Politics Thread

[GoMuskies]

I think everyone can get behind this: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/30/us/politics/obama-trump-protections-lgbt-workers.html?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share

Everyone? Hardly. OK by me, but I am certain there are lots of very disappointed social conservatives.

[SemajParlor]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3yDjylQ5Ps

[GoMuskies]

That damned Jeff Sessions shouldn't have fired Sally Yates then!

Wait....

[Pete Delkus]

I'm curious to the alternative method of refugee admittance, which would be temporary, Syrian safe zones.

When, where & how many is a question everyone will have conflicting views...why not assist in setting up areas, assisted by multi-nation front, where Al-Assad forces and Rebel fighters can't penetrate?

[SemajParlor]

That damned Jeff Sessions shouldn't have fired Sally Yates then!

Wait....

The point is that even this KKK fan club member is more rational than Trump. There's a new Sherriff in town.

[GoMuskies]

Please. Yates knew she was getting fired. If she had resigned, it would have been noble. This? Not so much.

[SemajParlor]

Yes, she's definitely the disingenuous one here.

[94GRAD]

The point is that even this KKK fan club member is more rational than Trump. There's a new Sherriff in town.

LeBron is coming to the rescue?

http://www.foxsports.com/nba/story/lebron-james-goes-off-on-charles-barkley-with-vicious-unfiltered-takedown-013117

[SemajParlor]

LeBron is coming to the rescue?

http://www.foxsports.com/nba/story/lebron-james-goes-off-on-charles-barkley-with-vicious-unfiltered-takedown-013117

Oh wow, did that just happen? What a great takedown. Angry Lebron >>

[GoMuskies]

Yes, she's definitely the disingenuous one here.

She richly deserved her firing.

[SemajParlor]

Ok, I will admit - "Fake Tears" Chuck Schumer nickname is hilarious.

[SemajParlor]

She richly deserved her firing.

If we're being honest, Go - I don't disagree. I have a lot of legitimate issues / concerns with Trump and his Admin. Won't pretend like I care about this one.

[Juice]

Ok, I will admit - "Fake Tears" Chuck Schumer nickname is hilarious.

I will never refer to Schumer as anything else besides Fake Tears Chuck Schumer. It's an absolute fire nickname/insult.

[SemajParlor]

I will never refer to Schumer as anything else besides Fake Tears Chuck Schumer. It's an absolute fire nickname/insult.

Lyin Ted Cruz, Crooked Hillary, Crooked Media, Failing New York Times, Fake Tears Chuck…my favorite is still Little Marco. LMAO this guy is President!

[Juice]

Lyin Ted Cruz, Crooked Hillary, Crooked Media, Failing New York Times, Fake Tears Chuck…my favorite is still Little Marco. LMAO this guy is President!

Little Marco is good too. It's so demoralizing. I'd be pissed if someone called me Little [name] all the time.

[Pete Delkus]

Drink the last sip from "The Muslim Ban" or "Extreme Vetting" news story, depending what side you're on, and get ready for tonights SC nomination.

Then, get ready for Fake Tears Chuck to go ballistic when Republicans, use the door that was opened by the Democrats when they eliminated the filibuster for limetime appointments, and went nuclear in 2013.

Again, depending ide your on, the Nuclear option worked for the Democrats, including the D.C. Circuit Liberal judge, Nina Pillard, who forced the Little Sisters of the Poor to cover the contraception manadate in Obamacare. So Trump, if he decides to go Nuclear, he'll need only 50 senate votes.

Democrats set the precedent in 2013, watch what could possibly happen over the next few months....

[X-band '01]

What would be funny is if Trump decided to nominate Merrick Garland once Ruth Bader Ginsberg's seat becomes vacant.

[GoMuskies]

What would be funny is if Trump decided to nominate Merrick Garland once Ruth Bader Ginsberg's seat becomes vacant.

Or....today even.

[Caf]

Or....today even.

I have a better chance of being nominated today. (I am not Neil Gorsuch or Thomas Hardiman)

[bobbiemcgee]

I think we get gorsuck

[SemajParlor]

He'll be appointing one of the referees from Monday Night Raw

[ArizonaXUGrad]

I think we get gorsuck

After reading his opinions regarding assisted suicide I could not have said it better.

[GoMuskies]

After reading his opinions regarding assisted suicide I could not have said it better.

Ooh, the BIG issues of the day.

[X-man]

I have a better chance of being nominated today. (I am not Neil Gorsuch or Thomas Hardiman)

Sadly, I agree.

[Juice]

https://twitter.com/kattykaybbc/status/826541070783758336

[SemajParlor]

Well if there's one thing this election has taught us is that polls on a national scale are accurate predictors of what the country is feeling.

[SemajParlor]

But in all seriousness, are those numbers making that much of a statement? They are fairly in line with his approval / disapproval.

[paulxu]

Reminds me of the Iraq fiasco.
You spend months ginning up the fear, and it works.
Nevermind whether the fear is rational, or even supported by facts.
Sharia law is coming! Write some laws, head for the hills, whatever.
You get the fear crap going and you can get away with almost anything.
FDR was so right.

The only check left on this madness are the Republicans in Congress.
Maybe Trump pissed them off by using their staff without telling them.
One can hope.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

Ooh, the BIG issues of the day.

Do you make any valid points or just spout off useless drivel like most internet heroes? Seriously, do you know his stance on the issue? It's pretty extreme. It probably mirrors other highly religious issues as well. I get you are in Trumps pants, but step back and realize we are on a path back to the 50s. Instead of Eisenhower, we are going to have McCarthy.

[GoMuskies]

Do you make any valid points or just spout off useless drivel like most internet heroes? Seriously, do you know his stance on the issue? It's pretty extreme. It probably mirrors other highly religious issues as well. I get you are in Trumps pants, but step back and realize we are on a path back to the 50s. Instead of Eisenhower, we are going to have McCarthy.

Lol. You got me. All about the Trump. It's been at least two pages on this thread since I've called him an idiot.

Sorry that assisted suicide doesn't make my litmus test list.

[Strange Brew]

Do you make any valid points or just spout off useless drivel like most internet heroes? Seriously, do you know his stance on the issue? It's pretty extreme. It probably mirrors other highly religious issues as well. I get you are in Trumps pants, but step back and realize we are on a path back to the 50s. Instead of Eisenhower, we are going to have McCarthy.

Funny, you defined yourself in the first sentence and provided the evidence you are what you accuse Go of there after. That was pretty fantastic. Well done.

[Nigel Tufnel]

Not sure if goes here...but it's political. Absolutely devastated that Wilmington and Clinton County didn't get that Amazon business. 1.4 billion investment into the air park and 2700 new jobs to a county that lost 10000 jobs when DHL left. Poop. My brother in law has been working close on this deal and has killed himself the last year and a half a half. He is crushed. Pilot strike before Christmas didn't help. But I think the politics are what killed that deal. Now northern Kentucky gets the money and jobs. The community could have really used that punch in the arm. Instead, the community got kicked in the groin. Sucks.

[Juice]

Akash Chougule ‏@AkashJC 2h2 hours ago
Neil Gorsuch was confirmed by the Senate *unanimously* in 2006. Now let's see which Democrats decide to play petty politics this time.

And here are all the current and former Democrat senators who confirmed Gorsuch https://twitter.com/AndrewWMullins/status/826598116904333312

Such names as: Obama, Clinton, Schumer, Biden, Durbin...

[Lloyd Braun]

Akash Chougule ‏@AkashJC 2h2 hours ago
Neil Gorsuch was confirmed by the Senate *unanimously* in 2006. Now let's see which Democrats decide to play petty politics this time.

And here are all the current and former Democrat senators who confirmed Gorsuch https://twitter.com/AndrewWMullins/status/826598116904333312

Such names as: Obama, Clinton, Schumer, Biden, Durbin...

So you are quick to criticize democrats being hypocritical.... but fail to recognize the republicans who set the precedent?

[Juice]

So you are quick to criticize democrats being hypocritical.... but fail to recognize the republicans who set the precedent?

What precedent? Because I don't believe Kagan or Sotomayor were ever unanimously confirmed as a circuit judge, but I could be wrong.

[GoMuskies]

So you are quick to criticize democrats being hypocritical.... but fail to recognize the republicans who set the precedent?

Isn't this the same as the "but Obama" defense many Republicans use and many Democrats correctly deride?

[Lloyd Braun]

What precedent? Because I don't believe Kagan or Sotomayor were ever unanimously confirmed as a circuit judge, but I could be wrong.

Referring to Garland. Which was also "petty politics". Both sides are guilty of this and pointing out one side without the other is "not fair!"

[Lloyd Braun]

Isn't this the same as the "but Obama" defense many Republicans use and many Democrats correctly deride?

Both sides can be a-holes that's well documented.

[Lloyd Braun]

What precedent? Because I don't believe Kagan or Sotomayor were ever unanimously confirmed as a circuit judge, but I could be wrong.

Two final notes... a lot can change in 10+ years, so assuming you would vote for someone 10 years ago doesn't mean you would today. And circuit judge is not exactly the same thing as Supreme Court.

[Juice]

Two final notes... a lot can change in 10+ years, so assuming you would vote for someone 10 years ago doesn't mean you would today. And circuit judge is not exactly the same thing as Supreme Court.

1) This whole process is now f*cked because of what the Dems did during Bork

2) Read the words of Obama's solicitor general https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/31/opinion/why-liberals-should-back-neil-gorsuch.html

[Lloyd Braun]

1) This whole process is now f*cked because of what the Dems did during Bork

2) Read the words of Obama's solicitor general https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/31/opinion/why-liberals-should-back-neil-gorsuch.html

1) The finger pointing needs to stop if this country is going to be unified. The republicans are just as whiny if not more. You can reference Obamas entire presidency for that.
2) I never questioned him as a judge or his resumé. Just pointing out they are not equivalent positions. You don't need to convince me to vote for him. I don't have a vote. I would personally not obstruct if I were democrat. Pick your battles and hope Trump has the decency (gulp) to compromise on another issue.

[X Factor]

I think we get gorsuck

Act your age.

[SemajParlor]

Reminds me of the Iraq fiasco.
You spend months ginning up the fear, and it works.
Nevermind whether the fear is rational, or even supported by facts.
Sharia law is coming! Write some laws, head for the hills, whatever.

*** Contains explicit language, of course, because it's Chris Rock ***

This entire clip - but especially from 1:20 to 2:40 has aged quite well.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UhjfxZHOT_o

[bobbiemcgee]

Act your age.

Were you my fifth grade teacher? Last time I heard that.

[Masterofreality]

If a Judge with an impeccable reputation, with Degrees from Columbia (Ivy League) (Honors) Harvard Law (Ivy League) (Honors) and Oxford as a Marshall Scholar with a vast impressive experience resume, cannot get confirmed because he strictly interprets the Constitution despite personal beliefs upon which the Country's laws are built, there is no hope.

