Jump to content
Tornado

The General 'Murican Politics Thread

Recommended Posts

https://mediamatters.org/blog/2017/03/27/breitbart-denied-permanent-senate-press-gallery-credentials/215826

Breitbart was denied Senate press credentials for a variety of reasons, such as lack of evidence Bannon has fully separated himself from it and content that is too slanted.

Trump has yet to weigh in, but I assume there will be plenty of "liberal bias" accusations despite the fact that the credential committee can be overruled by a Senate committee, which is of course under GOP control. This would of course cue the far right to dig a hole deeper and demonize mainstream conservatives for being biased against them. It's never contemplated that maybe the alt-right is too far up its own behind to realize how nonsensical much of its ideology is.

I have to say. When Trump took office on January 20th, things looked grim. But now? With the striking down of both refugee bans, the failure of the AHCA, and something like this... I feel a little bit less worried about the next 2-4 years. The music has changed from Your Best Nightmare to Finale.

And 2 months in, no less. Here's hoping he doesn't follow up failure after failure after failure with something more popular in time for the midterms.

9 hours ago, SenEDtor Missile said:

I'm kinda confused.

It's a political stunt. He thinks Germany "owes" NATO money, when there's no requirement for states to spend that money at present. There's a target rate many years from now, but that's not the same as falling short.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The us govenrment has removed LGBT people from the census. And defenders are claiming it's fine since it "wasn't needed information." 

 

Ugh.

edit: well, it was never there to begin with, but it's been highlighted that the 2020 census won't include us. Still bs when race and gender are perfectly fine with no complaints, but sexuality is somehow the "pointless none of your business" one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest this is rather like the Tomodachi Life glitch being patched out. On its own, not including LGBT people isn't that grievous, but the moment it's proposed and then shot down, it just looks bad.

Meanwhile:

https://thenextweb.com/money/2017/03/29/man-says-fuck-ill-sell-browser-history-isps-can/#.tnw_hbNrPW1M

Best. Protest. Ever. He put his browser history up for sale on eBay in response to the ISP laws.

https://www.usnews.com/news/top-news/articles/2017-03-29/exclusive-republicans-mostly-blame-congress-for-healthcare-reform-failure-reuters-ipsos-poll

If you wanted a reason to be insanely distrustful of the GOP's base... here it is. 26% of Republicans blame the House Democrats for healthcare's failure, and only 23% blame House Republicans. Trump and Ryan get barely any blame.

What's the argument, that Democrats shouldn't have been party line in their vote? Oh no. You don't get to call for that moist and gushy bipartisanship when your Party did everything in its power to sabotage and undermine Obama for the past 8 years. Any Democrat who breaks ranks should be thrown out on their ass on the Capitol's steps.

Failing that, I guess they're unaware the GOP has a House majority (somehow, when plenty of GOP pundits kept bragging about how omnipotent they are with control of 3 chambers and most state governments).

https://www.c-span.org/video/?426211-1/senate-republicans-threaten-nuclear-option-democrats-filibuster-gorsuch

It's too early to play the filibuster card, guys. I know everyone's pissed at what happened with Garland, but the Democrats aren't in a position to do it to Trump. They're a minority. Clearly arithmetic is lacking on both sides of the aisle. We should wait until an election year. Pull the same card that was used against Garland. There's good odds Trump will have to fill a vacancy during one.

And the moment the GOP overrides that? It will make them look really bad, as it exposes their hypocrisy like no other.

Take a look at this table of Cabinet appointments, though. Notice how very few of the nominations have massive partisan divides. We've lost that this last decade. It's sad. Historically, so many candidates were broadly supported that voice votes were held over formal tallies. It gets even worse if you go back to our founding, as most appointments were confirmed by voice vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Gregg (Ogilvie) said:

To be honest this is rather like the Tomodachi Life glitch being patched out. On its own, not including LGBT people isn't that grievous, but the moment it's proposed and then shot down, it just looks bad.

