Jump to content

U.S. Politics: Gunnin' From The Long Arm of the Law


Sivin

Recommended Posts

39 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Don't be afraid of having state gun control laws laws struck down in the courts, just find ever more creative ways to come as close as possible to the outcomes you want.

I absolutely agree with this. I'd add that the dysfunction in Congress right now probably helps this, too, since it means Democrats could blunt a Republican effort at passing a broad "override" bill on state-level gun control laws. 

 

25 minutes ago, Yukle said:

There is that law mulling about at the moment, though, where states can only apply whatever restrictions also apply in the remaining 49 states.

Good target for a filibuster by Democrats. Or at least they could force the Republicans to break the filibuster to pass it, which would suck but also be a long term victory for Democrats as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With donors demanding action on Guns could the Republicans have victored themselves to death like the Kaiser's right wing in the fall of 1914?

Here they are, with Paris literally in sight but the momentum is grinding dry. Republicans have a stranglehold on state and federal governments all over the country and finally put every ounce of political muscle they had into forcing their tax scam through.

Now what? They can't appeal Obamacare. They won't touch guns. They won't. They won't. They won't.

The Republicans never really stood for anything except the common rallying cry of 'less taxes' and 'NO'.

And now there's nothing left to stand 'for'. They have to defend the inaction on guns while MOST of the country wants action. They have to defend the budget deficit. They have to defend bigotry in an increasingly atheist society. They have to defend hate and racism and slashing safety nets and wealth inequality.

They have to defend so many positions that seemed irrelevant when the promise of tax cuts was out there on the horizon but now that it's been accomplished I wonder if this surge of Republican donations dies off in the next few years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Quote

Former Trump campaign aide and Mueller investigation target Rick Gates will plead guilty to fraud-related charges in the next few days and testify against his former business partner and former Trump campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, the Los Angeles Times reported on Sunday. Last week, CNN said that a plea deal was being finalized between Mueller’s prosecutors and Gates, and that deal is apparently now set, according to the Times’ sources

.

Report: Former Trump Aide Rick Gates Will Plead Guilty, Testify Against Manafort\

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/02/report-rick-gates-to-plead-guilty-testify-against-manafort.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is it that whenever there is a mass shooting the pro-gun politicians get to trot out the "now is not the time" rhetoric partly claiming to respect the victims, when it seems like most of the victims' families and the victims who survived and sill have a voice feel like now is exactly the time? I do see the justification for the rhetoric has shifted a bit, from being less about respecting the victims (because that seems pretty untennable even to the pro-gun politicians) to a claim that regulation as an immediate response will be emotional and kneejerk. This of course is obviously an untennable argument to any objective viewer, but it seems like the pro-gun folks feel like it's an argument that can still play sufficiently with a general audience while keeping the donor and voter base satisfied that there is no opening for action now or in the future.

It might play with the general audience for the next 1 or 2 mass shootings, (which might only be a month or 2) but they'll have to pivot to another excuse for inaction after that.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:
Quote

Former Trump campaign aide and Mueller investigation target Rick Gates will plead guilty to fraud-related charges in the next few days and testify against his former business partner and former Trump campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, the Los Angeles Times reported on Sunday. Last week, CNN said that a plea deal was being finalized between Mueller’s prosecutors and Gates, and that deal is apparently now set, according to the Times’ sources

.

Report: Former Trump Aide Rick Gates Will Plead Guilty, Testify Against Manafort\

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/02/report-rick-gates-to-plead-guilty-testify-against-manafort.html

It's interesting, even in our far flung corner of the world some of our news radio stations are being bombarded by people complaining about too much news coverage of this "fake news". It seems like there is a global effort underway to discredit the Mueller investigation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Anti-Targ said:

It's interesting, even in our far flung corner of the world some of our news radio stations are being bombarded by people complaining about too much news coverage of this "fake news". It seems like there is a global effort underway to discredit the Mueller investigation.

That's pretty nuts. How is this not news? A third advisor to the Trump campaign is about to plead guilty while testifying against his campaign manager. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/15/2018 at 10:18 PM, dmc515 said:

How the hell would anyone know the effect of ending a program that's hasn't ended yet - let alone its effect on vote choice?  You have an annoying habit of asking for impossible evidence then acting like the absence of such supports your point.

And you have a similarly useful habit of stating things as facts and then being offended when someone asks for evidence.

Put it another way: DACA hasn't been solved in 10 years. With Obama. Trump ran largely on an anti-latino platform. There is a lot of reasonable evidence and implication that DACA is cared about by a lot of people, but is not worth drawing a line. Hell, we already saw this with Democrats and the budget deal. 

On 2/15/2018 at 10:18 PM, dmc515 said:

Responsibility attribution would be much clearer on who ended DACA than who is responsible for school shootings in many voters minds.

Citation needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, @WinterFox, you were saying a while back how Trump's polling numbers at over 57% disapproval were a tipping point. Turns out you're right; since then they  have only gone up and up, and he's now at 41.5% approval and only 53% disapproval, a net change of +9. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, WinterFox said:

It's unfortunate, it really is, but at the end of the day the DACA people are not worth the ungodly effort it would take to get them back in 3 years. It breaks my heart to type those words, and I would absolutely love some type of priority visa program, but the dangers to literally the basic functions of our democracy are too great to waste political capitol on another quagmire created by the Republicans. 

