I have to say, whatever the status of Mueller's investigation, it feels like there's an uptick in news about persons involved lately, due to their connection to other legal stuff going on.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
US PoliEra 2019 |OT3| YOU WERE AT MY WEDDING, DENISE
- Thread starter Ogodei
- Start date
- Status
I have to say, whatever the status of Mueller's investigation, it feels like there's an uptick in news about persons involved lately, due to their connection to other legal stuff going on.
I'm still seething about this, and it need to be brought up.
Because what really gets me about that exchange is Wilbur Ross' abject arrogance. He starts out by stating that AOC is out of time and that he isn't obligated to answer the question. He completely dismisses her as if she's a sub-human not worth his time or effort. Good for Chairman Cummings who stepped up and said "Well I'm asking. Please answer the question", which is sad that he even had to do so. Then Ross goes on to lie (under oath) that he did comply with the law. That this behavior has become so commonplace that it fails to raise alarm is symptom of a completely dysfunctional political process.
Second time we've seen that, with Whitaker before. I don't know why they expect this to work.
His wording is clear: "Our lawyers say we complied with the law." He's scot free of that's false.
Sorry, that page doesn't exist!
And this is why you all need to spoiler tag your tweets.
Not to mention even I could follow AOC's line of questioning both attempts at asking. She was clear and eloquent in raising the issue and trying to bring to light the severity of how Ross was mangling the Census and the rules to benefit a dark road. She did so without vilification or demonizing the witness or making loud showman-like outbursts. She pointed her questioning at the issue very directly and how the law is written. Making a concise case of right and wrong.
And yet of course Ross, and his apparent counsel Meadows, just shrug their shoulders and plead naive.
You are not alone in seething at this total scam.
It's worse than that.
It's saying "Muslims are bad, but shooting them isn't the right way to go about persecuting them."
You're taking her comment too abstractly. I think she's saying she'll bring office supplies to diplomatic meetings and throw them at other people.
I think I'm more in favor of a one-state solution at this point, but it's a tough one for me. I'm fundamentally opposed to ethnostates. But on the other hand, basically every time in history Jewish people lived with anybody else, the other group eventually tries to kill them all. After thousands of years of that, I understand why Jewish people were keen to have an ethnostate.
I do think a superpower needs to come in and tell them that this situation isn't currently working, and that they need to consider other ways of keeping themselves safe. Kinda how we get smaller countries to denuclearize.
You don't bring a stapler to a shoe fight.
(that picture is fake and that whole incident probably never really happened).
I don't actually think the media *faces*—reporters, hosts, anchors, the people you generally see etc.—want Trump to win again, not even the access journalism folks. But at the highest levels, the C-suite media execs... yeah.
It isn't any different than fossil fuel companies having a vested interest in not reducing pollution
They are making more money and getting better ratings than ever before. It's bad for America and democracy but it's good for them so they don't care.
This is more about the larger political movements at play, specifically right-wing parties, but I'd recommend the book Go Back to Where You Came From: The Backlash Against Immigration and the Fate of Western Democracy.
The author takes a more global approach, barely touching on the US aside from obvious parallels, in order to examine the myriad ways in which Europe, Australia, and, briefly, South Africa's burgeoning right-wing parties are enacting policies and debates over immigration, refugees, and the coming wave that will kick into high gear with mass climate change.
The main caveat I have given before is that the book features a LOT of right-wingers being quoted at length. While the author makes it clear that they disagree with those views, and competing ones are given time, you will wade through mountains of bullshit all for the necessity of getting into that mindset.
The book can be a little disjointed in its approach and needed some focusing, but does try to illuminate some specific points about the movements and their policies - Australian offshoring, using hard immigration policy as deterrence to immigrate, how South Africa's immigration issues bely race, etc.
Ordered. Thank you.
I hope it covers how someone who immigrated to a country, then got profiled as a terrorist for their race, a few decades later could vote for Brexit.
A feel like a big takeaway with the Klobuchar controversy that's not pointed out enough is that it's probably a bad idea to replace a president with a comically low staff retention with one who also has a comically low staff retention.
Last edited:
In case you needed a direct example of how right wingers and conservatives literally live in Opposite Land. That clown claiming a Muslim terrorist would receive "Lone wolf, mental illness, not representative of the whole" talk, but supposedly white terrorists don't? The exact complete opposite of reality, but there he is claiming it as a whiny complaint.
