US Politics Mega-thread - Page 10065

On March 15 2018 16:35 GreenHorizons wrote:



^^ this is what I'm talking about by greatly overestimating how well police do these things. No one said they wouldn't have resources either.

I feel like all of those were addressed in there, though not all especially expounded on. The article has some links to go with it too that can provide additional context/detail.

On March 15 2018 16:48 Wegandi wrote:


No, I think police are absolute shit and have a perverse incentive structure, but your solutions are even more anemic (not all mind you, but the overarching ideas) and counter-productive. I'll have to take a look again, but I didn't see anything about how these unpaid "patrols" are going to enforce statutory laws. It wasn't even mentioned at all - which isn't surprising. Instead of side-stepping my arguments, how about you address them? I'm curious how you're going to accomplish to abolish the enforcement arm of the statutory law process and yet keep the statutory law process intact. It's fascinating and I'm eager to hear you out here.

On March 15 2018 16:57 GreenHorizons wrote:


I'm not exactly sure what you mean 'enforce statutory laws'. If you want to clarify, I think I might be able to help you. The 'enforce' part

On March 15 2018 14:18 Mohdoo wrote:


From a bird's eye view, it looks like people are being asked to do things most people would not be comfortable with. They refuse. They end up fired. If Trump hires people who are willing to do his bullshit, I guess they won't leave?

On March 15 2018 17:00 Wegandi wrote:


Who do you think enforces the laws written in your legislature?

On March 15 2018 17:11 GreenHorizons wrote:


That's not my question. My question is what do you mean when you say 'enforce'. I'm asking the human actions you're talking about them performing.

On March 15 2018 17:25 Wegandi wrote:


The human action is some combination of arrests, investigation, database maintenance, etc. It also depends on the state as well. Are you in favor of doing away with traffic laws? If not, how are these community unpaid patrols going to handle that? Police also enforce evictions, warrants, and any violations of the 10 million and one laws on the books. In other words, these unpaid patrols going to go arrest non-compliant people for stuff like licensing, or are you in favor of getting rid of licensing? Something tells me you're not someone who wants to slash 99% of the laws on the books, but maybe I'm wrong here.

On March 15 2018 17:48 Falling wrote:
Then who is paying these community patrols? And how integrated are these community patrols with each other when one criminal bounces to the next city? Also what stops a community patrol from simply being the criminal syndicate, rather than a defence against it?

James Comey’s book is getting the Harry Potter treatment.

“A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies and Leadership,” the upcoming memoir from former FBI director James Comey, is set for publication on April 18 — and with anticipation rivaling that of the cult children’s favorite, the publisher is taking extreme precautions to prevent potentially explosive revelations detailing Comey’s interactions with President Donald Trump from leaking.

Instead of circulating multiple print drafts among the editors and agents working on the book, the publisher, Flatiron Books, has implemented a password-protected electronic system so that only those involved in the project have access to it.

The project is stored under a code name so that staffers who are not involved in the project wouldn’t know where to find it if they tried. At warehouses that will ship out copies of the book, workers are being asked to sign nondisclosure agreements, according to people familiar with the procedures.

And while books typically ship out from warehouses about two weeks before their official publication dates — sometimes landing on bookstore shelves days early — the shipping date for Comey’s book is expected to be moved closer to the publication date to keep a tighter lid on the physical copies.

The Comey book is set to land just as the frenzy surrounding Michael Wolff’s tell-all ”Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House” has settled down. Like Wolff’s book, Comey’s is expected to provide an inside-the-room account of how Trump’s White House functions — but without the overarching questions about the author’s credibility casting a shadow over its contents.

Aside from his public testimony before Congress, Comey has been disciplined in remaining virtually silent about his past interactions with the president, or the developments in special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation — even though it was the circumstances of his termination that are at the core of questions about whether the president tried to obstruct justice.

Last month, Comey tweeted a book teaser: a picture of himself in a recording studio, where he has been working on his audiobook: “Lordy, this time there will be a tape. Audio book almost finished,” he wrote online, a reference to his reaction, during his appearance before the Senate Intelligence Committee last June, to Trump’s suggestion that he had tapes of their conversations.

