Jump to content

The Political Thread - Browncoat edition... down with the Alliance!


Recommended Posts

Hi everyone, if you want to do some charity work. Figure out for me whether that's worth reading. Kthxbye.

forgot we had to keep simple for some.

 

translate relevant portion for the adhd crowd:

 

the majority o' recent joint chiefs of staff came from helot families and the current US president is a helot who not only avoided military service, but has public ridiculed spartans. the spartan/helot dichotomy don't hold save as a joke, but we didn't see a smiley, so...

 

edit: added video clip

 

 

figured reading a couple lines o' text might still be too strenuous for a few folks, but who doesn't like otter videos?  

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited by Gromnir

"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

"Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Malcom X makes some great points here....

Just what do you think you're doing?! You dare to come between me and my prey? Is it a habit of yours to scurry about, getting in the way and causing bother?

 

What are you still bothering me for? I'm a Knight. I'm not interested in your childish games. I need my rest.

 

Begone! Lest I draw my nail...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Politicians acting hard is always hilarious.

  • Like 1

Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra

Link to post
Share on other sites

Politicians acting hard is always hilarious.

 

can't expect 'em all to be like lincoln.

 

 

HA! Good Fun!

"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

"Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)

Link to post
Share on other sites
And I thought Ted Cruz tweeting his porn was weird.

"I am the expert, asshat." - Hurlshot

"I'm fine with humanity being wiped out" - majestic

"I won't say what just in case KaineParker is reading" - Bartimaeus

"Oh no! Is there super secret ending as well? I don’t care." - Wormerine

Link to post
Share on other sites

Opening statement of Michael Cohen, Trump's longtime personal lawyer who was convicted on a variety of charges a few months ago by Special Counsel Mueller, to Congress in tomorrow morning's publicly televised testimony and hearing (with some material evidence to be displayed to boot): https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000169-2d31-dc75-affd-bfb99a790001

I read the entire thing. Fun read. I set a recording for CSPAN tomorrow morning so I can watch the followup.

Some important bits from the opening statement:

  1. "Mr. Trump put Mr. Stone on the speakerphone. Mr. Stone told Mr. Trump that he had just gotten off the phone with Julian Assange and that Mr. Assange told Mr. Stone that within a couple of days there would be a massive dump of emails that would damage Hillary Clinton’s campaign."
  2. "The President of the United States thus wrote a personal check for the payment of hush money as part of a criminal scheme to violate campaign finance laws. You can find the details of that scheme, directed by Mr. Trump, in the pleadings in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York....I am providing a copy of a $35,000 check that President Trump personally signed from his personal bank account on August 1, 2017 – when he was President of the United States...to reimburse me...for the illegal hush money I paid on his behalf."
  3. "In conversations we had during the campaign, at the same time I was actively negotiating in Russia for him, he would look me in the eye and tell me there’s no business in Russia and then go out and lie to the American people by saying the same thing. In his way, he was telling me to lie....There were at least a half-dozen times between the Iowa Caucus in January 2016 and the end of June when he would ask me “How’s it going in Russia?” – referring to the Moscow Tower project. You need to know that Mr. Trump’s personal lawyers reviewed and edited my statement to Congress about the timing of the Moscow Tower negotiations before I gave it."
  4. "Yet, last fall I pled guilty in federal court to felonies for the benefit of, at the direction of, and in coordination with Individual #1. For the record: Individual #1 is President Donald J. Trump."

  5. "Donald Trump is a man who ran for office to make his brand great, not to make our country great. He had no desire or intention to lead this nation - only to market himself and to build his wealth and power. Mr. Trump would often say, this campaign was going to be the “greatest infomercial in political history.” He never expected to win the primary. He never expected to win the general election. The campaign - for him - was always a marketing opportunity."
  6. "Mr. Trump directed me to find a straw bidder to purchase a portrait of him that was being auctioned at an Art Hamptons Event. The objective was to ensure that his portrait, which was going to be auctioned last, would go for the highest price of any portrait that afternoon. The portrait was purchased by the fake bidder for $60,000. Mr. Trump directed the Trump Foundation, which is supposed to be a charitable organization, to repay the fake bidder, despite keeping the art for himself. Please see Exhibit 3B to my testimony."

