• Light/Dark
  • 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.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

US PoliEra 2019 |OT8| WHITE HOUSE ADMITS TO QUID PRO QUO WITH UKRAINE

Status
Not open for further replies.
Reader mode
SSF1991

SSF1991

Member
Jun 19, 2018
3,263
Really fucking annoyed at how Amy was given so much debate time for no fucking reason, attacked everyone's policies and never talked about her own, and she gets rewarded for it. And that Pete was a fucking asshole through the whole fucking debate and gets rewarded for that too. And how Biden was an enttitled, condescending dick to Warren at the end of the debate and there are even moderates on Twitter defending that too because "it's a debate so obviously Warren's going to be treated like shit, it's all her fault anyway, can't take the heat get out of the kitchen".

Moderates and the media have not learned a fucking thing from 2016. Nothing.
 
Last edited:

brainchild

Independent Developer
Verified
Nov 25, 2017
9,482
SSF1991 said:
Really fucking annoyed at how Amy was given so much debate time for no fucking reason, attacked everyone's policies and never talked about her own, and she gets rewarded for it. And that Pete was a fucking asshole through the whole fucking debate and gets rewarded for that too. And how Biden was an enttitled, condescending dick to Warren at the end of the debate and there are even moderates defending that too because "it's a debate so obviously you're going to treat a woman like shit, can't take the heat get out of the kitchen".

Moderates and the media have not learned a fucking thing from 2016. Nothing.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yeah, it was ridiculous.
 
ExtremelyBitter

ExtremelyBitter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,944
AnotherNils said:
Didn't see this posted the past three pages.



Bolton has to testify.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


This seems like a bold strategy:
Sondland's explicit conditioning of a meeting between Zelenskiy and Trump prompted Bolton to direct then-Trump Russia adviser Fiona Hill to report the situation to White House lawyers. Although some details about the meeting had been previously disclosed, this account provides the most extensive chronology to date of the chain of events that led Bolton to call the shadow Ukraine policy aimed at advancing Trump's political interests "a drug deal," as NBC News has reported.

The account also appears to undercut Sondland's text message to a senior U.S. official in Ukraine on Sept. 9 that Trump "has been crystal clear no quid pro quo's (sic) of any kind" with the Ukrainian government. The fact that Hunter Biden had joined Burisma's board had been widely reported for years and discussed publicly by Trump personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani. But Sondland plans to tell Congress he was unaware of Hunter Biden's ties to the company at the time, a person with knowledge of his testimony says, an assertion that lawmakers are expected to treat with extreme skepticism.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

So Sondland is going to admit to the quid pro quo but claim he personally had no knowledge that it was politically motivated?

How does this keep getting dumber
 
Amibguous Cad

Amibguous Cad

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,033
AnotherNils said:
Just finished listening to one of the two transgender cases in front of SCOTUS and boy, it is not an easy one. Philosophically, of course Transgender people should received equal protection, but legally it's a difficult argument to make, partly because just discussing transgenderism correctly is difficult. The liberal justices were stumbling around a bit with their phrasing just trying to talk about it. Our society doesn't have a firm grasp on it yet.

Honestly, the closing segment gave the cleanest, simplest argument I've heard:
Code: 
25 If Harris

1 Homes fired a man because he was a man that
2 would be sex discrimination. If it fired an
3 employee because he was insufficiently
4 masculine, that would clearly be sex
5 discrimination.
6 In this case, Harris Homes fired Aimee
7 Stephens because he thought she is a man who is
8 insufficiently masculine. That too must be sex
9 discrimination.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I mean, it's not that hard of a legal argument to make, but this isn't the legal argument that's most likely to be successful.

This kind of reminds me of when people were trying to sheohrn gay marriage into existing sex discrimination statutes. Since, after all, you're saying a man can't marry another man because he's a man, while a woman can, that's obviously sex discrimination. It's too clever by half, and there's a reason why the courts rejected that argument. Likewise, the current case facing the court isn't asking whether trans people should be allowed to be discriminated against in employment as a whole, it's only asking whether sex discrimination statutes should forbid it... and you don't have to be a card-carrying member of the federalist society to think that that argument is lacking. It's not something the people who originally passed those statutes had in mind, and while you can do some word algebra to gussy the argument up, in the end it's pretty clear that the locus of the discrimination isn't in that they dislike that someone is a man or a woman, but that they dislike that they're trans, full stop.

In the end, it's ludicrous that something like 26 states don't have an antidiscrimination statute for queer people of any type, and queer activists should dedicate themselves to trench work in statehouses rather than swinging for the fences with a dubious supreme court argument.
 
