US Politics Thread 2016-2020

[Rockstar]

excellent observation.

[August]

Just think of the movies that will come out of it. I'll bet Oliver Stone is already assembling background material!

[Skybird]

It got reported that during a meeting with Trump in the WH, Trump repeatedly pressed Comey for pledging himself personally to the person of Trump, not to the duties and role of Comey's office, duties, and service, which are not the person of the president perosnally, but the FBI. Führergehorsam, we call that in German, or Nibelungentreue. Comey should have rejected that demand to allow getting corrupted by Trump, which led to Trump repeatedly pushing him for it again, mistaking professional honesty with personal loyalty. Later, as we know, Trump attacked Comey for dishonesty and attacked his character. He also tried to intimdate him in words via the press and wanred him against revelaing to the public what he called internal information, which of course wa smeant to be a warnign to not tell the public what coup against the FBI Trump was running.

This is no longer just harmless odditiy, this is the behviour of a man that is not any different from banana republic dictators and tyrants like Erdghan or Putin. Trump tries acts and speaks the language of the godfather of some Sicilian Mafia clan. And as commentators have started to point out, he started to really damage the substance of the US constitutional and legal order.

From a purely American perspective , he must be removed, no matter how. Better yesterday than today. This is becoming dangerous far earlier than I assumed it to be possible.

I can only hope that the Russian connection breaks Trump's neck - and that of his damn clan that he tries to anchor in the Washington soil as the new dynasty haunting America for times to come.

This was always the main question: Would President Trump go beyond mere Twitter abuse and move against institutions that limit his power? By any reasonable standard, we now have an answer.

Trump’s official rationale for firing FBI Director James B. Comey — that the president was suddenly seized with outrage at the shocking treatment of Hillary Clinton by the FBI during the election — is false in a typically Trump-like way. It requires his supporters to demonstrate their loyalty by defending the indefensible. This is apparently the manner in which Trump identifies true believers. They must be willing, when instructed, to say that 2+2=5. On cable television.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...b37_story.html

During his famous interviews with David Frost in 1977, Richard Nixonmade a statement regarding Watergate that has been mockingly quoted ever since. “When the president does it, that means that it is not illegal,” he said to Frost. Nixon was a smart lawyer and a close student of the Constitution. He was basically right. The president, in effect, sits above the law. The Justice Department, after all, works for him. Refusing to follow certain ethical guidelines in separating himself from his business empire, Trump told the New York Times, “The law is totally on my side, meaning, the president can’t have a conflict of interest.” Most lawyers say he is right. The rules don’t really apply to the president.

(...)

There are only two forces left that can place some constraints on Trump — the courts and the media — and he has relentlessly attacked both. Every time a court has ruled against one of his executive orders, the president has ridiculed the decision or demeaned the judges involved. To their enormous credit, the courts have not been deterred from standing up to the president.
That leaves the media. Trump has gone at them (us) like no president before, smearing news organizations, attacking individual journalists and threatening to strip legal protections guaranteed to a free press. We will survive, but we must recognize the stakes.
The media should cover the administration’s policies fairly. But they must also never let the public forget that many of the attitudes and actions of this president are gross violations of the customs and practices of the modern American system — that they are aberrations and cannot become the new norms.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...=.b0e96d4ba949


Board of CEOs of the autocrat and macho corporation. (We hope for our first quota female).



"there aint no Russian connection... there aint no Russian connection... there aint no Russian connection..."


by Stuttman, Der Tagesspiegel

[August]

Skybird you're basing this enormous wall of text on what the New York Times claims unidentified associates of Comey heard him say. Hardly the most solid of sources especially coming from that rag. The president flat out denies that he asked Comey for a loyalty oath. Comey himself has not said that such a pledge was demanded of him.

In other words this is just another political attack on the president by a hostile media organization with a proven track record of collusion with the Democratic party. Just more mud tossed by the liberals in the hopes that enough suckers will believe it to make a difference to their dwindling power.

Interesting, what "fake news" claim is immediately a lie - no need for further investigation.
Your President says "not true", and you immediately fall in line as if it is therefore true - despite the fact that Trump so far spend 3 days in office where he didn't spread some sort of lies.
Oh and on two of these days, he went golfing.

The day will come many people here will fall over their own bias, and make a pretty dumb face when they start to finally realize what 1+1 equals... but this seems to take longer than expected.

