US Politics: Opening Pandora's Box

[Mexal]

15 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Okay, here's what the blackmail would have looked like from the Russians:

do what we tell you to do, or we'll release the information that you lied.

Here's what it looked like from our situation now:

Come clean with POTUS and the rest of the staff including Pence, or we'll release the information that you lied.

There is no evidence or even insinuation there was any blackmail. All we know is that IC went to Yates/FBI and they went to Trump. Nothing happened, Flynn continued in his normal job and then information was leaked to the Post. It could have been leaked from the DOJ, they knew. It could have been leaked from the FBI, they knew and it could have been leaked from the WH as they also knew.

15 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

That last part is massively problematic. Did you elect anyone in the IC? Again, turn this on its head with respect to partisanship - if a Democrat was elected and the IC didn't trust them, wouldn't that be a massive issue? 

Again, I think their mistrust is entirely justified and warranted, and it still is a massive problem even though it's likely warranted. The intelligence community is not part of the checks and balances on our government and almost definitely shouldn't be. 

I didn't elect Trump and even if I did, I certainly didn't do it with all the information. If a Democrat was elected and they were actively lying to the public about interactions with a foreign power that hacked the Republicans to put the Democrat in the Presidency, then yea, I think I would still be on the side of getting relevant information out to the public to ensure our government hasn't been compromised by a foreign power, especially if the FBI/DOJ/IC all went through the proper channels and nothing was done.

15 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Their oath is to also obey the law, and violating the Espionage Act is pretty well against that oath - and we've seen that it does not matter what exculpatory reasons you might have are as far as violation of the Espionage Act.

I absolutely think that Trump is massively in the wrong here and did everything completely stupidly and dangerously. When apprised of Flynn's lies he needed to do a lot more. He ignored it. When pressed, he continued the lie knowing that it was untrue. This potentially jeopardized the security of the US by allowing someone with high security clearance who was compromised to continue looking in on details. That is a massive issue. 

And NONE OF IT changes the fact that the iC dictating which government officials stay and go is not a good thing for any democracy. 

Not sure how they violated the Espionage Act (nothing was released or retained, just the knowledge that it existed) nor do I know how anyone, at this point, can prove it was even the IC that did this and not the other agencies involved.

Additionally, I don't see where the IC is dictating which government officials can stay and go. They released to the public the NSA lied about conversations with the Russian Ambassador to the VP, the public and the Trump Administration and that there was proof that he wasn't telling the truth. They didn't blackmail the Administration to say "get rid of him or else" though it definitely feels like they released the information because the Administration chose to do nothing. Trump and Flynn made the decision, not the IC.

Anyway, not going to argue with you. I know we agree significantly more than we disagree here. It's just the level of outrage we have towards the various elements that are slightly different.

[Happy Ent]

2 minutes ago, Week said:

[…] may not be wholly antisemitic, but it turns a blind eye its existence among its supporters.

So does the Left, so that doesn’t get us anywhere. Really. I’ve been on the Left all my life. The only antisemites I’ve ever actually met are on the Left. It’s a very big problem for us.

As far as I can tell, Breitbart and Trump are a strong shift of American politics towards philosemitism, in particular a unflinching support of Israel. I think this is great news. (There’s little enough great news as it is.) In particular, the US has stopped its anti-Israelic policy under the Obama administration (which is one of the very few things that I disliked Obama for) and taken a very hostile stance towards the most antisemitic people on Earth: Arab Muslims.

So, from this particular perspective, the Trump/Bannon administration does good things both on practice and in theory (in that their rhetoric is compatible with what they actually do). Andrew Breitbart was strongly fuelled by his love for the people of Israel, and his opinions continue to inform the current administration (maybe via Bannon, maybe via the son-in-law… I don’t know this.) One can obviously disagree with this (and the Left, who I consider to be latently antisemitic, does), which is fine—we all have different, valid opinions and can and should disagree about who should be driven into the Mediterranean—, but to label this as antisemitic seems strange to me.

In particular, if it’s just based on hear-say. I’m a bit shocked by that. Antisemitism oughtn’t be a label tossed around lightly.

