Trump presidency

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
SDK
Posts: 703
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 7:40 pm UTC
Location: Canada

Re: Trump presidency

Postby SDK » Fri Sep 28, 2018 10:38 pm UTC

I guess I just keep hoping that some people in the Republican party might care about keeping the country running... Silly me.
The biggest number (63 quintillion googols in debt)

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Sep 28, 2018 10:58 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:But if they hadn't blocked Garland, they would've only had 1 conservative SC Justice now. Assuming no more retirements/deaths, if the Dems win big the score will be 1 conservative and 1 moderate justice, if not, 2 conservative justices, versus 1 conservative and 1 liberal justice.

Working together isn't going to get the Republicans the results they want.


Yeah, that was a winning play for them. Having a liberal justice instead of a conservative justice, with the payoff being perhaps more liberal support next time? Ehhh. Naw, they won the Garland fight, and even now, it doesn't seem like they're paying much of a price.

Puts a bit of pressure on the remaining liberal justices, I imagine. Gotta eat healthy, put off retirement.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10500
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Sep 28, 2018 11:07 pm UTC

SDK wrote:I guess I just keep hoping that some people in the Republican party might care about keeping the country running... Silly me.


Pfff bwahhhahaha

User avatar
Yablo
Posts: 634
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2012 9:57 am UTC
Location: Juneau, Alaska

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Yablo » Sat Sep 29, 2018 12:09 am UTC

SDK wrote:It's really the Republican's fault they're feeling crunched for time here anyway. If they hadn't set precedent by blocking Garland back when it was Obama's turn to pick, they wouldn't have to worry about the Democrats blocking their pick on the off chance they win the midterms. It's weird... it's almost like working together actually does make life better for everyone!

Are you saying Feinstein held onto Dr. Ford's letter for two months and released it just before the recommendation to proceed with the confirmation as political retaliation for the blocking of the Garland nomination?
If you like Call of Cthulhu and modern government conspiracy, check out my Delta Green thread.
Please feel free to ask questions or leave comments.

User avatar
natraj
Posts: 1895
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:13 pm UTC
Location: away from Omelas

Re: Trump presidency

Postby natraj » Sat Sep 29, 2018 1:12 am UTC

i've lost track in the whole rapist judge fiasco about whether this was posted already so sorry if this is a repeat but anyway

in further the administration literally just does not give a fuck if the whole world burns news their own environmental impact statement predicts a catastrophic 7 degree rise in global temperature by the end of the century and as a result they are like oh well we'd better just not do anything except try as hard as we can to bleed the planet dry in the meantime since it wouldn't make us enough money to try and do literally anything about this whatsoever. there is no end to how much this adminstration is tryna be comic book villain levels of evil but they keep trying to outdo themselves!
You want to know the future, love? Then wait:
I'll answer your impatient questions. Still --
They'll call it chance, or luck, or call it Fate,
The cards and stars that tumble as they will.

pronouns: they or he

ijuin
Posts: 1112
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:02 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby ijuin » Sat Sep 29, 2018 1:35 am UTC

*If* we assume that Third World countries will follow China’s trajectory on pollution (i.e. increase massively as they industrialize), then the “anything we do is a drop in the bucket” argument makes sense. However, that assumes that everyone in the world has the same attitude as the current US administration. And if there’s one thing that Trump is good at, it is projecting his own biases onto others.

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 2113
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Sableagle » Sat Sep 29, 2018 1:50 am UTC

natraj wrote:7 degree rise in global temperature by the end of the century

7°F or C?
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.

User avatar
natraj
Posts: 1895
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:13 pm UTC
Location: away from Omelas

Re: Trump presidency

Postby natraj » Sat Sep 29, 2018 2:13 am UTC

You want to know the future, love? Then wait:
I'll answer your impatient questions. Still --
They'll call it chance, or luck, or call it Fate,
The cards and stars that tumble as they will.

pronouns: they or he

duodecimus
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 12:25 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby duodecimus » Sat Sep 29, 2018 3:56 am UTC

Hey uh, question.

Justice Kavenaugh said that he drank in highschool, which was in Maryland, and he turned 18 in 1983.

Wikipedia says that in 1982, the legal drinking age in Maryland was raised to 21.