[Rockstar]

Dictorship my butt. The duty of a department head in the executive branch of government is supposed to advise and carry out the policies of the chief executive. If they cannot do that then they get fired and the chief executive gets to find someone who will.

[Skybird]

2+2=5. "I do not pull the cat's tail, I just hold it tight."

[August]

One equals a million



What will one do when the real wolves assemble and everyone is tired of ones lies?

[Platapus]

I don't like the idea of requiring an elected person to publicly release their tax forms. As long as the IRS certifies that there is nothing wrong with it, that is all that should be required.

I doubt the average person will even understand the tax forms of someone with a complicated business and family background, so we would be back where we are now with political commentators just spinning it as they like it.

It is nice that politicians voluntarily release personal data, but I don't want it a requirement. Of course, the voters are free to make their own inferences based on the activity of the politician.

[vienna]

Originally Posted by August

Skybird you're basing this enormous wall of text on what the New York Times claims unidentified associates of Comey heard him say. Hardly the most solid of sources especially coming from that rag. The president flat out denies that he asked Comey for a loyalty oath. Comey himself has not said that such a pledge was demanded of him.

In other words this is just another political attack on the president by a hostile media organization with a proven track record of collusion with the Democratic party. Just more mud tossed by the liberals in the hopes that enough suckers will believe it to make a difference to their dwindling power.

Trump flat out denies something? That fountain of truth and honesty? Really?? That's your argument?? "Sad, weak". Actually, the real meat of Trump's troubles have been caused by, predictably, Trump himself. He really must have a lot of lead in his heiney, given how often he shoots himself there. Aside from doing a boneheaded thing like firing the head of the investigative agency charged with either confirming or clearing the allegations against Trump associates (and, again, there have been no official allegations against Trump, himself), he then compounds the whole mess by first denying the firing had anything to do with the Russian-influence investigation and then he reverses himself and says the decision was based on the investigation. To fully top off the mess he's gotten himself into, he then hints at the existence of "tapes" of conversations he had with Comey. Trump is his own worst enemy; every action he takes screams out a high suspicion of guilt. Someone compared Trump's actions to those of a child who comes into the house and tells his/her parent, out of the blue, "I didn't throw my shoes up on the roof!" and walks away; the parent instantly has more than a passing suspicion, if they check the roof, the shoes will be there. Trump's furtiveness, prevarication, and duplicity only serve to further make the idea of his possible guilt take hold. His own party is steadily moving away from supporting his actions and he is rapidly losing any traction he might have had with the public...

His latest idiocy of hinting at the existence of "tapes" may be very costly; members of the House and Senate, from both parties, are now calling for him to 'put up or shut up'. They want him to either produce the tapes and prove his allegations and assertions, or they want him to admit he was lying about any "tapes" and to publicly apologize to Comey and the American people:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/power...d82_story.html

These are not made up transgressions or allegations of misuse of power; they are very real and Trump, again, has no one to ultimately blame but himself. It is highly conceivable the situation will get worse for Trump, and by extension, the GOP; the really sad part is, all this would have been unnecessary if Trump had just shut up and gotten out of the way...

Oh, and for those who nod their heads like bobble-head dolls in agreement with Trump and the Far Right assertion the whole investigation has been born out of the DEMs 'sour grapes' over losing the Electoral College vote, there is no better response than a factual timeline:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...a-story-made-/

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Dictorship my butt. The duty of a department head in the executive branch of government is supposed to advise and carry out the policies of the chief executive. If they cannot do that then they get fired and the chief executive gets to find someone who will.

You know, I seem to remember the FBI Director is required, by law, to take an oath of office; now how does it go? Oh, yes, exactly like this:

I [name] do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

I must be missing something. Did Trump or the Congress change the oath to specify absolute loyalty to the President? I can't seem to find it in there, anywhere. Perhaps you would be so kind to point it out to us. Also, the oath says "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic". Now, to investigate the possibility of a foreign power to interfere with the conduct of the US political system, in any way, seems to cover the foreign enemies part; I'd say a President who consciously, deliberately, knowingly, and with intent acts in such a way as to interfere, perhaps criminally, with the legitimate investigation into such a matter has made himself little more than a domestic enemy. The FBI Director is not obligated to pledge fealty to anyone or anything other than Constitution of the United States of America, nor is he beholden to any political party, political agenda, or individual caprices of Congress or the occupant of the White House. Comey was doing his job, and given he has pissed off Presidents from both parties, he seems to have been doing the job well; the big difference is, the prior the Presidents, even though they were not necessarily always happy with the course of Comey's action, they were at least smart enough to stay out of the way and let whatever was being done play out; this president seems to lack both the basic knowledge of his office and the common sense of an average person. Even working people have more sense: if faced with an employer who is engaging in illegal or unethical conduct, most honest people would at least quit if not turn the matter over to the proper authorities. Common street criminals have more sense than Trump and his minions...

Regarding foreign enemies, it must be great to win a war without firing a shot:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...uence-election




<O>

[Bilge_Rat]

Originally Posted by vienna

Oh, and for those who nod their heads like bobble-head dolls in agreement with Trump and the Far Right assertion the whole investigation has been born out of the DEMs 'sour grapes' over losing the Electoral College vote, there is no better response than a factual timeline:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...a-story-made-/

<O>

Politifact?

that is your source?

[vienna]

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

Politifact?

that is your source?

The source does not refute the facts, the same facts that are available from other sources, as well...

So, basically, your argument to any posit of reality is a schoolyard "Sez you..."...

Being unable to actually intelligently refuting facts or offering up cogent counterarguments and resorting to mocking a source as your form of rebuttal? "Sad, sad, sad and weak, weak, weak". No wonder Trump was able to sell his shoddy bill of fare to all those yokels...

Come on, use your wits and give an intelligent argument that really has substance and isn't just a regurgitation of 'the party line'... if you can...




<O>

[em2nought]

This is the underhanded thing that's been going on in our institutions of learning ever since I went to university https://www.truthmonitor.com/2017/05...berals-ignore/

[Skybird]

EVERY political party has an inbuild craving for intellectual erosion and streamlining mono-opinion. Thats what it is there for in the first. And that is why I am against EVERY political party there can be. The whole system design featuring parties, is wrong.

Hooligans. They do not ask for who the better team was in last sunday's match. Because that hooligans always will decide by worn team colours, not by playing performance. My colours: good. Your colours: fistintheface.

Political parties must be destroyed. EVERY SINGLE ONE. Their power priviliges must die with them.

[vienna]

[Truth Monitor]?

that is your source?

(Sorry, some of Bilge_Rat must have infected my post...)...


This is how you do it:

Read the article and noticed it was dated "14 hours ago"; checked Google News and Yahoo News to confirm and found no mention. I copied a string of the article's text and found out the original articles (there were more than one) actually first appeared back on or about 12 December 2016, not "14 hours ago"; this indicates that while the "Truth Monitor" article seemed a current response to a current situation, it in fact is a recite of five-month old articles passed off as current 'fact':

http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/e...-echo-chamber/

http://freebeacon.com/politics/morni...rvative-ideas/

http://truepundit.com/video-morning-...ral-education/

These articles appeared originally a full month ahead of the inauguration Trump and represent a range of opinions, not necessarily fact, about a long-debated issue, an issue that will most likely be argued for as many decades to come as it has for decades preceding: it ultimately proves nothing, conclusively. Like the Trump Campaign-Russian issue, it certainly requires further discussion and investigation...

It must be pointed out the original source of the articles is, in fact, a panel discussion held by and on the MSNBC program Morning Joe; we all know from that paragon of wisdom, Donald Trump, MSNBC is a fountain of "fake news" and misinformation; perhaps the panel discussion was a ruse to raise yet another issue that doesn't exist, you know like ties between Trump campaign staff and Russia; I mean, we can't trust MSNBC because, after all, Trump says they lie and can't be trusted and we all know how honest Donny is...

As far as Truth Monitor is concerned...ahem:

...

A questionable source exhibits any of the following: extreme bias, overt propaganda, poor or no sourcing to credible information and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for the purpose of profit or influence. Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact checked on a per article basis. ...



Bias: Extreme Right


...

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/truth-monitor/

The site does go on to give examples of Truth Monitor's apparent disregard for anything near the Truth...

I'm more than willing to listen to anyone's viewpoint as long as that view is based in actual fact, not propaganda, or, worse, tin-foil hat vagaries...

BTW, I actually do believe there is a pervasive liberal bent in higher education and I do believe it colors a great deal of what is taught; is it as serious as the Far-Right makes it out to be? Perhaps not, but it is an interesting question that bears further investigation...



<O>