 

Eh, I think this has been a issue long coming. When gender and race are included as optional, one must question why sexuality isn't also a optional piece to have there? I don't see the harm in more inclusion. It's not like there's nothing that could be gained by more stats on different groups within our country. Not including them while everyone else gets representation seems a bit problematic and feels like they're not recognizing us as a legit community/group. I mean I'd have argued what went down with tomodachi life would have been debatable whether the glitch was there or not. In this age, having same sex options should just be a given, as it doesn't harm or hurt anyone for the option to be there 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, KHCast said:

Eh, I think this has been a issue long coming. When gender and race are included as optional, one must question why sexuality isn't also a optional piece to have there? I don't see the harm in more inclusion. It's not like there's nothing that could be gained by more stats on different groups within our country. Not including them while everyone else gets representation seems a bit problematic and feels like they're not recognizing us as a legit community

I think it's the applicability aspect of it. Sex, race, nationality, income, etc. are all spread out (to a point in the case of men vs women, but that still tends to bounce around 50/50). An LGBT option would basically be dominantly heterosexual with a minority of other categories.

While it would make for interesting information, I don't think "LGBT should be an option because sex and race are" holds water.

On the other hand, census information is used to allocate federal funding and government agencies' policies, so an LGBT statistic might be useful if argued as necessary for LGBT programs. If we know how many LGBT students there are, for example, we have an idea how much federal funding should be given to schools to keep LGBT students safe.

Though there will be problems in application. A lot of transgender people, from my experience, use anonymity to come off as being cisgender. Very few transgender people seem to go around saying they are transgender. They identify (mostly) as men and women (as opposed to transmen and transwomen) to strangers, and transgender status is only revealed to intimates or if they want to build empathy for people currently in the process of transitioning.

If we have a sex/gender option and a separate "would you consider yourself transgender" question, that is a possibility, but the anonymity principle is still in play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the sense of equal treatment to others I still feel as if it's doing a disservice to not consider the option, even as a optional bit. I still don't think us being "small" in comparison to heterosexuals is a legit enough reason to say no either. It shouldn't be compared to heterosexuals. We're always gonna be smaller than them. Even if all the people that are closeted, or questioning opened up, we'd still be fairly small to them. So that point is useless end of the day regarding not acknowledging us. It's more information gathered, and it's still a large community that needs aid and acknowledgment from the government. I mean if we're gonna go off assumptions and half truths about our community vs actual statistics and analytical information, I'm gonna be confused with how this government runs 

 

Edit: i'd also question some nationalities and races being way bigger than communities like LGBT at this point.

Edit 2: and I think their anonymity would still be safe since the census tends to be anynomous. So I don't think they should worry unless they have people watching them as they fill out it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, KHCast said:

In the sense of equal treatment to others I still feel as if it's doing a disservice to not consider the option, even as a optional bit. I still don't think us being "small" in comparison to heterosexuals is a legit enough reason to say no either. It's more information gathered, and it's still a large community that needs aid and acknowledgment from the government.

And we are acknowledged even without specific numbers. Executive orders, legislation, and court cases galore have resulted from the LGBT issue. Whether or not gays and the transgender have federal protections is ultimately going to be contingent on who is in power, not the census numbers.

Social acceptance is the next big step for LGBT people, really.

Though as mentioned, a census category for the LGBT community would be useful for purposes of allocating funding for LGBT programs. Though that's about where the usefulness ends, given we already know plenty about the community from independent studies (hence why those who think homosexuality is a choice are able to whip out "gays have higher rates of mental illness" as misrepresented evidence for their position).

Other than that, though, it is a token proposition. It is a nice idea to have representation, but I'm not seeing it as a pressing issue. I'm more concerned about executive orders and conservative court appointments.

7 minutes ago, KHCast said:

I mean if we're gonna go off assumptions and half truths about our community vs actual statistics and analytical information, I'm gonna be confused with how this government runs 

This is the era of alternative facts so that was going to be a given either way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of those independent studies I still wouldn't claim as concrete evidence since they can be easily doctorned, and have bias people in charge or test subjects,  etc. it's why when I hear the "LGBT only make 10% of the world" I shrug since that could easily not take into account a lot of people and many could easily be in denial and say otherwise for a multitude of reasons.(I mean it's still a fairly small percentage, but I still think more than 10%) though by that same token, I guess that would also apply to a census in terms of concerns of how useful it would be for our community.

