The left doesn't love this country, they love the socialist utopia that they desperately want to turn it into. Republicans were meekly, cowardly, treasonously letting them do it incrementally until Trump. That's why they HATE him so much, he doesn't fold when threatened with whatever card they wish to play next. He isn't low energy. :03:
Trump is far from perfect, but he's what the right needed in response to the leftward slide that we've been on for many years. Maybe the Bush's of this world won't be such girlie men from now on. When I say that I don't mean I want them to go beat up on some cave dwellers, I want them to fight the fight we have against the left right here, right now.
It looks like another Trump step has resulted in another Trump stumble:
Trump walks back plan to declassify Russia probe documents --
https://nypost.com/2018/09/21/trump-walks-back-plan-to-declassify-russia-probe-documents/
<O>
Platapus
09-21-18, 03:35 PM
Nice thoughts Platapus but I fear we have moved beyond such unity platitudes. The cultural schisms between left and right in this country have grown too large and it's only a matter of time before the chasm engulfs us.
Perhaps we could all, here, start being a little more tolerant toward other's and their political opinions.
We have to be the change we want to see.
Platapus
09-21-18, 03:36 PM
The left doesn't love this country, they love the socialist utopia that they desperately want to turn it into. Republicans were meekly, cowardly, treasonously letting them do it incrementally until Trump. That's why they HATE him so much, he doesn't fold when threatened with whatever card they wish to play next. He isn't low energy. :03:
Trump is far from perfect, but he's what the right needed in response to the leftward slide that we've been on for many years. Maybe the Bush's of this world won't be such girlie men from now on. When I say that I don't mean I want them to go beat up on some cave dwellers, I want them to fight the fight we have against the left right here, right now.
Or not.
Skybird
09-21-18, 04:24 PM
Trump is the symptom - neither its cause nor it's cure.
Anyhow:
Hello dear old friend, long time no see! Lets do the same old party show from the good ol' times once more!
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-19/heloc-atm-back-over-24-million-americans-are-using-home-equity-get
.
Perhaps we could all, here, start being a little more tolerant toward other's and their political opinions.
We have to be the change we want to see.
Ok i will play a little.
The change I want to see is for the left to stop trying to destroy my country and you're telling me to be more tolerant? How exactly?
Buddahaid
09-21-18, 10:38 PM
I think that went well.
Sailor Steve
09-21-18, 11:28 PM
The change I want to see is for the left to stop trying to destroy my country and you're telling me to be more tolerant? How exactly?
The "Us vs Them" mentality doesn't help. When people started criticizing Trump your first response was "You must have voted for Hillary." A lot of people didn't like either one of them. Not everybody on the Left wants to "destroy the country". There are some real idiots on the Right as well, and a lot of people support the Left as a reaction to them. Yes, there are those on the right who also want to destroy the country, usually in the name of saving it. Look at the Patriot Act. To save the country we have to destroy the very thing it stands for - Liberty. I've seen this from the Right more times than I can count.
That said, I'm still more conservative than I am Liberal. Some might even call me a Libertarian at heart. I do believe there's no such thing as a good tax, period. They may be necessary, but the problems start when politicians decide it's okay to spend other people's money and then decide taxes for whatever cause are a good thing. And every politician does that.
On the other hand I'm not one hundred percent certain that some of the socialist programs wouldn't work. I'm still against them, not on principle but because if they don't work, how do you convince people they aren't working and how do you take them back. The sad truth is that you can't. For that reason I stand against them. And yet here I am, living off the government, using Federal Health Care (through the VA), living in HUD-funded housing, because a low partial rent is better than being homeless again, and getting a very small pension from the same VA.
Double-standard? Maybe. Welfare Queen? It could be argued. Yet so are many millionaires. Did you know the government has a special "free" insurance program for rich people whose homes are wrecked by natural disasters? There are other programs like that, and they were signed into law by members of the "good" Right as well as the "evil" Left. As I see it, both sides are doing everything in their power to destroy, if not the country itself, what it stands for.
You sound conflicted Steve. When you work it all out get back to me. :salute:
Sailor Steve
09-22-18, 09:14 AM
Not conflicted. Just willing to look at all sides of the issues and not automatically assuming I'm right. :sunny:
Platapus
09-22-18, 09:15 AM
I think that went well.
I honestly did not have high expectations.
Not conflicted. Just willing to look at all sides of the issues and not automatically assuming I'm right. :sunny:
I guess that is the key. And stopping to claim that the other side has evil motives.
Frankly, I have my doubts how the majority could be a 'conservative' and a 'liberal' in all topics. For me that looks more like the Amiga vs Atari ST war in my childhood. Similar thing: Facts did not matter but emotions were high on both sides.
I am a conservative when it comes to defense and foreign policy but a liberal or left when it comes to environment/protection of animals. I guess maybe that helps to understand the 'other' side...
Divided Americans !?
Please tell me I'm wrong when I say/Write:
Whether you like or dislike your President Mr. Trump
You like your country.
You may see it differently on how your country should be ruled….but you love your country.
I'm talking about the country outside the politics.
Markus
Skybird
09-22-18, 01:42 PM
"Conservatism is only as good as what it conserves." - Hayek.
"You must grab them by their pussies." - Trump.
Bleiente
09-22-18, 01:57 PM
Divided Americans !?
Please tell me I'm wrong when I say/Write:
Whether you like or dislike your President Mr. Trump
You like your country.
You may see it differently on how your country should be ruled….but you love your country.
I'm talking about the country outside the politics.
Markus
Victor (Correctly) :up:
Not conflicted. Just willing to look at all sides of the issues and not automatically assuming I'm right. :sunny:
Uh huh, well just remember that's exactly what the deer is doing when it stands frozen in the middle of the highway while the 18 wheeler bears down on it.
"You must grab them by their pussies." - Trump.
Inaccurate and misleading. If you're going to use quotation marks maybe you should get it right.
Skybird
09-22-18, 04:42 PM
Inaccurate and misleading. If you're going to use quotation marks maybe you should get it right.
"Though we travel the world over to find the beautiful, we must carry it with us, or we find it not." - Emerson.
Trump's great(tm) sayings show what he is looking for in life and in the world, and by that reveals what he is made of himself. The more dirt and hostility he sprays in his speaking, the more of the dirt he is made of himself is revealed. He doe snot find anything different, because he is not any different.
But go on, defend this crooked character, try to distract from his many flaws and the rotten smell around him, sell him your precious loyalty. If this is the standard by which your vote can be had, then your choice has only my pity.
People may think they choose the lesser of two evils. That way they nevertheless choose evil. That way they only chose the easier way. The only sensible option is to fight BOTH evils.
Sailor Steve
09-22-18, 08:32 PM
Uh huh, well just remember that's exactly what the deer is doing when it stands frozen in the middle of the highway while the 18 wheeler bears down on it.
Which has nothing at all to do with what I said. I see no difference between you and the "Evil Lefties" you hate so much. Different sides, yes, but the same exact means and methods.
Which has nothing at all to do with what I said. I see no difference between you and the "Evil Lefties" you hate so much. Different sides, yes, but the same exact means and methods.
Oh I've known how you felt about me for a long time now Steve. My point to you however was that you and everyone else sitting on the fence will have eventually to pick a side, or be run over in the middle of the road like that deer.
Buddahaid
09-22-18, 09:32 PM
Here lies the Art of Compromise. You know, it's really quite easy in a one party system, all those pesky decisions are already taken care of and everybody is happy.
Sailor Steve
09-22-18, 10:12 PM
Oh I've known how you felt about me for a long time now Steve. My point to you however was that you and everyone else sitting on the fence will have eventually to pick a side, or be run over in the middle of the road like that deer.
Actually I don't think you have any idea how I feel about you. As for "sitting on the fence" and "middle of the road", it's hard to take a side when, as I said, they both behave in the same way.
"Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule – and both commonly succeed, and are right."
—H. L. Mencken
Not my words, but ones that reflect the reality as I see it. Yes, the Left is a major cause of this nation's troubles. So is the Right. The very fact that there are sides is one of the major problems we have. Yet there they are, and they both insist that they are totally right and the other side is totally wrong, and for the most part are so convinced of their own rightness that it's difficult to have a real conversation with either one without having to wade through a sea of bluster, challenge and True Belief.
I do take sides, but I do it issue by issue, not as a Party Line. I'm also open to honest discussion, but I rarely find it.
Skybird
09-23-18, 05:34 AM
The very fact that there are sides is one of the major problems we have.
Some of the wisest words spoken in this whole long thread. And they are true for practically every Western state, not just the US.
But people like to have "sides". Its tribalism in modern terms, like is bing a die hard fan for the football club of your home city. And that is why this election system, with so many people voting by habit or for tribalist reasons, makes no sense.There is assumed to be a level of reasonability and altruism and insightful knowledge beign at work, that simply is not there at all. That is also one of the major criticisms voiced by democracy-critics like Jason Brennan.
I cannot mention a >realistic< mehtod to overcome this, this issue us hauntign mankind since - since always, it seems. Nevertheless I can say that this issue leads man into tyranny and corruption and collapse time and again. We must overcome this, or we get overcomed. Worse, we all in th world must overcome this, else the few that chnage will soon get eaten again by their neighbouring enemies thzat refuse to follow this new idea.
Its probably a hopeless cause. But the only reasonable cause: professionalised politics and administration, the idea of superregional concepts like national states, must be left behind. A bit we can learn from Switzerland maybe, and from a few city-states, from a few cities and communities in the US that try to follow this trail (quite successful: better public services, and lower tax levels and more economic, smaller bureaucratic systems) as well as from historic examples (my favourite example being the Hanse which blossemed when it had no caste of career politicians, and once the career politicians took over, got immersed in unneeded foreign political conflicts and so descended).
