Jump to content
Tywin et al.

US Politics: It’s Not A Crime If Your Feelings Got Hurt

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

Sanders completely pinned to the wall as her lie is exposed, calls it a "slip of the tongue." I guess is the new Alternative facts. She should be put under oath at all times, or just assume if her mouth moves she is lying.

Slip of the tongue happens once. She’s repeated that lie several times.

9 minutes ago, Zorral said:

I haven’t read the report, but it’s also my understanding that it does not touch on Trump’s finances at all, nor the Trump Organization’s.  

Hopefully SDNY is feeling thirsty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing about Sarah Sanders is that she isn't even a very good liar. It's obvious when she knows she's saying something that is flat out untrue. Of course, we have a large sample to analyse there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, mormont said:

The thing about Sarah Sanders is that she isn't even a very good liar. It's obvious when she knows she's saying something that is flat out untrue. Of course, we have a large sample to analyse there. 

You shut your bear mouth! Michele Bachmann recently said that Trump is the most biblical and godly president there’s ever been or ever will be, so SHS isn’t lying. We all know that good Christians cannot lie if they hope to go to heaven, after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Kalbear said:

The reason Clinton got impeached over a blowjob is because Republicans controlled the House. The reason that Trump isn't going to be is because Democrats control the House (and are, at least right this instant, not choosing to impeach). And the reason they're not choosing to impeach is that they do not believe that they can get a conviction. (which is almost certainly accurate). 

Clinton would not have been impeached if the Democrats had controlled the House, but he was NOT impeached over his sexual behavior. He was impeached for LYING about that behavior in court. Very few members of Congress of either party back then were really concerned about the sexual exploitation aspects of his conduct. The Republicans just thought the perjury was a "gotcha" to get rid of him, not the actual sexual activity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

You shut your bear mouth! Michele Bachmann recently said that Trump is the most biblical and godly president there’s ever been or ever will be, so SHS isn’t lying. We all know that good Christians cannot lie if they hope to go to heaven, after all.

I know you are being facetious, but your last statement does not fit Christian theology at all. The doctrine of atonement covers that -- and it seems like this is really appropriate to bring this up on Good Friday itself. Not all Christians have a simplistic fundamentalist understanding of atonement as being "substitutionary", but all Christians do believe Jesus's death on the cross is in some way related to human salvation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Ormond said:

I know you are being facetious, but your last statement does not fit Christian theology at all. The doctrine of atonement covers that -- and it seems like this is really appropriate to bring this up on Good Friday itself. Not all Christians have a simplistic fundamentalist understanding of atonement as being "substitutionary", but all Christians do believe Jesus's death on the cross is in some way related to human salvation.

(i) Per a quick, lazy Google search, that doctrine does not apply to all sects, including Sander’s, and (ii) the last statement is not correct, because, well, Trump.

:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, larrytheimp said:

I've seen a few different people reporting a militia rounding up asylum seekers and immigrants near the border at gunpoint and then calling border patrol.  It's been all over twitter today.  This is seriously fucked up if the videos are what they seem to be.  ACLU has referenced one of the videos and linked it too also I'm assuming this is actually happening.  Wtf.  

Charge these fuckers with kidnapping.

 

https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/apr/18/new-mexico-migrants-armed-militia-detained?__twitter_impression=true

Absolutely charge them with kidnapping.  Hope they get put under the jail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Absolutely charge them with kidnapping.  Hope they get put under the jail.

They'd be pardoned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

They'd be pardoned.

It’s not kidnapping if you’re rounding up people who aren’t REAL Americans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

They'd be pardoned.

Kidnapping is a State not a Federal Crime.  The President lacks the power to pardon people who commit State crimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Kidnapping is a State not a Federal Crime.  The President lacks the power to pardon people who commit State crimes.

For now. When it becomes abundantly clear that Trump needs to pardon himself and his family at the state level, Republicans will find a way to make it so. It is known.

Share this post


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

Very few members of Congress of either party back then were really concerned about the sexual exploitation aspects of his conduct.