 

im just saying though I don't see the harm in having it there even if it's for a "small" group like LGBT. It's not a pressing issue, but it's in the limelight right now, and I think it's fair for people to be upset or ask "what's the harm in having it?" I only really see benefits to have from more options 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In other news, it's pretty fucking messed up that our privacy is further being fucked, as the government will now start selling our internet histories. Yeah remember how Trump was fear monger omg his support during his campaign with points like "the government is spying on you, and that's horrible". Lol he really suckered his supporters into eating his dogshit since he's doing the very thing that infringes on our privacy. God damn, if you're in America, and you've got stuff you don't want the government selling, delete your history, purge your computers data, or use servers that can't be tracked. This isn't just an attack on the internet, but the rights of the people 

And this was voted in ONLY by republicans. Honestly, how long before we can say openly "fuck republicans?" Cause with every passing day, it seems supporting that cesspool is getting more and more difficult for anyone without being a slimeball themselves.

Edit: service providers are selling our info and FCC is being fucked by the house and senate. Still fucked up, but yo clear it up, no the government is not the one selling out. It's just companies, like always, doing the selling out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well when a overwhelming majority of repubs decide to flat out infringe on people's rights, and support shot like this and sellout, I think they start loosing the benefit of the doubt of being there for the people's interest and thus begin to loose my respect. What's gained from this for us? Nothing lol, but try and convince me otherwise, I got the popcorn waiting.

Also yes, I'm sure if Trump wasn't president, a lot of the shit he's been supporting and backing wouldn't be nearly as severe or even exist, including this. It's a basic fundamental that privacy is a American expectancy and right. I'm almost positive Clinton or any dem for that matter wouldn't be a the chomps to back this, since again, NO DEMOCRATS VOTED FOR IT. And since he was touting against invasion of privacy for the longest time, him backing this would be held to him more than anyone. So yeah, I put my blame on Trump and his administration for making repubs feel like they can abuse certain policies to overturn the shit out of pre-existing laws for their, only only their favor, as well as spam bs laws hoping one gets passed. Say what you want about liberals, lefters, sjw's, but this shit wouldn't be happening with them, a lot of the controversial bullshit from trumps administration wouldn't be happening.

 

Also given the nature of your views and what you tend to believe, it's not as if you're helping your party look any better in my eyes to want to apologize. Yknow, given how you and you're party kinda ARE the intolerant ones in a number of ways much more than me for simply having enough of what they're trying to force down my throats

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Chairman Of The Board said:

I love how you think that if Trump didn't get in this wouldn't have happened. By the way "how long before we can openly say "fuck republicans?"" That's very liberal of you. You know the liberals, always tolerant of the other guys opinion, "why can't we all just get together and agree", "the party that protects the rights of everyone", "the peace party".

You say that but you can LITERALLY look at the house vote. ALL 50 Republicans who were there (2 absent) voted yes and ALL 48 Dems voted No. You also have to realize that this was done in response to a bill Obama passed a few months ago. It was made to go against that bill and now it will also remove the bill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike Flynn is seeking immunity.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/mike-flynn-offers-to-testify-in-exchange-for-immunity-1490912959?mod=e2tw

Whether or not the tale he has to tell is capable of exposing the entire story of Trump and Russia, that Flynn is seeking immunity likely means he knows he's in trouble.

 

And the fact the FBI has not accepted his offer as of yet could mean they don't want or need it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, -Robin- said:

Mike Flynn is seeking immunity.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/mike-flynn-offers-to-testify-in-exchange-for-immunity-1490912959?mod=e2tw

Whether or not the tale he has to tell is capable of exposing the entire story of Trump and Russia, that Flynn is seeking immunity likely means he knows he's in trouble.

 

And the fact the FBI has not accepted his offer as of yet could mean they don't want or need it.

