Political Discussion Thread (With Rules)

[aylwin13]

Just think how we feel... we have to live here.

[Pariah]

.

 

My thoughts exactly.

[Badger]

It's been working so far - at least with his base.  Hopefully we're getting to the point where people who haven't forgotten are in a position to make that past catch up.

 

Well, in politics, memories seem to last a max. 2 years.  (otherwise no one would get re-elected.  )

[Badger]

I found two pieces to be insightful on the situation:

 

Don't look for deep Machiavellian plots behind Trumps Firing of the FBI director; he just isn't that complicated.

 

Attention, liberals: Comey deserved to be fired, and the Constitution is just fine

 

 

I might not like Trump, but firing Comey is one of the things I agree with.  Sorry, timing or not, the Comey firing is not a battle the liberals should be fighting.  If you truly believe Comey "gave Trump the election" you should want him gone. End of discussion.  (likewise, if you believe Hillary was guilty).  The timing isn't good, though if a Russian probe were to hypothetically give him job security, for all we know, that could buy him a long time, perhaps years.  And we have enough problems without nursing his mind-boggling stupidity.

 

After the GOP vs Obama, I am willing to give much leeway to the Dem role as antagonist.  But, this is just too poorly veiled for me, it is way too obvious the big outrage isn't the Comey firing, but the fact Trump was  the one who did the firing.  

 

In any case during the election, Comey seemed intent on playing the hero to both sides in the election.  Cant say what his logic was (and if I was snarkier tonight I would question myself using "logic" in a topic about Comey).   But, someone who plays at being friends to both sides of a conflict deserves loyalty from neither.

 

 

Edit: And the quicker we accept that we had an election between 2 people who belong being locked under the jail, the better we will be.

[Old Man]

After the GOP vs Obama, I am willing to give much leeway to the Dem role as antagonist.  But, this is just too poorly veiled for me, it is way too obvious the big outrage isn't the Comey firing, but the fact Trump was  the one who did the firing.

I can't speak for any other librulls, but my own outrage is that the firing is a transparent attempt to derail a federal investigation. Not only did Trump literally say as much, it's a consistent pattern with him:

 

- U.S. attorney Preet Bhahara, who was leading the investigation into Deutsche Bank's laundering of Russian money

- 45 other U.S. attorneys involved in corruption and foreign government threats

- Sally Yates, days after Yates revealed what she knew about Flynn's Russian dealings

- And now Comey, who was leading the agency running the investigation into Russian ties

 

How can anyone not see this pattern? Why does Trump have it in for law enforcement officers who investigate corruption? If Trump were innocent, why would he interfere in the investigation that would exonerate him? Or as I heard posed on the radio today, how could Trump possibly act any more guilty?

 

 

 

In any case during the election, Comey seemed intent on playing the hero to both sides in the election.  Cant say what his logic was (and if I was snarkier tonight I would question myself using "logic" in a topic about Comey).   But, someone who plays at being friends to both sides of a conflict deserves loyalty from neither.

Comey seems to have been so intent on remaining impartial that he managed to alienate both sides of the aisle. I suppose this makes him less of a Republican stooge and more of a Keystone Kop. Still, he was well liked and respected within his bureau, and Trump's attempt to derail the Russia investigation now appears to be motivating agents to redouble their efforts instead.

 

 

 

Edit: And the quicker we accept that we had an election between 2 people who belong being locked under the jail, the better we will be.

 

 

I'd love to hear what crimes Hillary might have committed that would actually justify a jail term. Even if she were, at this point she looks rather like the lesser evil.

[Badger]

You know there isnt any point into going into the Hillary thing.  If you still believe Hillary is innocent, there is literally nothing that can be said to prove it to you.  So dont even bother asking that as I know you were in this discussion in 2016.  Simply, ignore that part of my post if need be.

 

 

Respected in the bureau?  Yes, I heard that from the interim head.  Pardon me, if I dont take his word for it.  Though, to be fair, I dont have an actual opinion, on what I believe on the bureau's opinion on the whole about Comey, but I am not going to take the temp's word alone for it.  I frankly, would have been surprised if he said otherwise, actually. 