Isn't that like, bad? I'm not really familiar enough with American law to say how bad, but still.


Also, isn't he under oath for all this, including when he said he never drank in older hearings? I feel like 'willing to lie under oath' shows plenty enough disregard for the rule of law to disqualify him from serving as a justice.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6802
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Sat Sep 29, 2018 4:33 am UTC

duodecimus wrote:Hey uh, question.

Justice Kavenaugh said that he drank in highschool, which was in Maryland, and he turned 18 in 1983.

Wikipedia says that in 1982, the legal drinking age in Maryland was raised to 21.

Isn't that like, bad? I'm not really familiar enough with American law to say how bad, but still.


Also, isn't he under oath for all this, including when he said he never drank in older hearings? I feel like 'willing to lie under oath' shows plenty enough disregard for the rule of law to disqualify him from serving as a justice.

Statute of limitations apply to drinking. You can still judge him harshly, like denying him a promotion if you were in charge and cared.
Lying under oath only matters if you're caught. So far, nobody has really called him out on that. You're kinda back to the previous point.

User avatar
Euphonium
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2009 11:17 pm UTC
Location: in ur bourgeois bosses' union, agitating ur workers

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Euphonium » Sat Sep 29, 2018 4:45 am UTC

duodecimus wrote:Hey uh, question.

Justice Kavenaugh said that he drank in highschool, which was in Maryland, and he turned 18 in 1983.

Wikipedia says that in 1982, the legal drinking age in Maryland was raised to 21.

Isn't that like, bad? I'm not really familiar enough with American law to say how bad, but still.


Brett Kavanaugh is almost certainly a rapist, and is definitely a misogynistic sack of shit who doesn't see anything wrong with rape (as are those who continue to defend him).

But forgetting, offhand, the exact year in which the Maryland law changed isn't really something to hold against him.

And no, it doesn't speak to his ability as a jurist, because if he were ever faced with a case where it were relevant, he could very easily look it up, so there's no need to memorize trivia like this.

As for underage drinking itself...eh. Unlike committing rape, this actually is something the vast majority of teenagers engage in at least once. It's the sort of thing where, I'd prefer a child of mine not do it, but I've done it myself, and so has almost everyone else I know, and it's not in and of itself something I'd hold against an adult.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10500
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Sat Sep 29, 2018 5:04 am UTC

sardia wrote:
duodecimus wrote:Hey uh, question.

Justice Kavenaugh said that he drank in highschool, which was in Maryland, and he turned 18 in 1983.

Wikipedia says that in 1982, the legal drinking age in Maryland was raised to 21.

Isn't that like, bad? I'm not really familiar enough with American law to say how bad, but still.


Also, isn't he under oath for all this, including when he said he never drank in older hearings? I feel like 'willing to lie under oath' shows plenty enough disregard for the rule of law to disqualify him from serving as a justice.

Statute of limitations apply to drinking. You can still judge him harshly, like denying him a promotion if you were in charge and cared.
Lying under oath only matters if you're caught. So far, nobody has really called him out on that. You're kinda back to the previous point.


If we were to even make an attempt at arresting people who drank underage, the entire country would be in prison, including the Mormons as the prison guards.

As for lying under oath about it, eh, that's a drop in the bucket at this point compared to all the other shit he's done.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6802
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Sat Sep 29, 2018 7:23 am UTC

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/wh ... ting-lies/
As a reminder, the best way to tell if someone is lying is with facts, not judging testimony.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7368
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: Trump presidency

Postby The Great Hippo » Sat Sep 29, 2018 12:04 pm UTC

sardia wrote:https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-humans-are-bad-at-spotting-lies/
As a reminder, the best way to tell if someone is lying is with facts, not judging testimony.
I don't need to be able to tell whether or not he's lying to determine whether or not he's acting like an indignant, hyperbolic baby, though.

Which should send up some pretty big red flags.

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 2113
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Sableagle » Sat Sep 29, 2018 12:50 pm UTC

I'm no expert on the US justice system, but am I right in thinking that the more money an accused person has, the more times the case is likely to get elevated to the next court up, that the Supreme Court is the top level and can overrule anything any lower court says, that precedent established by a Supreme Court ruling becomes law and must be applied in future cases and that the Republican Party is currently busy stacking the Supreme Court with men (for want of a better noun) who are on record as apparently finding sexual assaults by rich white guys acceptable?
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.