Its neither the one party state versus the two party state. It is about no-party state, it is about no superregional state at all. It is unlikely to ever come. Too many parasites are hooked up to the status quo, and working solutions of that are so drastic that people will no accept them. And if you force them, then you have another dictarship again. Its all a dilemma royal.
Platapus
09-23-18, 06:35 AM
My hopeless fantasy is for people to recognize the common sense of moderation and to recognize the absurdity of extremism.
I might as well wish for a pony for my birthday. Both have the same chance of happening. :doh:
ikalugin
09-23-18, 07:20 AM
I think pony is more likely.
Mr Quatro
09-23-18, 09:09 AM
Your free to think whatever you want ... getting someone to agree is another subject :up:
https://www.bing.com/th?id=OIP.a4aUyEFUO4AXv_yKad9BswHaFj&w=250&h=181&c=7&o=5&dpr=1.5625&pid=1.7
At least I find it refreshing that people now start to discuss issues instead of only accusing the other one(s)...even if not all can or want to go along with this...
(my favourite example being the Hanse which blossemed when it had no caste of career politicians, and once the career politicians took over, got immersed in unneeded foreign political conflicts and so descended).You are once again oversimplifying and twisting history to back your worldview. :roll:
The Hanseatic League was already very much embroiled in foreign conflicts long before its (gradual) decline. The League's decline was more to do with outside pressure from other emerging powers than "career politicians".
The Cambridge Economic History of Europe from the Decline of the Roman Empire, Vol. 2 summarizes:
The debut of the League was thus very successful. As a political
weapon it proved itself equally successful in the struggles which it was
to wage in the subsequent hundred or hundred and fifty years. The
Treaty of Utrecht of 1474, which concluded a somewhat similar
conflict with England a century later, still found the League in full
possession of its foreign privileges and as triumphant over its enemies
as it had been in 1370. Yet, successful as the League was in direct
political action, it failed, as it was bound to fail, in its attempt to arrest
the march of economic and political forces which continued to shape
the evolution of trade in northern Europe. It was unable to defend its
position in Novgorod in the face of the rising power of the Tsars;
unable to maintain its old position in Flanders in opposition to the new
centres of northern trade which were rising under different auspices
in Brabant and Holland; unable to maintain its monopoly of eastern
routes; in fact unable to maintain the route itself, which came in the
end to be rivalled and replaced by other routes crossing the continent
further south. Above all it was incapable of preventing the rise of the
two great rivals who were destined in the sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries to supplant the Hanse in the economic leadership of northern
Europe — England and Holland.
Skybird
09-24-18, 05:02 AM
Dowly, the Hanse is - or was - a hobby of mine, deriving from my love for our former home town Lübeck, which I know, love and where we once lived, long time ago. If you ever have a chance to visit the old town of it, do it. Yes, i have simplified the history of the Hanse, because I do not want to make a long report on it here. But the fact remains that during its rise and peak the alliance and its free cities were self-maintaining in their administrative tasks and that it was the traders that at the same time while they did their own businesses also cared for the tasks and needs of their homeports and respective: cities. The Hanse was no military alliance, but it had teeth, and although it was non state-like, but "private", it was able to field combat power at sea and land that were both forces others could not afford to not take into account. In other words: it was able to push its trade interests through and defend them, even with force. Just later a split in the way the Hanse cities were managed occured. With the raise of Lübeck (not Hamburg, as one might think) to the de facto capital of the Hanse, a new "caste" of people emerged from the ranks of the traders and captains and those who had become wealthy. They translated their welath more and more into polticla power not for the sake of the city - caring for the poor and the widows, building schools, widow homes and hospitals and social wellfare structures - all of that you still can see in structures and buildings in several Hanse cities, especially Lübeck - but the aspired power for the sake of political power itself. This is what I call the rise of the caste of career politicians. Thy stem from the ranks of former traders who had become wealthy, but they disconnected more and more from the mor socially oriented way of administration as their predecessors had done, and were more and more willing to stick their noses into foreign conflicts that originally the Hanse stayed away from. This was the beginning of the Hanse's fall. It started to sought power they exceeded what it it neede din power to just defend its trade structures, and started to stuck its nose into affairs that originally it must nit have had interest in. By doing so, it started to bite off more than it could chew.
Yes, I simplify it all, because this should be a forum post that does not become too long. But I simplify on the basis of the literature I have about it on my book shelf ;). As I said, Hanse history is a special interest of mine since long - and already since my years at elementary school :) I went to that school in Lübeck as y small boy, and back then Germans were not yet afraid to name a school course "Heimatkunde/Sachkunde" (today there would be an outcry, probably). In Lübeck in the seventies that meant: "History of the Queen of the Hanse - Lübeck, and the Hanse itself. What got me ignited as a little kid,were the adventure stories about the pirate in the Baltic that were so attractive for young boys to read or hear about, who challenged the Hanse, mocked and resisted to it (and finally got brought down nevertheless), Klaus Störtebeker. In Germany, the name still is known, especially in the Hanseatic regions in the North, think of him as kind of a German Robin Hood, without happy end. - And so my interest was started.
The more political and "professionalised" the Hanse became, the more it entangled itself in foreign intrigues and conflicts that originally it had little business to do with. But the more it got weakened (mostly from within), the more it craved to still be seen as the secrete superpower of the North that it once had been indeed, but was no more. It fall was self-made. The more characteristics of a state the Hanse formed out, the weaker it got, and the more its inner politics turned into a battlefield of intrigues.
Plenty of lessons to be learned from it. Especially regarding the EU.
Oh, and note: you quote and excerpts about the history, are simplifications as well. They are not wrong, but not complete - they get not described in the context of the inner development of the Hanse and the change in the way it administrated itself. The way your summary describes the going of history for the first and middle part of the Hanse#s living cycle, it is not just so because the others were so strong but because the Hanse grew weaker by itself. In parts that was inner politicis, in parts it was overstretching.It was not just pressure from the outside (that too, there was trade rivalry, but the Hanse initially had more than enough strength to defend its groundsand even expand it), but because due to the erosion within. For some time it was so strong that none of the kingdoms in the North could ignore it or do thingsagainst its explicit will. And that even included powerful Sweden. Thats as if Singapore today would keep China or the US in check in its part of the Pacific.
But would you agree that it wasn't just the internal disputes and politics that were the sole reason the Hanse declined and eventually ceased to exist? That was my beef about your original post; you made it seem like it was the reason it disintegrated.
Interesting subject nevertheless. :yep:
Skybird
09-25-18, 02:17 PM
There are always the rivals from other countries or alliances. And inner and outer events in the Hanse may even have mutually fed back on each other, most liokely it was like that, yes. I think this is the case most of the time with the unfolding of history anyway. In the end, the raise of Holland and England as naval trade empires probbaly would have triumohed in the end anyway, but with Hanse that did not erode itself it may have happened over a longer period of time, with other paths events unfolded on.
In the end, any power that has risen, sooner or later falls again, and the Hanse was not different, nor would it have been different if it would have stayed wise for longer time. It would have lived longer, and would by that have made it more difficult to rise at the cost of it. That hardly is a brillianbt conclusion. Its just wehat happens in historx all the time.
As I said, the brief summary you quoted is not wrong, its just not complete, takes events on the outer stage - from the Hanse's point of view - out of the context that links them with Hanseatic inner changes.
The consequences of the existence of the Hanse are hard to overestimate, and the shine and glory and the enormous wealth that this trader alliance accumulated, still can be seen in the buildings of the old towns of the Hanse cities, where they survived WWII. If you know Lübeck or Wismar (which is like a smaller model copy of Lübeck), then you will recognise the old towns of any other former Hanse city'S old town as well, the infleunce in culture, art and architecture, heavily influenced by the enormous wealth of the Hanse, radiated from Lübeck into all other regions of the Hanse. The level of social wellfare projects called to life by successful traders who became donators, was unique for that time, and in places lives on until today. It found condensates in the citiy'S architecture as well, were foudnaiton homes for poor and people in need were build. The traditonal Protstant working ethic and the Christian idela of caring for hte weak combined itself with the honour code of the "guild men", the Hanse traders, that amongst business men in Hanse cities whose fmailies lived in these cities since long time, partially lives on until today.
The golden time of the Hanse was 13th to early 15th century, but its beginnings reach back into the early 12th century. It formed up as decentralised local initiatives that became successful due to - for that time - revolutionary changes to the ways financial transactions were handled, surpassed in that quality (guaranteed safety) only by eqivalent practices in Italy, and the success of the traders who stationed their Kogge-ships in cityies' harbours made these persons welcomed candidates for the political offices of that city, a development described by the shift from the era of the "trading Hanse" to the "city-Hanse". As long as this process did not reach to far, the activity and coordination of the Hanse was not comparable to that of a nation'S centralised government, was more in private, volunterily self-organising hands, and was superior in economy and efficiency. For some time the Hnase fielded military navel power that nboody in the baltic could ignore. When this process went beyond a certain treshhold point however, and more and more administrational power centralised in Lübeck, the inofficial capitol of the Hanse, it started to behave like a national state, showed more and more typical administrational problems of states, got more and more eroded by inernal introgues and corruption, and saw the factors that had made it great and strong, being weakened and hollowed out.
The Hanse became great becasue it was no state-run affair, But the more similiar it became to a state late ron, the weaker it became, and the more it lost what had made it big.