They do the same with everything. If you actually listened to their complaints about "the left" or "Democrats" or "SJWs", they continuously are describing the right wing, worldwide, to a tee. Like it would be funny how spot on their descriptions are, if it weren't dangerously deranged.
The AP says Jane Sanders wasn't being compensated. However, her son was bringing home 100k a year for running the foundation, which means around 17% of the foundation's entire fundraising went to him. Nothing unusual about that!
Oddly, the UK comes up very little. The main actors being analyzed are in France, Denmark, Australia, and South Africa.
And be warned, the author does bring up "economic anxiety". To be fair, that seems like a more, not legitimate....salient argument in states with very integrated safety nets.
For instance, and I had no clue about this, South Africa's constitution grants citizenship rights to anyone physically present in the country, including access to all social benefits. Thus, an argument arises pretty quickly on how those benefits can survive mass migrations placing an ostensible strain on the system. Of course, this then raises questions about those societies barring or otherwise discouraging engagement with employment to protect their native populations, creating a feedback loop of "immigrant cannot be gainfully legally employed, but we afford them benefits, and then get angry when they want to work but cannot."
This comes up a lot in the French and Danish chapters. Failures of integration, not on the part of the immigrant but imposed by the state, create feedback loops.
There's also talk about these predominately secular societies not having any clue how to approach engaging with more religious immigrant communities. It's here that the author does blame both sides, and makes a pretty convincing argument, while also pointing out the myriad right-wing Euro movements that still erect Nativity scenes, claiming they are cultural rather than religious and never seeing the irony.
Well don't give me the cliff notes for the whole book! I'm going to read it :P
Fallon actually does a pretty decent job of impersonating Beto.
https://www.cnn.com/videos/media/20...-bdk.cnn/video/playlists/atv-trending-videos/
Still waiting on donation numbers.
https://www.cnn.com/videos/media/20...-bdk.cnn/video/playlists/atv-trending-videos/
Still waiting on donation numbers.
Losing your shit when negotiating with foreign powers seems like a rather large liability, rather than an asset. But I'm sure that dumb, dumb narrative sells to certain people. (Who won't vote for her anyway)
There's been 0 Beto emails today. I wonder if he's holding off due to the NZ attack? Maybe get be why there aren't fundraising numbers.
I don't want it to happen either. But if it does, you can't blame poliera for not holding back.
That's still nowhere near as impressive as the composition at Trump's rally in El Paso, which is 80% Latinx.
Glass shower door? Well someone's saying at a flashy hotel. Can't hit your head on a flimsy plastic curtain! Sucker. Serious talk though: 7 stitches a freaking lot and I'm glad he's okay.
The hypocrisy of Bernie railing on the Clinton foundation while this shit was going on is astounding.
How can we expect him to be president? How can he protect and keep us safe? He can't even protect himself from a glass door!!
No, not at all. Just not interested in thermonucleur war.
Old people break easy.
That Cult of the Dead Cow -- where's the name come from? Anything to do with the old way of marking uninitialized memory as hex DEADBEEF?
Oh dear... Will Bernie be healthy enough with enough stamina to survive the primary season?
So I read that Beto's court packing scheme he mentioned a couple days ago involves Democrats picking 5 judges, Republicans picking 5 judges, and then those judges picking 5 more judges! Which I thought was naive, unconstitutional, further cements two party rule, and finally, gives too much power to the judiciary.
But then I heard Buttigieg suggested the exact same thing two weeks ago on Pod Save America:
https://crooked.com/podcast/2020-pete-buttigieg-on-freedom-and-farting-cows/
So I'm thinking
But then I heard Buttigieg suggested the exact same thing two weeks ago on Pod Save America:
https://crooked.com/podcast/2020-pete-buttigieg-on-freedom-and-farting-cows/
So I'm thinking
- Who is advising Petey B of this nonsense?
- Did Beto just rip this idea off Buttigieg?
Remember when people were wondering if Hillary was healthy enough to finish the race when she passed out at the 9/11 memorial?
I will say, if the potential make-up of a SCOTUS panel was fluid, I think we'd see less nonsense laws and cases being passed and filed. Too much of what happens is triggered by what the court make-up is.
Good point!
Is it obvious that I desperately want to be back in front of a classroom assigning textbooks?
Ya know, I keep having this sinking feeling that although I have a general feeling of positivity for Beto I wonder if he isn't the Democratic version of Scott Walker, a guy who can speak in the general platitudes of the party but doesn't have much else going on upstairs.
- Status