DanGo

DanGo

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,742
ExtremelyBitter said:
This seems like a bold strategy:


So Sondland is going to admit to the quid pro quo but claim he personally had no knowledge that it was politically motivated?

How does this keep getting dumber
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Unless I've missed something, all the reporting about what he plans to testify is from before the leaks about what others have testified. He was trying to get ahead of it and set the record, but it seems pretty fucking hard for him to stick with that now. Maybe it's the best he's got, but then maybe it'd be better for him to just call it quits instead of playing a shit hand.

I was listening to the WaPo podcast today and got some details about him I hadn't heard before, and apparently Sondland was telling people he was aiming for Secretary of State and that handling things like Ukraine for Trump would help him get it. The more I hear, the more it sounds like he was fully committed to doing whatever dirty work Trump wanted. He also kept showing up at events and meetings that seemingly had nothing to do with his ambassadorship to the EU.
 
aspiegamer

aspiegamer

Member
Oct 27, 2017
10,460
ZzzzzzZzzzZzz...
AnotherNils said:
Honestly the most fascinating aspect to me is how much more willing everyone was to go after Warren compared to Biden the past few debates. There are myriad of reasons I can think of but I'd love to know why.

Edit: Speaking of women it's amazing that Pelosi is the only visible female politico in that room. Though Liz Cheney is there somewhere.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
One of CNN's major headlines allllllllllll day was "hey look, Warren's the new front-runner, and you can tell by how everyone ganged up on her last night!" so this has to have been coordinated at a fairly high level. Edit: Out of fairness, that was like EVERYONE'S headline today, but it sure is convenient that CNN managed to preempt everyone on that via a debate they themselves hosted, huh?

And yeah I think Pelosi is the only woman in that entire room. Even Pence is absent. ...sorry, couldn't resist.
 
Good Hunter

Good Hunter

Alt account
Banned
Sep 26, 2019
259
cubanb said:
Guess she isn't as politically savvy as we thought....
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
shinra-bansho said:
Lol my respect for AOCs political acumen just went down a lot.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
FreezePeach said:
Those political instincts....are limited.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
adam387 said:
lol AOC not as good at the politics as I gave her credit for.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
1*QTTYKluUkrqQRn1QYA8t8g.gif
 
Steel

Steel

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
18,220
Steel

Steel

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
18,220
Good Hunter said:
I don't feel that way and I don't appreciate you insinuating that I do feel that way.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I was insinuating that that point has been made in this very thread by people doing exactly that and it's hardly like you're saying they've been mansplaining.

And, really, you're complaining about very mild criticism.
 
Falore

Falore

Banned
Feb 15, 2019
745
Prior to the 2020 candidates I didn't really know much about tulsi gabbard.. so I am genuinelywondering:

How did Tulsi rise to prominence and actually get backers at such ayoung age despite beinga scientifically proven nutter butters candidate? (bad or sick? person)
 

Eric_S

Member
Nov 29, 2017
831
AnotherNils said:
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


So I just read this.

You don't talk about this so that opponents (read, russia) can't get an exact reading on your capabilities and gets a harder time to calculate the deployments in other nations through proportionality. And of course for diplomatic deniability reasons, should Russia want to base nukes in Syria, say.

But what does Trump do? Well, something that would probably get a field agent arrested for treason. And for good reasons too.
 
JABEE

JABEE

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,854
CNN spent the debate propping up moderate campaigns for some reason.

Klobacher was polling at 1-2% nationally and received more questions than some of the front-runners.
 
TheAbsolution

TheAbsolution

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,391
Atlanta, GA
JABEE said:
CNN spent the debate propping up moderate campaigns for some reason.

Klobacher was polling at 1-2% nationally and received more questions than some of the front-runners.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
They do this every time they host a debate. They keep expecting another moderate to appear and challenge Biden but tbh I don't think any of them have good enough campaigns to even come close to doing that.
Except for maybe Pete and that still remains to be seen.
 
Dream Machine

Dream Machine

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,085
Fork said:
i would 100% take Marianne over Pete
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Good Hunter said:
Agreed. The way I see it the only candidates that can beat Trump are Bernie and Warren. If we can't have one of them, we might as well roll the dice with one of the zany ones and see what happens.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
"Yeah, the fourth debate was pretty dull until Marianne performed an exorcism and banished Buttigieg via pressure points and rosewater. Booker did okay."
 
chainlinkspiral

chainlinkspiral

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,579
I know there's a lot of news to process in a given day, so it's great the discussion has turned in the direction it has. Really good stuff. We bad memes now hour.
 
Reader mode
Status
Not open for further replies.