U. S. Politics: A noun, a verb and no collusion.

[Tywin et al.]

1 hour ago, Shryke said:

I'm betting this is squarely aimed at voter suppression. The GOP, if they didn't notice before, certainly noticed during the 2016 primary that "Clinton hates black people" style attacks seemed to be getting real traction and so they are trying the same style thing. Trying to peel off black support for Democratic candidates at the margins.

It’s important to remember that Trump was losing badly until Bannon implemented the scorched Earth tactic. Once they did that, the entire focus of the campaign was throwing as much mud as possible at Clinton. Suppressing likely Democratic voters is the best thing going for Republicans at this point. If everyone voted, they’d never win again outside of rural areas.

[Kalbear]

3 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

It’s important to remember that Trump was losing badly until Bannon implemented the scorched Earth tactic. Once they did that, the entire focus of the campaign was throwing as much mud as possible at Clinton. Suppressing likely Democratic voters is the best thing going for Republicans at this point. If everyone voted, they’d never win again outside of rural areas.

Eh. The important thing to note is that a whole lot of supposed undecideds were Republicans who came home to vote for the Republican candidate, largely because that's what they do. 

[Martell Spy]

Worlds Apart

How neoliberalism shapes the global economy and limits the power of democracies

https://newrepublic.com/article/147810/worlds-apart-neoliberalism-shapes-global-economy

Quote

The current rules all but ensure that governments act in the interests of capital, since, if businesses do not like a certain country’s policies (say, a proposal that corporations pay their fair share of taxes), they can disrupt the economy by abruptly withdrawing from that country. Preserving the rights of capital is the goal, even when that means sacrificing democratic demands. That is why our world is a more neoliberal one than it once was, and why it matters. However fractious and internally contradictory neoliberal thought may be, and however overused it can be as a term, it is describing something real.

 

[Tywin et al.]

3 hours ago, Kalbear said:

Eh. The important thing to note is that a whole lot of supposed undecideds were Republicans who came home to vote for the Republican candidate, largely because that's what they do. 

Well that too, along with a number of other variables. But it would be a mistake to undervalue just how effective the scorched earth tactic was. It suppressed Clinton’s vote while simultaneously bringing Republicans back into the fold because their hatred of her is stronger than their love for Trump was.

[Yukle]

I saw a few things on the news relating to Lord Drumpf's ability to pardon.

There are a few points I was wondering.

1) Accepting a pardon is an admission of guilt, so if he pardoned Cohen, would he have to specify the exact crimes Mueller would charge him with?

2) If Cohen accepts a pardon, can that admission of guilt be used as evidence against co-conspirators?

3) If a state and the federal government are both pursuing criminal charges for the same crimes, does one or the other have to drop the charges so that the person isn't prosecuted twice?

4) To expand on 3), if Trump pardons himself of all federal crimes of any kind, could NY state still continue its investigations, or would that contravene the idea that he has already seen legal justice?

[Martell Spy]

Macron Takes Not-So-Subtle Shots at Trump in Speech to Congress

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/04/macron-takes-shots-at-trump-in-speech-to-congress.html

Quote

 

Macron began his speech with a lengthy rundown of the historical connection between France and the U.S., eventually working his way to the present. That’s when he began criticizing Trump without using his name.

Macron said the world must embrace multilateralism and reject “isolationism, withdrawal, and nationalism.” In a clear rebuke of Trump’s “America First” tendencies, he added: “It can be tempting to us as a temporary remedy for our fears. But closing the door to the world will not stop the evolution of the world.”

He went on to criticize leaders who attempt to capitalize on “fear and anger,” a group that would include both President Trump and Marine Le Pen, Macron’s right-wing opponent in the 2017 election who won Trump’s support.

On the issue of climate change, Macron did not mince words. “We are killing our planet,” he said. “Let’s face it: There is no Planet B.” His play on words drew a standing ovation from Democrats, while Republicans remained seated.

 

 

[Mexal]

6 minutes ago, Yukle said:

I saw a few things on the news relating to Lord Drumpf's ability to pardon.

There are a few points I was wondering.