The Hnase teches many lessons for today'S initiaves to build free private cities - lessons for how to start and how to run it, but also warning lessons on what mistakes to avoid. In the end, the Hanse did not last as long as some city states in Italy, namely Venice, or Genoa. Still, a very interesting matter indeed. And I must admit, authors of books often present very contradicting views on certain aspects of the Hanse's history.
None of this has to do with US Politics.
Middle of the road... :hmmm:
Seems like a fine place to drive; mainly, because, you know, if you steer too far to one side or the other, you'll most likely end up in a mess in a ditch or crumpled up against some barrier...
People in the middle of the road aren't just standing there, waiting; they are getting on with the normal business of life and not waiting for a tow truck (also driving down the middle of the road) to pull them out of their self-made messes...
<O>
Trump: The World is no longer laughing at us!! #MAGA #NOCOLLUSION
The World:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eN2jqTilLOM
Mr Quatro
09-26-18, 03:45 AM
Middle of the road... :hmmm:
Seems like a fine place to drive; mainly, because, you know, if you steer too far to one side or the other, you'll most likely end up in a mess in a ditch or crumpled up against some barrier...
People in the middle of the road aren't just standing there, waiting; they are getting on with the normal business of life and not waiting for a tow truck (also driving down the middle of the road) to pull them out of their self-made messes...
<O>
Why do Hollywood movie stars lean mostly to the left?
Why is the whole state of California mostly democrats?
Surely it's not due to the poor people, you know the poor pickers ... I thought all rich people were Republicans. :yep:
Why is the whole state of California mostly democrats?
Because, California is full of fruits, nuts and flakes. :yeah:
Buddahaid
09-26-18, 08:56 AM
Maybe because it's not landlocked and inbred.
https://i.imgur.com/hrd0bUD.gif
Trump: The World is no longer laughing at us!! #MAGA #NOCOLLUSION
The World:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eN2jqTilLOM
Yes, he has accomplished so much: in the first 19 months, the highest turnover of staff in the history of the Presidency (even counting Presidents who served two (or, in the case of FDR, more) terms:
https://www.npr.org/2018/03/19/594164065/trump-cabinet-turnover-sets-record-going-back-100-years
...then there is a record setting number of felony convictions of Trump associates, campaign members, and White House staff:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/08/22/donald-trump-michael-cohen-paul-manafort-felonies-robert-mueller/1061162002/
...and there will most very likely be more, if Mueller is allowed to complete his investigations. Oh, and there is the record set for taking the Office of the President, the international respect of other nations, and our influence on international issues and completely trashing same said in less than two years...
The Trump Oval office is a ramshackle circus and Donny Boy is the Head Clown...
Why do Hollywood movie stars lean mostly to the left?
...
Artists have always been among the most liberal of professions and it would be, indeed, highly unusual for those in the film, TV, music, etc., industries to not be likewise. There is also the long, long, historic antagonism of various 'conservative' or 'fundamentalist' cultures and governing entities towards the arts, particularly when the thoughts, ideas, or representations run contrary to the ideology of the governing. The arts are usually the first to suffer from censorship or repression under oppressive extreme regimes, be they Right or Left; the repression is most extreme when cultural politics is melded with religious fundamentalist fanaticism. Hence, in our country, art, of all kinds, has leaned away from the restrictive Right and towards the more accommodating left. There are not a few Right leaning entertainment ventures here in CA, but they tend to mainly cater to their niche audience of like-minded patrons, often existing out of the mainstream...
...
Why is the whole state of California mostly democrats?
...
A number of reasons. A prime cause has been the dearth of GOP candidates who are able to appeal to the needs and interests of the general voting population; the CA-GOP has been tied to mainly out-of state Far Right national GOP interests, very often at odds with the general will of the voters, and that stance has not played well with the majority of voters and the CA-GOP has been hemorrhaging registered voters as a result. If the voters aren't going to buy your ideas and/or proposals or if they won't espouse your political bent, you aren't going to have very many registered voters...
Also, Californians, on the whole are content with the current direction of the State and are not prone to 'upset the apple cart' and take a risk on what appears to be flawed political/social offerings...
...
Surely it's not due to the poor people, you know the poor pickers ... I thought all rich people were Republicans. :yep:
No, there are an awful lot of very rich DEMs in CA and they do carry a lot of clout. It should be noted DEMs are less than 50% of the registered voters in CA (44.6%); however, GOP Registered CA voters (25.4%) are nearly 19 percentage points behind the DEMs. This indicates DEM candidates or issues, in order to pass, have to pull in Independent voters as well as some GOP voters. What is really of note is the increase in voters registering as "No Party Preference" (the CA term for Independent has grown and will surpass the total number of GOP registered voters. A lot of this is due to the many younger voters who are turning their backs on partisan politics, in general. Here is a break down from the CA Secretary Of State on voter stats:
154 -DAY REPORT OF REGISTRATION
January 2, 2018, for the June 5, 2018, Statewide Direct Primary Election
TRENDS
Since the last 154-Day Report of Registration for a Statewide Direct Primary in a gubernatorial election
year (December 31, 2013):
The total voter registration in the state increased from 17,660,257 to 18,980,481.
The percentage of eligible Californians who are registered to vote increased from 73.4% to 75.7%.
The percentage of voters who have no party preference increased from 20.9% to 25.0%.
The percentage of voters registered with a qualified political party decreased from 76.7% to 74.4%.
The percentage of voters registered with the Democratic Party increased from 43.6% to 44.6%.
The percentage of voters registered with the Republican Party decreased from 28.7% to 25.4%.
SOURCE: 154-DAY REPORT OF REGISTRATION -- January 2, 2018, for the June 5, 2018, Statewide Direct Primary Election -- (Page 2)
https://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov/ror/154day-stwddirprim-2018/historical-reg-stats.pdf
If you look at Page 1 of the above report, there is a historical table of trends and stats dating back to 1997...
Keep in mind, when comparing CA stats with other states, CA is rather unique in that CA has so much influence on the rest of the country. The CA-GOP's long term embrace of Far Right, even radical, political stances has cost them dearly and the overall partisan bickering by both major parties has caused a dramatic increase in Independent voters and the trends that have developed in Ca are now recently being seen in the national political scenes. The fact a GOP Presidential candidate was not able to garner more votes than a highly unsatisfactory DEM candidate is troubling for the GOP. Perhaps, they should view the GOP's fate in CA as a cautionary example...
CA is the most populous state in the US, with its population holding at 12% of the national total, or 1 in 8 Americans. The next nearest state is Texas, and CA exceeds their total by over 11 Million citizens or about 39% of Texas's total population; in fact, the population of the State Of California exceeds the total population of Canada by some 3 Million people. CA , if it were a separate country, would be the 5th largest world economy, just ahead of the UK, and behind the rest of the US, China, Japan, and Germany. Comparing the conditions and conduct of CA with any other states is like comparing apples to oranges...
<O>
Maybe because it's not landlocked and inbred.
http://www.hangoutstorage.com/banjohangout.org/storage/attachments/archived/photos/large/93/93713-11442125102014.jpg
Just a-pickin' ans a-grinnin' :D
<O>
Mr Quatro
09-26-18, 04:00 PM
Yes, he has accomplished so much: in the first 19 months, the highest turnover of staff in the history of the Presidency (even counting Presidents who served two (or, in the case of FDR, more) terms:
https://www.npr.org/2018/03/19/594164065/trump-cabinet-turnover-sets-record-going-back-100-years
...then there is a record setting number of felony convictions of Trump associates, campaign members, and White House staff:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/08/22/donald-trump-michael-cohen-paul-manafort-felonies-robert-mueller/1061162002/
...and there will most very likely be more, if Mueller is allowed to complete his investigations. Oh, and there is the record set for taking the Office of the President, the international respect of other nations, and our influence on international issues and completely trashing same said in less than two years...
The Trump Oval office is a ramshackle circus and Donny Boy is the Head Clown...
Artists have always been among the most liberal of professions and it would be, indeed, highly unusual for those in the film, TV, music, etc., industries to not be likewise. There is also the long, long, historic antagonism of various 'conservative' or 'fundamentalist' cultures and governing entities towards the arts, particularly when the thoughts, ideas, or representations run contrary to the ideology of the governing. The arts are usually the first to suffer from censorship or repression under oppressive extreme regimes, be they Right or Left; the repression is most extreme when cultural politics is melded with religious fundamentalist fanaticism. Hence, in our country, art, of all kinds, has leaned away from the restrictive Right and towards the more accommodating left. There are not a few Right leaning entertainment ventures here in CA, but they tend to mainly cater to their niche audience of like-minded patrons, often existing out of the mainstream...
A number of reasons. A prime cause has been the dearth of GOP candidates who are able to appeal to the needs and interests of the general voting population; the CA-GOP has been tied to mainly out-of state Far Right national GOP interests, very often at odds with the general will of the voters, and that stance has not played well with the majority of voters and the CA-GOP has been hemorrhaging registered voters as a result. If the voters aren't going to buy your ideas and/or proposals or if they won't espouse your political bent, you aren't going to have very many registered voters...
Also, Californians, on the whole are content with the current direction of the State and are not prone to 'upset the apple cart' and take a risk on what appears to be flawed political/social offerings...
