Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Paladin of Ice

US Politics: The Ides of Mueller

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
58 minutes ago, Shryke said:

I doubt it. You don't seize power by stopping elections, you just rig them. Even Putin runs elections.

The GOP will just completely ignore the law and work to continue to stack the judiciary with cronies and rig elections.

And how can the GOP rig the elections Gerrymander every state and district ? Someone , the Courts, The media ,social media . and local politicians , citizen watch dog groups would figure out that some kind of fix was in and stop it or publicize  it to the point that it wouldn't  happen at all.

Edited by GAROVORKIN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Shryke said:

It seems like Mueller submitting questions to Trump spooked them all. I think they looked at what they were asking, realised what they might know and are fucking panicked.

I read something saying after his tweets today Trump's staff rushed him to a golf course to distract him.

Well, the Trump org subpoena was recent as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, TheKitttenGuard said:

As in an accurate reading of the Political enviorment?

As in I am a oak?

Republican control does help  Trump cause, there is absolutely no disputing that one.

Im thinking Larch.:D

 

Edited by GAROVORKIN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

(CNN)Sen. Lindsey Graham gave a stern warning Sunday to President Donald Trump against firing special counsel Robert Mueller.

"As I said before, if he tried to do that, that would be the beginning of the end of his presidency," the South Carolina Republican said on CNN's "State of the Union."

 

Why does Lindsey's comments make think of this?  Hmmmm, I wonder.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, GAROVORKIN said:

I wouldn't be the Oak in Aesops fable which broke  because it couldn't bend like the reeds.

Why are you biased on oak trees?  I didn't ask what you wouldn't be. That is pretty concerning....

55 minutes ago, Nasty LongRider said:

That's OK as far as it goes, but I like this variation, if you were a twee, what kind of twee would you be?

There may be other variations as well.     

:D Someone else got the reference!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe would be one of the top two or three key witnesses in any obstruction of justice case against President Donald Trump. On Friday, Trump’s Attorney General Jeff Sessions destroyed McCabe professionally in a way that could ruin his reputation for telling the truth.

These are the most important things to remember after Sessions fired McCabe for an undefined failure to be forthcoming during an investigation of his role in the bureau’s work on the Hillary Clinton email scandal and related inquiries.

 

The Only Relevant Known Fact About McCabe’s Firing Is That He Is a Key Witness Against Trump

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/03/the-only-relevant-known-fact-about-mccabes-firing-is-that-he-is-a-key-witness-against-trump.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Nasty LongRider said:

Why does Lindsey's comments make think of this?  Hmmmm, I wonder.

 

Hm , I do have to concede  that this bit is definitely appropriate to the current situation.:P

 

But then there is the sequel 

" They ate Robins Minstrels. There was much rejoicing."  :D

 

 

Edited by GAROVORKIN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

Since the firing of James Comey, the staff members around Trump have managed to placate, delay, or contain some of these impulses. But nearly every reporter following the White House now agrees that Trump is moving into a new phase of his presidency. He is aware that he has surrounded himself with people who consider him a moron or are trying to save the country from his madness, and he is relentlessly casting them off.

Trump may not be systematically breaking through the protective ring that has surrounded him, because he is barely capable of doing anything in a systematic fashion. But in fits and starts he is lurching in the same basic direction. He is doing the things his aides told him he could not do, or refused to carry out. Imposing tariffs was a major step in asserting his autonomy. Firing Rex Tillerson in humiliating fashion was another. The case that he would leave Mueller alone relied on the assumption that Trump would stay contained forever. That assumption is crumbling.

It is also notable that Trump’s recent behavior displays a reckless disregard for even his own self-preservation.

 

Trump Is Taking Out His Enemies and Turning Toward Robert Mueller

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/03/trump-is-taking-out-his-enemies-and-turning-toward-mueller.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, Guy Kilmore said:

Why are you biased on oak trees?  I didn't ask what you wouldn't be. That is pretty concerning....

:D Someone else got the reference!

Because the very inflexible nature of Oak Trees makes it impossible to reason with them .:P

Which is why I put a Tree related Monty Python Reference. :)

Edited by GAROVORKIN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GAROVORKIN said:

If Mueller actually had something concrete , leaks not withstanding ,  It would have come out by now  in some way shape or form . 

