General US Politics

[Shoblongoo]

20 hours ago, Tryhard said:

It'll be interesting where the hammer falls, but I find it hard to keep interested in the Mueller investigation, it already feels like an eternity. Really, it's all noise until the final verdict at this point.

There's what--17 separate criminal investigations into Trump and his affiliates now being conduct at the federal, state, and local level?

Looking more and more like the bigger threat to Trump is coming from the investigation thats being done now by the New York Attorney generals office + Southern District of New York.

One of the more telling moments of Cohen's testimony is when he was asked some specific questions about criminal conduct at the Trump Organization, and his knowledge of Trump's involvement with things like tax evasion and insurance fraud and charity scams.

His answer was something to the effect of: "I can't answer those questions, because they pertain to ongoing criminal investigations by the Southern District of New York.  

However, he freely answered questions about Trump's Russian connections and efforts to build a Trump Tower in Moscow. And how Trump insisted on keeping those efforts going during the 2016 election, because he didn't actually think he was going to win--he thought Trump Moscow was "the deal" he was gonna be working on after Hillary took office + he returned to managing his private real estate empire.  (there's an answer for the history books)
_________

What that tells me is Mueller is wrapping up on Russia Collusion. Paul Manafort and Roger Stone were his big targets. 

The OTHER criminal conduct he uncovered was off-loaded to state and local prosecutors.

And that may have been a tactical decision on Mueller's part to make sure The White House can't interfere with the investigations or grant pardons for any criminal charges arising therefrom, since the president only has power to hire/fire/direct FEDERAL investigators and can only pardon FEDERAL crimes.

If State prosecutors file state charges--the White House can't do jack-diddly. Thats outside their sphere of influence. 

...and whats been going on with those investigations is just beginning to become public now...

Edited February 28, 2019 by Shoblongoo

[Excellen Browning]

In any case, whatever the Mueller investigation reveals wrt Donald Trump's criminal activities, as long as he's president he's safe from (criminal) prosecution. 

And right now it looks like the republicans will not indict him. 

[eclipse]

13 hours ago, Excellen Browning said:

In any case, whatever the Mueller investigation reveals wrt Donald Trump's criminal activities, as long as he's president he's safe from (criminal) prosecution. 

And right now it looks like the republicans will not indict him. 

This is so depressing.  I guarantee that if a Democrat pulled half the crap that Trump is being investigated for, Republicans would be calling for that person's head.

[Dr. Tarrasque]

9 hours ago, eclipse said:

This is so depressing.  I guarantee that if a Democrat pulled half the crap that Trump is being investigated for, Republicans would be calling for that person's head.

It is, and they have.

If the Republicans applied the same standards they did when they went after Bill Clinton (or hell, Hillary prior to the Midterms), Trump would be done by now. It doesn't helps that you've got people on the conservative side gaslighting and perpetuating the White Supremacists' wet dream of a Civil War breaking out in the near future

Edited March 2, 2019 by Dr. Tarrasque

[Excellen Browning]

9 hours ago, eclipse said:

This is so depressing.  I guarantee that if a Democrat pulled half the crap that Trump is being investigated for, Republicans would be calling for that person's head.

Yea, but right now it's the democrats calling for a republican's head. What matters is getting the other party to also care.

[Tryhard]

Best you could hope for is that as soon as Trump leaves office, that he would be slapped with an indictment on the same day. 

Republicans will protect Trump until he leaves office. It does not matter if there is evidence. You can count on that.

Edited March 2, 2019 by Tryhard

[Dr. Tarrasque]

White Supremacists picking up Anti-Vaxxers. Voters need to realize that Trump 2020 is a possibility, Democrats need to campaign in ALL swing states, Non-voters that are sick of Trump need to remove Republicans from the Senate or else this will keep happening.

Police officers who shot Stephon Clark will face no charges

EDIT: A fair argument for why US Politics are so messed up today. But of course, because Vox is left-leaning, it's subject to being ignored by people who think they're centrists and those on the right.