There is no logical reason for the Democrats to obstruct Gorsuch.

[Lloyd Braun]

So what was wrong with Garland? Where is the logic in blocking him? It's all "petty politics".

[Caf]

So what was wrong with Garland? Where is the logic in blocking him? It's all "petty politics".

Prisoner's dilemma. Why break the chain of pettiness if your opponent might not?

[GoMuskies]

I understand that the Democrats will have to fight the nomination, but Gorsuch does not seem very controversial as a pick. At least not yet. We'll see what can be dug up on him.

[xubrew]

I understand that the Democrats will have to fight the nomination, but Gorsuch does not seem very controversial as a pick. At least not yet. We'll see what can be dug up on him.

A Republican nominated him!! HOW MUCH MORE CONTROVERSY DO YOU NEED??!!

OUT OF THE COFFEESHOPS AND INTO THE STREETS!!!!

[GoMuskies]

A Republican nominated him!! HOW MUCH MORE CONTROVERSY DO YOU NEED??!!

OUT OF THE COFFEESHOPS AND INTO THE STREETS!!!!

Good point. I also read somewhere that he's said some pretty crazy things about assisted suicide.

[SemajParlor]

A

OUT OF THE COFFEESHOPS AND INTO THE STREETS!!!!

At least it's not a Tea Party...

[X Factor]

Were you my fifth grade teacher? Last time I heard that.

Well, "gorsuck" is something a fifth grader would probably come up with and think it's funny.

[ChicagoX]

[QUOTE=Juice;576948]1) This whole process is now f*cked because of what the Dems did during Bork

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Bork get both a hearing and a vote, and then was voted down by the Senate? Mitch McConnell set a completely different precedent moving forward in that presidents now can only nominate SCOTUS justices for three of the four years of a term if the opposition party controls the Senate.

A perfectly qualified Merrick Garland didn't even get a hearing with almost a full year left in Obama's term. I fail to see how that correlates to Bork. One person received a hearing and a vote, and was not confirmed with a half-dozen Republicans also voting against him. The other, who was very moderate and qualified, couldn't even get a hearing.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

Funny, you defined yourself in the first sentence and provided the evidence you are what you accuse Go of there after. That was pretty fantastic. Well done.

Yeah well except I actually took some time to read up on Gorsuch's opinions from previous important cases, so yeah there was that which I actually mentioned in a previous post. Fantastic, good post Strange would read it again.

[Juice]

[QUOTE=Juice;576948]1) This whole process is now f*cked because of what the Dems did during Bork

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Bork get both a hearing and a vote, and then was voted down by the Senate? Mitch McConnell set a completely different precedent moving forward in that presidents now can only nominate SCOTUS justices for three of the four years of a term if the opposition party controls the Senate.

A perfectly qualified Merrick Garland didn't even get a hearing with almost a full year left in Obama's term. I fail to see how that correlates to Bork. One person received a hearing and a vote, and was not confirmed with a half-dozen Republicans also voting against him. The other, who was very moderate and qualified, couldn't even get a hearing.

No, he didn't. Chuck Schumer said in 2007 that Bush shouldn't get to pick his candidate, except Schumer wasn't successful. Schumer also blocked nominees for lower court positions.

[ChicagoX]

[QUOTE=ChicagoX;576985]

No, he didn't. Chuck Schumer said in 2007 that Bush shouldn't get to pick his candidate, except Schumer wasn't successful. Schumer also blocked nominees for lower court positions.

Was a SCOTUS nominee blocked from receiving a hearing and vote? I can't ever remember a time when this actually happened up until last year. It's hard to say the precedent was set to prevent a nomination from moving forward when that never actually happened in 2007. A politician simply saying something doesn't actually set precedent. In this case, actions literally speak louder than words.

[xubrew]

Oh wow, this is great.

People agree that the process is fucked up because of recent nominees that have been blocked, but can't quite agree on who is most at fault for fucking it up.

Question: If it's fucked up, then why continue to do the very thing that you think is fucking it up??

Actually, I already know the answer to that. Carry on.

[SemajParlor]

Oh wow, this is great.

People agree that the process is fucked up because of recent nominees that have been blocked, but can't quite agree on who is most at fault for fucking it up.

Question: If it's fucked up, then why continue to do the very thing that you think is fucking it up??

Actually, I already know the answer to that. Carry on.

It's amazing how clear solutions seem to be when you're benefitting from them isn't it.

Democrats have felt that way for a while. Now it's the Republican's turn. And the world keeps spinning

[ArizonaXUGrad]

[QUOTE=Juice;576992]

Was a SCOTUS nominee blocked from receiving a hearing and vote? I can't ever remember a time when this actually happened up until last year. It's hard to say the precedent was set to prevent a nomination from moving forward when that never actually happened in 2007. A politician simply saying something doesn't actually set precedent. In this case, actions literally speak louder than words.

I am wondering this myself. When was the last time a Garland situation happened? This is a great question.

Side note, the pushing through of Tump's cabinet members is also something I am not sure I agree with here especially the ones who either lied to the panels or the ones who failed to answer questions fully. The other side of that is to just give Trump these people, but be forced to answer for what they do.

[Caf]

It's amazing how clear solutions seem to be when you're benefitting from them isn't it.

Democrats have felt that way for a while. Now it's the Republican's turn. And the world keeps spinning

Seriously. This is part of the game folks. Get used to it (if you somehow haven't been able to from your lifetime of it being this way). No one has a moral or ethical high ground in terms of civic procedure.

[xubrew]

Seriously. This is part of the game folks. Get used to it (if you somehow haven't been able to from your lifetime of it being this way). No one has a moral or ethical high ground in terms of civic procedure.

Well this is what needs to change if we don't like where we are. You can blame the other side all day wrong, but you'll only be half right. I'm pretty much as disgusted with both sides as both sides are disgusted with each other. They're right about the other side being disgusting. Now all they need to do is turn around.

[Lloyd Braun]

What would be nice is if the democrats say: "we won't obstruct Gorsuch if you replace DeVos (clearly inept) with (insert middle ground cabinet member choice here)." It would be a win-win. One win is significantly larger, but it would restore some good will. Would Trump say no to that? Or is he too much into cronyism too?

[ArizonaXUGrad]

What would be nice is if the democrats say: "we won't obstruct Gorsuch if you replace DeVos (clearly inept) with (insert middle ground cabinet member choice here)." It would be a win-win. One win is significantly larger, but it would restore some good will. Would Trump say no to that? Or is he too much into cronyism too?

Toss in Price and Mnuchin there as well, the both have no business being in the cabinet. Fact of the matter, you are looking at a guy who doubled down on the stupid birther movement, a party that spend 6 years in obstruction, and are now crying foul.

I think one could argue a moratorium on the practice if the sitting President weren't so divisive.

[Caf]

Well this is what needs to change if we don't like where we are. You can blame the other side all day wrong, but you'll only be half right. I'm pretty much as disgusted with both sides as both sides are disgusted with each other. They're right about the other side being disgusting. Now all they need to do is turn around.

Much easier said than done. I won't be the hypocrite to say everyone just needs to get along in a political thread of a college basketball forum which I frequently argue on.

[GoMuskies]

What's wrong with Mnuchin?

[muskiefan82]

What's wrong with Mnuchin?

His name makes me think he should be representing the lollipop guild, for one.

[GoMuskies]

His name makes me think he should be representing the lollipop guild, for one.

Well, that particular concern is more than offset by his incredibly hot fiance.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

What's wrong with Mnuchin?

Onewest Bank to start, lending discrimination issues and unfair foreclosure practices. Then go ahead and review his work in the Cayman Islands. I guess him and Trump go hand and hand with these two nuggets though recently have moved apart of a couple areas (taxes on the rich and I believe Dodd-Frank). I am not a Mnuchin fan, but I wasn't a fan of Geitner either.

[GoMuskies]

What was unfair about Onewest's foreclosure practices? I know they were aggressive, but did they actually foreclose on people who weren't substantially behind on their mortgages?

As for Cayman? Meh. Standard stuff IMO.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

What was unfair about Onewest's foreclosure practices? I know they were aggressive, but did they actually foreclose on people who weren't substantially behind on their mortgages?

As for Cayman? Meh. Standard stuff IMO.

Cayman thing is bad, the fact that people have normalized it is worse. Onewest had the FDIC assume future losses on those loans that it foreclosed on. They had their own robo-signing controversy and were also accused of steering customers towards not making payments to get government refinancing deals that never came. Yes, it's a common story but it's still his story.

[GoMuskies]

Seems more like a "controversy" than a controversy to me. They negotiated a good deal with the FDIC, which shouldn't really be an indictment of Mnuchin. The robo-signing was stupid, but everyone was doing it (not an excuse of course), and it was a technical violation and not a real one. The people who were foreclosed on were delinquent on their mortgages.

There's no doubt that foreclosing on people is a dirty business, but the only reason banks are able to give random people six figure loans is because of the asset backing up the loan. If banks aren't able to foreclose on delinquent borrowers, that lending market goes away, and most of us cannot buy homes anymore. I don't really see anything in the Mnuchin dealings other than a bank that was more aggressive in foreclosing on home loans than some people are comfortable with.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

Seems more like a "controversy" than a controversy to me. They negotiated a good deal with the FDIC, which shouldn't really be an indictment of Mnuchin. The robo-signing was stupid, but everyone was doing it (not an excuse of course), and it was a technical violation and not a real one. The people who were foreclosed on were delinquent on their mortgages.

There's no doubt that foreclosing on people is a dirty business, but the only reason banks are able to give random people six figure loans is because of the asset backing up the loan. If banks aren't able to foreclose on delinquent borrowers, that lending market goes away, and most of us cannot buy homes anymore. I don't really see anything in the Mnuchin dealings other than a bank that was more aggressive in foreclosing on home loans than some people are comfortable with.

You have your opinion on the matter, I have my own opinion. A guy willing to make his dollars like this is not one I would like on the President's cabinet. Trump feels differently, so do you. Just be warned, be careful what you ask for.

[GoMuskies]

You have your opinion on the matter, I have my own opinion.

Yep, completely with you. My bias is certainly in favor of guys coming from the business world, I'll admit. I loved Mitt Romney for example. I like Mnuchin, Ross and Tillerson best of the Trump cabinet picks. The guys coming from the business world in general seem more practical and less partisan, and their interests probably dovetail closer with mine than most career politicians and academics.

Also, I don't think Trump really falls into that category. I mean, obviously Trump has been in the business world, but I'd put him more in the entertainment category than the business category if I had to put him in a box.

[Caf]

In the face of Bannon, everyone besides Devos seems qualified and sane to me. I've actually become a fan of Tillerson based on what I've read. Just hoping he's not as close to Putin as advertised.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

In the face of Bannon, everyone besides Devos seems qualified and sane to me. I've actually become a fan of Tillerson based on what I've read. Just hoping he's not as close to Putin as advertised.

