General US Politics

[eclipse]

4 hours ago, Archer of Red said:

Wew lads, here we go!

You're a little late (scroll up).

[Time the Crestfallen]

11 minutes ago, eclipse said:

You're a little late (scroll up).

And that kids, is why a regular and health sleep schedule is important ;_;

Anyway, who do you think the first round is going to? The general word seems to be at least Manafort and possibly Flynn, but I think both is a little optimistic at this point. I'd say probably Manafort and some people lower down.

[Moblin Major General]

4 hours ago, Res said:

(snip)

For the longest time, America did not have the wherewithal to obtain the resources that it needed to function, much less prosper. Even when the complete extent of the contiguous US was realized, it took decades to move people to the places that they needed to be to work for both their own well being, but also for America. There has always been this disproportionate focus on the individual in the United States, and that is reflected in our documents and our laws, and by extension the way that our bureaucracy handles those that are less fortunate, both monetarily and in regards to circumstances. We have been conditioned to believe that hard work is the only way to get what we need, and the only way to get the gratification that we have served both our needs and the needs of our children. This has put us behind most of the West because the private sector has not been forced to tone down or scale back because human capital is too profitable to regulate, a problem regularly faced since the cotton gin was invented 225 years ago.

The disillusionment that millennials face is that we have seen that our attitude as a country has only caused us suffering and stagnation. Sadly, most of us are not of the age or mindset to run for higher office, and few of us have the wherewithal to attempt to become someone in an executive position politically. In a way, our only recourse and only defense against playing into the system is to rebel against every facet of our society, even going so far as to inject injustice into places it might not actually exist. We protest, we decry, and we even just flat out complain, all in an attempt to change the whole thing, but in doing so, the status quo has rejected us. And so, we are forced to comply, and we are broken further by the exploitative economics of our treasury. Taxes that make no sense, a debt that increases exponentially that paradoxically is 95% made up of what the government owes the people, funds levied from taxes being used to combat problems that don't exist, et cetera.

[Shoblongoo]

2 hours ago, Hylian Air Force said:

For the longest time, America did not have the wherewithal to obtain the resources that it needed to function, much less prosper. Even when the complete extent of the contiguous US was realized, it took decades to move people to the places that they needed to be to work for both their own well being, but also for America. There has always been this disproportionate focus on the individual in the United States, and that is reflected in our documents and our laws, and by extension the way that our bureaucracy handles those that are less fortunate, both monetarily and in regards to circumstances. We have been conditioned to believe that hard work is the only way to get what we need, and the only way to get the gratification that we have served both our needs and the needs of our children. This has put us behind most of the West because the private sector has not been forced to tone down or scale back because human capital is too profitable to regulate, a problem regularly faced since the cotton gin was invented 225 years ago.

The disillusionment that millennials face is that we have seen that our attitude as a country has only caused us suffering and stagnation. Sadly, most of us are not of the age or mindset to run for higher office, and few of us have the wherewithal to attempt to become someone in an executive position politically. In a way, our only recourse and only defense against playing into the system is to rebel against every facet of our society, even going so far as to inject injustice into places it might not actually exist. We protest, we decry, and we even just flat out complain, all in an attempt to change the whole thing, but in doing so, the status quo has rejected us. And so, we are forced to comply, and we are broken further by the exploitative economics of our treasury. Taxes that make no sense, a debt that increases exponentially that paradoxically is 95% made up of what the government owes the people, funds levied from taxes being used to combat problems that don't exist, et cetera.

Democracy is a device that ensures a People shall be governed no better than they deserve. Whose fault is it?

Trump lies everyday, shows outright contempt for our institutions of law and journalism, made an ass of himself and pissed off everyone on his first-and-only diplomatic mission to Europe, attacks "son-of-a-bitch" NFL protestors but defends the "fine people" showing up at Neo-Nazi rallies, tweets like a pissed-off teenager on subjects ranging from Celebrity Apprentice to War with North Korea with no delineation of serious treatment in-between, has been called "immature," "unable to control his anger," and "utterly untruthful" by leading Senators in his own party, has zero working knowledge of government or public policy and habitually talks about issues like an unprepared student trying to bullshit his way through a report on a book he didn't read (i.e. "Its a big beautiful book, right? It got great reviews. People are saying they can't believe how good this book is--they've never seen anything like it before. Its a tremendous book. I'm very smart. I read the entire book. Susie didn't read the book.), and generally runs his White House like he's still producing a reality TV show.