Oh and here's a great quote the Republicans love to ignore from one of their own past presidents:

Quote

To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.

The party switch is real and they love to argue that it isn't.

Edited March 3, 2019 by Dr. Tarrasque

[Shoblongoo]

On 3/2/2019 at 3:39 PM, Tryhard said:

Best you could hope for is that as soon as Trump leaves office, that he would be slapped with an indictment on the same day. 

...thats actually not entirely outside the realm of possibility...

[Etrurian emperor]

40 minutes ago, Shoblongoo said:

...thats actually not entirely outside the realm of possibility...

And then Trump voters will riot about the EVIL establishment punishing their hero as soon as they are able. 

[Shoblongoo]

34 minutes ago, Etrurian emperor said:

And then Trump voters will riot about the EVIL establishment punishing their hero as soon as they are able. 

 

On 3/2/2019 at 3:37 AM, eclipse said:

 I guarantee that if a Democrat pulled half the crap that Trump is being investigated for, Republicans would be calling for that person's head.

2016:   "Hillary is being investigated by the FBI. That must mean Hillary is corrupt!"

2018:  "Trump is being investigated by the FBI. That must mean the FBI is corrupt!"


https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

^^^

From a purely political science perspective, this has been one of the most bizarre trends of the Trump presidency.

Compare-and-contrast Trump's approval rating to previous presidents. What stands out (aside from how low it is) is how flat it is: almost no movement up-or-down with the ebb-and-flow of current events. Always within a few marginal points above or below ~40%.

As opposed to the large swings you see in prior presidencies, where the approval rating spikes up when the president is perceived as doing something good (i.e. passing major legislation, unifying the country in a time of crisis, etc.). And the approval rating drops down when the president is perceived as doing something bad (i.e. presiding over a government shutdown, getting caught in a corruption scandal, etc.).

...Trump gets caught paying hush money to a porn star he was screwing while his wife was at home with their newborn child...
...Trump Foundation shutdown by NY Attorney General's office for defrauding charities + using donations to decorate Trump's hotels and golf clubs...
...Trump named unindicted co-conspirator in election fraud felonies by his attorney in Congressional testimony...

Nothing moves the numbers. 

The suggestion here is that we're living in times where public opinion--isn't really responsive to actual facts or occurrences anymore. Its baked in. Its entrenched. 

The partisans have their worldviews, and their worldviews are immobile.

...it didn't use to be that way...

(look at how those numbers moved in prior presidencies) 

Edited March 6, 2019 by Shoblongoo

[Dr. Tarrasque]

12 minutes ago, Shoblongoo said:

The suggestion here is that we're living in times where public opinion--isn't really responsive to actual facts or occurrences anymore. Its baked in. Its entrenched. 

The partisans have their worldviews, and their worldviews are immobile.

...it didn't use to be that way...

(look at how those numbers moved in prior presidencies) 

Because they're constantly fed "alternative facts" and there's an increasing number of sources that tailor to pushing 

A problem that humans have is that if they make something a part of their identity, they become extremely protective and react irrationally when that subject is attacked (See Backfire Effect). Anything that disproves their misconception will require lots of repetition (Trump is a criminal who's committed fraud) while anything that backs up their misconception will be hailed as if it were a mountain of evidence (the left is violent, look at this example of a kid attacked for wearing a maga hat).

Conservatives will continue to argue that their lying and fake news is protected under free speech and attempts from government to crack down on it will probably see a battle taken to the courts (which they're still packing with people to push their agenda).

The US was not prepared for this. Let's hope enough states forego their electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote so that all votes are equal in the 2020 Presidential Election and non-voters get an incentive to participate.

[Shoblongoo]

15 minutes ago, Dr. Tarrasque said:

Because they're constantly fed "alternative facts" and there's an increasing number of sources that tailor to pushing 

A problem that humans have is that if they make something a part of their identity, they become extremely protective and react irrationally when that subject is attacked 

The bolder is the bigger problem I would think.

The way people latch on to "alternative facts" and credit non-credible sources to fortify their stances against fact-based criticism is the effect.