User avatar
eran_rathan
Mostly Wrong
Posts: 1844
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:36 pm UTC
Location: in your ceiling, judging you

Re: Trump presidency

Postby eran_rathan » Sat Sep 29, 2018 12:54 pm UTC

Sableagle wrote:I'm no expert on the US justice system, but am I right in thinking that the more money an accused person has, the more times the case is likely to get elevated to the next court up, that the Supreme Court is the top level and can overrule anything any lower court says, that precedent established by a Supreme Court ruling becomes law and must be applied in future cases and that the Republican Party is currently busy stacking the Supreme Court with men (for want of a better noun) who are on record as apparently finding sexual assaults by rich white guys acceptable?


The general rule in the US is you get just as much justice as you can afford. The same for healthcare too.
"Does this smell like chloroform to you?"
"Google tells me you are not unique. You are, however, wrong."
nɒʜƚɒɿ_nɒɿɘ

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10274
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Trump presidency

Postby addams » Sat Sep 29, 2018 12:55 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:As for lying under oath about it, eh, that's a drop in the bucket at this point compared to all the other shit he's done.
It may be 'A Drop in the Bucket'.
Yet; It is illegal.

Personally, I'd love to see that spoiled, judgmental Judge be prosecuted and spend a few weeks in a jail for it.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3989
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Dauric » Sat Sep 29, 2018 1:32 pm UTC

Sableagle wrote:I'm no expert on the US justice system, but am I right in thinking that the more money an accused person has, the more times the case is likely to get elevated to the next court up, that the Supreme Court is the top level and can overrule anything any lower court says, that precedent established by a Supreme Court ruling becomes law and must be applied in future cases and that the Republican Party is currently busy stacking the Supreme Court with men (for want of a better noun) who are on record as apparently finding sexual assaults by rich white guys acceptable?


This is true except the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court doesn't adjudicate on matters of facts of a case or guilt or innocence of the defendant. The Supreme Court judges the laws that apply to a case and whether those laws are consistent with the Constitution and it's Amendments or other case precedents.

A murder trial would never have been heard by the Supreme Court no matter how much money the defendant threw at the system, there was no question about the applicability of laws against murder. If evidence had been gathered improperly that still wouldn't have gotten to the Supreme Court as that's not a question of the legality of the policy, but rather that the officers hadn't adhered to legal policy in gathering evidence.

A state legislature makes a new law that forces abortion clinics to adhere to some draconian requirements to operate: This can end up at the Supreme Court. The applicability and 'just-ness' of the law is at question. A police department adopts new Orwellian policies on surveillance, cases where this has arguably harmed someone can get to the Supreme Court and te court decides if it represents a break with rules about search and seizure.

Basically the Supreme Court presides over the output of legislatures rather than over the actions of individual citizens. Once a case goes to the Supreme Court -technically- it goes back to the lower courts to be re-decided with the interpretation of the law settled. In practice once a case is done in the SC either the offense itself is no longer an offense, or critical evidence is no longer applicable, so there's little to no point in actually going back to the lower courts.

So, it's not that stacking the Supreme Court does anything for "Rich white guys convicted of Sexual Assault", but rather that a conservative Supreme Court is likely to uphold a broad reading of Second Amendment rights, overturn Roe Vs. Wade, give corporations the rights of individuals and allow corporations to act freely and without regulation (Citizen's United decision), etc.

The other one that might be why Trump is pushing for Kavanaugh: The Supreme Court might be called on to decide whether a sitting President may be investigated and arrested for crimes while in office. Kavanaugh has been on record as stating that a sitting president is immune from prosecution "so they aren't distracted from important matters of state".
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

Mutex
Posts: 1475
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:32 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Mutex » Sat Sep 29, 2018 2:33 pm UTC

Vox have an interesting article detailing the times Ford and Kavanaugh dodged a question during the testimony.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... ring-chart

Short version, Ford dodged zero questions, and Kavanaugh dodged a whole lot, at least according to Vox. I'm going through some of the questions they highlighted as him dodging, some seem a little mean, such as this one:

DURBIN: I — I’ll just say this: If you, Judge Kavanaugh, turned to Don McGahn and to this committee and say, “For the sake of my reputation, my family name, and to get to the bottom of the truth of this, I am not going to stay — be an obstacle to an FBI investigation,” I would hope that all the members of the committee would join me in saying, “We’re going to abide by your witch — wishes, and we will have that investigation.”