 

I am actually open-minded on the FBI opinion on Comey, but not by interim guy, I'd have to hear from rank-and-file. What they actually say, I will believe.

[Badger]

You know there isnt any point into going into the Hillary thing.  If you still believe Hillary is innocent, there is literally nothing that can be said to prove it to you.  So dont even bother asking that as I know you were in this discussion in 2016.  Simply, ignore that part of my post if need be.

 

 

Respected in the bureau?  Yes, I heard that from the interim head.  Pardon me, if I dont take his word for it.  Though, to be fair, I dont have an actual opinion, on what I believe on the bureau's opinion on the whole about Comey, but I am not going to take the temp's word alone for it.  I frankly, would have been surprised if he said otherwise, actually. 

 

I am actually open-minded on the FBI opinion on Comey, but not by interim guy, I'd have to hear from rank-and-file. What they actually say, I will believe.

 

Edit: It's possible he was being too impartial. He was either trying to be too impartial or too partial. (or he was as incompetent as I fear).  Regardless, if you asked the liberal side last Friday the answer you get is "Comey threw the election" possibly worse accusations.  They hated the guy, he was (apologies to Putin) THE scapegoat to Hillary's loss.  As soon as he gets fired that all changed.   Wailing commences, he'll probably be called a martyr for a noble cause before the weekend is done.  The smell of that hypocrisy is putrid. And I am actually for an investigation on Russia.  I am a bit more skeptical to Russia's involvement than most here (more impartial than skeptical actually, but that unfortunately =skeptic nowadays).  But, I think anything like that is of utmost seriousness, and must be investigated.  I also have absolutely no confidence, COmey is capable of leading an investigation of my local speeding ticket in 1995, let alone a possible upended election that turns the world upside down.  (course, do I believe Comey is really that grossly idiotic?  I admit not really, in the truest sense.  I believe he was in way over his head for a job as bureau chief, and has done nothing on any level to prove otherwise, and has shown absolutely no reason not to pack him and send him to obscurity.  But, I do admit snark mode did click on.  Bottom line is he is not up to his role, the liberal talking heads can cry all they want about the firing, but it is akin to mourning at a funeral of the relative you most hated).  It is what it is. 

[Nolgroth]

I suppose you can call the 46 US attorneys being asked to resign as suspicious. It was certainly abrupt. Not entirely unprecedented, but sure. I'll go ahead and agree that there was some ethically questionable decision making there. Certainly something that wasn't entirely smart. On the other hand, Trump has been very suspicious of just about anybody appointed by Obama. So there is that to consider as well.

 

Sally Yates also instructed the Justice Department not to defend Trump's travel ban executive order. As that was so important to Trump and Trump tends to lash out with childish vindictiveness, I am not sold that it was because of any knowledge of Flynn's Russian entanglements. Not that said knowledge wouldn't be an extra incentive. I have to decide if Trump is that complex or not. 

 

Comey became a polarizing figure when he interfered in the election process. I won't lie and say that I'm sorry that Hillary lost. What Comey did, however, should have cost him his job somewhere around 20 minutes after President Trump took office. Or maybe before then. Now, because of that delay, there is the color of obstructing an investigation. That might actually be the intent and it might actually be true. I have no real loyalty to President Trump. On the other hand, I have no confidence in Jim Comey. Tough call.

 

All in all, I have to give some credence to the theory that Trump is deliberately covering something up by using personnel changes to replace/remove potential threats. I am absolutely NOT convinced of this, but from a certain perspective, I can see it when I squint just right. I can also see every one of those instances mentioned being a direct result of Trump lashing out like some pimply-faced, self-entitled teenage brat. If a smoking gun is found, do you suppose that a Republican led congress will actually do anything about it? Will it get buried under all the other nonsense? Will there be endless hearings to sort out what needs sorting out? I wonder. Anyway, for now it is fuel to keep the left and media sharpening their pitchforks and making their torches. So business as usual.  