...without prejudice to positions or policies or partisan politics, his approval ratings should be in the single digits. In any sane country he'd be less popular than Oral Herpes.

He's at ~40%. No matter what he says or does, he stays at ~40%.

Sorry America--I want good things for you. But in the words of one of the great metal bands of the 80s:

Bow Down Before the One You Serve.
You're Going to Get What You Deserve.
 

3 hours ago, Archer of Red said:

And that kids, is why a regular and health sleep schedule is important ;_;

Anyway, who do you think the first round is going to? The general word seems to be at least Manafort and possibly Flynn, but I think both is a little optimistic at this point. I'd say probably Manafort and some people lower down.

Its all speculation at this point and we'll have a more definitive answer soon enough.

...that being said...

A Grand Jury Indictment doesn't just come out of thin air. There's certain warning signs that are going to lead up to it.

...The FBI executing a search warrant against your home. (Manafort)
...Your former business associates being subpoenaed to turnover documents and testify under oath.  (also Manafort)

I don't know whats happening inside the investigation. But from the outside-looking-in, he looks like the ripe target.

Edited October 28, 2017 by Shoblongoo

[Dayni]

4 minutes ago, Shoblongoo said:

...without prejudice to positions or policies or partisan politics, his approval ratings should be in the single digits. In any sane country he'd be less popular than Oral Herpes.

He's at ~40%. No matter what he says or does, he stays at ~40%.

Considering that the last poll I remember off the top of my head suggested 22% approval from other countries, with only Russia improving their opinion of him by any large margin, I think he's got some people okay with him.

Still not saying much.

[Moblin Major General]

@Shoblongoo, Trump is the logical conclusion of my splurge. People were tired of being told what to do, so they elected someone so incompetent that the status quo couldn't help but be kept. Will it change? Only when those of us in our 20s now age into our 30s and 40s, and that we can't help but change the status quo to what we want to have as the world we raise our children in.

[Res]

50 minutes ago, Hylian Air Force said:

@Shoblongoo, Trump is the logical conclusion of my splurge. People were tired of being told what to do, so they elected someone so incompetent that the status quo couldn't help but be kept. Will it change? Only when those of us in our 20s now age into our 30s and 40s, and that we can't help but change the status quo to what we want to have as the world we raise our children in.

Right now not many people in their 30s and 40s have much influence, either. We've the oldest government we've ever had and we've been ruled by the baby boomers for more than a generation now. 

[Phoenix Wright]

4 hours ago, Hylian Air Force said:

@Shoblongoo, Trump is the logical conclusion of my splurge. People were tired of being told what to do, so they elected someone so incompetent that the status quo couldn't help but be kept. Will it change? Only when those of us in our 20s now age into our 30s and 40s, and that we can't help but change the status quo to what we want to have as the world we raise our children in.

this is such a vague statement it has no meaning. what people? what were they being told to do? what elements of the status quo are you talking about? how was that changing? who wanted to keep it the same? 

in no universe should trump be the logical conclusion to be elected as a world leader. no universe.

[eclipse]

1 hour ago, Phoenix Wright said:

in no universe should trump be the logical conclusion to be elected as a world leader. no universe.

I'll argue that he IS a logical conclusion.  How often do you see neutral opinions on news stations?

[Time the Crestfallen]

Yep, Manafort and his buddy Gates are the first ones.

Here's the thing:
https://www.justice.gov/file/1007271/download

[Thane]

2 hours ago, Archer of Red said:

Yep, Manafort and his buddy Gates are the first ones.

Here's the thing:
https://www.justice.gov/file/1007271/download

For those of us outside of the States with less knowledge about the finer details surrounding these goings-on, what does this mean and what are some likely consequences of this?

[Tryhard]

trump is not very good at this

[Res]

2 hours ago, Thane said:

For those of us outside of the States with less knowledge about the finer details surrounding these goings-on, what does this mean and what are some likely consequences of this?

From what I understand the most likely outcome is that people surrounding/formerly employed by Trump are charged and imprisoned; Trump's approval ratings drop even lower and his chance of a 2020 reelection bid are scuppered.

