U.S. Politics: Are You Threadening Me Master Jedi?

[denstorebog]

2 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

Everything about his history, reputation, and ego suggests he will leak his recommendations and details of the investigation if he feels he's being suppressed. 

Given that I don't know much of his background, can you tell me a bit about what he's done in the past that would suggest he'd choose this path?

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

20 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Hmmmmm....the Dow is down 325 points right now. Maybe a little reaction before the address tonight?

You’d think it would be up, given that a major part of tonight’s speech will be about how much he’s done for the economy and the sycophantic behavior the business community has been showing Trump lately.

Also it’s at -366 now.

[Mexal]

8 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

Why wouldn't he do that?  Mueller may have a pristine reputation, but he's also been a political player in DC for the better part of two decades.  Plus, that reputation has been cultivated by being perceived as standing up to power.  Everything about his history, reputation, and ego suggests he will leak his recommendations and details of the investigation if he feels he's being suppressed.  

You're right, there is a difference between Comey's notes and Mueller leaking the key points of his investigation.  In the former the White House could at least claim executive privilege.  The latter is much more similar to Comey's July 2016 press conference or October 2016 letter to Congress on the Hillary investigation - both of which violated DOJ procedure but are hardly illegal.

Why wouldn't he do it? Because he follows the rules and the rules state the decision making comes from the AG, who in this case is Rosenstein. Everything has to be approved by him. Mueller is a special counsel, not an independent counsel and he works for Rosenstein. There is a pretty big difference.

The stated reason by Rosenstein for firing Comey was his press conference against Clinton as it was extraordinary and completely against the rules. The odds that Rosenstein will allow Mueller to do the same exact thing are pretty slim but even if he does, it's Rosenstein's call, not Mueller's. That's pretty much the point. Rosenstein has complete authority over this investigation, just like Lynch did until she more or less recused herself (she didn't but backed away) by talking to Bill Clinton privately on the tarmac just as a decision was being made on the Hillary case. If she doesn't do that shit, there is no Comey press conference. There are legitimate questions about Rosenstein given the Comey firing but he's the best chance anyone has with this getting some kind of public review.

[DanteGabriel]

27 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Hmmmmm....the Dow is down 325 points right now. Maybe a little reaction before the address tonight?

Seems to be a reaction to Amazon announcing a new health care venture with JP Morgan and Berkshire Hathaway.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/30/amazon-jpmorgan-berkshire-health-care-company-376824

[IamMe90]

Surprised no one is commenting on the obvious quid pro quo being carried out by the White House in its announcement that it will not enforce sanctions against Russia that were almost unanimously voted into law by both bodies of Congress, across both parties, and signed into law by the President already. I mean, really, it's hard to get much more transparent than that. The Trump Administration must be feeling pretty brazen, and I can understand why. I also have to wonder if all of the bullshit surrounding the Nunes memo was fabricated, at least in part, to bury this news. 

[Ormond]

32 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Hmmmmm....the Dow is down 325 points right now. Maybe a little reaction before the address tonight?

I think on MSNBC this morning they were implying that this was mostly because of a big hit on health care stocks, reacting to a joint announcement by Amazon and Berkshire Hathaway about their new plan for reducing employee health care costs.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/30/amazon-berkshire-hathaway-and-jpmorgan-chase-to-partner-on-us-employee-health-care.html

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-30/amazon-berkshire-jpmorgan-to-set-up-a-health-company-for-staff

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/01/30/581804474/amazon-berkshire-hathaway-and-jpmorgan-chase-launch-new-healthcare-company

[DMC]

5 minutes ago, denstorebog said:

Given that I don't know much of his background, can you tell me a bit about what he's done in the past that would suggest he'd choose this path?

This.

5 minutes ago, Mexal said:

The odds that Rosenstein will allow Mueller to do the same exact thing are pretty slim but even if he does, it's Rosenstein's call, not Mueller's.