KAVANAUGH: I — I welcome whatever the committee wants to do, because I’m telling the truth.

Maybe it's just that I'm not feeling well right now but he seemed agreeable to the proposal of an FBI investigation there, which is what the question was asking him about?

But there's definitely plenty of questions about his drinking he dodges hard. Example:
HIRONO: … that James Roche said, your roommate, “Although Brett was normally reserved, he was a notably heavy drinker, even by the standards of the time. And he became aggressive and belligerent when he was drunk.” So is your former college roommate lying?

KAVANAUGH: I would refer you to what I said in the sealed or redacted portion about his relationship with the other two roommates, and I’m going to leave it at that. I will say – Senator, you were asking about college.


Hoo boy and the bits where they question him about the incident itself:
BOOKER: … Thank you, sir. Do you wish that she never came forward?

KAVANAUGH: Senator, I did not do this. The witnesses…

BOOKER: That — that’s not my question, sir. Could you try to answer my question, sir? Do you wish she never came forward?

KAVANAUGH: … The witnesses who were there say it didn’t happen.

BOOKER: OK, sir. Do you wish she would’ve just remained silent then?

KAVANAUGH: I wish — the witnesses who were there say it didn’t happen. All allegations should be taken seriously.

BOOKER: So — so even if it’s in the final days — days before a vote, if someone has a credible allegation of experience that they held for a long time, that person should be allowed to come forward. And in fact, as she said, it was her civic duty. You’re not questioning her sense of civic duty are you?

KAVANAUGH: She did come forward and then the — then the — it was…

User avatar
Euphonium
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2009 11:17 pm UTC
Location: in ur bourgeois bosses' union, agitating ur workers

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Euphonium » Sat Sep 29, 2018 3:29 pm UTC

Dauric wrote:
Sableagle wrote:I'm no expert on the US justice system, but am I right in thinking that the more money an accused person has, the more times the case is likely to get elevated to the next court up, that the Supreme Court is the top level and can overrule anything any lower court says, that precedent established by a Supreme Court ruling becomes law and must be applied in future cases and that the Republican Party is currently busy stacking the Supreme Court with men (for want of a better noun) who are on record as apparently finding sexual assaults by rich white guys acceptable?


This is true except the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court doesn't adjudicate on matters of facts of a case or guilt or innocence of the defendant.


Except when they do.

Opus_723
Posts: 75
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 8:55 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Opus_723 » Sun Sep 30, 2018 5:56 am UTC

All the reporting I'm seeing seems confused as to how much the White House is limiting the scope of the investigation, and the claims by WH staff seem to be at odds with "sources close to the investigation."

That's probably somewhat normal, but I think it should be noted that there's the possibility that the White House is telling them which witnesses they are allowed to contact, and there is a source claiming that the FBI is expressly not to seek corroboration of Kavanaugh's drinking habits in college.

Hopefully the reporting becomes more clear in a few days.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna915061?__twitter_impression=true

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6802
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Mon Oct 01, 2018 12:38 pm UTC

https://www.politico.com/interactives/2 ... aine-chao/
The wife of McConnell and Transportation secretary is either the world's laziest person or is trying to hide her activities from public scrutiny. Possibility both.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 4060
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Soupspoon » Mon Oct 01, 2018 12:51 pm UTC

Noting the number of similarly-themed comments below the article, maybe she's "Making $$$s in her free time for only a few hours a week!", and secretly using that to offset the departmental deficit?

idonno
Posts: 300
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 3:34 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby idonno » Mon Oct 01, 2018 1:09 pm UTC

But six former DOT officials who worked closely with previous Transportation secretaries told POLITICO that the amount of private time during work hours delineated on Chao’s calendar is atypical.

Are their calendars not public information? If not, why not and if they are, why the reliance on claims made by people from the other administration instead of using the equivalent data set? It seems suspicious to me.