 

As to Hillary Clinton, you either believe that she has done terrible things or you don't. There are no facts that are going to sway either side. I'm with Badger on that. Take it as his opinion (and mine for that matter) and move on with that knowledge. In my opinion, Hillary would have been just as bad for the nation as Trump, but in different ways. The one thing that we are going to miss is her inevitable release of classified documents about our alien encounters. According to my unassailable sources on Coast to Coast, Podesta was very interested in this line of thought and was going to urge Hillary to "come clean" about our contact with ETI. That would have been something at least.

[Old Man]

Regarding Hillary, I have to say that I'm more than willing to believe she's guilty of something, but there just isn't much evidence to support the allegations. And what allegations there are are nothing compared to what Trump has virtually confessed to on record--obstruction of justice, sexual assault. So I can't agree with the assertion that "Hillary would have been just as bad". An evil, perhaps, but surely the lesser one.

[Pariah]

Aside: If the only choices we have in an election are differing degrees of evil, are we not forced to conclude that we're living in a Hell of our own making?

 

Okay, back to Comey and the Russians.

[Nolgroth]

Regarding Hillary, I have to say that I'm more than willing to believe she's guilty of something, but there just isn't much evidence to support the allegations. And what allegations there are are nothing compared to what Trump has virtually confessed to on record--obstruction of justice, sexual assault. So I can't agree with the assertion that "Hillary would have been just as bad". An evil, perhaps, but surely the lesser one.

 

Maybe. I think that really depends on your political ideology and beliefs. I'm not saying that Hillary would have been worse than any other Democrat in office but I also don't believe that the economic engine of the USA could withstand another eight  years of Democratic governance. Ironically, most of the Democratic social positions I can support, or at least, tolerate. I just think the Liberal economic model is motivated by doing good things for people who need them and is ultimately unsustainable. That is my own opinion and really frames my voting and political opinion.

 

Who's to say what would happen now. I look at the chain of succession down from Trump and I have to worry if something is found and action is taken against Trump. I look at the names and those bother me much more than tolerating Trump* for the remainder of his term. That being said, this is all opinion that is not based on heavy research into the depths of each man's soul and the sins he has committed. Take it for what it is worth. 

 

 

* If Trump goes down, I hope Pence falls with him. On the absolutely scientific basis of my gut instinct, I think Pence would be really bad as President. 

[Nolgroth]

Aside: If the only choices we have in an election are differing degrees of evil, are we not forced to conclude that we're living in a Hell of our own making?

 

If I were still capable of weeping, I would have wept when the primaries were over and we were faced with an impossible choice. I chose instead to laugh maniacally at the impending circus. It has still kept me amused.

[Pariah]

Strangely, that sounds like a perfectly healthy response to me.

[dmjalund]

I just think the Liberal economic model is motivated by doing good things for people who need them and is ultimately unsustainable.

 

Other countries seem to manage it

[Iuz the Evil]

Other countries seem to manage it

Yeah, California is doing just fine thanks. Budget surplus again, give rest of country more than we take. Even paying down those pension liabilities everyone is so worked up about.

 

On a state level, progressive economics work really nicely. Different strokes I guess.

[Nolgroth]

If we get this single payer medical thing going, let's revisit this conversation. Let's also hope some of that budget surplus gets used to fix infrastructure like roads, bridges and dams. It's easy to claim that we are doing fine when essential services like that are ignored for the better part of a generation. From where I sit, maintaining that infrastructure is the very purpose of having a centralized government. Different strokes indeed. 

 

Mind you, this could easily devolve into a disagreement about where money should be spent. Not looking to go there. Just saying that not everything is as hunky dory as all that. 

[Iuz the Evil]

No way does single payer not get vetoed by Jerry Brown even if it passes. I work closely with DHCS and nobody thinks there is any real likelihood of single payer at a state level who I'm talking to. I think that's unfortunate, but there it is.

 

I'm comfortable with spending more on infrastructure than occurs presently, would like to see some of the trillions the Feds have gotten spent there actually. That responsibility is in my estimation not the state's alone. Infrastructure is not the primary function of government in my philosophy, but one of a number of obligations to citizenry though.