No, there are an awful lot of very rich DEMs in CA and they do carry a lot of clout. It should be noted DEMs are less than 50% of the registered voters in CA (44.6%); however, GOP Registered CA voters (25.4%) are nearly 19 percentage points behind the DEMs. This indicates DEM candidates or issues, in order to pass, have to pull in Independent voters as well as some GOP voters. What is really of note is the increase in voters registering as "No Party Preference" (the CA term for Independent has grown and will surpass the total number of GOP registered voters. A lot of this is due to the many younger voters who are turning their backs on partisan politics, in general. Here is a break down from the CA Secretary Of State on voter stats:
SOURCE: 154-DAY REPORT OF REGISTRATION -- January 2, 2018, for the June 5, 2018, Statewide Direct Primary Election -- (Page 2)
https://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov/ror/154day-stwddirprim-2018/historical-reg-stats.pdf
If you look at Page 1 of the above report, there is a historical table of trends and stats dating back to 1997...
Keep in mind, when comparing CA stats with other states, CA is rather unique in that CA has so much influence on the rest of the country. The CA-GOP's long term embrace of Far Right, even radical, political stances has cost them dearly and the overall partisan bickering by both major parties has caused a dramatic increase in Independent voters and the trends that have developed in Ca are now recently being seen in the national political scenes. The fact a GOP Presidential candidate was not able to garner more votes than a highly unsatisfactory DEM candidate is troubling for the GOP. Perhaps, they should view the GOP's fate in CA as a cautionary example...
CA is the most populous state in the US, with its population holding at 12% of the national total, or 1 in 8 Americans. The next nearest state is Texas, and CA exceeds their total by over 11 Million citizens or about 39% of Texas's total population; in fact, the population of the State Of California exceeds the total population of Canada by some 3 Million people. CA , if it were a separate country, would be the 5th largest world economy, just ahead of the UK, and behind the rest of the US, China, Japan, and Germany. Comparing the conditions and conduct of CA with any other states is like comparing apples to oranges...
<O>
This is why we should elect vienna as our Political Zar :up:
Wait a minute we don't have a Political Zar :hmmm:
Platapus
09-26-18, 04:44 PM
I still think that Reagan has the record for most convictions in an administration, but that record is being challenged by Trump.
This is why we should elect vienna as our Political Zar :up:
Wait a minute we don't have a Political Zar :hmmm:
I will consider the position only if a couple of really great-looking Czarinas are included in the deal... :D
I still think that Reagan has the record for most convictions in an administration, but that record is being challenged by Trump.
Its not a question of just amount, its a question of how many in how short a time: Regan had 8 years to rack up his record; Trump is already set to topple Reagan in less than 2 years...
...but, then, Trump really, really, loves having the most of anything...
<O>
u crank
09-27-18, 05:28 PM
I still think that Reagan has the record for most convictions in an administration, but that record is being challenged by Trump.
Yea those statistics are accurate. I did a little fact check and the Republicans win that contest.
M.Stanton Evans once said...
“We have two parties here, and only two. One is the evil party, and the other is the stupid party. ... I'm very proud to be a member of the stupid party. ... Occasionally, the two parties get together to do something that's both evil and stupid. That's called bipartisanship.”
I believe that the reason for the difference is simple. The reason why there have been so many felony convictions in Republican administrations is 'the stupid party'. Stupid is as stupid does. The reason why there have been less felony convictions in Democratic administrations is....'the stupid party'. Stupid is as stupid does.
As for the 'evil party'.... well they still are. The Kavanaugh confirmation hearings are a shining example of that.
Jimbuna
09-28-18, 06:29 AM
Republicans are pushing to vote on President Donald Trump's nominee for the US Supreme Court on Friday, after hearing dramatic testimony from him and a woman accusing him of sexual assault.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45674139
I do appreciate the potential seriousness of the above but having spent a few hours watching the hearing 'live' on the UK news channels, is this not beginning to look like a circus?
This was nothing more than a political stunt from the get-go.
Well, it's she said/he said. No one knows who's right and who's wrong. That's why it would be important to have an investigation of some sort.
One thing about Kavanaugh's testimony yesterday feels off to me, and that is his own admission that he did drink 'too much' at times, but when questioned thoroughly about basically did he ever not remember what he had done the previous night his answer was: no.
As someone who has drunk 'too much' in more than fifty one occasion, that not having any memory loss seems a bit strange. Maybe it's a cultural difference in definition or something, but that really felt contradictory. How can you drink 'too much', yet still remember everything next morning, isn't that just normal drinking? Not one time did he lose memory because of drinking 'too much'?
Skybird
09-28-18, 09:34 AM
The actors and jesters are here,
the stage is in darkness and clear,
we're raising the curtain
and no-one's quite certain whose play it is.
That in such a confused situation such a controversial candidate should get pushed through early only because looming elections may threaten the majority to push him through shows how deeply corrupted the whole situation and the whole system is. This does not only illustrate the deep polarization and hostility between both camps, but also how damaged the whole system already is. With the greatest(tm) Pussygrabber of the United States having a clear interest in the lead act. Whats the saying - birds of same feather flock together; and: dog don't eat dog.
The character and integrity of the candidate is in seriosu quesiton and must be investigated over the allegations. How could one vote on him right now before anyone knowing anything? Some obviously do not care for the allegations being true maybe, and they do not care for having a sexual assaulter in a high ranking office. Which only shows how "kaputt" their political goals and understandings are.
Its all corrupted, on all levels, the whole thing, and beyond.
Kaputt, kaputt, kaputt.
Mr Quatro
09-28-18, 09:51 AM
This history making moment is out of our hands gentlemen ... :yep:
One of the participates in the confirmation hearings, for the next Supreme Court Justice, is lying and one of them is telling the truth.
All things are spiritual only one side can win ... :yep:
God shall not be mocked :hmmm:
The character and integrity of the candidate is in seriosu quesiton and must be investigated over the allegations. How could one vote on him right now before anyone knowing anything? Some obviously do not care for the allegations being true maybe, and they do not care for having a sexual assaulter in a high ranking office. Which only shows how "kaputt" their political goals and understandings are.
Exactly. Documents have been given to the senate judiciary committee, it shouldn't take too long for authorities to look over them and decide, if there is need for a more thorough investigation. But no, once again the Republicans show they don't care.
Neither we nor the SJC know who is speaking the truth, yet no investigation, even the briefest, is allowed.
Then there's Avenatti's clients who also say Kavanaugh wasn't as clean as he seems. Yes, yes, 'certain' news sources paint Avennatti as a showboat etc. but he sure is right about awful lot of things.
Bilge_Rat
09-28-18, 11:25 AM
Everything you say about Kavanaugh is true. In "normal" times, there would be a hold while the allegations are investigated and/or another nominee would be put forward, but these are not "normal" times.
Democrats have used every procedural trick to delay/block every nominee put forward by Trump and that have already stated that if they win control of the Senate, they will block any other Supreme Court appointment until after the 2020 election. So the political calculus by the GOP is confirm Kavanaugh now or risk that they cannot get another appointment through until 2021.
Despite all the moral high ground claimed by both sides, this is just raw power politics, nothing else.
AVGWarhawk
09-28-18, 11:28 AM
Exactly. Documents have been given to the senate judiciary committee, it shouldn't take too long for authorities to look over them and decide, if there is need for a more thorough investigation. But no, once again the Republicans show they don't care.
Neither we nor the SJC know who is speaking the truth, yet no investigation, even the briefest, is allowed.
Then there's Avenatti's clients who also say Kavanaugh wasn't as clean as he seems. Yes, yes, 'certain' news sources paint Avennatti as a showboat etc. but he sure is right about awful lot of things.
The problem here is a investigation has been done. Three people named by Ford have all been question under oath. Ford's best friend who was said to have been at the party said under oath this event never happened. It is nothing but a stalling tactic by the Dems.
At the end of the day Feinstein is to blame for this entire mess. July Feinstein received a letter from Ford. At that time charges should have been pressed on Kavanaugh(no statue of limitations where this event took place). At that time the process for Kavanugh and SCOTUS would have stopped. The Dems little problem solved. But no, Feinstein held on this "trump" card and pulled it out when Kavanaugh looked to be put into position of SCOTUS. Feinstein did not care about Ford. Ford said she is not a pawn when in fact she was made a pawn for Feinstein and friends political gain.
I have no doubt that something happened to Ford. The proof that it was Cavanaugh remains to be seen. This should have become a legal matter back in July when the letter appeared at Feinstein's office. It was not. It was used as weapon for later on if needed.
At this juncture, Ford's career and life is forever changed. Never should have happened. The letter was in confidence but leaked anyway. Kavanaugh career is destroyed in the national spotlight. Utter crap at the hands of Feinstein and friends. It is a circus. I feel sorry for Ford and what she was put through years ago and yesterday. I feel for Kavanaugh who has been railroad in the national spotlight. The entire chamber of idiots should be ashamed.
Good luck to the next potential SCOTUS nominee. He or she will be picked apart for age 1 day to present.
Bilge_Rat
09-28-18, 11:34 AM
if Kavanaugh does not go through and the GOP keeps control of the Senate, the next one on the list will likely be Amy Barrett.
As the old saying goes, be careful what you wish for, she is a lot more conservative than Kavanaugh...
AVGWarhawk
09-28-18, 11:38 AM
if Kavanaugh does not go through and the GOP keeps control of the Senate, the next one on the list will likely be Amy Barrett.
As the old saying goes, be careful what you wish for, she is a lot more conservative than Kavanaugh...
They will probably find Amy Barrett at the age of 7 spit on Billy in the playground. At such a young age the aggressiveness of Amy's nature was already manifesting. :doh: No to SCOTUS.
We, sir, are screwed by the hands of the lunatics in DC.