When Tillerson said that sanctions make it too hard to do business in Russia, he completely lost me.

[Caf]

When Tillerson said that sanctions make it too hard to do business in Russia, he completely lost me.

By putting Iran "on notice" today, this administration is at least as hard on Russia as the last was.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

By putting Iran "on notice" today, this administration is at least as hard on Russia as the last was.

Iran sanctions and Russia sanctions are two different things.

[paulxu]

The false equivalency of the SC nominee situation drives me nuts (not hard to do).

I need to get into the alternative fact mode for the next 4 years I guess.

[Caf]

Iran sanctions and Russia sanctions are two different things.

Oh no! Not the sanctions! Sanctions are a weak approach and have been proven ineffective against Russian aggression. Putin has shown time and again that he is more than willing to let his economy be harmed to increase Russia's clout abroad. If we dropped them, literally nothing would change.

Tillerson's answers on Russia are the most comprehensive and hard lined Russia policy we've seen in decades. Specifically to your point, you're wrong because he said he supports the Magnitsky Act, and wants to keep the status quo (Obama sanctions) until a new relationship is formed. Also, he's right. It hurts our businesses and accomplishes nothing.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

Oh no! Not the sanctions! Sanctions are a weak approach and have been proven ineffective against Russian aggression. Putin has shown time and again that he is more than willing to let his economy be harmed to increase Russia's clout abroad. If we dropped them, literally nothing would change.

Tillerson's answers on Russia are the most comprehensive and hard lined Russia policy we've seen in decades. Specifically to your point, you're wrong because he said he supports the Magnitsky Act, and wants to keep the status quo (Obama sanctions) until a new relationship is formed. Also, he's right. It hurts our businesses and accomplishes nothing.

Actually, Russian sanctions have proven effective in depressing their economy.

Edit: It's a wait and see with this administration concerning Russia. Yes ours and the EU's sanctions have hit them hard, I will be curious to see what he and Tillerson do specifically and how it works out.

[X-band '01]

Iran sanctions and Russia sanctions are two different things.


Oh no! Not the sanctions! Sanctions are a weak approach and have been proven ineffective against Russian aggression. Putin has shown time and again that he is more than willing to let his economy be harmed to increase Russia's clout abroad. If we dropped them, literally nothing would change.

Tillerson's answers on Russia are the most comprehensive and hard lined Russia policy we've seen in decades. Specifically to your point, you're wrong because he said he supports the Magnitsky Act, and wants to keep the status quo (Obama sanctions) until a new relationship is formed. Also, he's right. It hurts our businesses and accomplishes nothing.

When would Russia and Iran be eligible for a full desaggelation?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fugGUgvtbO4

[bobbiemcgee]

Fighting resumes in Eastern Ukraine with Russia. Wonder if trump will put the russians "on notice'. haha.

[Caf]

Actually, Russian sanctions have proven effective in depressing their economy.

Edit: It's a wait and see with this administration concerning Russia. Yes ours and the EU's sanctions have hit them hard, I will be curious to see what he and Tillerson do specifically and how it works out.

As I said, Putin doesn't care. It didn't change anything in Crimea and they meddled in the election anyway. What's the end game of depressing their economy?

[GoMuskies]

The bonfire those loonballs in Berkeley built tonight looked fun. Hope they roasted some s'mores on that bad boy.

[Juice]

The bonfire those loonballs in Berkeley built tonight looked fun. Hope they roasted some s'mores on that bad boy.

They finally proved to everyone how big of p*ssies they all are out there on that campus. If you don't agree with a speaker, here's a novel concept, don't go.

[Xville]

Actually, Russian sanctions have proven effective in depressing their economy.

Edit: It's a wait and see with this administration concerning Russia. Yes ours and the EU's sanctions have hit them hard, I will be curious to see what he and Tillerson do specifically and how it works out.

You must be a fan of alternative facts because you keep spouting this, and it is simply not true yet you keep trying to pass it off as fact. The sanctions have done very little to Russia's economy. What has hurt their economy is the fact that oil prices plummeted.

[paulxu]

Wanted to put this in Tweets You Gotta Love...but...

https://twitter.com/trumpdraws

[ArizonaXUGrad]

You must be a fan of alternative facts because you keep spouting this, and it is simply not true yet you keep trying to pass it off as fact. The sanctions have done very little to Russia's economy. What has hurt their economy is the fact that oil prices plummeted.

You need to believe the accountant here, the sanctions against some companies and areas of the Russian economy to obtain debt have effectively depressed their economy. They also have trade sanctions that prevent improving technology in key high money economic areas as well. Seriously, yes the depressed oil price is a contributing, but their inability to access capital is as well.

All of this without firing a shot, not to mention that Russia has also significantly eased its support of separatists.

[boozehound]

They finally proved to everyone how big of p*ssies they all are out there on that campus. If you don't agree with a speaker, here's a novel concept, don't go.

I agree, although I feel like people already knew how big of a bunch of p*ssies they are out there, but it's still nice to be reminded sometimes. Free speech goes both ways, and while I'm not a fan of Milo (I think he's basically just a troll, really) he isn't directly inciting violence, which is just about the only time I'm OK with attempting to limit free speech.

Don't go. If you must protest that's fine, but do it peacefully and without destruction of property.

[Caf]

You need to believe the accountant here, the sanctions against some companies and areas of the Russian economy to obtain debt have effectively depressed their economy. They also have trade sanctions that prevent improving technology in key high money economic areas as well. Seriously, yes the depressed oil price is a contributing, but their inability to access capital is as well.

All of this without firing a shot, not to mention that Russia has also significantly eased its support of separatists.

That's all fine and dandy, but what has been the result of this on Russian aggression? Do you think said sanctions would give Russia pause before annexing more of Eastern Europe?

[ArizonaXUGrad]

That's all fine and dandy, but what has been the result of this on Russian aggression? Do you think said sanctions would give Russia pause before annexing more of Eastern Europe?

So far, it has given them reason to (most likely) meddle in our election.

[Juice]

I agree, although I feel like people already knew how big of a bunch of p*ssies they are out there, but it's still nice to be reminded sometimes. Free speech goes both ways, and while I'm not a fan of Milo (I think he's basically just a troll, really) he isn't directly inciting violence, which is just about the only time I'm OK with attempting to limit free speech.

Don't go. If you must protest that's fine, but do it peacefully and without destruction of property.

He's definitely a troll. I don't think I have ever seen anything longer than a 2 minute clip from him. He doesn't interest me whatsoever, but how can they be so scared of him? or so angry with him? It's absolutely pathetic.

[boozehound]

He's definitely a troll. I don't think I have ever seen anything longer than a 2 minute clip from him. He doesn't interest me whatsoever, but how can they be so scared of him? or so angry with him? It's absolutely pathetic.

He's basically just a shock jock as far as I can tell. I don't understand why a significant amount of people on the right have decided to mobilize around that clown, but whatever.

The left, I think, is beginning to hurt their message right now with the hyperbolic reactions to everything. Setting fires in the streets definitely hurts their message. I do think there is room for a legitimate beef right now, but I would argue it should be focused around keeping Trump from cutting into the first amendment rights and key civil liberties.

[Caf]

So far, it has given them reason to (most likely) meddle in our election.

So they've accomplished nothing good for us...

[SemajParlor]

He's basically just a shock jock as far as I can tell. I don't understand why a significant amount of people on the right have decided to mobilize around that clown, but whatever.

Oh.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

So they've accomplished nothing good for us...

Good lord be honest, you are already preparing your blind allegiance speech when your glorious leader removes the discussed sanctions.

[GoMuskies]

Good lord be honest, you are already preparing your blind allegiance speech when your glorious leader removes the discussed sanctions.

You think Caf considers Trump his "glorious leader"? Have you followed this thread at all?

[Caf]

Good lord be honest, you are already preparing your blind allegiance speech when your glorious leader removes the discussed sanctions.

Hahaha that is hilarious. Feel free to make a substantive argument whenever you are ready.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

Hahaha that is hilarious. Feel free to make a substantive argument whenever you are ready.

Lest you forget, I gave mine in favor of noted sanctions and their continuance. I would be in favor of more strict, maybe toss in a few other industries or restrict Russia's ability to get any kind of capital at all.

[Caf]

Lest you forget, I gave mine in favor of noted sanctions and their continuance. I would be in favor of more strict, maybe toss in a few other industries or restrict Russia's ability to get any kind of capital at all.

Again, what good do they do us? They got Russia to hack our election and keep their grasp on Crimea? If they hurt our business even just a little bit, and all we get from them is a weaker Russian economy with increased aggression, what good are they? You don't have to have blind allegiance to Trump to see that sanctions against Russia aren't necessarily all they're made out to be.

[Masterofreality]

Again, what good do they do us? They got Russia to hack our election and keep their grasp on Crimea? If they hurt our business even just a little bit, and all we get from them is a weaker Russian economy with increased aggression, what good are they? You don't have to have blind allegiance to Trump to see that sanctions against Russia aren't necessarily all they're made out to be.

Well, Obama sure thought that those sanctions were working so well against Iran. *Searches hard for "RollEye" emoji.* :rolleyes:

[bobbiemcgee]

Well, Obama sure thought that those sanctions were working so well against Iran. *Searches hard for "RollEye" emoji.* :rolleyes:

So if they don't work, why is trump doing them again.

[paulxu]

So if they don't work, why is trump doing them again.

Probably so they'll say we broke the deal, and they can go back to working on a nuclear weapon program. Maybe even kick inspectors out?

Is there an emoji for incompetence?

[Pete Delkus]

The bonfire those loonballs in Berkeley built tonight looked fun. Hope they roasted some s'mores on that bad boy.

More of the same at NYU tonight. Keep it up regressive left & campus loons.

[GenerationX]

Based upon the garb and the statements from the University, my understanding is that the rioters in California were anarchists, not university students. It wouldn't surprise me at all if they were plants to make the protesters look bad. Or it may have been a radical left wing group. Who knows. I think some of the main goals lately have been to incite fear and stifle opposition, though. Regardless I agree that rioting is wrong. The vast majority of protesters are peaceful, though.

[Caf]

So if they don't work, why is trump doing them again.

I think they work very well on Iran. It's a much smaller economy than Russia's, plus we've had a coalition of allies willing to cut them off as well.

[SemajParlor]

http://www.businessinsider.com/mccain-australia-trump-call-2017-2

[RealDeal]

If Trump can stop things like the Bowling Green massacre from happening again he has my full support. Never forget!

[STL_XUfan]

If Trump can stop things like the Bowling Green massacre from happening again he has my full support. Never forget!
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/6d/2b/42/6d2b42da733c3502362744f4fefeeff9.jpg

#NeverForget (stolen shamelessly from reddit)

[GoMuskies]

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/6d/2b/42/6d2b42da733c3502362744f4fefeeff9.jpg

#NeverForget (stolen shamelessly from reddit)


I like it. I'm stealing it.