This seems to entirely miss the point of the hypothetical.  What I'm saying is Mueller would do this if (and only if) his investigation were shut down and/or Mueller's findings upon concluding the investigation particularly salient (e.g. recommending impeachment) and still suppresed by Rosenstein or whomever replaces Rosenstein.  In those instances, there is no more reason for Mueller to play by the rules or abide by the chain of command that just quashed his investigation, so whether it's Rosenstein, Sessions, Trump, or Melvin Purvis that has ultimate "authority" is entirely irrelevant.

And yes, Comey's press conference was the reasoning Rosenstein gave in his letter recommending Comey's firing.  That's why I mentioned it - it certainly is a fireable offense.  But, again, in the hypothetical Mueller would effectively be fired anyway.

[Fragile Bird]

6 minutes ago, DanteGabriel said:

Seems to be a reaction to Amazon announcing a new health care venture with JP Morgan and Berkshire Hathaway.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/30/amazon-jpmorgan-berkshire-health-care-company-376824

I have been amazed no one has posted that story. It could really be a game changer.

But, the markets were down yesterday as well. It could be the start of the correction everyone has been looking for after a huge year last year.

[Prince of the North]

9 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

You’d think it would be up, given that a major part of tonight’s speech will be about how much he’s done for the economy and the sycophantic behavior the business community has been showing Trump lately.

Also it’s at -366 now.

Whenever I think of a "State of the Union" address delivered by Trump my mind immediately changes it to "Gaslighting of the Union".

And I think we all know the only reason the Dow isn't soaring today (and every day) is the "vast left-wing conspiracy" out to get Trump at all costs.  I wonder if he'll make any vague allusions to his completely unfair and misguided persecution in his address tonight?   

[The Wedge]

23 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

You’d think it would be up, given that a major part of tonight’s speech will be about how much he’s done for the economy and the sycophantic behavior the business community has been showing Trump lately.

Also it’s at -366 now.

But is -366 points off of 26,000+ as rattling as 366 points off a decade ago?

As a percentage, 366 points in either direction isn't panic-inducing today.  What percentage drop would be cause for pause?

[Fragile Bird]

1 minute ago, Ormond said:

I think on MSNBC this morning they were implying that this was mostly because of a big hit on health care stocks, reacting to a joint announcement by Amazon and Berkshire Hathaway about their new plan for reducing employee health care costs.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/30/amazon-berkshire-hathaway-and-jpmorgan-chase-to-partner-on-us-employee-health-care.html

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-30/amazon-berkshire-jpmorgan-to-set-up-a-health-company-for-staff

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/01/30/581804474/amazon-berkshire-hathaway-and-jpmorgan-chase-launch-new-healthcare-company

Ormond, there has not been a market correction, a drop of 10% or more, since 2015, and that was just over 10%. There are usually at least 1 a year, as there have been 123 since 1900. This bull market is getting long in the tooth. One individual event like a letter of intention, with no details and no plans, has knocked tens of millions (don't know if it's hundreds of millions) off of a sector. That's a good indicator of nervousness. 

The average correction is 17%, which would drop the Dow from the 26,000 range to the 23,500 range. Corrections are a normal and regular part of the market, and we haven't had any. On the other had, the drop now might not continue, because it's earnings season with good earnings, not bad earnings which normally trigger a drop. We'll see what happens tomorrow.  

The markets have been so complacent that the Dow only had 6 days, 6 measly days, where it dropped 1% or more last year. That's pretty amazing. Iirc, the S&P had no 3% drops in 288 days, the longest streak in it's history.

Numerous analysts have pointed out market conditions that have not appeared since just before the 2008 crash.

There have been 32 bear markets, a drop of 20% or more, since 1900, or about every 3.5 years. The average bear market drop is 32%, which would drop the Dow to the higher 17,000s. Amazingly, that only returns the Dow to where it was in 2015, which shows how fast and steady the rise has been. 

When I was in the finance sector, we always warned new clients that there would be a bear every four years, something they needed to take into account with regard to how much risk they could tolerate. Opening a statement that says 1/3 of the value of your investments has disappeared can be pretty frightening.

As I have said several times already in US Politics threads, I believe 'reversion to the mean' will be a phrase you will hear often in the next year.