After seeing this circus, I cannot for the life of me see why a person would want to go into politics at all anymore! Every bit of your life becomes public, not the good things you do, just the bad. And are blown way out of proportion!!
Mr Quatro
09-28-18, 02:23 PM
The problem here is a investigation has been done. Three people named by Ford have all been question under oath. Ford's best friend who was said to have been at the party said under oath this event never happened. It is nothing but a stalling tactic by the Dems.
I thought this was a true statement by Judge Kavanaugh too, but seems it was lie. There has been no investigation and no sworn statements only Ford and Kavanaugh have been investigated.Some attorney's have submitted signed letters to the committee. Read this:
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/kavanaugh-lied-senate-judiciary-committee.html
Kavanaugh Lied to the Judiciary Committee—Repeatedly
None of the alleged witnesses, other than Ford and Kavanaugh, has been interviewed. Instead, the alleged witnesses have issued short statements of nonrecollection and have asked not to testify. The committee’s Republican majority, eager to brush the case aside, has accepted these statements and has refused to ask further questions.
I have no doubt that something happened to Ford. The proof that it was Cavanaugh remains to be seen. This should have become a legal matter back in July when the letter appeared at Feinstein's office. It was not. It was used as weapon for later on if needed.
I agree, but how in the hell can the FBI investigate this attempted rape without a date or a month or an address even ... just the summer of 1982?
I think Dr Ford has left something out on purpose, but why has yet to be revealed. Could it be that she was actually raped by these two men and didn't want it to go public for personal reasons?
Ten (10) minutes (she said it was that long) is a long time to wrestle on a bed in a locked bedroom before she was able to fight them off and flee to another upstairs bathroom, but only three (3) people know if that is true and none of these three are talking.
Platapus
09-28-18, 03:06 PM
I want to see the reactions from the Democrats when their future nominee is faced with a multitude of accusations.
I wonder if they will be so believing when the accusations are made against their side.
I suspect not since all the women who accused Bill Clinton were "lying" and that Bill Clinton was presumed innocent unless evidence could be produced.
As the old saying goes: Where you stand depends on where you sit.
Two things that bother about the Kavanaugh testimony: twice he was asked, directly and simply, about having an FBI investigation into the charges and twice he gave non-answers; apparently, on the question of an actual, official investigations, Kavanaugh can't seem to simply say either yes or no...
One thing that bothers about Kavanughs 'thorough' vetting is the failure to access the more than 100,000 documents related to his service in the GW Bush Administration; if there is nothing there, then why hide it all?...
One very big difference between Kavanaugh and Ford: Ford has actually taken a polygraph test on the charges and passed; Kavanaugh, as with the idea of an FBI investigation, has either said nothing about his willingness to take a polygraph or has given vague, non-answers; if he has nothing to hide, why evade? I don't know about anyone else, but if I were in such a situation, and I was innocent, I would demand to take a polygraph just to put the issue to rest, Hell, I'd even take sodium pentothal, testify under hypnosis, whatever it took; I'd look at my opponents and say "Bring it on!!", not hide and snivel like Kavanaugh...
All this hiding and evading: whatever happened to the "Total Transparency" Trump promised when he said he'd "drain The Swamp"? Oh, I forgot; instead Trump decided to build his own "Huuuuger!!!" and worse swamp...
<O>
ikalugin
09-28-18, 04:12 PM
Because Polygraph can be made to show whatever end result you want, which is why it is inadmissable.
Would you want to undergo procedure that could be made to say whatever the investigator wanted when you are the subject of a witch hunt?
Mr Quatro
09-28-18, 04:13 PM
One very big difference between Kavanaugh and Ford: Ford has actually taken a polygraph test on the charges and passed; Kavanaugh, as with the idea of an FBI investigation, has either said nothing about his willingness to take a polygraph or has given vague, non-answers; if he has nothing to hide, why evade?
<O>
Were you aware that the ex-FBI agent that gave the polygraph test only asked two questions? Fwd to the 5:45 mark :o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-FcHXwr0sw
u crank
09-28-18, 04:26 PM
Asking the FBI to investigate an allegation of sexual assault 36 years after it happened without a time, date or location in one week shows just how dumb some politicians are.
And to what end? Even if the FBI or anyone else could completely clear Kavanaugh of any allegation not a single Democrat would change their vote. This has always been about Kavanaugh's conservative view of the law and the guy who nominated him.
Sailor Steve
09-28-18, 06:37 PM
What bothers me about this sort of thing (as with the Clarence Thomas allegations), is that there have been years, or in this case even decades, to make these charges, but they never turn up until the accused is involved in something big like this. It's a typical political witch-hunt, just like the Clarence Thomas hearings and just like the Bill Clinton impeachment. It's not about having better government. It's not about improving our country. It's about getting the other guy, and nothing more.
Were you aware that the ex-FBI agent that gave the polygraph test only asked two questions? Fwd to the 5:45 mark
...
Yes, but that was not unusual for a polygraph test, as was stated at about 4:30 into the clip you posted where the examiner so states and then expounds upon. We are all sort of thinking a polygraph test is like in the movies or on TV where a subject is hooked up and subjected to a long string of monotone questions and, in real life that is not the case in most circumstances; what you see on a TV or movie screen is mainly for dramatic effect and to create a sense of tension in a scene. Note that the examiner spent some time prior to the test interviewing Ford: if he had felt there was a need to affirm issues other than the veracity of Ford's statement(s), it would be presumed he would have asked additional questions...
I do, however, agree it would have been better to have had a more comprehensive set of questions; perhaps, now that the FBI is involved, Ford will take another test under better circumstances. I do also feel she may not get the chance to re-test because the corollary would be subjecting Kavanaugh to a similar test and I'm not sure he would be any more open to the idea than he has been and I also suspect the White House would much rather not have him take a test he might just fail...
<O>
Mr Quatro
09-28-18, 09:05 PM
I hope she doesn't think that she is going to get any special treatment from the FBI :hmmm:
That's Kirsten Gillibrand not Dr. Ford...
em2nought
09-29-18, 03:59 AM
Yes, but that was not unusual for a polygraph test
It's unusual based on the one I had to take. :03:
They should have an outside firm like the Mossad do the investigating since the FBI's "political leaning" is questionable. "Oh, while digging we (accidentally) discovered some evidence of the Judge colluding with the Russians." :D We are shocked! :har:
Bilge_Rat
09-29-18, 06:40 AM
interesting:
But Manger and McCarthy noted that prosecution was unlikely in Maryland because authorities would have to apply the law that existed at the time of the offense, not the law that exists now, Baltimore's FOX 45 News reported.
“For example, in 1982, assault and attempted rape were both misdemeanors and subject to a one-year statute of limitations,” they wrote.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/29/maryland-authorities-say-theyll-investigate-kavanaugh-if-victim-files-complaint.html
ikalugin
09-29-18, 07:12 AM
So even if it did happen he could not be charged?
Platapus
09-29-18, 07:24 AM
Yes, but that was not unusual for a polygraph test, ... We are all sort of thinking a polygraph test is like in the movies or on TV where a subject is hooked up and subjected to a long string of monotone questions and, in real life that is not the case in most circumstances;
Well I am basing my opinions on the several polygraph examinations I have been subjected to as well as my researcher when I was applying to be a polygraph examination in the military. What happened here is very unusual.
Here is what a usual polygraph examination consists of
1. A team of examiners, preferably not ones that will be administering the exam will sit down and script out the questions. There will be baseline questions, prep questions, stress questions, and recovery questions. Then the order of these questions will be set and multiple sets of these questions will be selected with some carefully planned changes in the order. This to help mitigate any anticipatory reaction from the person being examined. Also how the examiner will explain and define the terms used in the exam will be determined.
Bottom line, the polygraph examiner does not just ask a few questions. It is all carefully planned and baseline questions are a necessity. My baseline and reactions to the prep questions will be different from other people's reaction. The polygraph examiner needs to understand how this specific person in this specific situation reacts to the baseline and prep questions.
2. There are audio, video, and polygraph recordings of the entire process. There are also some collections that I choose not to share in this venue. The examiner then goes through the script with the person being examined to determine if they have any concerns or uncertainties about the question. All this is recorded. Then the examination "officially" starts (It already was started) and the person is asked the set of questions in the order that was determined prior to the examine. The last thing you want is a polygraph examiner reacting to an answer and then asking spontaneous questions. If something comes up in a polygraph examination, another examination will be scheduled where the new questions will be planned as before.
The polygraph tech can not determine deception by a contemporaneous reading of the polygraph data. That is strictly from the movies. Some people will show increased readings in deception, others may have suppressed readings in deception. That's why the questions are asked multiple time with planned differences in the order.
3. When the examination is finished, the Polygraph tech then reviews the Audio, Video while reviewing the time stamped polygraph data. The Tech then writes up a preliminary report.
Then, a separate poly tech, who was not involved in the examination, then also reviews the Audio, Video, and the time stamped polygraph data. This independent review is to mitigate any biases that the tech who conducted the exam might has made. This secondary review is usually done without the knowledge of the initial report.
You can not properly review polygraph data without also reviewing the contemporaneous audio and video of the examination. That's what takes so long.
Both of these reports are then given to the supervisor who compares them and at their discretion asks the examiner and the reviewer in for an interview. The supervisor may also review the Audio, Video, and Polygraph data, but this is not usual. Significant discrepancies or raised concerns will be evaluated to see if they garner scheduling a second examination.
Then the original examiner writes up the report, with any dissenting information. This report is signed by the examiner, the reviewer, and the supervisor. That's the official report.