But mostly, Comey’s feed has featured enigmatic pictures of the back of his head in various locations: in front of the Statue of Liberty; in a cornfield in Iowa; and sitting in front of the Comey family Christmas tree.

The quiet before the storm is helping to build anticipation: The book is already Amazon’s No. 1 bestseller in three categories: politics & social sciences; law; and biography.

The book is expected to provide the former FBI director’s first full accounting since he was fired of his experience working under Trump, as well as an account of his time serving in the previous two administrations.

On March 15 2018 17:54 GreenHorizons wrote:


I'm happy to keep answering questions, but it should be noted that my larger point isn't to lay out a comprehensive alternative plan to policing as we know it from budgeting out line items for investigations to implementing it legislatively, but that instead of accepting that what we have (or probably whatever wegandi is imagining we replace it with) a failing system and tinkering around the edges, we need to be talking about how we do a full tear-down and new construction.

Knowing that my ideas aren't the only ideas, I can tell you what I think. But we should pay attention to the fact that of the suggestions outlined by the Rolling Stone article, the community patrols was the one I expressed skepticism about for the reasons mentioned in the piece and you mention there.

If you're prepared to engage with that in mind, I'll indulge you.

On March 15 2018 22:09 Ryzel wrote:


Right, but one can't do a full tear-down and reconstruction without precise blueprints of what's going up in its place, which is what the comprehensive questions are trying to flesh out.

I'm also curious to hear you out on your specific ideas. When you say abolishing police, are you referring to abolishing the idea of systemized enforcement of law? Is the FBI subject to this as well? If not, why not?

President Trump’s administration imposed sanctions on a series of Russian organizations and individuals on Thursday in retaliation for interference in the 2016 presidential elections and other “malicious” cyberattacks. It was the most significant action taken against Moscow since Mr. Trump took office.

The sanctions came at the same time the Trump administration joined a collective statement with Britain, France and Germany on Thursday denouncing Russia for its apparent role in a nerve gas attack on a former Russian spy and his daughter on British soil, calling it a “clear violation” of international law. But the statement included no joint action in response.

The American sanctions announced on Thursday targeted many of the same Russian organizations and operatives identified by Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel, in an indictment that outlined an audacious attempt to spread disinformation and propaganda to disrupt American democracy and, eventually, influence the vote on behalf of Mr. Trump. The sanctions also responded to other cyberattacks, including a previously undisclosed attempt to penetrate the American energy grid.

“The administration is confronting and countering malign Russian cyberactivity, including their attempted interference in U.S. elections, destructive cyberattacks, and intrusions targeting critical infrastructure,” Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said in a statement. “These targeted sanctions are a part of a broader effort to address the ongoing nefarious attacks emanating from Russia.”

The sanctions, targeting five Russian organizations and 19 individuals, will generally block them from traveling to the United States, freeze any assets in the country and bar American businesses and individuals from doing business with them. Among the organizations sanctioned were the Federal Security Service, the successor to the K.G.B. known by its Russian acronym F.S.B., and Russian military intelligence, known as G.R.U., although they, like a few others, were previously penalized under past actions for the intervention in Ukraine.

In addition to the election meddling, the attacks cited by the Treasury Department included the NotPetya cyberattack that caused billions of dollars in damage in the United States, Europe and Asia in what the department called “the most destructive and costly cyberattack in history.”

The action came a day after Britain expelled 23 Russian diplomats and announced other measures in response to the poisoning attack but its allies announced no similar efforts.

“This use of a military-grade nerve agent, of a type developed by Russia, constitutes the first offensive use of a nerve agent in Europe since the Second World War,” the statement said. “It is an assault on the United Kingdom’s sovereignty and any such use by a state party is a clear violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention and a breach of international law. It threatens the security of us all.”

The statement indicated that the United States and other allies backed Britain’s conclusion about Moscow’s responsibility. “We share the United Kingdom’s assessment that there is no plausible alternative explanation, and note that Russia’s failure to address the legitimate request by the government of the United Kingdom further underlines Russia’s responsibility,” it said.