[Fragile Bird]

35 minutes ago, The Wedge said:

But is -366 points off of 26,000+ as rattling as 366 points off a decade ago?

As a percentage, 366 points in either direction isn't panic-inducing today.  What percentage drop would be cause for pause?

This is a drop of 1% or more, a common event prior to the craziness of last year's market during which, as I mentioned, we only had 6 of them. Combined with yesterday's drop, it would be the biggest drop in over a year and a half. Nothing has bothered this market, no presidential scandals, no election scandals, no North Korean missiles, nothing. It's utterly unnatural;.

[denstorebog]

If we're going to have a stock market crash, please let it be in the hours before the SOTU.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, Prince of the North said:

Whenever I think of a "State of the Union" address delivered by Trump my mind immediately changes it to "Gaslighting of the Union".

And I think we all know the only reason the Dow isn't soaring today (and every day) is the "vast left-wing conspiracy" out to get Trump at all costs.  I wonder if he'll make any vague allusions to his completely unfair and misguided persecution in his address tonight?   

Speaking of the SOTU, has this ever happened before:

Quote

Over the past few days, President Donald Trump and his surrogates have repeatedly reassured reporters that the president’s first Tuesday State of the Union will include an appeal to both sides of the aisle.

"We’re going to get something done, we hope bipartisan," Trump said Monday of immigration reform, which he plans to talk about in the speech. "The Republicans really don’t have the votes to get it done in any other way. So it has to be bipartisan."

But that plea for unity is somewhat hard to square with the Trump campaign’s latest fundraising effort: People who give to Trump’s re-election campaign in the hours before the speech will get to see their names displayed during a live stream of his speech at his campaign website , according to a fundraising request that went out Monday and which was first noticed by the Washington Post.

https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/gyw4em/trump-wants-to-use-the-state-of-the-union-to-make-some-cash

[Fragile Bird]

19 minutes ago, denstorebog said:

If we're going to have a stock market crash, please let it be in the hours before the SOTU.

I'm hoping it happens at the traditional time, the dangerous month of September. Maybe a small correction now, a lull during the summer when traders go away for vacation, then the hammer comes down after Labor Day.

Just in time for November elections.

[Prince of the North]

11 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Speaking of the SOTU, has this ever happened before:

https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/gyw4em/trump-wants-to-use-the-state-of-the-union-to-make-some-cash

I'm pretty sure it hasn't.  I can't even...

While Trump gaslights the country about all his "accomplishments" during the last year...he's gonna use the occasion as a...telethon?!  I wish I could say it's unbelievable...  

[Ormond]

49 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Ormond, there has not been a market correction, a drop of 10% or more, since 2015, and that was just over 10%. There are usually at least 1 a year, as there have been 123 since 1900. This bull market is getting long in the tooth. One individual event like a letter of intention, with no details and no plans, has knocked tens of millions (don't know if it's hundreds of millions) off of a sector. That's a good indicator of nervousness. 

The average correction is 17%, which would drop the Dow from the 26,000 range to the 23,500 range. Corrections are a normal and regular part of the market, and we haven't had any. On the other had, the drop now might not continue, because it's earnings season with good earnings, not bad earnings which normally trigger a drop. We'll see what happens tomorrow.  

The markets have been so complacent that the Dow only had 6 days, 6 measly days, where it dropped 1% or more last year. That's pretty amazing. Iirc, the S&P had no 3% drops in 288 days, the longest streak in it's history.

Numerous analysts have pointed out market conditions that have not appeared since just before the 2008 crash.

There have been 32 bear markets, a drop of 20% or more, since 1900, or about every 3.5 years. The average bear market drop is 32%, which would drop the Dow to the higher 17,000s. Amazingly, that only returns the Dow to where it was in 2015, which shows how fast and steady the rise has been. 

When I was in the finance sector, we always warned new clients that there would be a bear every four years, something they needed to take into account with regard to how much risk they could tolerate. Opening a statement that says 1/3 of the value of your investments has disappeared can be pretty frightening.

As I have said several times already in US Politics threads, I believe 'reversion to the mean' will be a phrase you will hear often in the next year.

Stephanie Ruhle on MSNBC this morning was saying she expects such a correction within the next year. So I don't think she is really disagreeing with you much. 

[Jace, Extat]

Whats the deal with this Pig who adopted an addict's whelp?

I didn't get this when it was all over the news a few weeks ago and I don't get it now that the most popular Trump is parading them around her husband's fife.

Seriously. It's not inspiring, it's creepy and weird. It says more about the state of our public assistance programs than anything.

[DMC]

So Gallup just put out Trump's approval by state for the the entirety of 2017.  They put out something similar in July, so it's interesting to compare the two.  In fact, I just spent a half hour putting together a spreadsheet to do just that. 

Now, it should be emphasized that any changes between the two should be depressed due to the fact the sample in July comprises a good portion of the overall sample for 2017.  That being said, in terms of "net" approval (approve minus disapprove), Trump increased from July to the entire year report in only four states:  Vermont (+2), Wyoming, West Virginia, and Maine (all +1).  The net approval for Maryland and Idaho stayed the same, so in 44 states Trump's net approval has decreased since July.  In eleven states, his net approval has decreased by at least 6 points - they are the following (percentage of the sample that was taken since the July report in parentheses):

1. Hawaii -12  (51%)
2. Rhode Island -12  (57%)
3. Kansas -10  (52%)
4. Montana -8  (50%)
5. New Hampshire -8  (54%)
6. Arkansas -7  (50%)
7. Nebraska -7  (52%)
8. Illinois -7  (54%)
9. Connecticut -7  (54%)
10. Indiana -6  (53%)
11. Texas -6  (52%)

Looking at the the major swing states, he is underwater by 14 points in both Michigan, Wisconsin, and North Carolina, 12 points in Florida, and 11 points in Pennsylvania - he's down 15 points in Texas (39/54).  Since July, his net has gone down 5 points in Michigan (55%) and Wisconsin (52%), 3 points in Florida (51%) and North Carolina (54%), and 2 points in Pennsylvania (53%).  ETA:  Forgot to mention Ohio - his net approval went from -1 (47/48) in July to -5 (45/50) with the sample evenly split.  His net approval is at least -11 in 28 states; and the 22 states where it's not that low constitute 150 electoral votes.  Overall, his net approval decreased from July to the entire year by an average of 4.08 points per state.

[Sivin]

20 hours ago, Kalbear said:

Can't wait to see @WinterFox's optimistic take on this one

Eh, it's pretty bad. Really bad. 

Those who have used words like "terrifying", "unthinkable", or "end of democracy" aren't exactly wrong. 

But let's remember that we've known for over a week that Nunes was going to do this. Let's see, folks. Batten down the hatches, steele yourselves for a dogfight until November. It is worth pointing out that Ryan and his coalition are cowards, cowards who will abandon this president the moment they feel the last of their footing shake loose from under them. 

It's a new low. It's scary. 

It's REALLY bad. 

But we're still here. We've still got a shot to take back the house. 

Personally I am most concerned about this lack of action on Russia sanctions. If Ryan and McConnel let this go unchallenged then it falls on our career civil servants to fight the powers that be from giving away the farm. 

But I think that is what will undo this man and his administration. The clear unwillingness to engage on Russian invasion into the American homeland is something that people notice. If Donald had an ounce of intelligence about him he would have obfuscated the lack of action with bland statements about "implementation and delicacy" for the rest of his natural life. Coming out and saying that he wasn't going to implement sanctions was the biggest mistake he's made while in office. I am hoping that is addressed in the follow up analysis of his State of the Union and that party leaders are hammered about this in after action interviews. 

Now where we go from here as a country is complicated regarding implementation and delicacy. I don't think it would be appropriate for me to address that at this time. Intrastate elections are quite byzantine and it would not be in this administrations interest to commit ourselves to a plan of action verbally that might ultimately fail to address the seriousness of the situation. Rest assured, these dictates from congress will be put into effect, as you know the president already signed them into law. We just want to ensure that the delicacies of the prospect are properly managed. Thank you all for your time.  (It's easy to say a lot of nothing if you're not 100% brain dead)