This is why it takes a while to get the results back from a polygraph. There is a lot of work involved in the planning, executing, and reviewing of a polygraph examination.
One guy asking two questions by himself is not an acceptable methodology of conducting a polygraph examination. It might work for parties, but not for something important
Polygraphs have their flaws. It is just a machine that records data. The weak links are always the humans including both the person being examined and the people doing the examination. A lot of work and planning is done to mitigate the human biases. The end result is something that works pretty good, most of the time, with most people. That's about as good as it gets with Polys.
The thing to keep in mind is that the polygraph is incapable of detecting lies or someone lying. It can only detect changes in data in which an inference of deception can be made.
This one guy, retired FBI or not, is doing polygraph system a disservice by whipping up a few questions, asking them multiple times and then selecting the dataset that favors his client and publishing that.
This is not how it is supposed to work. It only helps harm the already low confidence in the polygraph system.
Bilge_Rat
09-29-18, 08:58 AM
So even if it did happen he could not be charged?
seems so, plus it is a misdemeanour, not a felony, so most likely no jail time since he was a minor at the time even if he could be prosecuted and the charge was proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
Mr Quatro
09-29-18, 09:02 AM
That's Kirsten Gillibrand not Dr. Ford...
Okay, I deleted it ... are you sure your from Finland? :o
Aktungbby
09-29-18, 10:37 AM
whatever happened to the "Total Transparency" Trump promised when he said he'd "drain The Swamp"? Oh, I forgot; instead Trump decided to build his own "Huuuuger!!!" and worse swamp...<O> https://www.washingtonian.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/20180527_Memorial_Day-e1531942260502.jpgTHEY DON' T CALL IT 'FOGGY BOTTOM' FER NUTHIN':haha:
Highbury
09-29-18, 10:27 PM
Because Polygraph can be made to show whatever end result you want, which is why it is inadmissable.
Would you want to undergo procedure that could be made to say whatever the investigator wanted when you are the subject of a witch hunt?
In the case of 'Sack vs. the U.S. Department of Defense' in 2016, a D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals judge ruled that “law enforcement agencies use polygraphs to test the credibility of witnesses" & the tests "serve law enforcement purposes."
That judge was Brett Kavanaugh. :hmmm:
Onkel Neal
09-30-18, 03:13 AM
I have to ask, has anyone else wondered at how people in 2018 are using their standards to judge the actions of people who lived in 1982?
ikalugin
09-30-18, 03:49 AM
That is the new norm.
VipertheSniper
09-30-18, 10:34 AM
I have to ask, has anyone else wondered at how people in 2018 are using their standards to judge the actions of people who lived in 1982?
I'm not sure what you're getting at here, attempted rape was a crime back then too, no?
If he did what he's accused of, it was just as wrong then as it would be if he did that today.
Not sure where 2018 standards come into the equation.
"Modern" standards have been applied to past events since the advent of recorded history.
Sailor Steve
09-30-18, 11:30 AM
I'm not sure what you're getting at here, attempted rape was a crime back then too, no?
In 1982 Brett Kavanaugh was 17 years old. Christine Ford was 15. If he did it (and that's still a big IF) he was legally a minor at the time. That does make a difference in the eyes of the law.
There is no legal case here. What this is about is Liberal Democrats trying to block any attempt by President Trump to put another Conservative on the Supreme Court. Nothing more, nothing less. The law has nothing to do with it.
Onkel Neal
09-30-18, 04:50 PM
I'm not sure what you're getting at here, attempted rape was a crime back then too, no?
If he did what he's accused of, it was just as wrong then as it would be if he did that today.
Not sure where 2018 standards come into the equation.
Different times. When I was in high school, pressuring a girl on a date was nothing unusual. What is considered rape now was not the same then. And if you are high-minded and this shocks you, sorry. But don't take my word for it, just review some of the popular culture of the time (https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/9/27/17906644/sixteen-candles-rape-culture-1980s-brett-kavanaugh). That's just the way things were then.
Skybird
09-30-18, 08:08 PM
"Pressing a girl", and date rape, are two different things in my book. Back then, and today.
Also, there are more allegations made against Kavanaugh, by two other women. Again, older ones, but still: if true, three form a pattern.
Date or not, there is a red line that the boy should only overstep if the girl allows it. Beyond that, its rape, plain and simple. Its no life style then, its no pop art, its no culture - its rape. Back then. And today.
That this all now boils so hot is just a symptom for and a consequence of the hostile polarization that Trump did not the smallest effort to overcome. Instead he uses just every opportunity to spill more fuel into the fire. He surfs on this situation. Without it, he possibly already would be gone.
Voting citizens of the US should make the only reasonable step: turning away from BOTH parties. None of the two is innocent in all this mess. Let both parties collapse and then send the remains to hell.
em2nought
10-01-18, 01:30 AM
This might as well be a picture of every Republican since Reagan, and until Trump in regard to dealing with the DemonRats :03:
http://ww2today.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Neville-Chamberlain.jpg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opi8X9hQ7q8
Onkel Neal
10-01-18, 04:28 AM
"Pressing a girl", and date rape, are two different things in my book. Back then, and today.
Also, there are more allegations made against Kavanaugh, by two other women. Again, older ones, but still: if true, three form a pattern.
Date or not, there is a red line that the boy should only overstep if the girl allows it. Beyond that, its rape, plain and simple. Its no life style then, its no pop art, its no culture - its rape. Back then. And today.
.
Yeah yeah, I feel the same way. Today.
Like it or not, most people did not see it that way in 1982. Men and women. I don't recall a girl throwing a fit and declaring "sexual assault!" or "date rape!" in 1982. It was a different time.
Skybird
10-01-18, 06:00 AM
Yeah yeah, I feel the same way. Today.
Like it or not, most people did not see it that way in 1982. Men and women. I don't recall a girl throwing a fit and declaring "sexual assault!" or "date rape!" in 1982. It was a different time.
And would you conclude from that they liked getting date-raped?
Like you I grew up in that era, Neal. Finished school 1985. And i am far from lining up with today's many lobby groups on hypersensitivities, special rights for X, Y and Z, and gender and feminism and minority quotas and all that stuff. It makes me sick. And still:
That there was no policy of getting public over certain things in the 80s does not mean it was okay or tolerable to enforce what was not wanted by the one side. And the offender who overstepped the red line always has had the freedom to decide that he would not do it.
And in that last sentence lies what really matters. Its not about different understanding of formalities back then and today. Like it is not punishable when you say that "you have to grab women by their pussies" (sorry, i only quote your formidable POTUS), it nevertheless tells something important and relevant about the character, or lack of, of the somebody making such a contemptuous statement. It reveals a fundamental, basic attitude towards the subject.
They do not look just for a clerk in some unimportant office in the basement. And so, higher standards must be applied. The appearance of Kavanaugh in the hearing did not convince me he was honest. He pressed all the buttons to trigger the reaction he wanted to get.
The situation is deeply poisoned due to the deep hostility and polarization in your country. If both sides indeed would mean the best for the country, they would sit together and try to find a less controversial candidate. Instead both sides go for "All or nothing at all". The looser is the institution of the court, its loss of recognition and respectability and trustworthiness and in the end: the American people being affected by its decisions, and turning sceptical if not hostile to it.
I do not see how America ever will "heal" again after these deep rifts of the presents.
Bilge_Rat
10-01-18, 06:43 AM
Well if you want to get technical based on 1982 Maryland law and assuming everything happened exactly as Ford testified:
1. There was no "sexual assault" since that legal term did not exist in 1982;
2. There was no "rape" since that requires forcible penetration;
3. It is debatable if it even rises to the level of "attempted rape" since you would have to show his intent was to rape her and he made a serious attempt to accomplish his goal;
The reality is that even if she had complained in 1982, it is doubtful the police would have charged him with anything.
1. There was no "sexual assault" since that legal term did not exist in 1982;Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't 'sexual assault' an umbrella term that covers various sexual crimes?
Skybird
10-01-18, 07:29 AM
Well, some young people seriously argue that a blowjob, sorry, "is no sex".
Rape only when penetration occurs? That must be a male's law, no doubt. You can be sexually attacking even if penetration does not occur and may not even be desired by the pervert committing the attack.
German law qualifies not just penetration as rape, but also especially humiliating enforced sexual activities without penetration.
ikalugin
10-01-18, 07:57 AM
humiliating enforced sexual activities without penetration.
So glancing accidentally?
Bilge_Rat
10-01-18, 07:58 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't 'sexual assault' an umbrella term that covers various sexual crimes?
now yes, it was created partly to get away from the common law definition of "rape" and having to prove there had been penetration and to put more emphasis on the "assault " portion, but "sexual assault" as crime or even a legal concept did not exist in 1982. I know because I was in law school in 1982 and studying criminal law. My ambition at the time was to become a defence lawyer.
Bilge_Rat
10-01-18, 08:00 AM
Well, some young people seriously argue that a blowjob, sorry, "is no sex".
Rape only when penetration occurs? That must be a male's law, no doubt. You can be sexually attacking even if penetration does not occur and may not even be desired by the pervert committing the attack.
German law qualifies not just penetration as rape, but also especially humiliating enforced sexual activities without penetration.
that may be the law in Germany, but we are talking about laws in civilized common law jurisdiction. :ping:
in 1982, "rape" is only if you can prove penetration and no such thing as "sexual assault".
