U.S. Politics: Hairpiece In the Middle East Part 2

[OldGimletEye]

Trumpy. You're doing a heckuva job there:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/5/22/15655272/donald-trump-presidency-scandals-comey-fbi

Quote

The investigation into the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia is serious, and becoming more so. But it is not what is imperiling Donald Trump’s presidency. What’s imperiling Donald Trump’s presidency is, well, Donald Trump.

 

[Fragile Bird]

Hey. Flynn has announced he will not cooperate with any investigation and will take the Fifth if compelled to testify.

Because there's no there, there, right?

[The Wedge]

6 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Hey. Flynn has announced he will not cooperate with any investigation and will take the Fifth if compelled to testify.

Because there's no there, there, right?

Wasn't he the one claiming that anyone asking for immunity is guilty as hell?

And he was the one leading the RNC nitwits in the Lock Her Up! chants, right?

Irony is a stone cold b*tch.

[Trebla]

12 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Hey. Flynn has announced he will not cooperate with any investigation and will take the Fifth if compelled to testify.

Because there's no there, there, right?

"The internet is written in ink"

[OldGimletEye]

I didn't say Israel, so it doesn't count.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/israel-trump-denies-intel-claim-he-was-never-accused

Quote

With this in mind, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, standing alongside the American president earlier, was asked at a brief press conference if he has any concerns about intelligence cooperation with the United States. He said he did not. At that point, the leaders were poised to be whisked off to their next event, but Trump stopped everyone because he had something to declare:

“Just so you understand, I never mentioned the word or the name ‘Israel.’ Never mentioned that during that conversation. They were all saying I did, so you have another story wrong. Never mentioned the word ‘Israel.’”

 

[Fez]

This is why its a shame so many Democrats have ignored the Montana special election. Yes, Montana was one of Trump's stronger states and, yes, Quist has some serious flaws as a candidate. But despite that he's a coinflip to win on Thursday and that's with almost no national money. 

[Commodore]

Quote

 

SCOTUS upheld the lower court decision striking down North Carolina's gerrymander as racially biased. It was a 5-3 decision with Gorsch not participating; oddly it was Thomas that joined the liberals, which is a rare sight indeed.

Roberts, Kennedy, and Alito didn't fully dissent though, instead they issued an opinion agreeing in part and disagreeing in part.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/16pdf/15-1262_db8e.pdf

 

 the legislature created a majority minority district explicitly to comply with the Voting Rights Act, and got tarred as racists because of it

following the court's logic, the VRA (or at least the majority-minority district requirement) is unconstitutional (this is why Thomas voted the way he did; he believes any racial gerrymandering is unconstitutional)

The VRA fucks Dems because it over-concentrates their voters. So the court helped them out. 

 

[Fragile Bird]

Lol, Flynn not only is taking the Fifth as to testimony, he's taking it for documents. Meaning, Flynn has documents the government wants. Apparently there is some US provision about turning over documents without incriminating yourself. US lawyers can explain that.

And now Chris Christie is speaking up, saying he and Flynn did not get along, and he told both candidate Trump and president Trump what his opinion was. And Trump chose Flynn over Christie.

Topping it off, Christie said if he were president he wouldn't let Flynn in the WH, let alone appoint him to a position, lol!

[Fez]

2 minutes ago, Commodore said:

 the legislature created a majority minority district explicitly to comply with the Voting Rights Act, and got tarred as racists because of it

That's not why they did it and you know it.

https://thinkprogress.org/arrogant-anti-democratic-state-known-as-north-carolina-48d9f3e9b31e

 

Quote

 

Rep. David Lewis (R), one of the co-chairs of this committee, announced his criteria in an open hearing — “to the extent possible, the map drawers [would be instructed] to create a map which is perhaps likely to elect ten Republicans and three Democrats.”

Lewis later said that he chose these numbers because “I do not believe it’s possible to draw a map with 11 Republicans and two Democrats.”

In a party line vote, the committee then adopted redistricting criteria which provided that “the partisan makeup of the” preexisting maps “is 10 Republicans and 3 Democrats,” and that the committee would “make reasonable efforts to construct districts . . . to maintain the current partisan makeup of North Carolina’s congressional delegation.”

Rep. Lewis admitted that “this would be a political gerrymander,” but said that was fine because such a gerrymander “is not against the law.”

 

That was their attitude when they were changing the maps from the original gerrymander, which was the one thrown out today, to the current gerrymander that hasn't been challanged yet.

[Maithanet]

5 minutes ago, Fez said:

This is why its a shame so many Democrats have ignored the Montana special election. Yes, Montana was one of Trump's stronger states and, yes, Quist has some serious flaws as a candidate. But despite that he's a coinflip to win on Thursday and that's with almost no national money. 

Almost no national money?  This WaPo article says:

Quote

Quist, 69, has raised more than $5 million, nearly doubling the last Democratic candidate for Montana’s sole House seat.

Are you saying that $5 million was raised in Montana?  Or that $5 million isn't a lot more money?  The average winning congressional race was $1.6 million in 2012, and that is an average of a lot of media markets that are a helluva lot more expensive than Montana.  I expect that 5 million will buy Quist a great deal of tv and radio time across the state.  Quist is hardly running a bare-bones campaign.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, Mexal said:

If Mueller doesn't shut it down.