[STL_XUfan]

I like it. I'm stealing it.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFMLzXrfT_w

[SemajParlor]

Interesting first 2 weeks.

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/317709-federal-judge-halts-enforcement-of-trump-immigration-ban

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/317776-mccain-mexico-paying-for-border-wall-not-a-viable-option

[Caf]

Interesting first 2 weeks.

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/317709-federal-judge-halts-enforcement-of-trump-immigration-ban

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/317776-mccain-mexico-paying-for-border-wall-not-a-viable-option

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/02/eric-schneiderman-donald-trump-new-york-214734

This was the only comforting thing I read all week.

[SemajParlor]

https://twitter.com/kattykaybbc/status/826541070783758336

FAKE NEWS!!!!

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/03/politics/donald-trump-travel-ban-poll/index.html

[Strange Brew]

FAKE NEWS!!!!

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/03/politics/donald-trump-travel-ban-poll/index.html

Not saying you're wrong but I'd like to see how the questions were asked for both polls before I decide on what is "fake".

[Lloyd Braun]

Not saying you're wrong but I'd like to see how the questions were asked for both polls before I decide on what is "fake".

Since 53%+ do not approve of Trump or didn't vote for Trump this is not surprising. CBS had a similar poll.

[Strange Brew]

Since 53%+ do not approve of Trump or didn't vote for Trump this is not surprising. CBS had a similar poll.

Other polls say the opposite. You and the CNN poll may be right. I'd still like to see the phrasing of the questions especially since CNN fed debate questions to the DNC and CBS was the home of fake news, forged docs Dan.

[bobbiemcgee]

A majority of 'Pubs still think Trump won the popular vote. Is that "fake news".

[Strange Brew]

A majority of 'Pubs still think Trump won the popular vote. Is that "fake news".

Source?

[Juice]

A majority of 'Pubs still think Trump won the popular vote. Is that "fake news".

No, that's just being ill informed and/or an idiot.

[Juice]

FAKE NEWS!!!!

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/03/politics/donald-trump-travel-ban-poll/index.html

I'm in the same camp as Brew. I'd like to see the phrasing especially since CNN f*cked up the reporting on the operation in Yemen and the story on mentally disabled/firearm regulation.

But yes, I'm willing to accept that most people don't like it. That being said, I'm sure most people don't understand the history of this regulation and it's predecessors, how the countries were chosen, how long it lasts, etc.

And I say this as someone who overall doesn't support it because I don't see any real need for it right now. I just wish people understood that Trump is doing something that is very similar to what Obama did and there is some precedent. But when Obama did a similar ban with Iraqis, it was because they found terrorists within our borders planning a bombing that got here through the refugee program. I haven't heard any reports of anything similar lately, but again, I could be wrong.

[bobbiemcgee]

No, that's just being ill informed and/or an idiot.

I agree. They are idiots.

http://www.mediaite.com/opinion/over-half-of-republican-voters-believe-trump-won-the-popular-vote-which-he-did-not/

[bobbiemcgee]

Source?

The Hill, Newsmax, USA Today, Washpost, businessinsider, cnn, yahoo, slate, drudge, dozens more...

[Strange Brew]

I agree. They are idiots.

http://www.mediaite.com/opinion/over-half-of-republican-voters-believe-trump-won-the-popular-vote-which-he-did-not/

Again. Question asked? Methodology?

[LA Muskie]

I just wish people understood that Trump is doing something that is very similar to what Obama did and there is some precedent. But when Obama did a similar ban with Iraqis, it was because they found terrorists within our borders planning a bombing that got here through the refugee program. I haven't heard any reports of anything similar lately, but again, I could be wrong.

This isn't as true as it would seem at face value. The EO and the administration's talking points memo were both drafted to make it look similar to what Obama did (for precisely this reason) but in reality the "regulations" are far broader and open to "prospective" interpretation than anything that's even remotely close to Obama's limited restrictions on Iraqis in the immediate aftermath of attempted Iraqi terrorist infiltration. As just one (of many) examples, the EO sought to prevent the admission of fully vetted and approved resettled refugees and legal residents.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Caf]

Again. Question asked? Methodology?

If you click on the study in the article you can find it. Took me 5 seconds. If you were even remotely interested in actually seeing/acknowledging the poll you would have found it. Below are the questions:


1. Do you approve or disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling his presidential transition?
2. Regardless of whether you approve or disapprove of Donald Trump, do you think the way he
has handled the presidency so far is in line with what you expected of him, or has he handled
the presidency in an unexpected way?
2a. And do you think that is a good thing or a bad thing?
3. Do you approve or disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling: The economy. Terrorism. National Security. Healthcare policy. Immigration. Foreign Affairs.
6. How well are things going in the country today -- very well, fairly well, pretty badly or very
badly?
7. As you may know, Donald Trump signed an executive order which prohibits travel to the U.S.
for the next three months by citizens of seven majority-Muslim countries, and suspends the
U.S. refugee program for four months while reducing the total number of refugees the U.S. will
accept this year. Overall, do you favor or oppose this executive order? (53% oppose)
7a. Would you like to see the executive order expanded to cover other countries
beyond the seven already named, or not?
10. Do you favor or oppose allowing refugees from Syria to seek asylum in the United States?
(IF FAVOR/OPPOSE, ASK) Do you [favor/oppose] that strongly or just somewhat? (strongly oppose 53%)
11. Overall, do you think the executive order is an attempt to ban Muslims from entering the United
States, or not? (Yes, is a ban of muslims 55%)
17. Would you favor or oppose building a wall along the entire border with Mexico? (oppose 60%)

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2017/images/02/03/rel2a.-.trump.pdf

I'm anxious to see how you spin this. And Juice, do we really need to go over the minority religion language again?

[Strange Brew]

If you click on the study in the article you can find it. Took me 5 seconds. If you were even remotely interested in actually seeing/acknowledging the poll you would have found it. Below are the questions:



http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2017/images/02/03/rel2a.-.trump.pdf

I'm anxious to see how you spin this. And Juice, do we really need to go over the minority religion language again?

What do those questions have to do with the popular vote?

[Juice]

If you click on the study in the article you can find it. Took me 5 seconds. If you were even remotely interested in actually seeing/acknowledging the poll you would have found it. Below are the questions:



http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2017/images/02/03/rel2a.-.trump.pdf

I'm anxious to see how you spin this. And Juice, do we really need to go over the minority religion language again?

Nope because I don't have a problem prioritizing people that make up 1-10% of the countries effected.

[Caf]

What do those questions have to do with the popular vote?

This info is regarding the CNN poll. Do you need me to find the source data for the other one too?


Not saying you're wrong but I'd like to see how the questions were asked for both polls before I decide on what is "fake".


Other polls say the opposite. You and the CNN poll may be right. I'd still like to see the phrasing of the questions especially since CNN fed debate questions to the DNC and CBS was the home of fake news, forged docs Dan.

[Caf]

Nope because I don't have a problem prioritizing people that make up 1-10% of the countries effected.

That's fine, but your sentence,
I just wish people understood that Trump is doing something that is very similar to what Obama did and there is some precedent. is just plainly false for that reason. Obama's orders had no religious based specifications. I challenge you to find any reference to religion in them.

[Caf]

What do those questions have to do with the popular vote?

The question asked was "In last month’s election, Donald Trump won the majority of votes in the electoral college. Who do you think won the most popular votes?"

[Strange Brew]

This info is regarding the CNN poll. Do you need me to find the source data for the other one too?

Ok, using Trumps name invites respondent bias. As does using the term predominantly Muslim countries. An appropriate, more scientific question would be more along the lines of, "To what degree (1-5 scale) do you agree with the US gov't policy of restricting immigration and travel from countries the State Dep't believes to be hostile to the US and lack the gov't stability to properly identify their citizens".

[bjf123]

Ok, using Trumps name invites respondent bias. As does using the term predominantly Muslim countries. An appropriate, more scientific question would be more along the lines of, "To what degree (1-5 scale) do you agree with the US gov't policy of restricting immigration and travel from countries the State Dep't believes to be hostile to the US and lack the gov't stability to properly identify their citizens".

Yep. You can get any result you want to a statistically valid poll based on how the questions are phrased.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Juice]

That's fine, but your sentence, is just plainly false for that reason. Obama's orders had no religious based specifications. I challenge you to find any reference to religion in them.

Religion is a consideration of every refugee taken into this country.

[Caf]

Ok, using Trumps name invites respondent bias. As does using the term predominantly Muslim countries. An appropriate, more scientific question would be more along the lines of, "To what degree (1-5 scale) do you agree with the US gov't policy of restricting immigration and travel from countries the State Dep't believes to be hostile to the US and lack the gov't stability to properly identify their citizens".

I checked the questions from the poll Juice cited. It used Trump's name and majority muslim countries too. I'm surprised you didn't question that one though - what bias is that? Confirmation?


Do you agree or disagree with the Executive Order that President Trump signed blocking refugees and banning people from seven Muslim majority countries from entering the U.S.?

[Caf]

Religion is a consideration of every refugee taken into this country.

Not on the basis for the denial of entry.

[SemajParlor]

I was very much joking / poking at the ridiculousness when I called one source Fake News and the other one legitimate. I can’t believe people still go off of national polls when discussing anything to do with Trump.

[boozehound]

Joe Scarborough, whom I enjoy, has jumped on the bash Trump bandwagon.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2017/02/05/joe-scarborough-trumps-reckless-shot-at-a-federal-judge/?utm_term=.cf4e643bc95c

It's worth noting that Joe has been a pretty moderating voice on the reactions to Trump's presidency to date. I probably catch about 45-60 min of Morning Joe about 3 days a week, so I'm by no means fully informed on his historical opinions RE: Trump, however he seems to be shifting rapidly from defending Trump to critiquing him.

The Trump administration really needs to get their collective sh*t together. In just the last few days we have Trump bashing a federal judge, while also slamming the US as a vehicle to praise Russia. I was initially dismissive about the possibility of Russia having compromising information on Trump, however his bizarre behavior toward them is making me re-consider that stance. His comments about the US in reference to his stance on Russia are bizarre, to say the least. Likening any recent US Military action to Russia's imperialistic assault into the Ukraine is a major false equivalence, IMO.

[GoMuskies]

Good advice to the looney left on how to effectively combat Trump.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/02/how-to-beat-trump/515736/#article-comments

[X-man]

[QUOTE=GoMuskies;577926]Good advice to the looney left on how to effectively combat Trump.

[url]https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/02/how

Any advice to the rational left, who are the vast majority of the left?

[GoMuskies]

Follow the advice of that article, and police the loony left when they get out of hand.