Still no direct evidence of collusion, but there are other things to be concerned about, to say the least, regardless.

Edited by Bartimaeus
Link to post
Share on other sites

Opening statement of Michael Cohen, Trump's longtime personal lawyer who was convicted on a variety of charges a few months ago by Special Counsel Mueller, to Congress in tomorrow morning's publicly televised testimony and hearing (with some material evidence to be displayed to boot): https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000169-2d31-dc75-affd-bfb99a790001

 

I read the entire thing. Fun read. I set a recording for CSPAN tomorrow morning so I can watch the followup.

 

(snip)

 

Still no direct evidence of collusion, but there are other things to be concerned about, to say the least, regardless.

 

cohen and committee members has been informed russia is verboten, which is disappointing, but ain't surprising as mueller ain't finished. 

 

am actual a bit curious 'bout how much o' what is presumably sdny subject matter appears to be on the table. 

 

dunno. makes us think o' flea circus.  folks is gonna imagine all kinda stuff into being, while the real testimony is limited to behind closed doors.

 

HA! Good Fun!

"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

"Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)

Link to post
Share on other sites

So does that mean anything happens to Trump or is that just some more hot air leading to nothing?

"only when you no-life you can exist forever, because what does not live cannot die."

Link to post
Share on other sites

So does that mean anything happens to Trump or is that just some more hot air leading to nothing?

Too soon to tell. Absent something tangible impeachment is extremely unlikely. And futile given the makeup of the Senate. And to tell the truth ill advised with an election around the corner no matter what. The Dems would be better served getting all the dirt out in the open than they would be actually doing anything about ti once it is. But... being who they are I suspect they won't be able to help themselves. 

Get off my lawn!

Link to post
Share on other sites

So does that mean anything happens to Trump or is that just some more hot air leading to nothing?

 

What Guard Dog said, but also at this point, I personally believe that so long as Trump has roughly at least 30-35% approval rating, the rest of the GOP by and large will feel like they can't afford to criticize the guy (nevermind impeachment proceedings) no matter the evidence or how personally objectionable they find him. They're politicians, after all, and turning on the person that a large percentage of their voting base continue to think of as "their guy" is political suicide, regardless of anything else. Early into his presidency, I thought there might be a hope of impeaching him, but that was before I realized just the amount of deplorable behavior that the party of "personal responsibility" and "family values" was willing to accept so long as he doesn't have a (D) next to his name, so I think we're set to see a full term from him no matter what happens. I'm still excited to read Mueller's report even so, but I don't think he'd be impeached by the current Republican party even if it had a hundred smoking guns' worth of evidence.

 

Nixon lost his presidency after his approval ratings sat at a brutal 25% for months leading up to the 1974 elections with no end in sight. I think you'd need something like that for anything to change.

Edited by Bartimaeus
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Nixon left office because they had him on tape discussing the Watergate break in. It was after the fact but there was still more than enough incontrovertible evidence of conspiracy that impeachment and removal was a certainty. I don't think any approval rating would have saved him. They way he went out at least ensured pardons all around and saved face for the GOP a little bit. 

 

One thought on impeachment. It's been done twice in hour history. Both times it failed. And in both instances while there was a violation of the law it really did not rise to the level of severity that made it worth the trouble it caused. In Johnson's case the radical republican caucus in Congress was an example of the inmates running the prison. They would likely have turned on Lincoln with equal vigor had he not been murdered. Johnson was impeached for making recess appointments. Appointments they could have removed in the next session so they were just gunning for him and that was the excuse. Clinton they had dead to rights on perjury but that is a crime that is rarely prosecuted and even more rarely convicted on as a stand alone charge in the US. It's usually a throw in. Don't get me wrong, it has teeth. You can spend 5 years in prison for each count. But according to JTSOR there have been just 314 prosecuted cases of perjury as a sole indictment since 2016 that resulted in 112 convictions. So even thought they had Clinton it probably wasn't worth the trouble to try (and fail) to remove him.