Also, Given the heavy timing to Friday and a couple heavy Mondays, I find it hard to believe that a large portion of this isn't just taking extra time off which may be dishonest but not particularly sinister.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10274
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Trump presidency

Postby addams » Mon Oct 01, 2018 2:00 pm UTC

sardia wrote:https://www.politico.com/interactives/2018/where-is-elaine-chao/
The wife of McConnell and Transportation secretary is either the world's laziest person or is trying to hide her activities from public scrutiny. Possibility both.
That is what we can expect from the Orange Hitler's leadership style.

These people work for us!
We have a Right to know what they are doing!
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Oct 01, 2018 2:18 pm UTC

duodecimus wrote:Hey uh, question.

Justice Kavenaugh said that he drank in highschool, which was in Maryland, and he turned 18 in 1983.

Wikipedia says that in 1982, the legal drinking age in Maryland was raised to 21.

Isn't that like, bad? I'm not really familiar enough with American law to say how bad, but still.


Underage drinking is pretty normal. It's generally a slap on the wrist if you get caught at the time, unless there are further circumstances(driving, property damage, etc). It having an effect years down the line is a bit like criticizing someone for speeding. Technically not legal, but also very minor and culturally accepted. Plus, statute of limitations. Generally, nobody cares. So that's really not any reason to worry about his competence.

However, the triviality of the crime means it doesn't make a reasonable motivation for him to waffle on questions. And he definitely appears to be waffling on other questions. To the casual observer, it would appear that he is concerned about hiding worse.

I concur with Sardia that facts trump everything, but it does seem that he is acting fishy to me, and I don't think I'm particularly biased in this case. Yeah, one can be innocent and also be awful at answering questions, but the motive/opportunity/means triad is fairly reasonable for evaluating people in the absence of facts.

sardia wrote:https://www.politico.com/interactives/2018/where-is-elaine-chao/
The wife of McConnell and Transportation secretary is either the world's laziest person or is trying to hide her activities from public scrutiny. Possibility both.


Given the strong bias towards fridays, I'd suggest that laziness is more likely. Monday being second highest, that's a pretty typical extended weekend pattern. The example week showed them at the start of monday, and then a huge stretch at the end of friday. That seems like a "fuck this week" attitude.

Chen
Posts: 5577
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Chen » Mon Oct 01, 2018 2:49 pm UTC

I mean the hiding activities seems more likely. There are private appointments going to 6 pm on the Thursday and Friday but Monday and Tuesday both end at 5 pm. Why put a private appointment there if you didn't need to account for those times the other days?

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Oct 01, 2018 2:57 pm UTC

That might be relying overmuch on the example week. The calendar shown had up to 22 hours specified as private on some fridays.

I'm assuming she's not actually working 22 hour days, but that means her scheduled office hours must not be consistently the same as those shown in the example week.

User avatar
emceng
Posts: 3167
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:38 pm UTC
Location: State of Hockey
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby emceng » Mon Oct 01, 2018 3:31 pm UTC

Yablo wrote:
SDK wrote:It's really the Republican's fault they're feeling crunched for time here anyway. If they hadn't set precedent by blocking Garland back when it was Obama's turn to pick, they wouldn't have to worry about the Democrats blocking their pick on the off chance they win the midterms. It's weird... it's almost like working together actually does make life better for everyone!

Are you saying Feinstein held onto Dr. Ford's letter for two months and released it just before the recommendation to proceed with the confirmation as political retaliation for the blocking of the Garland nomination?


Not trying to be a dick here, but Jesus tap dancing Christ on a crutch. This is what's wrong with the GOP. SDK made a statement about how the GOP dicked over Obama's appointment, and you're projecting malicious intent onto a Democratic senator. Sure it's possible Feinstein did that. It is in no way related to what SDK wrote. I don't know why I'm responding here where when you argue in bad faith and ignore any points that contradict Fox News.
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. - CS Lewis

User avatar
Yablo
Posts: 634
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2012 9:57 am UTC
Location: Juneau, Alaska

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Yablo » Mon Oct 01, 2018 5:29 pm UTC

emceng wrote:
Yablo wrote:
SDK wrote:It's really the Republican's fault they're feeling crunched for time here anyway. If they hadn't set precedent by blocking Garland back when it was Obama's turn to pick, they wouldn't have to worry about the Democrats blocking their pick on the off chance they win the midterms. It's weird... it's almost like working together actually does make life better for everyone!