Skybird
10-01-18, 08:26 AM
And still behaviour of this kind tells somethign about the person showing it. BTW, with yourm logic you cna also argue that the shooting of fleeing Eastegrmernas at the inner-German border or the crimes ciommiotted by the Gestapo, were not to be rated as crimes because they were conformal with the then-vlaid laws.
Its always a sad thing if formality trumps over moral and ethics. And when the question of criminal behaviour turns into a game of "its okay as long as you get away with it". It remains wrong and the person behaving criminally remains to be fully responsible, however. Arguing in formalities only in the end leads to the perverted situation that any law enforcing turns into the cause of "offence" and "crime". Wouldn't that be absurd?
Kavanaugh now gets accused by a former fellow student that he was drinking often and heavily, and became aggressive whilew drinking. If true, again he is fully responsible for his drinking, and any consequences caused by that. As I have often argued before, mostly regarding alcohol and car driving: being drunk in no way is a reason to appeal for mitigating circumstances. The drinker is fully responsible for how much he drinks, and for even drinking at all.
Bilge_Rat
10-01-18, 08:34 AM
BTW, with yourm logic you cna also argue that the shooting of fleeing Eastegrmernas at the inner-German border or the crimes ciommiotted by the Gestapo, were not to be rated as crimes because they were conformal with the then-vlaid laws.
well not in a civilized common law jurisdiction, but nothing about German law surprises me. :ping:
Kavanaugh now gets accused by a former fellow student that he was drinking often and heavily, and became aggressive whilew drinking.
Here's his (Charles "Chad" Ludington) statement:
I have been contacted by numerous reporters about Brett Kavanaugh and have not wanted to say anything because I had nothing to contribute about what kind of Justice he would be. I knew Brett at Yale because I was a classmate and a varsity basketball player and Brett enjoyed socializing with athletes. Indeed, athletes formed the core of Brett's social circle.
In recent days I have become deeply troubled by what has been a blatant mischaracterization by Brett himself of his drinking at Yale. When I watched Brett and his wife being interviewed on Fox News on Monday, and when I watched Brett deliver his testimony under oath to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday, I cringed. For the fact is, at Yale, and I can speak to no other times, Brett was a frequent drinker, and a heavy drinker. I know, because, especially in our first two years of college, I often drank with him. On many occasions I heard Brett slur his words and saw him staggering from alcohol consumption, not all of which was beer. When Brett got drunk, he was often belligerent and aggressive. On one of the last occasions I purposely socialized with Brett, I witnessed him respond to a semi-hostile remark, not by defusing the situation, but by throwing his beer in the man's face and starting a fight that ended with one of our mutual friends in jail.
I do not believe that the heavy drinking or even loutish behavior of an 18 or even 21 year old should condemn a person for the rest of his life. I would be a hypocrite to think so. However, I have direct and repeated knowledge about his drinking and his disposition while drunk. And I do believe that Brett's actions as a 53-year-old federal judge matter. If he lied about his past actions on national television, and more especially while speaking under oath in front of the United States Senate, I believe those lies should have consequences. It is truth that is at stake, and I believe that the ability to speak the truth, even when it does not reflect well upon oneself, is a paramount quality we seek in our nation's most powerful judges.
I can unequivocally say that in denying the possibility that he ever blacked out from drinking, and in downplaying the degree and frequency of his drinking, Brett has not told the truth.
I felt it was my civic duty to tell of my experience while drinking with Brett, and I offer this statement to the press. I have no desire to speak further publicly, and nothing more to say to the press at this time. I will however, take my information to the FBI.
Mr Quatro
10-01-18, 10:07 AM
Dr Ford in her testimony said that this episode lasted ten minutes in a locked upstairs bedroom with two drunk men. It is also reported that she was wearing a one piece bathing suit.
Ten minutes is a long time ... I hope the next shoe that drops is not that she was too embarrassed to report that there was penetration and that now that she has had time to clarify what happened in that room she hopes that her civil duty has been preformed.
Only three witnesses with no date or even a month or a week or even a day of the week and no memory of how she got there or how she got home leaves me to wonder if there is another shoe to be dropped. :o
I hope not :hmmm:
Bilge_Rat
10-01-18, 10:48 AM
Here's his (Charles "Chad" Ludington) statement:
its called moving the goalpost.
Dr. Ford's testimony has a lot of holes in it and unless the FBI comes up with something he will probably be confirmed.
so the new line of attack is that he lied to Congress about his drinking.
Well I am basing my opinions on the several polygraph examinations I have been subjected to as well as my researcher when I was applying to be a polygraph examination in the military. What happened here is very unusual.
...
This one guy, retired FBI or not, is doing polygraph system a disservice by whipping up a few questions, asking them multiple times and then selecting the dataset that favors his client and publishing that.
This is not how it is supposed to work. It only helps harm the already low confidence in the polygraph system.
Your experience with polygraph(s) is accurate -- if a person is getting something serious like a high security clearance or is being criminally investigated; but, for the use of polygraph in civil actions or in situations like Dr. Ford, the bar is much lower; remember, those sorts of tests are usually carried out at the behest of a client's own counsel with the purpose of reinforcing their client's own interests. Where the test might get more particular and comprehensive would be if the matter involved high stakes litigation or if the opposing counsel asked to conduct their own test, in which case their motivation would be to probe with the intent of discrediting the person being tested...
I've never actually had a polygraph test, but came near twice, for two different jobs for which I applied, one where they filled the position before I had to take a test and the other where I found a position elsewhere also before the test was to be given; in both cases; I did enquire as to the scope, nature and process of the potential examination; one was apparently very through and the other was represented as being rather brief and cursory, sort of "We have to at least go through the motions"; I kind of wish I had taken at least one of the tests, if only as an interesting experience...
Different times. When I was in high school, pressuring a girl on a date was nothing unusual. What is considered rape now was not the same then. And if you are high-minded and this shocks you, sorry. But don't take my word for it, just review some of the popular culture of the time (https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/9/27/17906644/sixteen-candles-rape-culture-1980s-brett-kavanaugh). That's just the way things were then.
Being of an age (an old age), my teen years were in the 1960s and I can tell you one thing: if a guy tried to molest a girl and word got back to her father, brother(s), any other male family members, or a close male friend of the girl, the guy who did the molesting would have been subjected to a bit of "curbside justice" even if there were no law(s) explicitly prohibiting the molestation. I don't know about where anybody else grew up, but there were even enough gentlemen in our neighborhood, who, even though unrelated to the girl, would have also taken offense, intervened, and given out a bit of the "justice" as well. Wrong is wrong, no matter when or if there are any actual laws proscribing the wrong at the time of the incident. Any person who engages in such behavior is wrong, no matter what; and , though, a person may not be subject to official repercussions, that a person would engage in such actions speaks to the character, or lack thereof of that person, calling into question their personal morality, judgement, and ability to accept responsibility...
That said, what I really find troubling is the meltdown Kavanaugh displayed at Thursday's hearings: unhinged, evasive, at times near hysterics, I'm not sure he is, by any measure, up to the rigors of being a Supreme Court Justice. Surely, he can't be the only candidate that Trump and the GOP can come up with; maybe its time to cut possible losses and find someone else; if Kavanuagh is the 'best and the brightest' they can come up with, then their candidate pool must be the worst and the darkest. I just know there must be someone within the judicial ranks of the GOP else who won't be such a major embarrassment to the Party and to the country...
Poll:Opposition To Kavanaugh Grows-After Ford hearing:
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/10/poll-opposition-brett-kavanaugh-confirmation-grows-after-christine-blasey-ford-hearing.html
This might as well be a picture of every Republican since Reagan, and until Trump in regard to dealing with the DemonRats :03:
http://ww2today.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Neville-Chamberlain.jpg
You mean the same Trump who handed over to the Israelis highly classified and sensitive intelligence over the opposition of his own Intel officials who feared compromising US operations and operatives; or do you mean the same Trump who, also over the objections of Republican lawmakers, his defense advisers and some of his own economic officials, regarding known abuses and breaches, cleared the way for a sweetheart deal for China's ZTE telecom after China poured USD $500,000,000 into a project that is to bear trump's name; or do you mean the same Trump who has repeatedly refused to acknowledge or even defend the US against Russian interference in internal US governmental activities ; or do you mean the same Trump who has been the slavish pet of Putin and who has done every thing short of presenting his haunches like a baboon (a "huuuuge" yellw baboon) in heat to his Russian master? Dou you mean all of the above Trumps?...
Yeah, right, Trump is no Neville Chamberlain... :har:
<O>
its called moving the goalpost.
Dr. Ford's testimony has a lot of holes in it and unless the FBI comes up with something he will probably be confirmed.
so the new line of attack is that he lied to Congress about his drinking.
So, then, "Lying Hillary" is evil, "Lying Bill" is evil, "Lying Obama" is evil, but "Lying Brett" (under oath and on worldwide TV) is perfectly fine and honorable...
Sounds about right for typical GOP hypocrisy...
<O>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRJecfRxbr8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljmCX0R7Tqg
<O>
em2nought
10-01-18, 04:21 PM
Your experience with polygraph(s) is accurate -- if a person is getting something serious like a high security clearance or is being criminally investigated; but, for the use of polygraph in civil actions or in situations like Dr. Ford, the bar is much lower; remember, those sorts of tests are usually carried out at the behest of a client's own counsel with the purpose of reinforcing their client's own interests.
Yeah, right, Trump is no Neville Chamberlain... :har:
My lawyer had me do the baseline stuff and what not. I know who paid the dinero for it too, me. :har: I'd think they'd only skirt that stuff because it proved to "not" be helpful when they did it the first time so they did it again without it.