I don't get the impression that he would unless he believed it was merited. 

1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

And get his hand slapped away by Melania.

 

Don't they have separate bedrooms at their houses/apartments?

[all swedes are racist]

12 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Almost no national money?  This WaPo article says:

Are you saying that $5 million was raised in Montana?  Or that $5 million isn't a lot more money?  The average winning congressional race was $1.6 million in 2012, and that is an average of a lot of media markets that are a helluva lot more expensive than Montana.  I expect that 5 million will buy Quist a great deal of tv and radio time across the state.  Quist is hardly running a bare-bones campaign.

I think fez means quiet has only gotten a small amount of that ($620k or something) from the dccc and big national pacs, the rest is from donors mostly

[Commodore]

5 minutes ago, Fez said:

That's not why they did it and you know it.

https://thinkprogress.org/arrogant-anti-democratic-state-known-as-north-carolina-48d9f3e9b31e

That wasn't the basis for striking it down though (politically drawn districts are not unconstitutional). The court decided this time the district had too many blacks instead of not enough, it didn't need to be majority minority to get a democrat elected.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/16pdf/15-1262_db8e.pdf

Quote

For most of the twenty years prior to the new plan’s adoption, African-Americans had made up less than a majority of District 1’s voters; the district’s BVAP usually hovered between 46% and 48%…Yet throughout those two decades…District 1 was “an extraordinarily safe district for African-American preferred candidates.”…a meaningful number of white voters joined a politically cohesive black community to elect that group’s favored candidate.

Whatever pretense works to strike down a GOP map, they will use. Either there are too many blacks, or not enough, depending on what argument is needed to invalidate the map. 

 

 

[drawkcabi]

35 minutes ago, The Wedge said:

Wasn't he the one claiming that anyone asking for immunity is guilty as hell?

And he was the one leading the RNC nitwits in the Lock Her Up! chants, right?

Irony is a stone cold b*tch.

You could make accusation against accusation against Trump using only file records of what Trump's said and him and his supporters will still cry "Fake News!" and "Nothing There!" and "Witch Hunt!"

[Dr. Pepper]

1 hour ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

Not a chance.  She probably gets a better deal as a widow (which she is counting on), and I don't know that he really cares about stuff like that.  She is otherwise incredibly loyal to him in places that he does care about.  We have to stop projecting our own feelings on to her. 

I agree.  I get so uncomfortable with all the internet talk about Melania being a damsel in distress who needs to be saved.  That along with the slut shaming is some serious anti-feminist bullshit.  I don't understand why they do it to Melania but not Ivanka.  

[Mlle. Zabzie]

26 minutes ago, Commodore said:

That wasn't the basis for striking it down though (politically drawn districts are not unconstitutional). The court decided this time the district had too many blacks instead of not enough, it didn't need to be majority minority to get a democrat elected.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/16pdf/15-1262_db8e.pdf

Whatever pretense works to strike down a GOP map, they will use. Either there are too many blacks, or not enough, depending on what argument is needed to invalidate the map. 

 

 

As best I can tell, based on the findings in the case, the problem is that the legislature did not make an inquiry at all in respect of voting rights act compliance:

If you read the opinion, the legislature was perfectly clear that it used race as the predominant factor in drawing District 1 (purportedly for compliance with the VRA).  But that particular decision must still satisfy strict scrutiny.  The state could not satisfy the standard - in particular had no evidence that the surrounding white population would vote as a bloc to deny minorities their choice of candidate.  And in fact there was no evidence that it even considered the appropriate standard at all.

 

[Mexal]

1 hour ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

Not a chance.  She probably gets a better deal as a widow (which she is counting on), and I don't know that he really cares about stuff like that.  She is otherwise incredibly loyal to him in places that he does care about.  We have to stop projecting our own feelings on to her. 

I don't buy this. She might get a better deal as a widow, but that means she has to deal with Trump until he dies. Who knows when he dies. I think she has a fairly good case against him for divorce based on 12 women saying he sexually assaulted him and his own admission he likes to do that. I think she'll be fine with what she gets given she'll be rich for life. And to be honest, might behoove her to do it sooner rather then later because of all the legal shit that looks like will hit him. If he can't be prosecuted in office for prior illegality of business (i.e. money laundering), he certainly can after he's no longer president.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

10 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

I agree.  I get so uncomfortable with all the internet talk about Melania being a damsel in distress who needs to be saved.  That along with the slut shaming is some serious anti-feminist bullshit.  I don't understand why they do it to Melania but not Ivanka.  

Ivanka has been getting hammered of late. Her book got scathing reviews, her little panel interview in Germany was ridiculed, and the nepotism surrounding her position in Trump's administration has been widely covered. Most if not all her Liberal/Progressive bona fides have been questioned and stripped away. She escapes the slut-shaming bit, but I suspect that's because she hasn't posed nude.

[Trebla]

and I'm sure he is going to create peace between Israel and the Panamanians! 

[Fez]

56 minutes ago, commiedore said:

I think fez means quiet has only gotten a small amount of that ($620k or something) from the dccc and big national pacs, the rest is from donors mostly

Yes; this.