Are you saying Feinstein held onto Dr. Ford's letter for two months and released it just before the recommendation to proceed with the confirmation as political retaliation for the blocking of the Garland nomination?


Not trying to be a dick here, but Jesus tap dancing Christ on a crutch. This is what's wrong with the GOP. SDK made a statement about how the GOP dicked over Obama's appointment, and you're projecting malicious intent onto a Democratic senator. Sure it's possible Feinstein did that. It is in no way related to what SDK wrote. I don't know why I'm responding here where when you argue in bad faith and ignore any points that contradict Fox News.

I apologize if my question came off that way. I was honestly just asking if that was what SDK was saying. I wasn't projecting malicious intent on Feinstein, but the timing of the release of the allegations is what caused the time crunch SDK mentioned.
If you like Call of Cthulhu and modern government conspiracy, check out my Delta Green thread.
Please feel free to ask questions or leave comments.

User avatar
SDK
Posts: 703
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 7:40 pm UTC
Location: Canada

Re: Trump presidency

Postby SDK » Mon Oct 01, 2018 5:57 pm UTC

Yablo wrote:
SDK wrote:It's really the Republican's fault they're feeling crunched for time here anyway. If they hadn't set precedent by blocking Garland back when it was Obama's turn to pick, they wouldn't have to worry about the Democrats blocking their pick on the off chance they win the midterms. It's weird... it's almost like working together actually does make life better for everyone!

Are you saying Feinstein held onto Dr. Ford's letter for two months and released it just before the recommendation to proceed with the confirmation as political retaliation for the blocking of the Garland nomination?

No, I'm saying that if Garland hadn't been blocked, the Democrats wouldn't block the Republican nominee in the hypothetical future.

The Republican fear here is that the Democrats will win the Senate during the midterms and block the nomination for the remaining two years, right? As far as I'm aware, that never happened in the history of the United States until the Republicans blocked Obama's candidate. The Republicans chose to fight dirty and opened that up as an option. As CU pointed out, it probably was the "correct" play on their part since they've certainly gained more than they lost by doing that, but it comes at the cost of a well-functioning government.
The biggest number (63 quintillion googols in debt)

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6582
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Thesh » Mon Oct 01, 2018 6:18 pm UTC

Let's clarify: "right play" means Republicans have subverted democracy for the sake of ensuring that the government acts purely in the interests of the powerful. It's the right play for the Republican party, but not for Republican voters, but they will always blame all problems on liberals, minorities, and the parts of the government that protect the weak so no one in the party has a reason to care.

Like, there is nothing good coming out of this for anyone who is not actually evil.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

User avatar
eran_rathan
Mostly Wrong
Posts: 1844
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:36 pm UTC
Location: in your ceiling, judging you

Re: Trump presidency

Postby eran_rathan » Mon Oct 01, 2018 6:28 pm UTC

SDK wrote:
Yablo wrote:
SDK wrote:It's really the Republican's fault they're feeling crunched for time here anyway. If they hadn't set precedent by blocking Garland back when it was Obama's turn to pick, they wouldn't have to worry about the Democrats blocking their pick on the off chance they win the midterms. It's weird... it's almost like working together actually does make life better for everyone!

Are you saying Feinstein held onto Dr. Ford's letter for two months and released it just before the recommendation to proceed with the confirmation as political retaliation for the blocking of the Garland nomination?

No, I'm saying that if Garland hadn't been blocked, the Democrats wouldn't block the Republican nominee in the hypothetical future.

The Republican fear here is that the Democrats will win the Senate during the midterms and block the nomination for the remaining two years, right? As far as I'm aware, that never happened in the history of the United States until the Republicans blocked Obama's candidate. The Republicans chose to fight dirty and opened that up as an option. As CU pointed out, it probably was the "correct" play on their part since they've certainly gained more than they lost by doing that, but it comes at the cost of a well-functioning government.


that's part of the point for Republicans, though.