You just can't get over that 2016 election result can you? Looks like Canada just agreed to play Trump's economic ballgame too! So much winning going into November! :up:
My lawyer had me do the baseline stuff and what not. I know who paid the dinero for it too, me. :har: I'd think they'd only skirt that stuff because it proved to "not" be helpful when they did it the first time so they did it again without it.
You just can't get over that 2016 election result can you? Looks like Canada just agreed to play Trump's economic ballgame too! So much winning going into November! :up:
Cool your jets: all Trump has is a catchy name, "USMCA" and a proposal; there is no signed, ratified, treaty at all and Congress has yet to weigh in and, given the likelihood the GOP, under Trump's leadership, will lose at leat one hose, the ratification of the treaty is still plenty shaky. Just like all of Trump's other past "accomplishments" and announcements :it is hollow, "told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." (I thought I'd class up the joint with a little Willie S.). I'll believe it is a done deal when it is a done deal...
By the way, do you think maybe someone in Trump's 'brain trust' sat around trying to think of a catchy name thought "Hey! USMCA is really good! The rubes will make an association with USMC!..."?...
As far as the election, even if Hillary had won, I'd still be ticked off; hell, I'd be ticked off if Bernie won... :haha:
So far the only "winning" Trump has done is only apparent if you apply this guy's metrics:
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b109/Nasulril/CrazyCharlieSheenWinning.png
But, hey, you know what? That guy got fired... :hmmm:
:haha:
<O>
Skybird
10-01-18, 06:49 PM
its called moving the goalpost.
Dr. Ford's testimony has a lot of holes in it and unless the FBI comes up with something he will probably be confirmed.
so the new line of attack is that he lied to Congress about his drinking.
Clinton got attacked for lieng in shame over his adventure with Monica Lewinski. Oath and credibility and all that.
Double standards for Dems and Reps, or same standards for both - what should it be? Preaching water but drinking wine?
Bilge_Rat
10-01-18, 06:57 PM
So, then, "Lying Hillary" is evil, "Lying Bill" is evil, "Lying Obama" is evil, but "Lying Brett" (under oath and on worldwide TV) is perfectly fine and honorable...
Sounds about right for typical GOP hypocrisy...
<O>
if you mean that lying Brett gets the same treatment as lying Obama, Lying Clinton twins, i.e. no consequences whatsoever, in this case a lifetime appointment to the SCOTUS, then yes. :up:
not sure what your point was actually...:hmmm:
Buddahaid
10-01-18, 07:14 PM
The point is no one cares to see the faults in their party of choice apparently, and all act as if this is some stupid Saturday morning western where the good guys wear white hats and the bad guys wear black hats. The problem is it is never that simple but people will still act as if it is no matter how ridiculous it becomes for fear of being labelled a black hat.
My point is the GOP gets all self-righteous and moralistic, puffing up about how scandalous and abominable it is when a DEM is caught out in a wrong, but is extremely silent, evasive, or filled with excuses when one of their own i called out. I'm all for taking out both sides and have no qualms about seeing DEMs or GOP removed, impeached, or whatever is necessary to make them take responsibility for their actions. I've got no party, but, as I've said before, I'd give serious consideration to joining a party that had the guts, morality, and the willingness to be as forceful in policing their own party members as they are in policing other parties. So far the GOP, in their "turn at bat" are just as bad (worse, if you consider they seem to think its a good idea to kiss that fat ass sitting in the Oval Office) as the DEMs; and I don't really expect any different when the DEMs take over...
Basically, if you're gonna talk the talk, ya gotta walk the walk...
<O>
Mr Quatro
10-01-18, 09:00 PM
These two accounts have been frozen, meaning you can't contribute to them anymore, but I hear there is a third one with $200k in that one. Dr Ford said in court, "I'm aware that there's been several GoFundMe sites," and then added that she didn't know how to access that money. I bet those two free attorney's on either side of her could help her do that. :yep:
https://wjla.com/news/nation-world/gofundme-accounts-raise-over-700k-for-christine-blasey-ford
WASHINGTON (Circa) — Two GoFundMe accounts created for Christine Blasey Ford, the woman accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault, have raised more than $700,000.
Mr Quatro
10-01-18, 09:08 PM
BREAKING NEWS : The #Safeway store that #DrFord claims to have gone to in 1982 after the attempted rape, didn’t open until 1986
Buddahaid
10-01-18, 09:19 PM
Welcome to the Information Age. This is really what it's all about? The ability to accumulate political clout through the interwebs?
That, just highlights the need for a free press! Yes, there will be bull thrown without mercy, but that is no change from what has gone before, just the methods have changed and are subject to wider scrutiny.
I guess Rachel Mitchell doesn't "believe". :)
https://www.dailywire.com/news/36519/prosecutor-questioned-ford-shreds-her-case-5-page-ryan-saavedra?utm_medium=email&utm_content=100118-news&utm_campaign=Actengage
Rachel Mitchell, the prosecutor who questioned Christine Blasey Ford last week during a hearing in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee, wrote a five-page memo that was released on Sunday that outlines why she would not bring criminal charges against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.
Mitchell's memo notes nine significant problems with Ford's testimony and underscores that her case is "even weaker" than a "he said, she said" case.
"A 'he said, she said' case is incredibly difficult to prove," Mitchell states. "But this case is even weaker than that. Dr. Ford identified other witnesses to the event, and those witnesses either refuted her allegations or failed to corroborate them. For the reasons discussed below, I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the Committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard.
Onkel Neal
10-02-18, 01:00 AM
Being of an age (an old age), my teen years were in the 1960s and I can tell you one thing: if a guy tried to molest a girl and word got back to her father, brother(s), any other male family members, or a close male friend of the girl, the guy who did the molesting would have been subjected to a bit of "curbside justice" even if there were no law(s) explicitly prohibiting the molestation.
What, you never went parking with a girl, or to a drive in movie (or maybe a sailboat or airplane)? "Excuse me, Miss, may I have permission to touch your boob?" Is that how it went in your land? Cool, I always wanted an Amish friend.
https://cinemastarlets.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/a2.png?w=547&h=266
Sounds like you grew up with Wally Cleaver and the Beach Boys. I was a teen during the Motley Crue/Animal House generation :haha:
https://d3j0sq6zklqdqq.cloudfront.net/photos/2016/04/01/53-33679-animal-house-playboy-bunny-1459471021.jpg
BREAKING NEWS : The #Safeway store that #DrFord claims to have gone to in 1982 after the attempted rape, didn’t open until 1986 :o 1986 is when Safeway was bought by Kohlberg Kravis Roberts, that's what that document is about.
1986: KKR completed a friendly $5.5 billion buyout of Safeway to help management avoid hostile overtures from Herbert and Robert Haft of Dart Drug.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kohlberg_Kravis_Roberts#Founding_and_early_history
This (https://riverfalls.org/charities-view/history/) site about the history of Riverfalls mentions Safeway opening in 1968:
The District Grocery Store (‘DGS’) occupied the building where the Hunter’s Inn and Chico’s are now located; the Safeway would open its doors in 1968.Here's an article (https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/realestate/1985/10/12/a-giant-controversy-hits-potomac/affc91fb-a75a-4e5c-80bd-7979bcf9df73/?utm_term=.382db7e3e401) from The Washington Post dated October 12, 1985:
Castleberry said the Potomac Village Safeway has "wanted to expand almost from the time we came in there in 1968. But we were always told by residents that they liked things 'just the way they are'. . . . It has always been a low-key village concept."
Aktungbby
10-02-18, 02:14 AM
Is that how it went in your land? Cool, I always wanted an Amish friend.
ONLY DURING 'RUMSPRINGA' bby!https://imgix.ranker.com/user_node_img/50059/1001165495/original/they-throw-rumspringa-parties-photo-u1?w=650&q=50&fm=jpg&fit=crop&crop=faces!:Dhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rumspringa (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rumspringa) ....NO TELLING HOW MANY SUBSIMMERS WE HAVE IN LANCASTER COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA....AND THE ONE THING YOU NEVER HIT WHILE DRIVING IN AMISH COUNTRY IN YOUR EIGHTEEN WHEELER>https://imgix.ranker.com/user_node_img/50059/1001165518/original/even-the-amish-like-to-haul-ass-photo-u2?w=650&q=60&fm=jpg&fit=crop&crop=faces
Skybird
10-02-18, 05:31 AM
What, you never went parking with a girl, or to a drive in movie (or maybe a sailboat or airplane)? "Excuse me, Miss, may I have permission to touch your boob?" Is that how it went in your land? Cool, I always wanted an Amish friend.
Sounds like you grew up with Wally Cleaver and the Beach Boys. I was a teen during the Motley Crue/Animal House generation :haha:
C'mon, Neal. You're better than this. Simplifications to the extreme never end well.
Mr Quatro
10-02-18, 08:38 AM
1986 is when Safeway was bought by Kohlberg Kravis Roberts, that's what that document is about.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kohlberg_Kravis_Roberts#Founding_and_early_history
This (https://riverfalls.org/charities-view/history/) site about the history of Riverfalls mentions Safeway opening in 1968:
Here's an article (https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/realestate/1985/10/12/a-giant-controversy-hits-potomac/affc91fb-a75a-4e5c-80bd-7979bcf9df73/?utm_term=.382db7e3e401) from The Washington Post dated October 12, 1985:
No more facebook postings for me ... can you imagine how many seeds of hatred get spread by both sides on Facebook alone and no one bothers to check it out?
I bet the Russians in some back room somewhere already know that :yep:
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.