And remember, dear friends: Arguments aren’t soldiers.

[Kalbear]

Just now, Mexal said:

There is no evidence or even insinuation there was any blackmail. All we know is that IC went to Yates/FBI and they went to Trump. Nothing happened, Flynn continued in his normal job and then information was leaked to the Post. It could have been leaked from the DOJ, they knew. It could have been leaked from the FBI, they knew and it could have been leaked from the WH as they also knew.

I didn't say it was blackmail; I said it worked functionally as if it were blackmail. The steps and consequences were the same. This is a problem. 

Just now, Mexal said:

I didn't elect Trump and even if I did, I certainly didn't do it with all the information. If a Democrat was elected and they were actively lying to the public about interactions with a foreign power that hacked the Republicans to put the Democrat in the Presidency, then yea, I think I would still be on the side of getting relevant information out to the public to ensure our government hasn't been compromised by a foreign power, especially if the FBI/DOJ/IC all went through the proper channels and nothing was done.

Not sure how they violated the Espionage Act (nothing was released or retained, just the knowledge that it existed) nor do I know how anyone, at this point, can prove it was even the IC that did this and not the other agencies involved.

It's pretty clear that the Espionage Act was violated - you don't have to leak a document, simply leak intelligence about it with the goal of it not going to responsible parties. The lawfare article I linked earlier makes it pretty clear: "the Espionage Act makes intentional disclosure of classified “communications intelligence activities” a felony if such disclosure is made in a “manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government . . . .”"

Just now, Mexal said:

Additionally, I don't see where the IC is dictating which government officials can stay and go. They released to the public the NSA lied about conversations with the Russian Ambassador to the VP, the public and the Trump Administration and that there was proof that he wasn't telling the truth. They didn't blackmail the Administration to say "get rid of him or else" though it definitely feels like they released the information because the Administration chose to do nothing. Trump and Flynn made the decision, not the IC.

And before this there was the Comey letter.

No, they aren't at the level of Putin releasing sex tapes of his opponents - yet. The leaks are clearly set to cause problems, however, and to address those needs outside of the normal channels. In this case that makes perfect sense, as the channels are completely fucked up and led by an incompetent thief. I understand and sympathize with their reasoning and think they did a great service to the nation - but they also broke the law, and they did so in a way that undermines the democracy. 

If this sort of thing is a problem we need more oversight and more trust - open and honest - to solve it. What none of us should want is the intelligence agencies being the ones which dictate what information is released to the public in order to go around congressional lack of oversight and executive malfeasance. 

 

[Martell Spy]

Senate Republicans tell White House to withdraw Puzder nomination

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/senate-republicans-tell-white-house-to-withdraw-puzder-nomination-235062

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

6 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

Senate Republicans tell White House to withdraw Puzder nomination

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/senate-republicans-tell-white-house-to-withdraw-puzder-nomination-235062

I guess they weren't interested in trying the EXTRA BIG ASS TACO now with more MOLECULES!

[Happy Ent]

We discussed the US voting system a few threads back, and there’s a good article in New Republic about the recent recount case involving US senator Jill Stein, Comp. Sc. election security expert/hacker extrardinaire Alex Halderman, etc.). Long and informative.

[Kalbear]

Awesome. European spy agencies are actively spying on the US - and treating the US as an enemy source, basically.

Quote

 

These operations reflect a serious breakdown in the longstanding faith in the direction of American policy by some of the country’s most important allies. Worse, the United States is now in a situation that may be unprecedented—where European governments know more about what is going on in the Executive Branch than any elected American official. To date, the Republican-controlled Congress has declined to conduct hearings to investigate the links between Trump’s overseas business partners and foreign governments, or the activities between Russia and officials in the Trump campaign and administration—the very areas being examined by the intelligence services of at least two American allies.

Some details about Trump’s business partners were passed to the American government months ago. For example, long before the president’s inauguration, German electronic surveillance determined that the father of Trump’s Azerbaijani business partner is a government official who laundered money for the Iranian military; that information was shared with the Central Intelligence Agency, according to a European source with direct knowledge of the situation.

 

 

[Happy Ent]

3 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Awesome. European spy agencies are actively spying on the US - and treating the US as an enemy source, basically.

Remember that Obama had Angela Merkel’s phone tapped. Awesome then, awesome now.

[Kalbear]

1 minute ago, Happy Ent said:

Remember that Obama had Angela Merkel’s phone tapped. Awesome then, awesome now.

That's not a surprise. That they're treating the US as someone to not share intelligence with and assume that they are antagonistic is a lot worse. To be clear, other countries spying on the US, even our allies, is not newsworthy; them doing so in order to fight the US is.

[Reny of Storms End]

Edited because Kal already addressed HE's comment.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

59 minutes ago, Happy Ent said:

How that adds up to antisemitism is beyond me. Unless you cherry-pick, in which case I can easily taint the entire Left as antisemitic. And then some. In fact, and I say this with a straight face, I am confident that there is a more honest case to be made for the Left being antisemitic that Breitbart being it. Both in cherry-pickable quotes and in the open and honest antisemitism of the uglier of their followers.

Was this meant to be satire, or are you just woefully uninformed? Let's make this simple for you:

Steve Bannon has made it clear that he wants Breitbart to be the platform of the Alt-Right:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/11/21/meet_the_neo_nazi_steve_bannon_s_site_described_as_a_leading_intellectual.html

Quote

In August, Bannon proudly described his site as "the platform for the alt-right," a movement with Spencer as one of its intellectual leaders, again, according to Bannon’s own site.

Despite its new branding, over the weekend Spencer demonstrated the “alt-right” of Bannon for what it really is: neo-Nazis in suits and ties.

Alt-Right is a rebranded term for white supremacy:

https://www.thenation.com/article/alt-right-is-not-a-thing-its-white-supremacy/

 

The notion that the Left is more antisemitic than Breitbart is an absolute joke. 

[MerenthaClone]

21 minutes ago, Happy Ent said:

Remember that Obama had Angela Merkel’s phone tapped. Awesome then, awesome now.

Remember that a lot of "spying on our allies" was done in a weird way to get around some countries' privacy rights.  IE, we can't wiretap this guy without a warrant, but nothing prevents the UK from doing so and then sharing that with us.  Granted, Merkel's phone probably wasn't that, but to have other former allies continue to spy on us in an explicitly antagonistic way is a difference.  

Unrelatedly, the people freaking out about unsecured cellphones at Mar-a-Lago are on the money.  You can do a shitton with cellphones that a lot of people simply don't realize.  When the Intercept was doing their initial work with Snowden, they insisted that everyone involved turn their phones off and tossed them in a freezer far away from their work.  The various Blackberry devices used by Presidents, secretaries, etc are heavily, heavily modified.  None of that applies to cellphones from random paying guests at an event. 

 

e:  And yeah, I mostly ignored HE because it was a bunch of drivel where he confuses Zionism with semetism and is frankly fucking appalling about holding up Judeo-Christian morality as somehow moral and noble and good while simultaneously decrying Islam for being inherently inimical to that.  Fucking right-wing trash.  

[Week]

4 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

The notion that the Left is more antisemitic than Breitbart is an absolute joke. 

This article discusses some of the ongoing topics re: philosemitism and antisemitism. It also references the antisemitic nature of some of the Glenn Beck accusations of Soros (article is from 2011) - which seems no different than Breitbart's ongoing war against Soros. 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2011/feb/16/antisemitism-philosemitism

[Happy Ent]

6 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Was this meant to be satire, or are you just woefully uninformed? Let's make this simple for you:

No. And no, I don’t consider myself to be woefully uninformed, but am alway happy to learn more. However, by your standards of argumentation I seem to be some kind of expert.

Is the whole case for the perceived antisemitism of Breitbart and Bannon really made in terms of guilt-by-association and obviously malicious misrepresentations? Is that really all we have? Who would ever take such an argument seriously?