"Government doesn't work, so vote for me, and I'll go to Congress and make sure it doesn't work!" (and ride that gravy train into the sunset). It also makes it easier for them to claim inefficiencies, and thereby pressure the voters into thinking privatization would be better, making themselves and their cronies/handlers lots of money.

its a corollary to Grover Norquist's famous "drown it in the bathtub" comment.
"Does this smell like chloroform to you?"
"Google tells me you are not unique. You are, however, wrong."
nɒʜƚɒɿ_nɒɿɘ

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Oct 01, 2018 6:51 pm UTC

Thesh wrote:Let's clarify: "right play" means Republicans have subverted democracy for the sake of ensuring that the government acts purely in the interests of the powerful. It's the right play for the Republican party, but not for Republican voters, but they will always blame all problems on liberals, minorities, and the parts of the government that protect the weak so no one in the party has a reason to care.

Like, there is nothing good coming out of this for anyone who is not actually evil.


It's from the perspective of strategy, not of morals.

Though some folks are sufficiently partisan that they'll accept an "end justifies the means" approach. Quite a lot of them, actually.

User avatar
Yablo
Posts: 634
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2012 9:57 am UTC
Location: Juneau, Alaska

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Yablo » Mon Oct 01, 2018 7:34 pm UTC

eran_rathan wrote:that's part of the point for Republicans, though.

"Government doesn't work, so vote for me, and I'll go to Congress and make sure it doesn't work!" (and ride that gravy train into the sunset).

You say that like Democrats and Independents aren't just as guilty.
If you like Call of Cthulhu and modern government conspiracy, check out my Delta Green thread.
Please feel free to ask questions or leave comments.

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6582
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Thesh » Mon Oct 01, 2018 7:42 pm UTC

That is correct, Democrats and independent are not even close to being as guilty - in fact, they act in good faith while Republicans do not. I realize that saying "both sides do it too" is your only response to every single bad thing Republicans do, but it is not reality. It's just you being an apologist for those who are abusing power, even though people are being killed by Republican's deliberate assault on democracy and civil rights, because you believe that it is for the greater good.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Oct 01, 2018 8:10 pm UTC

Yablo wrote:
eran_rathan wrote:that's part of the point for Republicans, though.

"Government doesn't work, so vote for me, and I'll go to Congress and make sure it doesn't work!" (and ride that gravy train into the sunset).

You say that like Democrats and Independents aren't just as guilty.


Us Libertarian/independent sorts are pretty straightforward about our views on government. Plus, not a whole lot of folks run as third party/independent solely because they want the gravy train of easy money. If you want things easy, you stick with the parties that have all the power and a way better shot at getting more.

elasto
Posts: 3760
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby elasto » Mon Oct 01, 2018 8:38 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Us Libertarian/independent sorts are pretty straightforward about our views on government.

And us Centrists are pretty straightforward too. There are three major political parties in the UK and I have supported each of them at different times, and I share a lot of values in common with the SNP too.

I support mature, pragmatic, consensus-seeking politics not ideology, but unfortunately all parties have moved away from that in recent times (except for the LibDems, who basically got crucified at the polls for governing in a mature, pragmatic and consensus-seeking fashion...)

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 4060
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Soupspoon » Mon Oct 01, 2018 8:48 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:That might be relying overmuch on the example week. The calendar shown had up to 22 hours specified as private on some fridays.

I'm assuming she's not actually working 22 hour days, but that means her scheduled office hours must not be consistently the same as those shown in the example week.

I believe (without going back to re-read it) that was the "hours per every day of that month" example. 4 or 5 Fridays totalling 22 hours would be 5h30m a day or 4h24m a day, out of the 9ish 'working day' hours possible on those days (9-6, wasn't it?), given that they didn't count anything outside those hours,

(If, due also to public holidays excluding an entire Friday, that month, that'd be 7h20m, on average, blocked out of the three remaining days, also possible. Maybe even more taking of liberties, but not mathematically beyond bounds.)

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4582
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby LaserGuy » Mon Oct 01, 2018 9:32 pm UTC

United States and Canada sign literal 11th hour agreement-in-principle on a new NAFTA, setting the stage for the agreement to be voted through by Congress before the new Congress is sworn in after the midterms.

Details on the specifics are still forthcoming, but looking at what has been presented as the main changes compared to NAFTA, it feels like this was really just arguing at the margins of the agreement rather than any sort of a comprehensive revision as it was being sold as. Maybe I'd feel more strongly about it if I were involved in the dairy or auto sector.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests