Darth Richard II Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 1 minute ago, unpaid comintern said: lol welp http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/379439-holocaust-denier-wins-gop-nomination-in-heavily-democratic-seat?amp&__twitter_impression=true I was tempted to post that in the demonization thread, but it's pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aceluby Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 8 minutes ago, Darth Richard II said: I was tempted to post that in the demonization thread, but it's pointless. #notallnazis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKitttenGuard Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 A small enjoyable moment Quote Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump said Rick Saccone lost the Pennsylvanima special election, despite the fact that he has not yet conceded the race. Democratic candidate Conor Lamb has declared victory following a narrow lead in Pennsylvania's 18th District last Tuesday, and Republicans are looking at challenging the results. At a Republican fundraising event Tuesday, Trump said Saccone "didn't quite make it." "It was really close," Trump told the attendees. "We went in there. They were down. Good man, Rick Saccone. Good man. And didn't quite make it. But lost, think of it, lost by about 300 votes out of all of those votes. So, it's pretty incredible. But we can't let it happen. We have to win. There's nothing like winning. We have to win." Trump then added, "We're 5-0 and then we lost by 300 votes the other night, right? 300 out of 200-twenty-some-odd-thousand votes. 300 votes. And I will tell you, though, that area in Pennsylvania, and all of Pennsylvania, and all other states, they're energized. 'Cause I made a speech there two nights before, and I'll tell you what -- that crowd was -- they were going. They really -- they were happy. They were thrilled. I wish I was running. Man. That was some energetic group." The current vote tally shows Lamb up by about 700 votes, not 300. The President had campaigned for Saccone just before the special House election, and the district was solidly for Trump in the 2016 campaign. https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/20/politics/donald-trump-nrcc/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 So the count of bombs linked to the serial bomber is 7 bombs now? I watched Trump with the Saudi prince today and he was asked to comment about the Austin situation, and he just rambled on inarticulately, saying over and over "this a sick guy". I wondered if people dealing with the situation felt comfort from his words... All I could think of was, please God, make sure it's not a Democrat or an immigrant planting these bombs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 I'd bet real money its some skinhead/nazi fuckhead, giving the targets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 21 minutes ago, Darth Richard II said: I'd bet real money its some skinhead/nazi fuckhead, giving the targets. Eh. There's no real pattern that is evident. Maybe you're right, but the more recent bombs were basically targetless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 Were they? I know the one that went off in the post office today turned out to be non related but I was under the impression the targets were all black/Hispanic. I mean it's barely news so I'm not well informed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 Scratch that, the goodwill incident is what wasn't related. Hmmm looks like it might just be a crazy person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A True Kaniggit Posted March 21, 2018 Author Share Posted March 21, 2018 1 hour ago, Darth Richard II said: Were they? I know the one that went off in the post office today turned out to be non related but I was under the impression the targets were all black/Hispanic. I mean it's barely news so I'm not well informed. Couldn't find that article. But yes, the two fatalities were both black males. And one of the woman injured is Hispanic. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/19/us/austin-explosion-bombings.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin of Ice Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 16 hours ago, Zorral said: There's also the current NYC mayor, who would like to run Cuomo out of Albany. De Blasio is surely not happy about Nixon's run. Any particular reason you say this? I haven't caught a ton of NYC news or DeBlasio's reaction since Nixon announced, but Nixon and DeBlasio have been political allies for quite awhile, and at least according to some sources I saw, Nixon is being advised by the same team that helped DeBlasio win his first election for NYC mayor. I'm sure she likely talked to him about her plans for quite awhile, and DeBlasio would have ample opportunity to point out every point of Cuomo's many hypocrisies, every enemy who has dirt on him, every bit of Cuomo's two-faced nature that would look terrible being brought out in the press in the midst of an election year. Hell, he could have hooked her up with all this before she ever announced, stood back to the side with a smile on his face and play innocent when anyone asks him if he wants to see her beat Cuomo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ljkeane Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 It seems like the bomber in Austin may have killed himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGimletEye Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 Now conservative sorts of people. One need not be Friedrich Engels or part of the “far left” to think there is a whole lot of shenanigans going on with Dodd-Frank right about now with the help of some dirty Ds. Quote Banks continue to lobby for weaker financial regulation: capital requirements are excessive, liquidity requirements are overly restrictive, and stress tests are too burdensome. Yes, in the aftermath of the 2007-09 financial crisis, we needed reforms, they say, but Basel III and Dodd-Frank have gone too far. Quote Unfortunately, these complaints are finding sympathetic ears in a variety of places. U.S. authorities are considering changes that would water down existing standards. In the name of supporting community banks, the Senate has approved a bill to relax the regulation of large banks, in part by raising the asset threshold for a bank considered large. Quote These moves are not only discouraging, but they are self-defeating. Regular readers of this blog are familiar with our view that capital requirements remain too low. Higher capital clearly improves resilience. And, at current levels of capitalization, it does not limit banks’ ability to support economic activity. Experience suggests the opposite: well-capitalized banks lend more and they lend better, while zombie banks lend to zombie firms (see our previous post). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ants Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 17 hours ago, Mexal said: So many lawsuits. Stormy Daniels. Karen McDougal. And now, Summer Zervos' defamation case is going to court. And, with the SCOTUS refusing to take up the PA Congressional Map case, they have officially filed legislation for impeachment. I need to apologise to the original poster when I said posting ar article about the musings of a single state legislator was a bit unfair and not representative. They are that batshit crazy after all. 8 hours ago, unpaid comintern said: lol welp http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/379439-holocaust-denier-wins-gop-nomination-in-heavily-democratic-seat?amp&__twitter_impression=true I still think this story is unfair though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ice Queen Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 15 hours ago, dmc515 said: Technically the trial and debate is in the Senate. The impeachment process described is analogous to the impeachment process at the federal level - majority in the House to impeach and 2/3 in the Senate to convict after a "trial." As others have said, it'd be wholly punitive. If the legislature could reverse the court's decisions through impeachment, that's some really shitty constitutional design. Anyway, who knows if they're actually gonna convict. I don't follow state politics - studying national politics for a living is depressing enough - but my assumption is they're not really going to remove 4/7 of the Supreme Court, if only because it'd kill their reelection prospects. Either way, let's not jump to conclusions. I apologize for my temper tantrum yesterday. That news just really ticked me off. Majority in the House to impeach and 2/3 in the Senate to convict. This is PA and that's not very comforting. LOL They'll have no problem getting that because they always vote straight party lines. They're only removing the Democrats. One party rule at the state level. Anyway, thanks for the explanation. On the bright side, even Trump says Conor Lamb won 18. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 14 hours ago, dmc515 said: So both Graham and Flake suggested today impeachment is on the table if Trump fires Mueller: So, taking them at their word, only taking back the House and 16 votes to go! ...Otherwise known as a third of the GOP caucus. Oh, and Flake's vote doesn't really count since he'll be retired by the time the Dems could take back the House. I keep feeling like people are using the term “Constitutional crisis” incorrectly. If Trump fires Mueller, there is a perfectly good Constitutional remedy: impeachment. The actual Constitutional crisis comes when Congressional Republicans shrug and do nothing, which is exactly what they will do (at least in the House). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 Um...... Speaking of which, he’s totally going to fire Mueller. Also: Quote I think President Trump was right Signs that he’s crack or didn’t write this? Or both? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 1 hour ago, Crazy Cat Lady in Training said: I apologize for my temper tantrum yesterday. That news just really ticked me off. Majority in the House to impeach and 2/3 in the Senate to convict. This is PA and that's not very comforting. LOL They'll have no problem getting that because they always vote straight party lines. They're only removing the Democrats. One party rule at the state level. Anyway, thanks for the explanation. On the bright side, even Trump says Conor Lamb won 18. If the judges are impeached and convicted, I wonder what would happen next. Do the judges accept the verdict, or do they follow the example of the Kansas Supreme Court? Which, when the state legislature tried to take punitive action against them a few years ago, they ruled the legislature was in violation of the state constitution and blocked it (although that was a judicial salary issue, and did not escalate to impeachment; I think). I guess first of all we need to discuss if legislative leadership is on board with this or if this is far-right grandstanding (like attempts a few years ago to break up state electoral votes by gerrymandered districts). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 6 minutes ago, Fez said: If the judges are impeached and convicted, I wonder what would happen next. Do the judges accept the verdict, or do they follow the example of the Kansas Supreme Court? Which, when the state legislature tried to take punitive action against them a few years ago, they ruled the legislature was in violation of the state constitution and blocked it (although that was a judicial salary issue, and did not escalate to impeachment; I think). I guess first of all we need to discuss if legislative leadership is on board with this or if this is far-right grandstanding (like attempts a few years ago to break up state electoral votes by gerrymandered districts). http://www.duq.edu/academics/gumberg-library/pa-constitution/texts-of-the-constitution#5 Doesn’t seem to work that way. Here’s this part: Quote 5) This section is in addition to and not in substitution for the provisions for impeachment for misbehavior in office contained in Article VI. No justice, judge or justice of the peace against whom impeachment proceedings are pending in the Senate shall exercise any of the duties of office until acquittal. Also on if they'd run again: Quote The Governor and all other civil officers shall be liable to impeachment for any misbehavior in office, but judgment in such cases shall not extend further than to removal from office and disqualification to hold any office of trust or profit under this Commonwealth. The person accused, whether convicted or acquitted, shall nevertheless be liable to indictment, trial, judgment and punishment according to law. So that would be a no. However, I think they could appeal that they were not impeached for misbehavior, but for partisan political purposes, and they should win that. Hey look, I’m lawyering! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
all swedes are racist Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 enjoy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 16 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: I think Trump is milking the Federal Government for all the money he can. I think that's why he wanted the Presidency. It is a money generating scheme to keep his "businesses" afloat a bit longer. I agree that this is all about personal enrichment, but I never believe that he initially intended to win. I think this first started out as a bored rich guy doing it as a lark because he craves attention and thought he could earn a dime. Then in morphed into a way for him to maximize his branding and make as much money as possible in the wake of his loss. And since he’s won he’s sought to imitate people like Putin and become a kleptocrat. 16 hours ago, Mexal said: No, I don't think it did. Might have gotten coverage on Maddow but I don't watch her enough to know. Other than that, haven't seen it anywhere else. I think I posted it here though and we glossed over it since there was no "answer". That’s odd. This really should have been a major news story. It’s also important to keep in mind that the top bracket is $50m or more. That means he could literally be in debt billions of dollars to foreign creditors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.