Democrats should run on a message about Republicans as good as deporting Americans. They should not make promises. 

Well, I think the Democrats message should be pretty simple:  allow for an up or down vote on a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers.  The only reason it didn't pass in 2007, 2010, 2011, or last week is because the Republicans blocked it.  So, I agree that they shouldn't spend any more political capitol trying to get Republicans to do something most of them nominally say they are for.  Instead, the Dems' message should be crystal clear whose fault it is.

12 hours ago, Kalbear said:

Put it another way: DACA hasn't been solved in 10 years. With Obama. Trump ran largely on an anti-latino platform. There is a lot of reasonable evidence and implication that DACA is cared about by a lot of people, but is not worth drawing a line. Hell, we already saw this with Democrats and the budget deal. 

Except the context of the discussion was the Trump administration initiating a mass deportation of DACA recipients, something that has never been seen in the 17 years since the DREAM Act was introduced in Congress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dmc515 said:

Except the context of the discussion was the Trump administration initiating a mass deportation of DACA recipients, something that has never been seen in the 17 years since the DREAM Act was introduced in Congress.

The context was DACA failing. Again, if you think that they're going to run into houses and deport them regularly and swiftly you're just talking fantasies. What they'll do is simply deport a few, deport more of their families, and otherwise make their lives miserable as they have to live underground, can't do regular jobs, can't go to school, and otherwise suffer. They'll rely on self-deporting and general bad policies against latinos in general to weed most out, or they'll simply not pay that much attention to it and we'll go back to what we had prior to the DACA policy before.

And then in a few years they'll start deporting more of them, when it isn't as newsworthy. 

Kelly isn't Bannon. He doesn't want to create a massive political conflict to get his result. He wants to be quiet, and sneaky, and get results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dmc515 said:

Well, I think the Democrats message should be pretty simple:  allow for an up or down vote on a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers.  The only reason it didn't pass in 2007, 2010, 2011, or last week is because the Republicans blocked it.  So, I agree that they shouldn't spend any more political capitol trying to get Republicans to do something most of them nominally say they are for.  Instead, the Dems' message should be crystal clear whose fault it is.

Except the context of the discussion was the Trump administration initiating a mass deportation of DACA recipients, something that has never been seen in the 17 years since the DREAM Act was introduced in Congress.

Fuck that slow shit, republicans can easily reverse it. 

I want only one solution: Reagan's.

absolute immediate, irreversible amnesty for every person here illegal, they're all made citizens, effective the second the ink leaves the president's pen. 

This slow walk pathway to bullshit (DC centrist wonk nonsense) is no good whatsoever.

Immediate permanent action, ala Reagan is the only acceptable solution.

anything less is a crock of shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, lokisnow said:

Fuck that slow shit, republicans can easily reverse it. 

I want only one solution: Reagan's.

absolute immediate, irreversible amnesty for every person here illegal, they're all made citizens, effective the second the ink leaves the president's pen. 

This slow walk pathway to bullshit (DC centrist wonk nonsense) is no good whatsoever.

Immediate permanent action, ala Reagan is the only acceptable solution.

anything less is a crock of shit.

Pray tell how you’d get that passed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

The context was DACA failing.

No, the context was clearly about deportation being initiated on March 6, which is why I started replying in the first place, and somehow ended up being compared to Hans Landa shortly after your reply.  Also, not exactly sure what DACA "failing" even means.

18 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Again, if you think that they're going to run into houses and deport them regularly and swiftly you're just talking fantasies.

I agree.

19 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

What they'll do is simply deport a few, deport more of their families, and otherwise make their lives miserable as they have to live underground, can't do regular jobs, can't go to school, and otherwise suffer. They'll rely on self-deporting and general bad policies against latinos in general to weed most out, or they'll simply not pay that much attention to it and we'll go back to what we had prior to the DACA policy before.

Again, nobody really knows what they'll do.  I sincerely doubt Trump knows what he's going to do at this point.  Is this possible?  Sure.  It's also possible Trump decides to give Congress more time.  It's also possible he allows more DACA applications to come in until the court order is overturned.  And, sure, it's possible the brownshirts will move in quick in a couple weeks time.  The only thing we do know is this uncertainty already hurts DACA recipients.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

The context was DACA failing. Again, if you think that they're going to run into houses and deport them regularly and swiftly you're just talking fantasies. What they'll do is simply deport a few, deport more of their families, and otherwise make their lives miserable as they have to live underground, can't do regular jobs, can't go to school, and otherwise suffer. They'll rely on self-deporting and general bad policies against latinos in general to weed most out, or they'll simply not pay that much attention to it and we'll go back to what we had prior to the DACA policy before.

And then in a few years they'll start deporting more of them, when it isn't as newsworthy. 

Kelly isn't Bannon. He doesn't want to create a massive political conflict to get his result. He wants to be quiet, and sneaky, and get results.

Not sure this is entirely true. I think this might be true in sanctuary cities, but if DACA fails to be sorted out and these people are officially illegal, ICE will be at their doors when they can. They've already been doing it this past year and have gotten even more aggressive in 2018. There is almost no chance that ICE will just let them be if they're legally allowed to arrest, hold and deport. This is the kind of shit these guys live for.

As for Kelly, don't think he gives a fuck. ICE wasn't very quite when Kelly ran the DHS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...