Jump to content
Navv

General US Politics

Poll  

274 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you vote a third party?

    • Yes
      89
    • No
      111
    • Maybe
      74
  2. 2. Are you content with the results of the election?

    • Yes
      49
    • No
      111
    • Indifferent
      43


Recommended Posts

On 9/10/2019 at 7:03 PM, Tryhard said:

Bolton is (was?) the most dangerous person that I would point to in the US government. Finally some good news.

Alas...

Edited by Tryhard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Etrurian emperor said:

Is that even legal?

I don't know. It wouldn't surprise me if it is by virtue of there being no rules/law against such behavior. A lot of the legislative process assumes that all parties involved are acting in good faith but as it has been shown by several Republican politicians, they're not.

Democrats are constantly being surprised and blindsided when the Republicans break precedence and take underhanded actions like this and the Merrick Garland fiasco. It seems to be a smaller portion of them that see the reality.

Republicans demonstrate their disdain for the system of government we have on a daily basis and at this point they simply believe that things have to go their way and if not, either take away power or have the offender cease to exist.

It still pisses me off to no end that Biden thinks we should work with these assholes. They need to be removed from office and several them probably deserved it if they end up being assassinated... McConnell is certainly among those. The way the Republicans operate will draw ire from common people in the future and on the rare occasion that an attempt has been made on a Republican politician, the right-wing cries "RADICAL LEFTIST VIOLENCE" and plays victim with the claim that it's due to their "Conservative values".

Edited by Dr. Tarrasque

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dr. Tarrasque said:

https://www.salon.com/2019/09/14/facebook-removed-doctors-fact-check-of-false-anti-abortion-video-because-ted-cruz-complained/

Wait wait wait, isn't this one closer to actually being a violation of the 1st Amendment than anything conservatives have been bitching about lately? What the actual fuck.

If this is a violation of the 1st Amendment, then the entire removal of right wing YouTube channels and Facebook pages are... what exactly?

Remember when Tulsi Gabbard had her entire Facebook page taken down immediately following the 2nd Democratic debates? Pepperidge Farms remembers.

Funny how only now you're up in arms about protecting the 1st Amendment.

Edited by Life

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Life said:

If this is a violation of the 1st Amendment, then the entire removal of right wing YouTube channels and Facebook pages are... what exactly?

Remember when Tulsi Gabbard had her entire Facebook page taken down immediately following the 2nd Democratic debates? Pepperidge Farms remembers.

Funny how only now you're up in arms about protecting the 1st Amendment.

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/02/20/cens-f20.html
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/twitter-political-account-ban-us-mid-term-elections
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/oct/11/facebook-purge-page-removal-spam
https://theintercept.com/2017/12/30/facebook-says-it-is-deleting-accounts-at-the-direction-of-the-u-s-and-israeli-governments/
https://variety.com/2019/digital/news/twitter-bans-ed-brian-krassenstein-brothers-fake-accounts-1203225266/

And for a bonus, there has been a tracker of 'free speech incidents' that happens at academic institutions in the US - accounting for those, it is found that around 75% of them are actually directed at 'left-wing' victims.
https://freespeechproject.georgetown.edu/
https://www.niskanencenter.org/there-is-no-campus-free-speech-crisis-a-close-look-at-the-evidence/

I've never heard any right-wing commentator talk about left-wing accounts being removed.

Is it possible that people are likely only to care about such things when they can engage in tribalism?

Edited by Tryhard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Tryhard said:

I've never heard any right-wing commentator talk about left-wing accounts being removed.

Is it possible that people are likely only to care about such things when they can engage in tribalism?

This was the first thing that popped into my head when I read that and I didn't even need to do a Google search. Probably because this happened a week ago.

It's not my fault if you don't look for yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Sargon is on the left, according to him, isn't he? 😆

Just if you're going to use the claim that "nobody cared" about Tulsi Gabbard's situation, then perhaps ignorance is a valid excuse, considering I didn't even know about that either.

Perhaps making such generalising arguments about the left or right on social media is bullshit - but it's what I've observed. It's only a few that are principled enough to care enough to actually defend their opponents.

Edited by Tryhard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Life said:

If this is a violation of the 1st Amendment, then the entire removal of right wing YouTube channels and Facebook pages are... what exactly?

Remember when Tulsi Gabbard had her entire Facebook page taken down immediately following the 2nd Democratic debates? Pepperidge Farms remembers.

Yeah no, don't give me that garbage. Facebook, Twitter and other Social Media platforms removing right-wing crap that goes against their platforms terms of service IS NOT THE GOVERNMENT attacking Free Speech since you know, THEY AREN'T THE DAMN GOVERNMENT. 

Quote

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Sure, they aren't explicitly trying to make a law but given how these are all men IN CONGRESS, they have no business trying to shut down media and scientists telling them that they're fucking wrong just because it's "biased against our conservative values". This coming from their current leadership is just more evidence of how fucking stupid many conservatives today are when it comes to the first amendment.

10 hours ago, Life said:

Funny how only now you're up in arms about protecting the 1st Amendment.

No, I'm "up in arms" about it because IT'S A GODDAMN GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF SPEECH. These days the conservatives constantly whine and bitch about how the left is trying to make the government more powerful and leading to the tyrannical dictatorship the 2nd amendment was made for and yet here you have a prime example of the kind of shit the founding fathers were talking about when they made the 1st amendment. Try complaining about social media platforms removing right-wing content after conservatives wash away the stench of their perpetual hypocrisy.

I don't care where you stand on the political spectrum but you have to realize by now that the American right is complete and utter self-destructive joke that would embrace a dictatorship if they thought they could win a second civil war. If Conservatives want to be taken seriously, THEY should be constantly demanding their members of congress to proceed with impeaching that orange turd as their starting point.

Edited by Dr. Tarrasque

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Life said:

If this is a violation of the 1st Amendment, then the entire removal of right wing YouTube channels and Facebook pages are... what exactly?

Remember when Tulsi Gabbard had her entire Facebook page taken down immediately following the 2nd Democratic debates? Pepperidge Farms remembers.

Funny how only now you're up in arms about protecting the 1st Amendment.

Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, patreon, WhatsApp and Mumsnet are tools for racist forces far more than the anti-capitalist or green extremist movements.

 

Edit: pretty surprised that my phone autocorrects Mumsnet into having a capital M, but not patreon

Edited by Excellen Browning

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the first amendment guarantees protection from government, not from private companies

the only argument i see in favor of this is if people want their lives to be run by private companies....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Big news of the day is of course the developing story that Trump tried to extort the Ukrainian government for negative headlines against Joe Biden, by withholding foreign aid funds allocated by Congress unless and until  they agreed to open a criminal investigation against The Biden Family's activities in the Ukraine. 

And the previous holdouts in Congress now coming out in support of impeachment + Pelosi signaling that she's going to make a 'major announcement' by Thursday.  

Just for the lulz, I googled the top headlines for the 3 main cable news networks as this story was breaking. And this is just so telling of the problem we have with misinformation and entertainment 'news' in this country:

Top Headline on MSNBC
Trump Confirms Witholding Aid from Ukraine; Claims he did Not ask For quid-pro-quo

Top Headline on CNN
Trump's Ukraine Drama: Live Updates 

Top Headline on FOX
San Francisco Comes up with Novel Approach to Roust Homeless People from Sidewalks 
 

Edited by Shoblongoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Shoblongoo said:

Just for the lulz, I googled the top headlines for the 3 main cable news networks as this story was breaking. And this is just so telling of the problem we have with misinformation and entertainment 'news' in this country:

To back that up, let me remind everyone that on the day Michael Cohen was raided by the FBI, Tucker Carlson focused on Sex-Crazed Pandas.