 

Besides, if they succeed we'd have had Al Gore as President. You really need to beware what you wish for!

 

But if you do it you better be damn sure you have a smoking gun everyone will believe. Because the next time your guy is in the White House and the other guys ontrol Congress til will come for tat.

Edited by Guard Dog
  • Like 1

Get off my lawn!

Link to post
Share on other sites

So does that mean anything happens to Trump or is that just some more hot air leading to nothing?

Trump is a billionaire and a politician, ain't **** gonna happen to him unless the US decides to invade itself.

"I am the expert, asshat." - Hurlshot

"I'm fine with humanity being wiped out" - majestic

"I won't say what just in case KaineParker is reading" - Bartimaeus

"Oh no! Is there super secret ending as well? I don’t care." - Wormerine

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Nixon left office because they had him on tape discussing the Watergate break in. It was after the fact but there was still more than enough incontrovertible evidence of conspiracy that impeachment and removal was a certainty. I don't think any approval rating would have saved him. They way he went out at least ensured pardons all around and saved face for the GOP a little bit. 

 

One thought on impeachment. It's been done twice in hour history. Both times it failed. And in both instances while there was a violation of the law it really did not rise to the level of severity that made it worth the trouble it caused. In Johnson's case the radical republican caucus in Congress was an example of the inmates running the prison. They would likely have turned on Lincoln with equal vigor had he not been murdered. Johnson was impeached for making recess appointments. Appointments they could have removed in the next session so they were just gunning for him and that was the excuse. Clinton they had dead to rights on perjury but that is a crime that is rarely prosecuted and even more rarely convicted on as a stand alone charge in the US. It's usually a throw in. Don't get me wrong, it has teeth. You can spend 5 years in prison for each count. But according to JTSOR there have been just 314 prosecuted cases of perjury as a sole indictment since 2016 that resulted in 112 convictions. So even thought they had Clinton it probably wasn't worth the trouble to try (and fail) to remove him.

 

Besides, if they succeed we'd have had Al Gore as President. You really need to beware what you wish for!

 

But if you do it you better be damn sure you have a smoking gun everyone will believe. Because the next time your guy is in the White House and the other guys ontrol Congress til will come for tat.

 

Yeah, as racist and terrible as Johnson was, the Johnson one was partisan as all hell, but what if the President is a real dirty piece of **** that needs impeaching? That's the problem with the system. Not neccesarily saying impeachment should be made easy, but the President shouldn't be above the law, as civillian or politician.

 

On Al Gore, I get the feeling that the Republicans at the time either didn't care or definetly didn't take that into account as they just wanted their piece of meat, so to speak.

Link to post
Share on other sites

not that I agree with everything but its interesting (future, geopolitics):

 

  • Like 1

I'm the enemy, 'cause I like to think, I like to read. I'm into freedom of speech, and freedom of choice. I'm the kinda guy that likes to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder, "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecue ribs with the side-order of gravy fries?" I want high cholesterol! I wanna eat bacon, and butter, and buckets of cheese, okay?! I wanna smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section! I wanna run naked through the street, with green Jell-O all over my body, reading Playboy magazine. Why? Because I suddenly may feel the need to, okay, pal? I've SEEN the future. Do you know what it is? It's a 47-year-old virgin sitting around in his beige pajamas, drinking a banana-broccoli shake, singing "I'm an Oscar Meyer Wiene"

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Well, Nixon left office because they had him on tape discussing the Watergate break in. It was after the fact but there was still more than enough incontrovertible evidence of conspiracy that impeachment and removal was a certainty. I don't think any approval rating would have saved him. They way he went out at least ensured pardons all around and saved face for the GOP a little bit. 

