Squab Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 5 minutes ago, Kalbear said: If the shoe were on the other foot, I would fully support the government officials refusing to carry out what they believed was an illegal order When does Jeff Sessions get appointed? 6 minutes ago, Kalbear said: In general I favor inaction when there is confusion, and boy is there lots of confusion. Hows that working out for you? A day in court would solve this confusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ran Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 In other news, General Flynn has deleted his Twitter account, this after his son did the same after calling the EO a "#MuslimBan", and after reports are coming out that he's getting increasingly sidelined in the WH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tempra Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 13 minutes ago, Mlle. Zabzie said: Not much right now as she is, I believe, the only person who is authorized to sign foreign surveillance warrants. I hope for her sake she gets something cushy afterwards - honestly I'm guessing a lot of law firms would take a chance on her. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/30/us/politics/attorney-general-civil-rights-refugee.html?action=Click&contentCollection=BreakingNews&contentID=64859564&pgtype=article&_r=0 Eh, it would be a coup for any law firm to get her. Even before this action, she has tremendous credentials and authored a hugely important memo on individual accountability for corporate wrongdoing. Any law firm with a white collar practice would want her defending its clients. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mlle. Zabzie Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 3 minutes ago, Tempra said: Eh, it would be a coup for any law firm to get her. Even before this action, she has tremendous credentials and authored a hugely important memo on individual accountability for corporate wrongdoing. Any law firm with a white collar practice would want her defending its clients. Yup - I'm pretty sure she'll waltz into, like Davis Polk, but depends on what happens to her on the way out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Pepper Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 Anyone have a link to Rubio being unable to speak to the state department? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 14 minutes ago, Squab said: When does Jeff Sessions get appointed? Unknown if he will. The vote is potentially upcoming soon. 14 minutes ago, Squab said: Hows that working out for you? A day in court would solve this confusion. We've already had one day in court, and it did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tijgy Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 2 hours ago, Seli said: Of course if Trump was really serious about being concerned about terrorists he probably ought to have banned countries like France, Belgium, Netherlands, Germany. Somehow I don't see that happening quite yet. But that ban would also keep the European tourists out. I do agree with Belgium - all those terrorists have a link with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 1 minute ago, Tijgy said: But that ban would also keep the European tourists out. I do agree with Belgium - all those terrorists have a link with it Fortunately Belgium - as screwed up as it is - is not actually all of Europe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altherion Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 3 hours ago, mormont said: It's very simple, and we have been through it before. The groups who supported Trump most strongly are not the groups who suffered most from inequality. The groups who suffer most from inequality (eg black women) supported Clinton very strongly. The correlation between suffering from inequality, and voting for Trump, is at best weak, if not nonexistent. This was not a result caused by economic factors. The issue is not the level of inequality, it is the increase in inequality. Unless the poverty is at the level of starvation, the people most likely to rebel against the existing order are not those who are poorest, but those who are being dragged down. 3 hours ago, Kalbear said: As do most economics professors and researchers, who indicate that without exception immigration increases overall wealth of everyone simply because of larger scales and more ability to do more things. Yes, I know. The League of Unquantified Systematic Uncertainties has done a great deal of harm to everyone in the quantitative sciences. Not everything they say is false, but they miss enough to get the outcome wrong for a large number of people. We've had this discussion before so the only thing I will add to it is that right now, roughly half of the country has stopped believing them altogether (even when they say things which are true). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 Just now, Altherion said: Yes, I know. The League of Unquantified Systematic Uncertainties has done a great deal of harm to everyone in the quantitative sciences. Not everything they say is false, but they miss enough to get the outcome wrong for a large number of people. We've had this discussion before so the only thing I will add to it is that right now, roughly half of the country has stopped believing them altogether (even when they say things which are true). Sure. They've also stopped believing in climate change, Obama's citizenship and believe that Trump won in a landslide. Shockingly their lack of faith is not an indicator that they are accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savannah Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 1 hour ago, Fragile Bird said: You sure miss the big point, don't you? A base in a foreign country is a base in a foreign country and does not "belong" to the US. It's at the pleasure of the host country. Do you think that the US government's agreement with Germany requires Germany to buy the base at fair market value after they leave? More likely that Germany buys it for $1. You don't have a point. My point is simple and I shall repeat it. A thing can't be given back to you if it was never yours. After you tried to pass Ramstein as a leasehold improvement I should probably not respond to your ideas on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arryn Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 35 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: No, refusing to support an ongoing injustice. Prejudice against prejudice is prejudice!!!!! Opposing racism and racism are just two sides of the same coin!!!! Soylent Green is people, just not sure if they're allowed in or not. Need more information on religious beliefs and Trump business interests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squab Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 12 minutes ago, Kalbear said: We've already had one day in court, and it did. 34 minutes ago, Kalbear said: In general I favor inaction when there is confusion, and boy is there lots of confusion. Bwahahaha, you're making it up as you go along. 34 minutes ago, Kalbear said: If the shoe were on the other foot, I would fully support the government officials refusing to carry out what they believed was an illegal order. I look forward to you adhering to this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 2 minutes ago, Squab said: Bwahahaha, you're making it up as you go along. How so? They've had a stay already. There was no DoJ presence there. The judge believed that there was enough cause. As to making it up, you understand that I would prefer that the inaction involved is "not taking action on the order", not "not doing anything in response to the order", right? Quote I look forward to you adhering to this. Why? Do you even remotely care about hypocrisy? I doubt it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altherion Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 2 minutes ago, Kalbear said: Sure. They've also stopped believing in climate change, Obama's citizenship and believe that Trump won in a landslide. Shockingly their lack of faith is not an indicator that they are accurate. No. However, if they become even angrier and more numerous (which seems to be the direction this is going), being right will not help the people who oppose them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The guy from the Vale Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 4 minutes ago, Savannah said: You don't have a point. My point is simple and I shall repeat it. A thing can't be given back to you if it was never yours. You say the area where Ramstein was built was never German territory? Are you serious? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savannah Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 Just now, theguyfromtheVale said: You say the area where Ramstein was built was never German territory? Are you serious? Of course that's not what I said, Why would you make up such a thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 1 minute ago, Altherion said: No. However, if they become even angrier and more numerous (which seems to be the direction this is going), being right will not help the people who oppose them. And if they get angrier and more numerous and go after people who didn't harm them, what good is that? This is really the #1 problem I have with your ideology and using correlation to imply your worldview - that you believe that the harm is being caused by these elites and globalization, but the people who are getting more numerous and angry don't think that in the slightest. They aren't rallying against the banks or the institutions - they're rallying against the government to the benefit of those private groups. They're far more likely to blame Iranian immigrants than they are Goldman Sachs. So yeah, they're angry - and right now that anger is entirely devoid from the sources that you think they should be targeted at. Why would you think that is going to change? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The guy from the Vale Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 Because that's what your answer read like. The territory in question is German territory, so of course it can be given back (and would be expected to in case the US abolishes NATO...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savannah Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 1 minute ago, theguyfromtheVale said: Because that's what your answer read like. The territory in question is German territory, so of course it can be given back (and would be expected to in case the US abolishes NATO...) Then you can't read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.022a4ba4f4aa53526e0290eedde6f808.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.