Also, on the subject of Trump willingly releasing a transcript, let's not forget that Nixon did the same thing. It was BS back then, it will be BS now.

Edited by Dr. Tarrasque

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All sources now reporting that Pelosi is going to announce the official start of House Impeachment Proceedings.

lol now FOX is headlining it. (can't ignore that) 

Edited by Shoblongoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a scale of 1 to 10, how impeach-worthy is this latest offense? Knowing the administration's track record, we can say Watergate is a 4 for sake of comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This one would probably be a 9-10 given how blatant and easily defined it is:

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=(title:52 section:30121 edition:prelim)

But of course, Republicans will try to ignore/spin it. After all, back in 2016 Trump broke that law when he publicly called for Russia to get Hillary's e-mails

Quote

(2) a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national.

 

Edited by Dr. Tarrasque

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Glennstavos said:

On a scale of 1 to 10, how impeach-worthy is this latest offense? Knowing the administration's track record, we can say Watergate is a 4 for sake of comparison.

...put it this way...

Last time the allegation was that he solicited a foreign government to engage in criminal misconduct for the purposes of damaging a rival presidential candidate. That was a 10.

This time the allegation is he solicited a foreign government to engage in criminal misconduct for the purposes of damaging a rival presidential candidate, and did so by illicit means of bribery and/or extortion.    

_____


EDIT:  She did it:  https://thehill.com/homenews/house/462798-pelosi-backs-launching-formal-impeachment-inquiry-Trump

"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Tuesday announced the launch of a formal impeachment inquiry into President Trump."

"The speaker had long resisted calls for impeachment proceedings but as of Tuesday afternoon more than two-thirds of her caucus 
supported impeachment, with their ranks swelling after recent allegations that Trump made military aid to Ukraine conditional on that nation launching an investigation of former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter."

Edited by Shoblongoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Shoblongoo said:

Last time the allegation was that he solicited a foreign government to engage in criminal misconduct for the purposes of damaging a rival presidential candidate. That was a 10.

Was it a ten? I didn't hear many calls for impeachment inquiries from Congress. 

8 minutes ago, Shoblongoo said:

This time the allegation is he solicited a foreign government to engage in criminal misconduct for the purposes of damaging a rival presidential candidate, and did so by illicit means of bribery and/or extortion.    

Maybe I'm missing the bigger picture but the story was broke by a whistleblower, correct? Why is the president now bragging about it instead of deny deny deny? I mean, he can deny something reported on by the freaking FBI and the waters will calm eventually. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Shoblongoo said:

Big news of the day is of course the developing story that Trump tried to extort the Ukrainian government for negative headlines against Joe Biden, by withholding foreign aid funds allocated by Congress unless and until  they agreed to open a criminal investigation against The Biden Family's activities in the Ukraine. 

Trump to the Ukrainian president. 

''That's a cute country you have there. It would be a shame if I withheld aid and let my buddy Putin stamp all over it''

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Glennstavos said:

Maybe I'm missing the bigger picture but the story was broke by a whistleblower, correct? Why is the president now bragging about it instead of deny deny deny? I mean, he can deny something reported on by the freaking FBI and the waters will calm eventually. 

It's Trump. Don't expect him to make sense.

A possibility is that Trump is riding on the notion that Impeaching Clinton had hurt the Republicans , which is a talking point McConnell used to dissuade Democrats on Impeachment. At this point Trump wants to be re-elected into office so he can continue muddying the waters on his crimes, avoid being charged due to the bullshit "can't indict a sitting president" notion that would be backed up by Kavanaugh if it goes to the Supreme Court and profiting from the presidency.

Either way, I'm hoping Pelosi's district still votes her out. It wouldn't surprise me if her decision to finally support the impeachment inquiry is more of a result of Trump's attack on the Presidential candidate SHE desires as oppose to the fact that Trump's an obvious criminal and there's enough evidence to warrant the inquiry.

Btw, Trump could lose the popular vote by as many as 5 Million votes and still get reelected.