This seems pretttty fucking incriminating. I'm really interested to see where this goes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

"Gen. Flynn certainly has a story to tell, and he very much wants to tell it, should the circumstances permit. ... No reasonable person, who has the benefit of advice from counsel, would submit to questioning in such a highly politicized, witch-hunt environment without assurances against unfair prosecution," Robert Kelner, Flynn's lawyer, said in a statement late Thursday.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/30/politics/michael-flynn-immunity-testimony/index.html

Last year, Flynn likened the seeking of immunity to admitting guilt, so yeah this could be big - really big. I mean, the only person higher than him in the food chain was Trump, though I'm not sure he's going to be the (sole?) focus of Flynn's story. Honestly, this whole scandal is so deep and complicated that it seems to make Watergate look like an episode of Scooby Doo by comparison, and I doubt very much that any one person is going to have the whole story. It'll be many years before we know it all, but people like Flynn who were involved coming forward and turning state's evidence could speed things up considerably.
 

From yesterday's hearings, more Russian revelations:

Quote

The Kremlin paid an army of more than 1,000 people to create fake anti-Hillary Clinton news stories targeting key swing states, the leading Democrat on the committee looking into alleged Russian interference in the US election has said.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/russian-trolls-hilary-clinton-fake-news-election-democrat-mark-warner-intelligence-committee-a7657641.html

Quote

These efforts include the use of visible Kremlin propaganda outlets, such as RT and Sputnik, to publish false news stories and conspiracy theories. Russian actors then deploy social media bots to spread these false stories far and wide. In the U.S., Watts said, the goal has been to provoke the Trump into repeating them or retweeting them to his millions of followers.

In a moment that stunned the hearing room, Watts flatly stated that the president himself has become a cog in such Russian measures. When asked by Oklahoma Republican James Lankford, who appeared visibly dismayed, why, if Russians have long used these methods, they finally worked in this election cycle, Watts’ answer was extraordinary.

“I think this answer is very simple and is one no one is really saying in this room,” he said. Part of the reason, he went on, “is the commander in chief has used Russian active measures at times against his opponents.”

To buttress the claim that Trump (unwittingly or not) aided Russian disinformation efforts, Watts cited several instances. Among them: Trump’s citation of an apparently false Sputnik story at an October 2016 campaign appearance; his ongoing denial before and after the campaign of U.S. intelligence of Russian interference in the election; his claims of voter fraud and election rigging, which Watts said was pushed by RT and Sputnik; and Trump’s questioning of the citizenship of former President Barack Obama and even his primary rival Ted Cruz.

Watts added that one of the reasons such tactics are working is that Trump and/or his surrogates have repeated some of the claims, further spreading them through social media accounts that are owned both by real people and bots. Thus, the disinformation is kept alive and gradually becomes more real and plausible. “Part of the reason active measures work is because they parrot the same lines,” Watts said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2017/03/30/todays-russia-hearings-actually-revealed-something-new-and-important/?tid=pm_opinions_pop&utm_term=.54747f57c640

Quote

Trump Russia dossier key claim 'verified'

The BBC has learned that US officials "verified" a key claim in a report about Kremlin involvement in Donald Trump's election - that a Russian diplomat in Washington was in fact a spy.

...

Sources I know and trust have told me the US government identified Kalugin as a spy while he was still at the embassy.

It is not clear if the American intelligence agencies already believed this when they got Steele's report on the "diplomat", as early as May 2016.

But it is a judgment they made using their own methods, outside the dossier.

A retired member of a US intelligence agency told me that Kalugin was being kept under surveillance before he left the US.

In addition, State Department staff who dealt with Russia did not come across Kalugin, as would have been expected with a simple diplomat.

"Nobody had met him," one former official said. "It's classic. Just classic [of Russian intelligence]."

Last month, the McClatchy news website said he was under "scrutiny" by the FBI as he left the US. They did not report, as my sources say, that he was a member of one of Russia's spying organisations, the SVR or GRU.

Steele's work remains fiercely controversial, to some a "dodgy dossier" concocted by President Trump's enemies.