Politics taking on the form of tribal warfare driven by a mind-state of its our people vs. their people. Thats the cause. 

Edited March 6, 2019 by Shoblongoo

[Dr. Tarrasque]

5 hours ago, Shoblongoo said:

The bolder is the bigger problem I would think.
 

Yes but that one's part of human nature. You'll never be able to solve it at a grand scale, you can only debunk misconceptions for individuals provided that there exist a unifying narrative/consensus.

5 hours ago, Shoblongoo said:

The way people latch on to "alternative facts" and credit non-credible sources to fortify their stances against fact-based criticism is the effect.

It's one of many effects, yes.

5 hours ago, Shoblongoo said:

Politics taking on the form of tribal warfare driven by a mind-state of its our people vs. their people. Thats the cause. 

I disagree, that's just another effect. We've always had political parties, we've had elections where there's just a shitton of money spend on them and the candidates were just mudslinging at each other to come out on top, we've always had people treat politics like it's a sport so they just always root for their own team and we've always had voter apathy and as you've said

Quote

The partisans have their worldviews, and their worldviews are immobile.

...it didn't use to be that way...

Politics doesn't just suddenly "take on the form of tribal warfare" and ends up being the cause of division. Something leads up to it and THAT is the cause.

I think the biggest 2 causes are Fox News and the Republican leadership. Which one's worse depends on how you look at it...

Let's start with the first, Fox News: A lot of parallels can be drawn from Trump and Nixon and you'd think that given the history we have with Nixon, Trump wouldn't make it to half his presidency. But no, there's a distinct difference between the Nixon and Trump era and that is the fact that the press had a uniting narrative in the Nixon era: the biggest news sources all echoed the same story and information that was being found during the watergate scandal. Public opinion would change shift based on what was found but the narrative from the main sources of news ended up being the same so even though you had conservative outlets back then calling the attacks on Nixon unfounded, it didn't really matter because they weren't as big as Fox News. They've even said it on the network: "If Hannity were around, Nixon wouldn't have had to resign". You saw the New Yorker report right? It should go without saying that their shenanigans should be held accountable as they fraudulently elevated a candidate. Question for you, do you think the DNC is right in banning Fox News from televising the debates as a result?

Fox would still have its massive audience due to the other mainstream networks losing the people's trust but it still wouldn't amount to much power if the Republican leadership actually did their fucking oversight jobs and weren't hyperpartisan fucks. The intentional obstruction of Obama saw a congress that did jack squat and then they gave Trump the nomination despite how much they hated him just for the sake of scoring political wins. Now they have the Fox News president in power and they've seen what happens if there's any criticism to Trump as well as the Trump - Fox & Friends feedback loop so if any of them were to actually act on any fucking principle and push back on this shit, they know that it's political suicide so instead they now engage and collaborate with Fox News to protect Trump and dig in to the cult bias.

You know these entities are a problem and that their power needs to be removed. You know this piece of shit has to go.

Edited March 6, 2019 by Dr. Tarrasque

[Dr. Tarrasque]

Leaked chats of White Supremacists discussing how easy it is to infiltrate the GOP

The GOP's only response are just bullshit public statements and "resolutions"

[Pixelman]

Well I am glad they are at least speaking out against it rather than twiddling their thumbs going "ah shucks might as well ignore it"

EDIT: Also... what else can they do? Actually ignore it??? 

Edited March 8, 2019 by Pixelman

[Dr. Tarrasque]

1 hour ago, Pixelman said:

Well I am glad they are at least speaking out against it rather than twiddling their thumbs going "ah shucks might as well ignore it"

EDIT: Also... what else can they do? Actually ignore it??? 

They can take action that backs up their words.

1. Stop obstructing the HR1 bill that just passed the house. They could argue that there may be some controversial things about it (such as the voting age being 18) but in such a case, you negotiate, you don't just set your mind to block the vote and claim it's a power grab of the opposing party when the bill is literally meant to make it easier for EVERYONE to vote. The obstruction is what White Supremacists want, it sends a message that they have no problem with voter suppression against minorities that went on in Georgia as well as the voter fraud in NC.