It is possible, but extremely unlikely that Trump is a) impeached (but this would require the Republican-majority congress to make a move, which they almost certainly won't) or b) criminal charges are brought against Trump himself (which I gather is completely unprecedented and will almost certainly not happen).

[Thane]

1 minute ago, Res said:

From what I understand the most likely outcome is that people surrounding/formerly employed by Trump are charged and imprisoned; Trump's approval ratings drop even lower and his chance of a 2020 reelection bid are scuppered.

It is possible, but extremely unlikely that Trump is a) impeached (but this would require the Republican-majority congress to make a move, which they almost certainly won't) or b) criminal charges are brought against Trump himself (which I gather is completely unprecedented and will almost certainly not happen).

I see, thank you. While I understand it's unlikely that the president will get impeached, I can't help but feel like the world needs to chill the fig out for a few minutes and catch its breath, and it can't do that with him in charge. At least, hopefully, they'll be able to put some corrupt bastards behind bars.

Meanwhile, Europe is scratching its head over Catalonia, and the guy running that shitshow just went to Brussels to seek asylum, forcibly dragging other countries into the conflict.

[Lushen]

Uhmmm.... I hate to disappoint people but today is kinda a win for Trump.  We all knew Manafort was involved in some kind of corruption and it was better yesterday when people were speculating.  Now, the only thing he is being questioned for is embezzlement and avoiding taxes.  Now you might scream, 'But Trump hired him'.  Well, let's look at some facts:

- Paul Manafort was an adviser to many different Republican presidential candidates, most of which won.  Mots notably, he was involved in the Reagan election.  Avoiding Paul Manafort would have been stupid on Trump's part, especially when you consider he wants to be the second Ronald Reagan so having the adviser to Ronald Reagan would be a tremendous asset.  The idea that Trump just plucked a Russian informant off the streets could not be less accurate.  Half of all modern republican presidents have used him.

- Trump fired him.  Like, before this Russia story got very big.  No one else fired Paul Manafort, he's been in politics for years.  If this was Obama, people would be praising Obama for having the insight to fire someone we now know is corrupt. 

- Trump and his campaign was not mentioned at all.  Most (if not all) of the stuff he is being indicted for happened before Trump was elected and none of it had to do with Trump getting elected.  

- Investigation is expected to conclude soon with no Russia-Trump allegations.  

 

What else is good for Trump?  John Podesta, Hillary Clinton's Manafort, is in a lot more trouble than Trump's fired Manafort...  https://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/30/tony-podesta-stepping-down-from-lobbying-giant-amid-mueller-probe-244314

I truly believe when this investigation is over, Democrats will be sorry they ever started this conspiracy.  The DNC, Clinton, and Podesta could go down with Manafort.

[Res]

What's the source for the investigation concluding soon? Every article I've read has expressed surprised at how quickly Mueller is working and notes that the investigation is set to last for many months more.

This Twitter thread explains why it's also not a surprise that the charges don't currently relate to Trump and what the political ramifications are. 

[Tryhard]

Fox News and right-wing media spent the entire week attempting to discredit Mueller, and now he is bringing something that puts an end to all the 'nothingburger' talk. I'm almost sure you would still be saying this is not bad for Trump if he was led out in handcuffs. (which isn't going to happen, but I'm just saying)

I knew it wouldn't be long until Paul Manafort was already thrown under the bus, and expected it. Ex-Trump Campaign Foreign Advisor (who worked on Trump's campaign, obviously) George Papadopoulos has also now secretly plead guilty to making false statements to the FBI when he promised compromising information on Clinton. The more important thing is that Mueller has shown he is serious. We'll see where further developments go.

37 minutes ago, Lushen said:

I truly believe when this investigation is over, Democrats will be sorry they ever started this conspiracy.  The DNC, Clinton, and Podesta could go down with Manafort.

I wouldn't really mind, actually, but that would take more than Manafort.

Edited October 30, 2017 by Tryhard

[Lushen]

47 minutes ago, Res said:

What's the source for the investigation concluding soon? Every article I've read has expressed surprised at how quickly Mueller is working and notes that the investigation is set to last for many months more.

This Twitter thread explains why it's also not a surprise that the charges don't currently relate to Trump and what the political ramifications are. 

I should have said I suspect it will be concluded soon.  The reason I think this is because the entire basis of this investigation was to find evidence of Russian collusion and now we have charges that have nothing to do with russian collusion implying they couldn't find any real dirt. 