 

There's a big chunk of funding going to that in the governor's May revise in any case. $2.8 billion as part of $54 billion over the next decade on infrastructure improvement.

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/FullBudgetSummary.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwjtrbH55e_TAhUR9mMKHb5_C6wQFgg4MAU&usg=AFQjCNHaOzkvFISal4xM_5y3dSmw2hxMVw&sig2=A5o9fhAw-51VbRfJtqtfXw

 

There's a pretty cautious approach as opposed to surplus years in past cycles, I'm kind of pleased to see them breaking the traditional "feast or famine" cycle.

[Nolgroth]

Thanks for the information. You are absolutely correct that "feast or famine" is not a winnable situation. I hope you are correct in the Governor's inevitable veto. I'm not so sure, but stranger things than that have happened.

 

Now, because I realized that I am breaking a self-imposed rule to stay out of political discussions, I'm going to take a hiatus from this thread. To be honest, I'm surprised and really glad everybody was really civil and we had discussions instead of poo flinging. It is an easy thing to become reactionary when our views and beliefs are challenged. You all have a nice day. I got gaming stuff to focus on.

[Ternaugh]

Aside: If the only choices we have in an election are differing degrees of evil, are we not forced to conclude that we're living in a Hell of our own making?

 

Okay, back to Comey and the Russians.

 

Comey and the Russians sounds like it should be a Billy and the Boingers cover band.

[Tom]

And North Korea apparently launched another missile -- which demonstrated greater capabilities than previously observed...

 

While China was hosting an international meeting in Beijing, the inaugural meeting of their 'Belt and Road Forum'...

 

So, the Chinese (along with the Russians) were holding an international party to kick off their version of a new world trading order (since the US doesn't seem interested in that sort of thing anymore) and the North Korean test will quite likely be considered an embarrassment by the Chinese government.

 

Throw in a global cyberattack, and I'm starting to feel like the news is being written by a Champions GM.

 

(I'm also starting to feel like I'm not built on anywhere near enough points, but that's not unusual)

[megaplayboy]

Donald Trump revealed classified information to the Russian foreign minister and ambassador in a closed-door meeting in the Oval Office last week, officials told the Washington Post.

 

Trump’s meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Ambassador Sergey Kislyak—which drew scrutiny after members of the U.S. press were barred from taking pictures—occurred just one day after the president fired former FBI director James Comey, who was leading the investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian operatives.

 

 

 

According to the Post, Trump jeopardized a critical intelligence source, and risked cooperation from a critical ally in the fight against the islamic state.

 

“This is code-word information,” a U.S. official told the Post, adding the president “revealed more information to the Russian ambassador than we have shared with our own allies.”

 

 

______________

 

:headdesk:

[Old Man]

If the read the article it is clear that the intelligence in question came from an allied country, which will surely be more judicious in its sharing of sensitive information with the U.S. government going forward.

 

Meanwhile, the Russian money laundering investigation that Preet Bharara was spearheading has abruptly ended just before testimony was to be given.

[Sociotard]

I really want to hear a few Republicans explain why this is less bad than Clinton's email scandal.

 

If I had to anticipate the defense, I'd posit that Clinton's reckless email use may have been illegal, while Trumps divulgence was certainly not.

 

Just, from a security standpoint, this looks a lot worse.

[megaplayboy]

I really want to hear a few Republicans explain why this is less bad than Clinton's email scandal.

 

If I had to anticipate the defense, I'd posit that Clinton's reckless email use may have been illegal, while Trumps divulgence was certainly not.

 

Just, from a security standpoint, this looks a lot worse.

Far more careless and reckless.

[Old Man]

"It's far worse than what has already been reported."

 

Code-word level intelligence is SAP (Special Access Program) intel that is referred to only by cryptic code names.  Have Blue, for example, was the unacknowledged SAP for the F-117 stealth fighter.  That is the level of intel that Trump just blabbed to the Russian foreign minister in the Oval Office.  Not all such programs are "black" programs, but black programs are TS-SAP.