Edited by Dr. Tarrasque

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Glennstavos said:

Maybe I'm missing the bigger picture but the story was broke by a whistleblower, correct? Why is the president now bragging about it instead of deny deny deny? I mean, he can deny something reported on by the freaking FBI and the waters will calm eventually. 

Because in the end this might just end up hurting Biden and not Trump. It will be Clinton vs Trump all over again where dirt actually sticks on Clinton but Trump's cult forgives everything he does. 

This will not change any minds on Trump. Everyone who already realized he was openly corrupt and prepared to employ foreign intervention on his behalf will see this knowledge validated. But everyone who suspected Trump of being capable of this already knew this and thus no new minds will be swayed. Trump's cult has already demonstrated it will forgive and excuse anything Trump does so Trump openly showing himself to be corrupt and abusing his office to fund a private cause(his election) won't concern them. Its just another example of Trump's corruption that they will ignore. And as always the Republicans will protect Trump from this abuse of office coming back to bite him because they sold their souls to him. This should affect Trump very heavily and very negatively but it won't.

But its different with Biden. Unlike Trump he has supporters who might actually care. Biden does need to hold himself to certain standards because unlike Trump his supporters actively expect this of him and might walk out if he doesn't deliver. Just like Clinton's who's wrongdoings were easily overshadowed by Trump but also more damaging because unlike Trump she didn't have a cult that excused everything she did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Glennstavos said:

Was it a ten? I didn't hear many calls for impeachment inquiries from Congress. 

10/10 Congress didn't do its job.

Watergate being a "4"--that's your scale, right?  What was "Watergate"?

Watergate was law enforcement catching Republican operatives in the act of breaking into the hotel room of a prominent Democrat, for the purposes of trying to steal documents and get 'dirt' that they could use in the upcoming election. 

Nixon denied any knowledge or involvement, but obstructed the federal investigation into the attempted theft of documents and constantly attacked the investigation + reporting on the investigation as a politically motivated liberal conspiracy against his presidency.

And then when the evidence uncovered by the investigation came out: it turned out Nixon not only knew about the hotel break-in and attempted document theft, but had personally instructed the operatives involved to do it.
________________

Alter the fact pattern as follows:

1)  The attempted theft of documents was conducted by way of cyber-crime rather than physical breaking-and-entering; exposing far more persons and far more documents to potential theft.

2)  It wasn't just an attempted theft. It was a completed and successful one, which did in fact result in thousands of documents being stolen and used to influence an election.

3)  It wasn't Republican Party operatives who did it. It was the intelligence and espionage services of a hostile foreign government. 

4)  Prior to any investigation or official investigatory findings, there was public video of the presidential candidate beneficiary right before the theft and release saying: "Russia. If you are listening, I hope that you are able to find the emails."  

5)  The agents who investigated the theft of documents and the President's knowledge + involvement were retaliated against for conducting the investigations by the President's Justice Department with their investigation itself becoming the subject of 'investigation,' under directives from the president that investigating him for criminal misconduct was itself criminal misconduct. 


....and you have crimes + abuses of power several magnitudes above Watergate...

Which is what Congress had already been presented with before the Ukraine story broke.  

And if Congress today had the ethics and efficacy of Congress during the Nixon presidency, he already would have been impeached for that much. 
 

Edited by Shoblongoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the septic tank presidency. The amount of stink is already so bad, finding more in it won't change anything. And, the amount of excrement is too great to be vacuumed out.

I feel sorry for Pelosi. I only hope the need to do the Constitutional duty, even though it is practically futile b/c Senate, will not produce the bad result she and all others who hesitate at even the impeachment inquiry (myself included) fear- a 2020 win for the septic tank.

November 2018 was full of hope of a check to balance the presidency. How the House fangs have shown themselves ineffectually dull since then. Now, they risk a scenario where attempt to check has failed, and they'll fall out of favor with a majority of the electorate for 2020.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...