 

One thought on impeachment. It's been done twice in hour history. Both times it failed. And in both instances while there was a violation of the law it really did not rise to the level of severity that made it worth the trouble it caused. In Johnson's case the radical republican caucus in Congress was an example of the inmates running the prison. They would likely have turned on Lincoln with equal vigor had he not been murdered. Johnson was impeached for making recess appointments. Appointments they could have removed in the next session so they were just gunning for him and that was the excuse. Clinton they had dead to rights on perjury but that is a crime that is rarely prosecuted and even more rarely convicted on as a stand alone charge in the US. It's usually a throw in. Don't get me wrong, it has teeth. You can spend 5 years in prison for each count. But according to JTSOR there have been just 314 prosecuted cases of perjury as a sole indictment since 2016 that resulted in 112 convictions. So even thought they had Clinton it probably wasn't worth the trouble to try (and fail) to remove him.

 

Besides, if they succeed we'd have had Al Gore as President. You really need to beware what you wish for!

 

But if you do it you better be damn sure you have a smoking gun everyone will believe. Because the next time your guy is in the White House and the other guys ontrol Congress til will come for tat.

 

Yeah, as racist and terrible as Johnson was, the Johnson one was partisan as all hell, but what if the President is a real dirty piece of **** that needs impeaching? That's the problem with the system. Not neccesarily saying impeachment should be made easy, but the President shouldn't be above the law, as civillian or politician.

 

On Al Gore, I get the feeling that the Republicans at the time either didn't care or definetly didn't take that into account as they just wanted their piece of meat, so to speak.

 

I don't know if this is true or not but I do remember the speculation that the Clinton impeachment was payback for Nixon. It sounds so petty that it actually is credible!  :lol:

 

We have had some genuinely terrible human beings as President. Hard to say right now where Trump ranks among the likes of Taylor, Pierce, Harding, etc. But Congress needs to be careful when it comes to removing them. Don't forget they are substituting their judgement over the millions of voters that put that individual there. There is a blowback for playing the role of Brutus and Cassius on the Senate floor. So removing someone for being a POS unfit for office is dangerous. But if they have actually committed a crime then it becomes easier IF and only IF the magnitude of the crime is so large that an overwhelming majority of people will agree it needs to be done. You are right , the President is not above the law but some offences, like Perjury I guess, are not sever enough to be worth the effort.

 

We do have a remedy for the POS presidents who haven't violated the law. It's called elections and term limits.  

Edited by Guard Dog

Get off my lawn!

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/cohen-testifies-he-has-knowledge-of-other-illegal-acts-by-trump/vi-BBUahCj?ocid=spartanntp

 

is actual the most important part o' testimony we heard.  the stuff cohen were allowed to speak o' were stuff sdny and mueller didn't care 'bout anymore.  now cohen may be full o' p00p, and he sure as heck ain't running the sdny investigation, so would be dangerous to read too much into comments 'bout the sdny investigation, but the clip 'bove kinda reinforces our earlier observations 'bout the flea circus and the sdny aspects o' testimony.

 

"Asked about the last time he and Mr. Trump spoke, Cohen said he couldn't elaborate.

 

""Unfortunately, this topic is actually something that's being investigated right now by the Southern District of New York and I've been asked by them not to talk about these issues," Cohen said. Asked if there are any other illegal acts or wrongdoings federal prosecutors are investigating, Cohen responded, "yes.""

 

is this kinda cohen testimony, which while less salacious, intrigues us most.

 

people will parse testimony, but am thinking nothing much happened today.  folks who thought trump were a conman and a racist before testimony had their opinions cemented.  those who don't care trump is a racist conman didn't sudden change their opinions 'cause o' canceled checks and letters to schools.  nothing to see save the flea circus.

 

https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a26555074/who-is-allen-weisselberg-donald-trump-accountant-chief-financial-officer/

 

cohen gets attention, but weisselberg is the guy who interests us most.  guy were granted immunity.  is not like tv courtroom dramas wherein the clever criminal gets immunity, gives the prosecutor worthless info, and then walks away free and clear. you don't get immunity 'less you need immunity. you don't get immunity unless you got something to give. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited by Gromnir

"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

"Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)

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