That twitter thread looks like a S-Class conspiracy theorist xD

25 minutes ago, Tryhard said:

I wouldn't really mind, actually, but that would take more than Manafort.

The question is can Trump survive without Manafort.  Given that he fired him, yes absolutely.  Can democrats survive without Clinton, the DNC, and the Podestas?  I dunno, they don't have a president in office right now - they really need campaigning abilities.

It's also important to note that speculation of Trump begins and ends at whether or not he met with Russian Officials.  The speculation of Democrat-Russia Collusion begins at millions (or billions) of money and 20% of the US's uranium heading towards Russia.  Additionally, they ended up with the infamous Trump Dossier which consisted of many lies whereas Trump-Russia's speculation consisted of only truths.  If everyone here goes down, who do you think is going to hit the floor the hardest?

 

In other news, Sarah Huckabee gave a really great analogy to what I was saying earlier regarding the rich get richer under new tax reform.  I said earlier of course they'll get richer they have more taxable income, so this is a pretty good analogy for what I was saying.

Spoiler

 

 

Edited October 30, 2017 by Lushen

[Tryhard]

you really have some dissonance to speak about conspiracy theories while peddling uranium claims

edit: for what it's worth, the uranium story is an old one that has been recycled. to be fair, it's so pertinent to shout "but hillary" 10 months into Trump's presidency

https://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-uranium-russia-deal/

I mean, to be fair, Manafort was literally just indicted for, in part, conspiracy against the United States.

Edited October 30, 2017 by Tryhard

[Lushen]

10 minutes ago, Tryhard said:

you really have some dissonance to speak about conspiracy theories while peddling uranium claims

edit: for what it's worth, the uranium story is an old one that has been recycled

https://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-uranium-russia-deal/

I mean, to be fair, Manafort was literally just indicted for, in part, conspiracy against the United States.

Two things.

1.  I specifically said "Speculation ...." meaning that Republicans speculate that democrats were shoveling Uranium and campaigning money to Russia.  I also said Democrats "Speculate .....".  What I was saying is if both sides went down (both sides were right about their speculations), democrats would hit the floor A LOT harder.  I did not say I believe the Uranium story, although I do believe parts of the DNC->Russia->Dossier story may be true.  

2.  From what I understand, conspiracy against the Untied States is a financial crime that means he conspired to get out of United States taxes.  It is individual to him, took place in 2014, has nothing to do with Trump or his campaign, and not at all like what it sounds.  Conspiracy against the United States is what Democrats are focusing on right now but they don't seem to understand what it actually means.

In the words of a supreme justice on what conspiracy against the united states means:

"To conspire to defraud the United States means primarily to cheat the Government out of property or money," he said.

"But it also means to interfere with or obstruct one of its lawful governmental functions by deceit, craft or trickery, or at least by means that are dishonest."

Edited October 30, 2017 by Lushen

[Phoenix Wright]

13 minutes ago, Lushen said:

Two things.

1.  I specifically said "Speculation ...." meaning that Republicans speculate that democrats were shoveling Uranium and campaigning money to Russia.  I also said Democrats "Speculate .....".  What I was saying is if both sides went down (both sides were right about their speculations), democrats would hit the floor A LOT harder.  I did not say I believe the Uranium story, although I do believe parts of the DNC->Russia->Dossier story may be true.  

2.  From what I understand, conspiracy against the Untied States is a financial crime that means he conspired to get out of United States taxes.  It is individual to him, took place in 2014, has nothing to do with Trump or his campaign, and not at all like what it sounds.  Conspiracy against the United States is what Democrats are focusing on right now but they don't seem to understand what it actually means.

In the words of a supreme justice on what conspiracy against the united states means:

"To conspire to defraud the United States means primarily to cheat the Government out of property or money," he said.

"But it also means to interfere with or obstruct one of its lawful governmental functions by deceit, craft or trickery, or at least by means that are dishonest."

is...is this a defense for him?

[Moblin Major General]

The only reason Manafort isn't being called a traitor is because treason in the US is narrowly defined and at no point did anyone involved in the Russia scandal declare war against the US, nor did they give enemies of the US aid and comfort. Whether 2 or more people would testify is irrelevant. Manafort would be probably facing treason in most other countries, but not here, hence the indictment of conspiracy.