1) Accepting a pardon is an admission of guilt, so if he pardoned Cohen, would he have to specify the exact crimes Mueller would charge him with?

2) If Cohen accepts a pardon, can that admission of guilt be used as evidence against co-conspirators?

3) If a state and the federal government are both pursuing criminal charges for the same crimes, does one or the other have to drop the charges so that the person isn't prosecuted twice?

4) To expand on 3), if Trump pardons himself of all federal crimes of any kind, could NY state still continue its investigations, or would that contravene the idea that he has already seen legal justice?

Just as a FYI, this doesn't have anything to do with Mueller. The SDNY is the office investigating Cohen.

Not sure on 1/2.

On 3, federal crimes take precedent and if he's pardoned at a federal level, NY State wouldn't be able him to charge the same crimes due to their double jeopardy laws. It's why Schneidermann asked the state government to change the law and why NY State hasn't charged anyone with anything.

[Fragile Bird]

Lol, Michael Cohen has filed a declaration in the Stormy Daniels case that he is taking the 5th. Because he's under criminal investigation in New York.

What did Trump say? Anyone who takes the 5th is obviously guilty? 

[Yukle]

11 minutes ago, Mexal said:

Just as a FYI, this doesn't have anything to do with Mueller. The SDNY is the office investigating Cohen.

Oh. It all blurs into one for me.

I love watching Trump essentially do absolutely nothing but say (to this effect, not exact words), "Cohen is my bitch. He won't say a thing. He loves me and I hate him."

Which he might as well say. You'd have to be so spineless to keep working for a guy who doesn't pay you on time (if at all) and keeps letting you take the blame.

[Yukle]

Fascinating article I just read on a possible Mueller response if he's fired:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/25/opinion/robert-mueller-legal-whistleblowing.html

It's behind a paywall. If you can't be bothered clearing your brower's cache (the way around the paywall if you've hit five articles), here are the crucial points:

Quote

If Mr. Mueller is fired, he and his team would not have to do anything illegal to disclose classified information and ensure that the American people learned the truth.

...

 Mr. Mueller could lawfully take all the evidence he had collected — even the most highly classified materials — straight to Congress. 

...

 It is illegal to send classified documents across the regular internet, and Congress does not have access to the secure email system used by the executive branch. Therefore, someone with proper security clearance would probably need to manually transport the evidence — hard copy pages or encrypted hard drives — from the Special Counsel’s secure compartmented information facility to Capitol Hill, less than a mile away.

...

 if the evidence safely reached Congress, the president probably could not contain it. The 37 members of Congress on the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, as well as their staffs, are authorized to receive the most sensitive of classified information. Committee members from both parties — not just the Republican majority — would get access.

...

If Mr. Trump attempted any legal action, courts would almost certainly dismiss it on separation-of-powers grounds.

...

Mr. Mueller could also write an article describing what he learned, and submit it to the Department of Justice for prepublication review for classified material. If the department insists on redacting even one word, Mr. Mueller could sue to enforce his own First Amendment rights to communicate with the American people on matters of public concern. 

...

These mechanisms are imperfect and would produce uncertain results. And they’re still risky. A whistle-blower giving a media interview could inadvertently disclose classified information and wind up in prison.

But these mechanisms are lawful.

 

[Martell Spy]

6 minutes ago, Yukle said:

Oh. It all blurs into one for me.

I love watching Trump essentially do absolutely nothing but say (to this effect, not exact words), "Cohen is my bitch. He won't say a thing. He loves me and I hate him."

Which he might as well say. You'd have to be so spineless to keep working for a guy who doesn't pay you on time (if at all) and keeps letting you take the blame.

Well, he said he'd take a bullet for Mr. Trump. There might be a Whitney Houston/Kevin Costner Bodyguard type thing going on.

Or he could be repaid in favors. If it was me though I wouldn't trust Trump to ever pay anything.

[Tywin et al.]

32 minutes ago, Yukle said:

I saw a few things on the news relating to Lord Drumpf's ability to pardon.

There are a few points I was wondering.

1) Accepting a pardon is an admission of guilt, so if he pardoned Cohen, would he have to specify the exact crimes Mueller would charge him with?