2. Push for rebuking cuts by Trump to funding that is used against right-wing violence which has risen under Trump.

3. Have investigations on these groups like they did with Antifa. They tried to paint Antifa as an extremely dangerous organization but the US army investigation concluded that they're not that big a deal. Meanwhile, organizations that have white supremacist ideology tend to have dangerous individuals looking to kill, Chris Hasson for example. If you look into white supremacists, you'll see that they're awaiting a civil war because of the Trump opposition.

4. Cut ties and contacts with known white nationalists

5. Speak out against the Manafort sentence for being too lenient.

6. Push for Steve King's resignation. I believe this was already discussed before but it has become more relevant recently because of their attempts to paint Ilhan Omar as anti-Semitic.

7. Hell, vote FOR the recent anti-hate resolution

The statement is just PR bullshit to save face. They'll take such people if they think they can win and the evidence of that is Trump: they hated him and thought he was a disaster during the election but they gave him the nomination in the end cause they saw he could win. They basically did nothing when Trump called himself a Nationalist in one of his rallies going up to the midterms and the only real opposition they're doing to Trump is on the national emergency declaration and it's NOT because Trump is wrong to do that but because they're afraid of allowing that precedent for the next Democrat president.

 

EDIT: Something good from the Trump administration

Edited March 9, 2019 by Dr. Tarrasque

[XRay]

3 hours ago, Dr. Tarrasque said:

EDIT: Something good from the Trump administration

I thought you were being sarcastic, but that is pretty nice, although the article did mention that they blocked Obama from doing the same thing, so maybe this is a just a move to score some political points.

[Dr. Tarrasque]

@Shoblongoo DOJ lied about Uranium One order from Donald Trump

[Shoblongoo]

20 hours ago, Dr. Tarrasque said:

@Shoblongoo DOJ lied about Uranium One order from Donald Trump

Yeah at this point I just assume if Trump or someone in Trump's orbit says something, the opposite is probably true.

They lie more often than they tell the truth. 

[Tediz64]

@Dr. Tarrasque and @Shoblongoo

Have either of you two ever considered running for a political position to start building a portfolio so you can work your way up to higher positions?

I mean Shoblongoo since you already practice law as as lawyer, why not aim for the judicial branch and reach the Supreme Court? From what i've read here, you seem very educated and moderate. I'm pretty sure you'd make sound decisions and be fair. I can see you are at the very least concerned with civil rights from a ethical and moral point of view.

Dr. Tar, for you i'd recommend the legislative branch. You seem like the type that would get stuff done instead of sitting around talking about it. I've seen a handful number of times you propose practical reasonable solutions to problems. The only thing i could imagine getting in your way is the pride and stubbornness of others who refuse to cooperate.

 

When it comes to Republicans, i think it is fundamentally pride and being stubborn that is slowing down progress. Some problems we have actually could be solved relatively easy if they'd stop over-thinking it and just do something about it. If the proposed solution fails, as long as there isn't a threat to human life or threat to our country from a long-term point of view at the hands of another country, i don't see why we can't experiment with solutions. We could even state in the document with the proposed solution before it is signed, will only be effective until we can get results for analysis by experts at which point, we'll halt the solution to review the results and determine whether we should continue or not. It baffles me that we are still debating (not even at the phase where we try to implement something, let alone consider our options on how best to effectively and efficiently to integrate a solution) certain topics and not making advancements in the medical field or the technological field.

I saw this article of a veteran/solider not being able to have access to prosthetic body parts to facilitate life because of supply and cost. That made me pretty angry. You mean to tell me we can't help our troops protecting/safeguarding our way of life by giving them an artificial body part? Why? Those things should be on conveyor belts! Getting shipped by the thousands. Even civilians get into accidents here at home and they also don't have access? We seriously need to look at our priorities. Medical and technological advancements to at least make it so everyone has access to a certain product/service take priority over debating who is better than who. Then lowering the statistics of people becoming victims of crimes needs to be addressed. I get that being prejudice is bad and that going one step above that and acting on it (discriminating) is unacceptable. I'm not dismissing that, but we need to hurry up and reallocate our effort and resources. We need more candidates for our election cycles. If there exists an area where an election is uncontested, we have a problem. We need to get people in our government that do stuff, not talk about stuff. I nominate whoever breaks the cycle of doing nothing. 