Don't cheer when Madonna says let's bomb the White House, and tell Sarah Silverman she's an asshat when she calls for a military coup, for example.

[LA Muskie]

Agreed, Go!

[LA Muskie]

Joe Scarborough, whom I enjoy, has jumped on the bash Trump bandwagon.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2017/02/05/joe-scarborough-trumps-reckless-shot-at-a-federal-judge/?utm_term=.cf4e643bc95c

It's worth noting that Joe has been a pretty moderating voice on the reactions to Trump's presidency to date. I probably catch about 45-60 min of Morning Joe about 3 days a week, so I'm by no means fully informed on his historical opinions RE: Trump, however he seems to be shifting rapidly from defending Trump to critiquing him.

The Trump administration really needs to get their collective sh*t together. In just the last few days we have Trump bashing a federal judge, while also slamming the US as a vehicle to praise Russia. I was initially dismissive about the possibility of Russia having compromising information on Trump, however his bizarre behavior toward them is making me re-consider that stance. His comments about the US in reference to his stance on Russia are bizarre, to say the least. Likening any recent US Military action to Russia's imperialistic assault into the Ukraine is a major false equivalence, IMO.
I like to think of myself as part of the "rational left" (hats off to X-Man for coining that...). Trump's attacks on the Judiciary over the weekend very well may be his ultimate undoing.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

I like to think of myself as part of the "rational left" (hats off to X-Man for coining that...). Trump's attacks on the Judiciary over the weekend very well may be his ultimate undoing.

I still believe that he won't last without doing something illegal which will force the GOP's hands with an impeachment.

[boozehound]

I like to think of myself as part of the "rational left" (hats off to X-Man for coining that...). Trump's attacks on the Judiciary over the weekend very well may be his ultimate undoing.

It definitely should be a pretty big deal.

I'm not really sure what to think anymore, though. It seems like half of the people are acting like Trump is reincarnation of Hitler while the other half think he is infallible. That's a gross oversimplification, of course, but it doesn't seem like many minds are being changed. The GOP establishment seems content to wait in the wings for now, so it looks unlikely that they will force any change.

We are only two weeks into this thing it is significantly worse than I thought. I was hoping he would moderate once elected. The opposite seems to be happening. Hopefully Ryan, McConnell and the Republican establishment have a plan to deal with this, because it seems like we are heading toward some kind of crisis, I'm just not sure if it will be diplomatic, military, or constitutional.

[GoMuskies]

The GOP establishment seems content to wait in the wings for now, so it looks unlikely that they will force any change.


They don't really have a choice. The GOP establishment was adamantly opposed to Trump's candidacy. And then he won. It would be political suicide for the GOP establishment to turn on Trump now.

As for the rest, I don't think Trump is Hitler nor God Emporer (as I've heard him referred to by the most ardent supporters). I just think he's kind of incompetent and still trying to get his team in place/catch their stride. As you say, it's been two weeks. I think everyone (on both sides) should chill the fuck out for a bit. For better or worse, he's the President, and he's going to remain so for quite some time. Let's give this some time.

[boozehound]

They don't really have a choice. The GOP establishment was adamantly opposed to Trump's candidacy. And then he won. It would be political suicide for the GOP establishment to turn on Trump now.

As for the rest, I don't think Trump is Hitler nor God Emporer (as I've heard him referred to by the most ardent supporters). I just think he's kind of incompetent and still trying to get his team in place/catch their stride. As you say, it's been two weeks. I think everyone (on both sides) should chill the fuck out for a bit. For better or worse, he's the President, and he's going to remain so for quite some time. Let's give this some time.

I would be more in agreement if this administration didn't seem so intent on rushing headlong into a myriad of potential crises. I get that they need time to get their footing, particularly since they didn't seem to have planned on winning, and that the overall lack of competence surrounding Trump has exacerbated the situation. The problem is that they are making some big decisions without knowing what the hell they are doing. Conventional wisdom would be to lie low and promote status quo until you staff your administration, assess the various situations, and determine your (fully vetted) course of action. Instead they have opened with a controversial and potentially unconstitutional executive order, and followed that up by attacking the judicial branch on twitter. That's not even getting into the diplomatic issues.

[GoMuskies]

I would include Trump's administration among the people most needing to chill the fuck out. Right there with Ashley Judd. LOL

[SemajParlor]

He is a flat out ridiculous and dangerous human being to be in our charge our country. Anyone who cannot see this at this point is either a) not paying attention b) too committed to their party c) Donnie Trump

[boozehound]

I would include Trump's administration among the people most needing to chill the fuck out. Right there with Ashley Judd. LOL

Fair enough. Agree on both counts.

[LA Muskie]

It definitely should be a pretty big deal.

I'm not really sure what to think anymore, though. It seems like half of the people are acting like Trump is reincarnation of Hitler while the other half think he is infallible. That's a gross oversimplification, of course, but it doesn't seem like many minds are being changed. The GOP establishment seems content to wait in the wings for now, so it looks unlikely that they will force any change.

We are only two weeks into this thing it is significantly worse than I thought. I was hoping he would moderate once elected. The opposite seems to be happening. Hopefully Ryan, McConnell and the Republican establishment have a plan to deal with this, because it seems like we are heading toward some kind of crisis, I'm just not sure if it will be diplomatic, military, or constitutional.

He has a 90% approval rating among Republican voters. The only thing I can think of is that he is giving them all something that they really want and they are disregarding the rest. As a lawyer I'm shocked and dismayed at his full frontal on the judiciary. But much of his base sees it as an extension of the "anti-political-correctness" on which he campaigned. As long as he's "winning" his party, House Republicans aren't going after him. But I think he's making an enemy of the Courts, which could significantly hamper his effectiveness (but could also turn him into a martyr at the Republican grassroots level).

[LA Muskie]

They don't really have a choice. The GOP establishment was adamantly opposed to Trump's candidacy. And then he won. It would be political suicide for the GOP establishment to turn on Trump now.

As for the rest, I don't think Trump is Hitler nor God Emporer (as I've heard him referred to by the most ardent supporters). I just think he's kind of incompetent and still trying to get his team in place/catch their stride. As you say, it's been two weeks. I think everyone (on both sides) should chill the fuck out for a bit. For better or worse, he's the President, and he's going to remain so for quite some time. Let's give this some time.

I agree with all of this, save for his tendency toward autocratic philosophy. Don't get me wrong -- I don't think he THINKS of himself as an autocrat. But he hasn't yet come to grips with the fact that as President he is the head of just one of three co-equal branches of government. And I'm not sure he ever will. He has no comprehension of checks-and-balances.

[paulxu]

I remain worried about Bannon's influence in the White House.
I certainly don't think as a political operative that he should be on the National Security Council.
And it's disturbing that the President didn't seem to realize that one of his executive orders had actually placed him there.

[GoMuskies]

He has no comprehension of checks-and-balances.

Good point. It would have been better training for him if he'd have been the CEO of a company not named Trump. Then he'd have had to contend with a real board of directors as a check on his executive power. Obviously not the same as government, but closer than what he experienced with the absolute authority he had over the Trump Organization.

[GoMuskies]

I remain worried about Bannon's influence in the White House.


Definitely. This Bannon guy seems awful, and I think he's currently running the show for the most part. When Trump gets rid of this guy and puts in someone less horrible, I think things will normalize. Hopefully it's soon.

[Caf]

He is a flat out ridiculous and dangerous human being to be in our charge our country. Anyone who cannot see this at this point is either a) not paying attention b) too committed to their party c) Donnie Trump

Did you not try giving this some time?

[boozehound]

Good point. It would have been better training for him if he'd have been the CEO of a company not named Trump. Then he'd have had to contend with a real board of directors as a check on his executive power. Obviously not the same as government, but closer than what he experienced with the absolute authority he had over the Trump Organization.

Agree completely. I've been screaming this since the primaries as a counter-argument to the 'he's good a business so he will be a good President' argument. He operates a very autocratic business in which he holds absolute power and answers to no one. That is not good preparation for running the United States, particularly when you combine it with a level of narcissism that leads to him assuming that he is intrinsically able to make good decisions on things that he knows nothing about without doing any work up front to educate himself.


Definitely. This Bannon guy seems awful, and I think he's currently running the show for the most part. When Trump gets rid of this guy and puts in someone less horrible, I think things will normalize. Hopefully it's soon.

Hopefully. Trump can't like the media perception (right or wrong) that he is just an unwitting puppet to Bannon's puppetmaster. That assumption is pretty insulting on a personal level, and we all know how he does with that kind of stuff. I can't believe that I'm actually rooting for Reince Priebus to have more influence, but here we are.

[X-man]

Follow the advice of that article, and police the loony left when they get out of hand.

Don't cheer when Madonna says let's bomb the White House, and tell Sarah Silverman she's an asshat when she calls for a military coup, for example.
No problem. Now let's have the same vigilance with respect to the "loony right".

[GoMuskies]

No problem. Now let's have the same vigilance with respect to the "loony right".

Definitely. But you need to come up with some alliteration to make it official.

[SemajParlor]

Edit: posted in here by mistake


sorreyy

[Juice]

Remember when that POS Justin Trudeau acted like Canada gave a shit about refugees?


Prime Minister Trudeau took office in 2015 on a commitment to admit tens of thousands of Syrian refugees. "While the majority of the world is turning their backs and building walls, the fact that Trudeau took this bold humanitarian goal put [Canada] on the map," said Chris Friesen, director of settlement services at Immigrant Services Society of British Columbia.

But this year, Canada plans to take only 7,500 government-assisted refugees - less than half last year's number. People eager to sponsor refugees find themselves waiting years to do so.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/worried-trump-asylum-seekers-walk-cold-road-canada-183626789.html

Way to go Canada.

[Juice]

And one of the Cal rioters attacked a Syrian Muslim because he looked like a Nazi. Ooooops.

https://twitter.com/HashtagGriswold/status/828665682854285313

[bobbiemcgee]

I just hope they figure out how to turn the lights on in the White House soon.

[Caf]

Definitely. This Bannon guy seems awful, and I think he's currently running the show for the most part. When Trump gets rid of this guy and puts in someone less horrible, I think things will normalize. Hopefully it's soon.

I actually think in the past week pinning Bannon against Trump was the left's strategy. Everywhere you looked all the way to SNL, there are claims that Bannon really runs the show. Based on Trump's tweet about "calling his own shots" it may have gotten under his skin. It's kind of similar to the claims about Cheney-Bush, I just think Trump is more insecure/petty than W.

[boozehound]

I actually think in the past week pinning Bannon against Trump was the left's strategy. Everywhere you looked all the way to SNL, there are claims that Bannon really runs the show. Based on Trump's tweet about "calling his own shots" it may have gotten under his skin. It's kind of similar to the claims about Cheney-Bush, I just think Trump is more insecure/petty than W.