[Lushen]

5 minutes ago, Phoenix Wright said:

is...is this a defense for him?

A defense for Trump regarding Russia-Trump?  Yes.  Am I not allowed to do that?  There's, at this time, nothing conclusive involving Trump and Russia.  The story about Trump's son was a lot better for Dems than today's news.

4 minutes ago, Hylian Air Force said:

The only reason Manafort isn't being called a traitor is because treason in the US is narrowly defined and at no point did anyone involved in the Russia scandal declare war against the US, nor did they give enemies of the US aid and comfort. Whether 2 or more people would testify is irrelevant. Manafort would be probably facing treason in most other countries, but not here, hence the indictment of conspiracy.

No...the reason he isn't being called a traitor is because his charges are due to his personal finance.  Seriously read the report, there is no good news for democrats regarding Paul Manafort.  None.  I just explained what Conspiracy against the United States is.  It could not be a more separate charge from treason.  If anything, the charge should be renamed because it's not at all like it sounds.

Edited October 30, 2017 by Lushen

[Tryhard]

21 minutes ago, Lushen said:

Two things.

1.  I specifically said "Speculation ...." meaning that Republicans speculate that democrats were shoveling Uranium and campaigning money to Russia.  I also said Democrats "Speculate .....".  What I was saying is if both sides went down (both sides were right about their speculations), democrats would hit the floor A LOT harder.  I did not say I believe the Uranium story, although I do believe parts of the DNC->Russia->Dossier story may be true.  

2.  From what I understand, conspiracy against the Untied States is a financial crime that means he conspired to get out of United States taxes.  It is individual to him, took place in 2014, has nothing to do with Trump or his campaign, and not at all like what it sounds.  Conspiracy against the United States is what Democrats are focusing on right now but they don't seem to understand what it actually means.

In the words of a supreme justice on what conspiracy against the united states means:

"To conspire to defraud the United States means primarily to cheat the Government out of property or money," he said.

"But it also means to interfere with or obstruct one of its lawful governmental functions by deceit, craft or trickery, or at least by means that are dishonest."

It was meant to be somewhat humorous, but George Papadoupoulos and the news about him is actually far more indicative of any group conspiracy. Still, Manafort and his money laundering may not be good news for the rest of the Trump administration who may have participated in similar charges.

Papadopoulos is actually the more interesting case because so far he's just on the books for false statements, but it is found that he absolutely did intend to get compromising information on Clinton through emails to Russian politicians. I believe that he was the one that set up the meeting that Donald Jr. had that broke a while back.

Quick summary:

Three days after joining Trump's campaign, Papadopoulos sent emails concerning Vladimir Putin to seven campaign officials. Court documents show that an unnamed Trump "campaign supervisor" encouraged Papadopoulos to fly to Russia to meet with agents of the Russian Foreign Ministry, after being told that Russia had "dirt" on Hillary Clinton it wished to share with Trump's campaign. Between March and September 2016, he made at least six requests for Trump to meet with Russian politicians. In May, Paul Manafort replied to one such request by saying that "Trump is not doing these trips. It should be someone low-level in the campaign so as not to send any signal."

Assumedly, Papadopoulos is going to talk after pleading guilty.

Edited October 30, 2017 by Tryhard

[Res]

I don't see how it's a class-S conspiracy theory to suggest that a) Mueller isn't done and b) further charges are likely coming and will attempt to link to Trump, which is all that Twitter thread is really saying.

Here's The Guardian on how further charges are likely coming and may be aimed at trying to link to Trump.

Here's the WaPo on what could possibly happen next:

"It is possible that the Manafort indictment is meant to serve as leverage in Mueller’s broader investigation. There is no mention in the indictment of Trump. In 2006, Manafort bought a condominium in Trump Tower. Other New York real estate Manafort purchased in 2012 is listed in the indictment because the money used to buy the properties wasn’t included in his tax returns.

More charges could be filed against Manafort in the future."

Here's The NY Times on Mueller's next steps:

"The indictment, though undoubtedly significant, also raises the question of what Mr. Mueller’s next step will be. But it is widely believed that Mr. Mueller is hoping to pressure Mr. Manafort into flipping and becoming a cooperating witness, providing information about the central subject of his investigation: the relationship between the Trump campaign and Russia."