But on this vitally important point - Kalugin's status as a "spy under diplomatic cover" - people who saw the intelligence agree with the dossier, adding weight to Steele's other claims. 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39435786

I don't think this scandal is going to die any time soon. One revelation reinforces the others, and each drip-fed piece of news contributes to the painting of a stranger and more disturbing picture than any we might have imagined last year. The Americans - Season 20 is going on as we speak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently George Takei is running for David Nunes's Congress seat! (Sorry for the clickbaity title; this is the article on George Takei's Facebook page)

http://the-daily.buzz/a/george-takei-has-bombshell-announcement-and-washington-is-reeling?utm_content=inf_10_1163_2&tse_id=INF_4ef68720165511e798fc7bd31dd7c3e2

 

Edit: never mind, it's April Fools:

https://mobile.twitter.com/GeorgeTakei/status/848150976737542145

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Burnt Ash said:

Apparently George Takei is running for David Nunes's Congress seat! (Sorry for the clickbaity title; this is the article on George Takei's Facebook page)

http://the-daily.buzz/a/george-takei-has-bombshell-announcement-and-washington-is-reeling?utm_content=inf_10_1163_2&tse_id=INF_4ef68720165511e798fc7bd31dd7c3e2

A year ago I'd probably say this is being a little overambitious, but you know what? If Donald "Pussy-Grabber" Trump can be fuckmothering President of America, than George Takei can be a Congressman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Count me being with the people disappointed it was a joke. He makes so much political commentary it's understandable a lot of people believed it and were disappointed. He probably could have given Nunes a real run for his money, and been a strong liberal voice in the House.

Maybe the fact so many were on board with it will motivate likeminded celebrities, though...

A part of me doesn't want celebrity politicians to become the norm, but on the other hand, if it means there's a chance to take the House back and neuter the Trump administration early on, I'm all for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Betsy DeVos' husband and brother both appear to be heavily involved in shady dealings with Russia:

Quote

Blackwater founder held secret Seychelles meeting to establish Trump-Putin back channel

The United Arab Emirates arranged a secret meeting in January between Blackwater founder Erik Prince and a Russian close to President Vladi­mir Putin as part of an apparent effort to establish a back-channel line of communication between Moscow and President-elect Donald Trump, according to U.S., European and Arab officials.

The meeting took place around Jan. 11 — nine days before Trump’s inauguration — in the Seychelles islands in the Indian Ocean, officials said. Though the full agenda remains unclear, the UAE agreed to broker the meeting in part to explore whether Russia could be persuaded to curtail its relationship with Iran, including in Syria, a Trump administration objective that would likely require major concessions to Moscow on U.S. sanctions.

Though Prince had no formal role with the Trump campaign or transition team, he presented himself as an unofficial envoy for Trump to high-ranking Emiratis involved in setting up his meeting with the Putin confidant, according to the officials, who did not identify the Russian.

Prince was an avid supporter of Trump who gave $250,000 last year to support the GOP nominee’s campaign, records show. He has ties to people in Trump’s circle, including Stephen K. Bannon, now serving as the president’s chief strategist and senior counselor. Prince’s sister Betsy DeVos serves as education secretary in the Trump administration. And Prince was seen in the Trump transition offices in New York in December.

U.S. officials said the FBI has been scrutinizing the Seychelles meeting as part of a broader probe of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election and alleged contacts between associates of Putin and Trump. The FBI declined to comment.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/blackwater-founder-held-secret-seychelles-meeting-to-establish-trump-putin-back-channel/2017/04/03/95908a08-1648-11e7-ada0-1489b735b3a3_story.html?utm_term=.39d294fe522d

Quote

Trump’s alleged computer server connection with a Russian bank continues to be investigated

The story about this server connection first broke before the 2016 election

An alleged computer server connection between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank, an influential financial institution in Russia with connections to both the Russian and Ukrainian elite, is still being investigated by the FBI, according to a new report by CNN.

The FBI’s counterintelligence team, which is also looking into Russia’s suspected hacking of Democratic National Committee servers and the email account of her campaign chairman, is investigating why a computer server owned by Alfa Bank repeatedly looked up a computer server owned by the Trump Organization in Lititz, Pennsylvania. Eighty percent of the attempts to look up that Trump computer server were performed by Alfa Bank — 2,820 in total — with almost all of the rest being conducted by Spectrum Health, a medical facility chain for which Dick DeVos, the husband of Trump’s education secretary, Betsy DeVos, serves as chairman of the board.

http://www.salon.com/2017/03/10/trumps-alleged-computer-server-connection-with-a-russian-bank-continues-to-be-investigated/

It really is virtually everyone Trump surrounds himself with, isn't it? They almost all seem to be neck deep in shady Russian deals, or other deeply dubious activities wherein the Russians are somehow involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.