I'm not sure if it is the left's 'strategy' per se, but it has to get under Trump's skin. There are not a lot of things more insulting to someone than to portray them as an idiot puppet. There is no way that Trump is letting that roll off his back. If it keeps up (which I would imagine it will) I would expect it would lead to Trump feeling a need to do something to visibly separate himself from Bannon's influence.

[SemajParlor]

This guy isn't even trying

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/828939235499638784

https://twitter.com/AJ/status/828942118462877696

[boozehound]

This guy isn't even trying

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/828939235499638784

https://twitter.com/AJ/status/828942118462877696

Was he lying then, or is he lying now? Who knows? He lies so much it's hard to tell. Hail to the Chief!

[X-man]

I am still trying to understand how, if only 109 people were affected by his immigration order (according to Trump), how the stay by Judge Robart means that people are "pouring in" (Trump's tweet on 2/5).

[Caf]

Syria has secretly executed thousands of political prisoners, rights group says - Washington Post (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/syria-has-secretly-executed-thousands-of-political-prisoners-rights-group/2017/02/06/e4a7f56a-ecc5-11e6-a100-fdaaf400369a_story.html?hpid=hp_rhp-more-top-stories_no-name%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.8bb44b3843c6)

I really hope we don't end up cooperating with this regime.

[GoMuskies]

Betsy DeVos

[X-man]

Betsy DeVos, the so-called Secretary of Education

Fixed that for you.

[bobbiemcgee]

Fixed that for you.

https://danielskatz.files.wordpress.com/2017/01/bears.jpg

Guess the propaganda worked

[SemajParlor]

Remember when that POS Justin Trudeau acted like Canada gave a shit about refugees?



https://www.yahoo.com/news/worried-trump-asylum-seekers-walk-cold-road-canada-183626789.html

Way to go Canada.

Remember when that POS Mike Pence wouldn't accept a family of Syrian refugees bound for Indiana so Connecticut stepped up and took them for him.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/11/18/indiana-bound-syrian-refugees-redirected-connecticut/75988858/

[Juice]

Remember when that POS Mike Pence wouldn't accept a family of Syrian refugees bound for Indiana so Connecticut stepped up and took them for him.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/11/18/indiana-bound-syrian-refugees-redirected-connecticut/75988858/

But did Pence ever go on record and make a speech pretending how progressive he was about refugees before he turned that family away? Trudeau acted like he would accept any, and everyone when reality they're accepting on 7,500 people. That's the point of my post. Trudeau is also a piece of shit who thought Castro was a good leader/guy.

[GoMuskies]

I really liked the idea of an innovative choice for Education Secretary. Someone who disrupts the education establishment. I had high hopes that DeVos was the right person to fill that role. And maybe she still will be, but based on what I've seen so far I'm no longer particularly hopeful.

But what if Trump had convinced Salman Khan to be Education Secretary? That would have been both "swamp draining" and amazing.

[SemajParlor]

But did Pence ever go on record and make a speech pretending how progressive he was about refugees before he turned that family away? Trudeau acted like he would accept any, and everyone when reality they're accepting on 7,500 people. That's the point of my post. Trudeau is also a piece of shit who thought Castro was a good leader/guy.

No, he didn't. But if the implication was that all politicians are saying they will accept Refugees simply for political gains, I don't know if that's a fair one. A little sick and tired of people believing that accepting refugees from areas where they are literally getting slaughtered is this horrifically disingenuous social justice warrior act. Many states, and many residents of those states, believe that it's the right thing to do.

As far as Trudeau goes, yeah the Castro statement was stupid. Kind of like if one were to say that they respect Vladimir Putin.

[Caf]

But did Pence ever go on record and make a speech pretending how progressive he was about refugees before he turned that family away? Trudeau acted like he would accept any, and everyone when reality they're accepting on 7,500 people. That's the point of my post. Trudeau is also a piece of shit who thought Castro was a good leader/guy.

Did you read the rest of the article? Apparently 9,000 refugees have fled the US to Canada, 2,000 of which have had to sneak inland to get around the Safe Third Country Agreement. I'm guessing they're leaving because they want to hurt us.

[paulxu]

Apparently you can buy a cabinet position.

[RealDeal]

I really liked the idea of an innovative choice for Education Secretary. Someone who disrupts the education establishment. I had high hopes that DeVos was the right person to fill that role. And maybe she still will be, but based on what I've seen so far I'm no longer particularly hopeful.

But what if Trump had convinced Salman Khan to be Education Secretary? That would have been both "swamp draining" and amazing.

Totally agree on Khan, guess he didn't write enough checks.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

Apparently you can buy a cabinet position.

$250MM is a tad over my head and yes DeVos is in way over her head here. Public schools need a shakeup but not her ideas (at least her Detroit ideas).

[GoMuskies]

Cory Booker turning against DeVos like he'd never met her (and worked with her and supported her efforts) was kinda funny. Espcially when he claimed it had nothing to do with politics.

Nice try Cory. You're a politician, but at least own your bullshit.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=96&v=6pHqWDqdkSM

[xubrew]

No one likes the DeVos pick, and neither do I, but I'm curious to know who some of you would have liked. I haven't liked any of the picks since Rod Paige, and you could easily argue that Rod Paige was a disaster. I admit I liked the pick at the time, but I'd have a hard time arguing he actually ended up doling a good job. I don't think there is really a whole lot anyone could do in this position since so much of it is at the state level anyway, and that alone should minimize how horrible she could really end up being, but I agree that she is a horrible pick.

[Juice]

No one likes the DeVos pick, and neither do I, but I'm curious to know who some of you would have liked. I haven't liked any of the picks since Rod Paige, and you could easily argue that Rod Paige was a disaster. I admit I liked the pick at the time, but I'd have a hard time arguing he actually ended up doling a good job. I don't think there is really a whole lot anyone could do in this position since so much of it is at the state level anyway, and that alone should minimize how horrible she could really end up being, but I agree that she is a horrible pick.

Get rid of the whole damn department.

[Masterofreality]

Get rid of the whole damn department.

This.

The Dept of Ed is an 80 billion/ year boondoggle.

By the way. In 2009 the US was 24 in world PISA rankings for math, reading and science vs other countries. Obama appointed Arne Duncan, a Chicago cronie who, coincidentally ran a Charter School into the ground, then became Chicago Schools CEO- where he promptly tried to boost up Charter Schools. Coincidentally because that is the exact charge the Left is making against DeVos but they sure kept their yapping shut when Obama made his pick.

After 7 years of Duncan, in 2015 and after over $500 billion spent by the Dept of Ed, the US PISA ranking dropped to 25th. That is some return on investment.

Oh, and has ANYONE ever heard of John B King? Errrr, he was the last Secretary of the Dept. of Ed under Obama. He did such an effective job no one ever heard of him.

Schools are local. The Dept of Ed is a total waste of time and money. Their enforcement of equal education to the physically challenged and disabled can easily be transferred over to another Dept like HHS. Stop the madness.

[Caf]

Syria has secretly executed thousands of political prisoners, rights group says - Washington Post (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/syria-has-secretly-executed-thousands-of-political-prisoners-rights-group/2017/02/06/e4a7f56a-ecc5-11e6-a100-fdaaf400369a_story.html?hpid=hp_rhp-more-top-stories_no-name%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.8bb44b3843c6)

I really hope we don't end up cooperating with this regime.

The Strategic Suicide of Aligning With Russia in Syria - Foreign Policy (https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/02/07/the-strategic-suicide-of-aligning-with-russia-in-syria/)

This is worth a read.

[bobbiemcgee]

Schools are local. The Dept of Ed is a total waste of time and money. Their enforcement of equal education to the physically challenged and disabled can easily be transferred over to another Dept like HHS. Stop the madness.

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/318310-gop-lawmaker-proposes-abolishing-department-of-education

Maybe you'll get your wish.

[GoMuskies]

One thing's for sure: this is the most the Department of Education has been talked about ever.

[SemajParlor]

One thing's for sure: this is the most the Department of Education has been talked about ever.

Season 4 of The Wire

[GoMuskies]

Season 4 of The Wire

Never had HBO (I already pay extortionary rates for TV content), so I haven't seen the Wire. Probably need to find a way to fix that hole in my TV resume.

[bobbiemcgee]

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=the+wire+family+guy+youtube&&view=detail&mid=7949523F22679EC65D2C7949523F22679EC65D2C&FORM=VRDGAR

[SemajParlor]

LOL, I've seen that clip and yes, throw in The Sopranos in there too and that is pretty much me.

[GoMuskies]

I'm only like that with Seinfeld. It's only been 19 years after all.

[Masterofreality]

One thing's for sure: this is the most the Department of Education has been talked about ever.

So why the F is it still around?

[bigdiggins]

So why the F is it still around?

As a shill for teacher's unions, which is why they are so upset with DeVos as the pick.

[spursy]

As a shill for teacher's unions, which is why they are so upset with DeVos as the pick.

Yea that's it...

Sheesh. It has nothing to do with the fact she literally bought her way into the position and is grossly unqualified to do anything remotely positive for this country's education.

I have stayed out of any internet political debate since the primaries, but after Donnie's twitter meltdown tonight I simply can't keep to myself. You're a fool, and bought into a fool's lies, if you voted Bannon and his cronies into the white house.*

*Yes, this is rash, harsh, and emotional, but if you can stand by and say that you truly think what Trump is doing, and how he is acting, is okay then I don't know what to say, I guess we got different educations at Xavier.

[Xville]

It's funny...our public education system, especially in the inner cities, or in the case of louisville everywhere because they have bussing but anyways, have been failing for what 40 years or so? Yet, nothing has been done about it except that those districts just keep asking for more and more.money to "improve." Now all the left are so upset because DeVos might actually do something about it instead of just continuing to do the same thing over and over again with no results.

[spursy]

It's funny...our public education system, especially in the inner cities, or in the case of louisville everywhere because they have bussing but anyways, have been failing for what 40 years or so? Yet, nothing has been done about it except that those districts just keep asking for more and more.money to "improve." Now all the left are so upset because DeVos might actually do something about it instead of just continuing to do the same thing over and over again with no results.

I agree with everything you said except the last sentence. Devos isn't tasked with doing anything productive. Or actually helping anyone or any system. She will be good at what she has been hired to do - making the department even more incompetent than what it already is.

[SemajParlor]

So legitimately curious here --- Conservatives aren't happy with what's going on with Trump right? Like partly lines aside, we all have developed brains? We're just going to do that thing where this jackass tweets in all caps SEE YOU IN COURT to our Judicial branch and people are fine with it. 60+ million voted for this guy. Jesus Christ.

[Xville]

So legitimately curious here --- Conservatives aren't happy with what's going on with Trump right? Like partly lines aside, we all have developed brains? We're just going to do that thing where this jackass tweets in all caps SEE YOU IN COURT to our Judicial branch and people are fine with it. 60+ million voted for this guy. Jesus Christ.