[Shoblongoo]

2 hours ago, Tediz64 said:

@Dr. Tarrasque and @Shoblongoo

Have either of you two ever considered running for a political position to start building a portfolio so you can work your way up to higher positions?

I mean Shoblongoo since you already practice law as as lawyer, why not aim for the judicial branch and reach the Supreme Court? From what i've read here, you seem very educated and moderate. I'm pretty sure you'd make sound decisions and be fair. I can see you are at the very least concerned with civil rights from a ethical and moral point of view

Oh I've thought about it.

I might even want to run for elected office one day--be an actual lawmaker.  (lots of Congressmen start of as attorneys, and use their legal career as a springboard to get into politics)

I'd definitely wanna be further along in my career and have a larger reservoir of life experience to tap into before I attempt it. I'm also not really in a position to be making those kinds of waves right now with where my personal life is at--I just had my first kid. I got a good job and steady income atm; not really looking to throw that away and roll the dice on climbing-the-ladder in the near future. 

But like 15-20 years from now? Absolutely. I'd give it a shot. 

________

For all the shit people talk on Alexandria Osasio-Cortez and all the claims that she's "dumb" and her ideas are "unrealistic"--this is why I have nothing but the deepest respect for her and admire what she's already accomplished.

I'm not a stupid guy. If I today at 29 years old wanted to attempt to unseat my sitting Congressman and launch a bid for office--I couldn't do it. I don't even think I could get my name on the ballot. I don't have the drive, I don't have the networking skills, and I don't have the social platform or the popular support.

She's 29 years old. She did it. 
  
You gotta respect that. 
 

Edited March 12, 2019 by Shoblongoo

[Dr. Tarrasque]

Me in Congress? I always figured I wouldn't be worthy given how I'd support something as extreme as execution of corrupt politicians.

My residence is currently in Texas and given how I am Hispanic and my district's recent history, it seems like a battle lost before the fight begins. But of course, I haven't done much research when it comes to running for congress so who knows, might be easier than I suspect.

In other news, here's something that was bound to come up with all the recent anti-abortion BS.

7 hours ago, Shoblongoo said:

For all the shit people talk on Alexandria Osasio-Cortez and all the claims that she's "dumb" and her ideas are "unrealistic"--this is why I have nothing but the deepest respect for her and admire what she's already accomplished.
 

And the more their attacks fail, the worse off the conservatives look. It's similar to how the NRA executives and spokespeople are making the gun debate worse for gun owners that aren't insane.

Edited March 13, 2019 by Dr. Tarrasque

[Tryhard]

Jacob Wohl has supposedly been caught faking death threats as well in the same vein as Jussie Smolett. He happens to be right-wing and down the conspiracy rabbit hole. He's been suspended from Twitter. I believe this was also the guy who offered a woman money to accuse Mueller of sexually assaulting them, where she accused him assaulting her in a different state, when he was in Washington on jury duty on the day specified.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/jacob-wohl-faked-death-threats-against-himself

I hope Jacob and Jussie could both face the book on this one.

Edited March 14, 2019 by Tryhard

[Slumber]

A few of my grievances with the MPD will be alleviated if they can put Jacob Wohl behind bars or at least shut him up for a bit.

How did he not get in serious trouble for the fake allegations against Mueller?

[Dr. Tarrasque]

Jussie is a black and gay actor.

Jacob Wohl is white and his father is friends with Fox News.

If there's one takeaway from Manafort's sentencing, it's that there's different rules between whites in proximity to power and everyone else. Fox News currently has power, they talk directly to Trump on Fox & and Friends.

Edited March 14, 2019 by Dr. Tarrasque