2) If Cohen accepts a pardon, can that admission of guilt be used as evidence against co-conspirators?

3) If a state and the federal government are both pursuing criminal charges for the same crimes, does one or the other have to drop the charges so that the person isn't prosecuted twice?

4) To expand on 3), if Trump pardons himself of all federal crimes of any kind, could NY state still continue its investigations, or would that contravene the idea that he has already seen legal justice?

Also keep in mind, and someone please correct if I'm wrong, that accepting a pardon means you cannot plead the fifth.

[The Anti-Targ]

11 hours ago, Martell Spy said:

Mick Mulvaney Tells Bankers to Pay Up If They Want Favors From Trump

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/04/mulvaney-tells-bankers-pay-up-if-you-want-favors-from-trump.html

 

So Hillary Clinton's problem while Sec State wasn't that she was doing pay to play, it's that she was trying to keep is secret. If you are openly corrupt then I guess what you're doing is throwing out a challenge to your secretly corrupt opponents saying " You wanna go? Cashme ouside mutha fukers!" And of course no one does, because they are all in the pay to play game and they don;t want to be taken down as collateral damage.

[Yukle]

2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Also keep in mind, and someone please correct if I'm wrong, that accepting a pardon means you cannot plead the fifth.

Hmm... surely that would make sense. You're already protected from prosecution, as you've been pardoned. So it'd just be refusal to co-operate since nothing would happen to you no matter what you said.

[lokisnow]

it's always amazing to me just how much (liberal) white people do not want to believe that voter suppression has a substantial negative effect on their numbers. Part of the tribal politics of it all, POC are not part of the white liberal tribe, so things that exclusively target POC are discounted as maybe not really a thing by the liberal white tribe adherents. 

Take Texas for example. Voter suppression there is extensive, because it is done at the level of registration.  To register voters you have to be a texas resident, you have to be available to attend a long an extraordinarily boring class that is not accessibly by public transit, the class is held only once a month, in one location per county, and your ability to register voters expires at the end of every even numbered years. so if national democrats were to invest 10 million dollars getting people qualified to register voters, all of those people would be automatically disqualified at midnight on Dec 31 of 2018, so none of those people you've invested in would be able to register voters for 2020, without repeating the same insane set of requirements a second time.

What this has done is made all white national democrat leaders complicit and totally on board with texas republican goals of not getting people (particularly POC) registered to vote. That means texas' voter electorate is like twenty points more white than than their population, and it is because white democrat leadership actively participates in and promotes republican voter suppression in texas by meekly surrendering to the republican ground rules as simply the uncontestable natural state of things. 

To me, all this means is that texas requires more resources than any other state every cycle, because it is a moral imperative to not cooperate with republican voter suppression schemes--to not be complicit in suppressing your own voters-- fundamentally, fighting the republicans on this is the right thing to do, and something we must do even if it isn't the wonkiest-efficientest use of resources.

[Mexal]

I don't understand. What does white liberals have to do with anything? What is it exactly you'd want them to do?

[Jace, Extat]

Yeah, I make outrageous claims all the time. But I don't know what it is you're wanting Democrats to do? The new drive on voting suppression kicked into gear circa 2011 to my recollection and that's after the R's took back the House.

 

[Martell Spy]

Stick a fork in him. What a moronic pick and a moronic President.

Republican support for Jackson collapses
The VA nominee needs every GOP senator to back him. So far, few are.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/25/jackson-senate-republicans-trump-553693

Quote

But the GOP concern goes even deeper. Three Republican senators, granted anonymity, said they want the White House to withdraw the nomination immediately, calling it a self-inflicted wound that will only get worse with time.

 

[Morpheus]

The nomination always felt like quid pro quo for that ridiculous performance Jackson gave after Trump’s physical where he clearly lied about his weight and amazing genes.

[Fragile Bird]

4 minutes ago, Morpheus said:

The nomination always felt like quid pro quo for that ridiculous performance Jackson gave after Trump’s physical where he clearly lied about his weight and amazing genes.

We all think he lied about the weight, but Trump does have good genes in that his father lived to be 93 and his mother lived to be 88, and with relatively good health, iirc.