I wish someone would take his Twitter account away. With that said, he made promises during his election about things he was going to accomplish, and he has set a lot of those things in motion already. That is a lot more than what some presidents can say they ever did. Does he have a giant ego? Yep. Can he be divisive? Absolutely. However, a lot of the things he is planning to do, I like. I'll take a wait and see approach with him just like I did with Obama who I actually also voted for.

[Caf]

I wish someone would take his Twitter account away.

I LOVE the twitter. I'm not sure why anyone would want less access to the "thinking" of Trump. It gives us a representation of who he actually is, and what he actually thinks.

[Mrs. Garrett]

yea that's it...

Sheesh. It has nothing to do with the fact she literally bought her way into the position and is grossly unqualified to do anything remotely positive for this country's education.

I have stayed out of any internet political debate since the primaries, but after donnie's twitter meltdown tonight i simply can't keep to myself. You're a fool, and bought into a fool's lies, if you voted bannon and his cronies into the white house.*

*yes, this is rash, harsh, and emotional, but if you can stand by and say that you truly think what trump is doing, and how he is acting, is okay then i don't know what to say, i guess we got different educations at xavier.

this

[Mrs. Garrett]

So legitimately curious here --- Conservatives aren't happy with what's going on with Trump right? Like partly lines aside, we all have developed brains? We're just going to do that thing where this jackass tweets in all caps SEE YOU IN COURT to our Judicial branch and people are fine with it. 60+ million voted for this guy. Jesus Christ.

Seems that way doesn't it. I lost all faith in Republicans when DeVos was confirmed.

[Caf]

Trump Tells Xi Jinping U.S. Will Honor ‘One China’ Policy - NYT (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/09/world/asia/donald-trump-china-xi-jinping-letter.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&_r=0)

This is incredible.


Stung by Mr. Trump's unorthodox telephone call with the president of Taiwan and his subsequent assertion that the United States might no longer abide by the 'One China' policy, Mr. Xi has not spoken to Mr. Trump since Nov. 14, the week after he was elected. Administration officials say they believe he will only do so after Mr. Trump publicly commits to recognizing a single Chinese government in Beijing.

It looks like the silent treatment is effective on the Donald. The 2 had an "extremely cordial" phone call after Trump agreed to honor the one-China policy.

[boozehound]

So legitimately curious here --- Conservatives aren't happy with what's going on with Trump right? Like partly lines aside, we all have developed brains? We're just going to do that thing where this jackass tweets in all caps SEE YOU IN COURT to our Judicial branch and people are fine with it. 60+ million voted for this guy. Jesus Christ.

I think he still has like a 90% approval rating among registered Republicans, which is discouraging, but not particularly surprising. I don't know when/how those polls were taken though.

This Russia thing alone should be a big deal to anybody, but particularly to Republicans who have spent the last 8 years calling Obama soft on Russia. The latest revelations about Flynn's contact with Russia potentially undermining the sanctions Obama placed on them further underscores the need to keep investigating this.

His undermining of the department of justice is shocking, or at least it should be, to both sides of the political spectrum.

This whole thing is actually starting off much worse than I expected.

[Caf]

Allegations of treason! This is going great!

[GoMuskies]

I think he still has like a 90% approval rating among registered Republicans, which is discouraging, but not particularly surprising.

I think anything that makes the loony left (not the entire left for those ready to get panties wadded) go as batshit crazy as they've remained since 1/20 gets a 90% approval rating for registered Republicans, no matter how distasteful.

[vee4xu]

Okay, 96 pages of posts. I need the Cliff Notes version here. Anything been solved yet? Well, more solved relative to say, the Sooooo Where's the Warming thread? Carry on libs, atl-rights, conservatives, libertarians and whatever else you each call yourselves and one another. I'll be back in a month, or so to see if this soap opera has moved any further along than the Bold and the Beautiful has over the past year. If I get to the fitness center too late, the ladies have charge of the remote, so I know for a fact that the Bold and the Beautiful hasn't moved forward at all for at least the past year.

Carry on!

[bjf123]

Cliff Notes recap. The Conservatives think the Liberals care more about "feelings", want to let anyone into the country at any time for any reason, and are unable to accept any thoughts that don't fit their ideal. The Liberals think the Conservatives are racist, homophobic, Neanderthals who only care about guns and the Bible. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[vee4xu]

Cliff Notes recap. The Conservatives think the Liberals care more about "feelings", want to let anyone into the country at any time for any reason, and are unable to accept any thoughts that don't fit their ideal. The Liberals think the Conservatives are racist, homophobic, Neanderthals who only care about guns and the Bible. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So, no progress and nothing's changed, just like Bold and the Beautiful. Thanks for the clear and succinct summary.

[OTRMUSKIE]

This is what American Politics needed. This is why I voted for chaos. I want both parties to be destroyed and recreated to actually represent what I believe in. Neither party represents anybody anymore, imo. They represent greed, power and re-election. Trump is going to destroy both of them and hopefully without destroying the world first.

[Juice]

A few thousand pages ago Merrick Garland's nomination and lack of a vote was brought up and if it has happened before. I guess it has because Millard Fillmore submitted three different nominations for SCOTUS. The Senate ignored each one.

[boozehound]

This is what American Politics needed. This is why I voted for chaos. I want both parties to be destroyed and recreated to actually represent what I believe in. Neither party represents anybody anymore, imo. They represent greed, power and re-election. Trump is going to destroy both of them and hopefully without destroying the world first.

This is just a wildly dangerous (and particularly factual) view point in my opinion, unfortunately it seems that a lot of people feel this way. I don't believe it to be based on a rational, fact-based assessment of our country's current state, or our political system. It seems that when we run out of real problems we just manufacture some threats to fight against.

How is this 'What American politics needed'? We definitely have a dysfunctional political system, but 'voting for chaos' is a wildly reckless solution. All you did was vote in a more autocratic and dangerous version of the status quo. The idea that voting for Trump is somehow voting against greed and power is insane. Donald Trump is a second generation East Coast 'rich kid' who has shown a propensity toward greed that would make even the most craven politician compulsively shower. I just don't see how things are so bad that we are willing to take a massive risk (like electing an unqualified and mentally unstable autocrat to the highest office in the land) to 'fix' our imaginary problems? We certainly have some issues, but we have a fantastic quality of life relative to the rest of the developed world, and relative to almost any point in history.

So just to recap: in your estimation, our current system is so bad that you voted in a person who feel might 'destroy the world', in hopes that they are somehow going to bring the political system down, and Donald F-ing Trump is going to rebuild a more functional system in it's place? Holy shit. Hopefully your 'chaos' doesn't get a whole bunch of people killed.

[GoMuskies]

Joy Villa made her bank account great again last night. I'm not sure if she actually loves Trump or hates him, but the dress she wore last night was a brilliant business decision. She went from relative unknown to the top of the charts overnight.

[boozehound]

Joy Villa made her bank account great again last night. I'm not sure if she actually loves Trump or hates him, but the dress she wore last night was a brilliant business decision. She went from relative unknown to the top of the charts overnight.

I have no idea who that is. I guess that's the point, though.

[ChicagoX]

I'm curious to get conservatives' thoughts on both civil asset forfeiture as well as the fiduciary rule.

National Review: Trump Sides with the Sheriffs on Their Racket (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/444813/trump-civil-forfeiture-position-violates-constitution-pleases-sheriffs-who-profit)

Forbes: Trump Signs Memorandum Shelving Fiduciary Standard For Financial Advisors (http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamiehopkins/2017/02/03/trump-signs-executive-order-shelving-fiduciary-standard-for-financial-advisors/#60f892aa7a96)

How do these two EOs make America great again?

[SemajParlor]

Okay, 96 pages of posts. I need the Cliff Notes version here. Anything been solved yet? Well, more solved relative to say, the Sooooo Where's the Warming thread? Carry on libs, atl-rights, conservatives, libertarians and whatever else you each call yourselves and one another. I'll be back in a month, or so to see if this soap opera has moved any further along than the Bold and the Beautiful has over the past year. If I get to the fitness center too late, the ladies have charge of the remote, so I know for a fact that the Bold and the Beautiful hasn't moved forward at all for at least the past year.

Carry on!

Did we just all get scolded and belittled for posting our thoughts on an online message board?

[GoMuskies]

I have no idea who that is.

Neither did anyone else before last night.

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2017/02/AP_17043808125370-640x480.jpg

[Juice]

Neither did anyone else before last night.

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2017/02/AP_17043808125370-640x480.jpg

Her record/album/song sales soared overnight.

[GoMuskies]

I'm curious to get conservatives' thoughts on both civil asset forfeiture as well as the fiduciary rule.

National Review: Trump Sides with the Sheriffs on Their Racket (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/444813/trump-civil-forfeiture-position-violates-constitution-pleases-sheriffs-who-profit)

Forbes: Trump Signs Memorandum Shelving Fiduciary Standard For Financial Advisors (http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamiehopkins/2017/02/03/trump-signs-executive-order-shelving-fiduciary-standard-for-financial-advisors/#60f892aa7a96)

How do these two EOs make America great again?

Civil asset forfeiture is generally bullshit. I am glad to see that you side with the Koch brothers on this issue.

I'm not a big fan of the fiduciary rule. More nanny-state policy. But I don't feel particularly strongly either way. Caveat emptor.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

Civil asset forfeiture is generally bullshit. I am glad to see that you side with the Koch brothers on this issue.

I'm not a big fan of the fiduciary rule. More nanny-state policy. But I don't feel particularly strongly either way. Caveat emptor.

Civil forfeiture is an archaic law that needs to be removed entirely, the Fiduciary Rule would seem excessive until you consider how some of the big banks unloaded crap 8 years ago. It is pretty clear that Wall Street still needs rules that say if they are investing our money or giving us advice they need to at least believe it's on our best interest.

[boozehound]

"The Powers of the President are substantial and they will not be questioned".

Holy shit. Looks like the executive branch is continuing to declare war on the judicial branch, judicial review, and the core manner in which our government operates.

http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/-what-stephen-miller-said-should-worry-everyone-875968067895

It's 11:00 min long, but worth a watch. Yes, I realize that this is MSNBC, but I like Joe Scarborough and I think he has been a fairly moderate voice RE: Trump so far.

Scarborough: "If you are a Republican in Congress and you don't speak out, don't ever call yourself a constitutionalist." Man, I would have hoped it would take more than Donald Trump for us to sell out our democracy.

This keeps getting more and more strange.