Whenever I take the time to dive down into the intellectual swamp of the anti-Trump movement I come away increasingly distressed.

[Reny of Storms End]

20 minutes ago, Happy Ent said:

No. And no, I don’t consider myself to be woefully uninformed, but am alway happy to learn more. However, by your standards of argumentation I seem to be some kind of expert.

Is the whole case for the perceived antisemitism of Breitbart and Bannon really made in terms of guilt-by-association and obviously malicious misrepresentations? Is that really all we have? Who would ever take such an argument seriously?

Whenever I take the time to dive down into the intellectual swamp of the anti-Trump movement I come away increasingly distressed.

What are the obviously malicious misrepresentations?

[Ice Queen]

Okay, I haven't seen a news source since yesterday afternoon (my daughter had an allergic incident at school yesterday and was in the hospital) ...holy hell. I feel like I've been under a rock!

I'll bet real money that it was the intelligence community itself that leaked to NYT. Hillary has to feel vindicated in her assessment of Trump. We all knew she was, but the Trumpers need to start facing reality. 

What concerns me the most is the lack of willingness to investigate. The Republicans don't want their wet dream to end. 

[Rippounet]

33 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Was this meant to be satire, or are you just woefully uninformed?

It's just the usual bs argument that being anti-sionist (or criticizing Israeli policy) is akin to antisemitism. Because in many countries the left is highly critical of Israel, the idea is that the left is somehow anti-semitic.
Of course, by that token, leftists in Israel are anti-semitic, but hey, let's not bother with logic, uh?

[mormont]

1 hour ago, Happy Ent said:

 Islam is a terrible, terrible set of ideas. In particular, it is at variance with Judeo–Christian values as enshrined, for instance, in the UN Declaration of Human Rights.

This is flatly untrue.

I'm not interested in derailing the thread by litigating the same windy, tendentious crap you regularly get into over this, but it can't pass unchallenged.

2 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

. How could he be? His grandchildren are Jewish.

I'm not saying that Trump is or isn't anti-Semitic - he likely isn't - but this argument is fallacious. Trump's married: he has a sister: he has daughters: he had a mother. Those facts don't stop him holding some deeply offensive views about women. Being related to someone does not mean you can't be prejudiced about them.

2 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

I don't see what people are aiming at here, other than to find yet another stick to beat him with. It is a non-issue.

It's a big issue when people who very definitely are anti-Semitic are openly saying that they see Trump's election as a plus for them. It's incumbent on Trump, in that scenario, to publicly and clearly distance himself from that and condemn it, not make remarks that are such a mush of self-praise and non-sequiturs that it's unclear.

I'll also note that you can't have it both ways. Trump, in his remarks, directly attributes his election (with 306 EC votes) to the country being divided, so he can't be citing that same win and those same votes as proof that he has unified it. He can only be referring to that to boast about it. The context (derogating those who predicted he couldn't win) makes it 100% clear that this is what he was doing. No doubt about it.

[JGP]

Puzder withdrew, allegedly.

34 minutes ago, MerenthaClone said:

Remember that a lot of "spying on our allies" was done in a weird way to get around some countries' privacy rights.  IE, we can't wiretap this guy without a warrant, but nothing prevents the UK from doing so and then sharing that with us.  Granted, Merkel's phone probably wasn't that, but to have other former allies continue to spy on us in an explicitly antagonistic way...

I wouldn't call it explicitly antagonistic, at least insofar as its been related. If individual or in general Americans actually believe that the concern they have regarding Trump's background shouldn't be of concern to any one outside their borders, I'm not sure what to say that wouldn't be construed as a personal attack. And honestly, if Trump actually has these binding ties, intelligence agencies have had their finger on him for a long, long time. 

[IheartIheartTesla]

Trump's 'philosemitism' includes non-support for a two state (or maybe support for a one-state; who can tell) solution. You'd be having two fundamentally opposed tribes within the same boundaries (using some of the framing in this thread).....how is this good for Israel?

At any rate, just like global warming, it feels like the window for a two-state solution is rapidly closing. And all caused by 75000 of my fellow midwesterners.