This isn't really true.  There are still plenty of right wingers to this day that cite Clinton's sexual conduct as a touchstone moment in the debasing of the presidency, as if plenty of his predecessors didn't do close to the exact same thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

For now. When it becomes abundantly clear that Trump needs to pardon himself and his family at the state level, Republicans will find a way to make it so. It is known.

That’s easier said than done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Altherion said:

This is true, but it's misleading: the impact of the bad campaign is much larger than any other cause. When one side has twice as much money as the other, it shouldn't be so close. Also, a Presidential election attracts interference like a manure pile attracts flies. For example, Trump was also interfered with by foreign operatives (e.g. the former MI6 agent whose dossier started this whole collusion silliness) and there were people in the Balkans posting for both sides -- not because they cared either way, but because this made them more money than anything else they legally had access to.

I basically agree with you here: I don't think it would be as harmful, but nor would be very useful.

Money is something but there is clearly a law of diminishing returns, especially when the media gives you free press for literally everything you do. Clinton dominated no conversations except the email scandal and Trump dominated every conversation, no matter what it was. Money only matters so much. Clinton's campaign made a ton of mistakes but saying "having twice as much money means it shouldn't be close" without recognizing the dynamics of the race and the free and constant media attention Trump had for every rally, every statement, every minute of every day seems a bit disingenuous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Fragile Bird said:

Actually, reporters should start asking her, whenever she gives a response, if her answer is true or if she's lying.

It's like the old logic puzzle .....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting (obligatory one poll shouldn’t be too heavily relied on yada yada):  

Quote

The poll, conducted Thursday afternoon to Friday morning, is the first national survey to measure the response from the American public after the U.S. Justice Department released Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s 448-page report that recounted numerous occasions in which Trump may have interfered with the investigation.

According to the poll, 37 percent of adults in the United States approved of Trump’s performance in office, down from 40 percent in a similar poll conducted on April 15 and matching the lowest level of the year. That is also down from 43 percent in a poll conducted shortly after U.S. Attorney General William Barr circulated a summary of the report in March.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-poll/trump-approval-drops-3-points-to-2019-low-after-release-of-mueller-report-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKCN1RV16S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it looks like Obama takes plenty of blame on the Russian Interference bit:

 https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/19/opinions/mueller-report-obama-jennings/index.html?fbclid=IwAR2eaHr_V2KSGfdIU9fV8smHCt1Jh63jQK4iRNVnLT_5obW_p8SvEeJ1io8

 

The Mueller report flatly states that Russia began interfering in American democracy in 2014. Over the next couple of years, the effort blossomed into a robust attempt to interfere in our 2016 presidential election. The Obama administration knew this was going on and yet did nothing. In 2016, Obama's National Security Adviser Susan Rice told her staff to "stand down" and "knock it off" as they drew up plans to "strike back" against the Russians, according to an account from Michael Isikoff and David Corn in their book "Russian Roulette: The Inside Story of Putin's War on America and the Election of Donald Trump".

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, larrytheimp said:

Warren just said she supports impeachment.

I just saw that --

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2019/apr/19/mueller-report-donald-trump-latest-news-live-updates-subpoena?

Quote

 

To ignore a President’s repeated efforts to obstruct an investigation into his own disloyal behavior would inflict great and lasting damage on this country, and it would suggest that both the current and future Presidents would be free to abuse their power in similar ways.

The severity of this misconduct demands that elected officials in both parties set aside political considerations and do their constitutional duty. That means the House should initiate impeachment proceedings against the President of the United States.”

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, ThinkerX said:

This 'hot take' is a fucking joke.  What the fuck were they supposed to do?  The entire thing seems to be written from the angle of two Russia specialists on the White House Cybersecurity team who were pissed that Obama didn't go wit their counterstrike plans.  Trump and the entire right wing would have flipped out about how Obama was trying to influence the election if they went public earlier.  Fuck, when they tried to warn state electoral officials to check their security, that shithead in Georgia told them to fuck off.  

This is so fucking stupid and transparent.  

 

Seriously, what was supposed to happen?  

Would almost be funny if this was just trying to troll Trumpistas into admitting Russia was successful, seems like clickbait to me.

 

eta: the headline is so predictably misleading and has no payoff.  it never does tell us how the Obama team blew the Russia response.

Edited by larrytheimp

Share this post


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

×