[Juice]

The Muslim Olympian 'detained because of President Trump's travel ban' was detained under Obama
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/more-mainstream-media-mess-ups-the-muslim-olympian-detained-because-of-president-trumps-travel-ban-was-detained-under-obama/article/2614645#.WKH-yzVDfhQ.twitter

[SemajParlor]

Pentagon and CIA cannot trust the President of the US with intelligence because it will most likely end up with Russia. This was inevitable. Just another one of the many storylines to watch on this season of The Appre--- uhh the White House.

http://observer.com/2017/02/donald-trump-administration-mike-flynn-russian-embassy/

[boozehound]

Pentagon and CIA cannot trust the President of the US with intelligence because it will most likely end up with Russia. This was inevitable. Just another one of the many storylines to watch on this season of The Appre--- uhh the White House.

http://observer.com/2017/02/donald-trump-administration-mike-flynn-russian-embassy/

Are these guys idiots, or traitors? It basically has to be one or the other at this point. I guess it could be both.

[paulxu]

I think Observer is owned by Jared Kushner.
I wonder if there is some in-fighting going on in the White House.

[vee4xu]

Did we just all get scolded and belittled for posting our thoughts on an online message board?

No. I have no standing to either scold or belittle anyone. I leave that sort of thing to others. It was more a sort of commentary on the ever spinning dialogue that probably means well on all fronts, but gets no traction. I suppose it comes down to my not having the energy to make a point, defend a point, counter someone else's point, etc., etc. That doesn't mean I don't appreciate others who have the desire to do so. Bottom line: In this thread is rather like being in a large room where everyone is simultaneously shouting what they think about a topic without regard to what anyone else has to say. At some point, doesn't one simply get tired of yelling?

[chico]

No. I have no standing to either scold or belittle anyone. I leave that sort of thing to others. It was more a sort of commentary on the ever spinning dialogue that probably means well on all fronts, but gets no traction. I suppose it comes down to my not having the energy to make a point, defend a point, counter someone else's point, etc., etc. That doesn't mean I don't appreciate others who have the desire to do so. Bottom line: In this thread is rather like being in a large room where everyone is simultaneously shouting what they think about a topic without regard to what anyone else has to say. At some point, doesn't one simply get tired of yelling?

Unfortunately, this is pretty much what happens outside of message boards these days as well.

[Caf]

A private email server is looking pretty pretty pretty good right about now.

DOJ warned Flynn could be vulnerable to blackmail: reports (http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/319361-doj-warned-wh-on-flynn-report)

[GoMuskies]

A private email server is looking pretty pretty pretty good right about now.

DOJ warned Flynn could be vulnerable to blackmail: reports (http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/319361-doj-warned-wh-on-flynn-report)

Quick, someone Vince Foster his ass!

[GoMuskies]

Sounds like this will be the new guy:

Retired Navy Vice Adm. Harward served as deputy commander of U.S. Central Command, which oversees all U.S. forces in the Middle East. He served on the NSC during the George W. Bush administration and has served in the National Counterterrorism Center.

Since his retirement, Adm. Harward has taken up work in the private sector with Lockheed Martin Corp. He is currently the defense contractor’s chief executive in the United Arab Emirates.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-possible-successors-to-flynn-as-national-security-adviser-1487079964?tesla=y

[boozehound]

...and Flynn is out. Thank God. After Bannon, Flynn is probably the administration staffer who most concerned me. We already know Trump likes to buy into conspiracy theories (when they fit his agenda, of course), the last thing we need is a National Security staff that propagates them.

Of course this raises even more questions surrounding Trump's relationship with Russia. I doubt that we have heard the end of this.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

Forgive me as I have been skipping this last few days of Trump's reign, explain the Flynn thing to me. If I have it right, he told a Russian Ambassador in December that Trump would lift all sanctions. Is that correct?

First, I would guess that it would not be legal for him to do so in December. Second, why would he make that call at all? Is my timing off here? What did I miss? I skipped it to take a break.

[paulxu]

He probably told him something to that effect in December, when he was a private citizen.
But his relationship with the Russian goes back a few years, and he might have been talking with him during the campaign.
That will be more problematic.

[GoMuskies]

By the way, something bi-partisan happened. That's actually news these days.

David Shulkin was unanimously confirmed by the Senate to lead the Department of Veterans Affairs.

[muskiefan82]

By the way, something bi-partisan happened. That's actually news these days.

David Shulkin was unanimously confirmed by the Senate to lead the Department of Veterans Affairs.

He is actually a decent pick. We'll see if Congress will give him the new laws he needs to really fix things. Congress needs to move the VA (the VHA specifically) out from under the exorbitant protections that exist for employees of Federal agencies. If Congress would write new legislation to the United States Code to re-create the VHA as the first only, at-will, non-union Federal agency, the agency could begin fixing itself immediately. If each facility had the ability to eliminate staff that were a drain on productivity without the multiple appeals and grievance processes, the VA would be better off immediately and could begin to hire people who would know they would be held accountable. Do that and you'll see a different system immediately.

[LA Muskie]

Forgive me as I have been skipping this last few days of Trump's reign, explain the Flynn thing to me. If I have it right, he told a Russian Ambassador in December that Trump would lift all sanctions. Is that correct?

First, I would guess that it would not be legal for him to do so in December. Second, why would he make that call at all? Is my timing off here? What did I miss? I skipped it to take a break.
Correct. That is what's being reported. Also that he lied about the frequency, extent, and substance of his conversations with the Russian Ambassador to DOJ and, allegedly, to Mike Pence as well. It's being reported that his lies were discovered because the ambassador's calls were being intercepted by US Intelligence, and that the Trump Admin was briefed on this in January (by then-Acting AG Sally Yates of all people) but the Admin sat on it for at least 3 weeks until WaPo reported it this weekend. Only then (the reporting, not the entanglement) did it become an issue meriting the Admin's action...

[chico]

Stephen Miller should not do any more interviews. I guess you could say I'd like to see Steve Miller banned.

[XU 87]

Correct. That is what's being reported. Also that he lied about the frequency, extent, and substance of his conversations with the Russian Ambassador to DOJ and, allegedly, to Mike Pence as well. It's being reported that his lies were discovered because the ambassador's calls were being intercepted by US Intelligence, and that the Trump Admin was briefed on this in January (by then-Acting AG Sally Yates of all people) but the Admin sat on it for at least 3 weeks until WaPo reported it this weekend. Only then (the reporting, not the entanglement) did it become an issue meriting the Admin's action...

Is anyone concerned that the CIA leaked these clandestine calls, involving a U.S. citizen, to the media, which is completely illegal?

In short, these were American spies, spying on an Americans and leaking what they found to the media, for the purpose of undermining this American because they don't agree with him politically. Is anyone bothered by that?

[XUFan09]

Is anyone concerned that the CIA leaked these clandestine calls, involving a U.S. citizen, to the media, which is completely illegal?

In short, these were American spies, spying on an Americans and leaking what they found to the media, for the purpose of undermining this American because they don't agree with him politically. Is anyone bothered by that?

Did anything say that the unnamed source didn't agree with him politically? There's a good chance it's just a case of someone reporting a major intelligence issue up the chain, only for it to be ignored, so turning to the public was seen as a last resort. I mean, unless you consider it politically motivated for someone to think, "I don't think it should be ignored that a senior government official has so many ties to Russia and has lied about them."

[XU 87]

Did anything say that the unnamed source didn't agree with him politically? There's a good chance it's just a case of someone reporting a major intelligence issue up the chain, only for it to be ignored, so turning to the public was seen as a last resort.

It's illegal!!!!! Whoever(s) did this committed a felony. Are you arguing that it's ok for government intelligence people to use classified information obtained via govt. eavesdropping to undermine political opponents?

[Juice]

The one thing that's going to do the Trump presidency in is stupid scandals/crimes/incidents/stories (whatever you want to call them) like this one. Any political capital or momentum they could or would have is going to be wasted defending themselves against completely avoidable situations by not having a few f*ck ups in the administration. The good things him and the rest of the party do are going to be completely ignored with shit like this.

[paulxu]

I thought they were "spying" on the Russian ambassador when he was caught talking to a private US citizen (who with his background should have been smart enough to know we might be taping the Russian ambassador).

Also, was it the CIA or the FBI? I thought Comey held off going to the administration originally because they were investigating deeper.

[GoMuskies]

My understanding is that they're not allowed to listen to the private US citizen's portion of the conversation. But that's mostly from staying at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

[XUFan09]

It's illegal!!!!! Whoever(s) did this committed a felony. Are you arguing that it's ok for government intelligence people to use classified information obtained via govt. eavesdropping to undermine political opponents?

Yes, but it also information that the public should really know, if this guy was possibly going to continue serving in a high-ranking position in the U.S. government. And again, was there anything said that indicated it was a political opponent? Or are you just assuming that? I could easily see a Republican doing this.

[GoMuskies]

Why would someone being a Republican mean they weren't a political opponent? You don't recall the Never Trump movement?

[XUFan09]

Why would someone being a Republican mean they weren't a political opponent? You don't recall the Never Trump movement?

Good point, but I was more thinking about the 90% of Republicans who give Trump a positive approval rating right now. It's very likely for a Republican to have a favorable opinion of Trump that doesn't extend to a questionable White House official.

[Lloyd Braun]

Well that escalated quickly... would love to see anyone possibly defend this (https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/us/politics/russia-intelligence-communications-trump.html).

[LA Muskie]

Is anyone concerned that the CIA leaked these clandestine calls, involving a U.S. citizen, to the media, which is completely illegal?

In short, these were American spies, spying on an Americans and leaking what they found to the media, for the purpose of undermining this American because they don't agree with him politically. Is anyone bothered by that?

Yes. I'm concerned. I'm very concerned. I'm concerned that there is so little faith within his own administration, in the intelligence community, or in the military, that Trump can effectively and legally govern that they feel they need to create external pressure.

I'm concerned that our incoming NSA was so careless that he didn't even consider that the agencies he was about to lead were monitoring the calls of the Russian diplomat with whom he was conspiring to violate US law (at an absolute minimum), acts which could theoretically be viewed as acts of treason and which almost certainly compromised his ability to serve by leaving him vulnerable to kompromat.

And yes, I'm concerned that the Trump administration was -- and is -- more concerned about that controversy than the risk to national security.

I'm concerned that all of these are the things from which coups are born. And I'm concerned that -- terrifying as that may be -- that very may well be a positive development.

Basically, I'm concerned that we're fucked.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GoMuskies]

Coups? C'mon man, get a grip.

[Caf]

Is anyone concerned that the CIA leaked these clandestine calls, involving a U.S. citizen, to the media, which is completely illegal?

In short, these were American spies, spying on an Americans and leaking what they found to the media, for the purpose of undermining this American because they don't agree with him politically. Is anyone bothered by that?

I haven't really considered that yet. I'm still taking in the whole 'our President's campaign was in contact with Russian intelligence' thing. My first instinct is to acknowledge that these kind of leaks aren't normal. The intelligence agencies have a proud history of being as non-partisan as reasonably possible. I think the gravity of these revelations has a lot more to do with these leaks than politics.