No, it wouldn't.  He would continue the investigation until all leads are exhausted and only then release his findings in a concluding report.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

No, it wouldn't.  He would continue the investigation until all leads are exhausted and only then release his findings in a concluding report.

Things have come out; indictments, plea deals, subpoenas and the negotiation with Trump for questioning.  No leaks needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Nasty LongRider said:

Things have come out; indictments, plea deals, subpoenas and the negotiation with Trump for questioning.  No leaks needed.

But so far, nothing leading to Trump.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

No, it wouldn't.  He would continue the investigation until all leads are exhausted and only then release his findings in a concluding report.

T  If there nothing, then it all goes away, if Mueller has something ,  It will be the biggest political scandal since Watergate , maybe even bigger.  To borrow a well worn Cliche , time will tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Mueller is a professional who from all reports runs a tight ship.  Trump is a washed up TV hack who runs his mouth.  

Edited by Nasty LongRider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GAROVORKIN said:

Because the very inflexible nature of Oak Trees makes it impossible to reason with them .:P

Which is why I put a Tree related Monty Python Reference. :)

When you say it is impossible to reason with an Oak, doesn't that make you an oak as you are inflexible in your judgements?  Why did you go negative?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 


When I queried the authors about the similarity of these analytic approaches, Fishkin agreed. “Our view of the structural differences between the two party coalitions is highly overlapping with the collective view of a number of political scientists, with Grossmann and Hopkins prominent among them,” he said. “Our focus is different in that we are interested in a particular form of political behavior – constitutional hardball – and the incentives and motivations that surround it. Because of our different focus, we end up emphasizing some pieces of the story that a political scientist might not, including the two party coalitions’ rather different views of the Constitution itself."

In many contexts, Pozen said, "it will be a logical fallacy to assume that just because a social or political practice is reciprocal, in the sense that both sides participate, it must also be symmetrical, in the sense that both sides participate in the same way. I get the sense that some observers of constitutional hardball may have noticed Democrats getting into the act and conflated reciprocity with symmetry. Others may not have wanted to touch the symmetry/asymmetry issue because they find it hopelessly ‘political’ or because it is so difficult to measure. For whatever reasons, legal scholarship has been surprisingly quiet on the question of constitutional hardball's partisan dimensions.”

Because the implicit belief in symmetry is so strong — with the added convention of treating both sides equally regardless of evidence — it’s important to grasp the strength of evidence to the contrary. There are four reasons the authors give why an asymmetric account makes sense. First, certain GOP hardball tactics haven’t migrated over to the Democratic side, while Republicans have readily used Democratic tactics when given a change. Specifically:

Democrats have not threatened credibly to default on the national debt.
They have not enacted measures likely to suppress Republican voter turnout in federal elections.
They have not fired their own hand-picked Senate parliamentarian in an effort to overturn rulings that displeased them.
They have not appointed agency heads known to oppose the agencies they will be leading.
And they have not they impeached a President.

 

Tilting the playing field: How Republican “constitutional hardball” has reshaped politics
Stealing a Supreme Court seat is just one example: Republicans have long believed they must play dirty to win

https://www.salon.com/2018/03/18/tilting-the-playing-field-how-republican-constitutional-hardball-has-reshaped-politics/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Martell Spy said:

Tilting the playing field: How Republican “constitutional hardball” has reshaped politics
Stealing a Supreme Court seat is just one example: Republicans have long believed they must play dirty to win

https://www.salon.com/2018/03/18/tilting-the-playing-field-how-republican-constitutional-hardball-has-reshaped-politics/

I've been of the general opinion for awhile, that if you give a Republican clown an inch, he'll take a mile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

No, it wouldn't.  He would continue the investigation until all leads are exhausted and only then release his findings in a concluding report.

Given the extent this investigation has exhibited thus far, I am not sure it that it can reach a state where all leads are exhausted within a reasonable time (e.g. one decade). This isn't about Trump and Russia anymore, it's about anything and anyone even vaguely related to Trump and there's a whole lot of these entities.

Incidentally, for the people hoping that the US would intervene in Russian elections, this either didn't happen or it had no effect whatsoever: the results are currently being counted and both exit polls and early results show Putin winning with over 70% of the vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GAROVORKIN said:

But so far, nothing leading to Trump.

 

The top of the food chain is always last in an investigation like this. You build from the bottom up. Every white collar investigation is the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×