| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7921 Posts
On March 03 2017 00:28 LegalLord wrote: His Twitter reflects his ego far more than it does issues genuinely important to the country. But you already knew that. Still haven't got used to the new presidential style  | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On March 03 2017 00:28 LegalLord wrote: His Twitter reflects his ego far more than it does issues genuinely important to the country. But you already knew that. Although I agree with this assessment, I don’t believe the President will ever be able to make that argument successfully. His twitter will always been seen as an extension of the office and how he plans to govern. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
Former President Obama is getting ready to jump back into the political pool, former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said Tuesday. Holder said he has been talking with Obama about different ways to help the new National Democratic Redistricting Committee, according to Politico. Obama asked Holder to be chairman of the group last year. “He's ready to roll,” Holder told reporters at a briefing. Obama and other top Democrats are focusing efforts on state-level races and ending the reconfiguring of voting districts through the politically-laded process known as gerrymandering – a combined effort to end “Trump-ism” and help their party regain control of Congress and legislatures across the country. Fox News | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15725 Posts
On March 03 2017 00:21 Scarecrow wrote: Absolutely, it's great for Trump, but isn't it a concern that the president's biggest political adversary is investigative reporting? I think his point is that a lot of this isn't investigative journalism. As an example, people who believe illegal immigration harms American workers are not racist. They just feel insecure about the fact that they can't raise a family as well as their parents did, so they've had enough and demand something changes. But it isn't racism, its self-loathing turned into resentment and blame shifting. Regardless, a lot of policies have more to do with selfishness and dreaming of the 50s rather than actual racism. Investigative reporters would have been smart to do pieces on what has changed over the past 60 years and why the days of buying a house on a single factory worker wage isn't going to happen again. Instead, there are hit pieces on the alt right and xenophobia. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7921 Posts
What future can Obama have in national politics? I understand he can't be candidate again; are there any perspective in the US for a former Potus to play a big role once his terms are over? | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On March 03 2017 00:45 Biff The Understudy wrote: What future can Obama have in national politics? I understand he can't be candidate again; are there any perspective in the US for a former Potus to play a big role once his terms are over? They're generally popular people the party listens to. He can be another Billy Clinton. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7921 Posts
On March 03 2017 00:44 Mohdoo wrote: I think his point is that a lot of this isn't investigative journalism. As an example, people who believe illegal immigration harms American workers are not racist. They just feel insecure about the fact that they can't raise a family as well as their parents did, so they've had enough and demand something changes. But it isn't racism, its self-loathing turned into resentment and blame shifting. Regardless, a lot of policies have more to do with selfishness and dreaming of the 50s rather than actual racism. Investigative reporters would have been smart to do pieces on what has changed over the past 60 years and why the days of buying a house on a single factory worker wage isn't going to happen again. Instead, there are hit pieces on the alt right and xenophobia. Those are not mutually exclusive. The changes in rural and working class America is investigated and documented by plenty of quality papers. It's just that they do both and Milo sells better than the life of poor people. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On March 03 2017 00:45 Biff The Understudy wrote: What future can Obama have in national politics? I understand he can't be candidate again; are there any perspective in the US for a former Potus to play a big role once his terms are over? In theory he may be able to be a judge, DNC chairman, congressman, maybe a cabinet member? Although I'm not sure about those. UN Secretary General would be pretty cool Or First Gentleman | ||
KwarK
United States43282 Posts
SEN. PATRICK J. LEAHY: Several of the President-elect's nominees or senior advisers have Russian ties. Have you been in contact with anyone connected to any part of the Russian government about the 2016 election, either before or after election day? SESSIONS: No. *turns out that Sessions met with Sergey Kislyak. Sergey Kislyak, the Russian ambassador, is considered by US intelligence to be one of Russia's top spies and spy-recruiters in Washington, according to current and former senior US government officials.* (CNN) I'm really not sure where the ambiguity in his language was. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
Relevant since recently I saw allegations that it was so crazy for Senators to meet with Russian ambassadors. Sessions' spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores said there was nothing "misleading about his answer" to Congress because the Alabama Republican "was asked during the hearing about communications between Russia and the Trump campaign -- not about meetings he took as a senator and a member of the Armed Services Committee He'll likely remove himself from the investigation as he said he may do earlier. Democrats calling for his head notwithstanding. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18839 Posts
| ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28716 Posts
On March 03 2017 00:11 Gahlo wrote: It hasn't happened to white people, so he doesn't care. Same way he didn't care about the Indians getting shot at the bar or the Mosque attack in... was it Canada? Didn't he specifically address the Indians getting shot in his congressional speech? | ||
|
Liquid`Drone
Norway28716 Posts
On March 03 2017 01:09 KwarK wrote: *turns out that Sessions met with Sergey Kislyak. Sergey Kislyak, the Russian ambassador, is considered by US intelligence to be one of Russia's top spies and spy-recruiters in Washington, according to current and former senior US government officials.* (CNN) I'm really not sure where the ambiguity in his language was. That he asked whether he had been in contact with part of the russian government about the 2016 election, not during the election. If they were only talking about stuff entirely unrelated to the 2016 election, then he's technically truthful. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21969 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On March 03 2017 01:09 KwarK wrote: *turns out that Sessions met with Sergey Kislyak. Sergey Kislyak, the Russian ambassador, is considered by US intelligence to be one of Russia's top spies and spy-recruiters in Washington, according to current and former senior US government officials.* (CNN) I'm really not sure where the ambiguity in his language was. The problem one was the surrogate question from Franken, not quoted. "About the 2016 election" is the operative word here. Do you need help finding the Franken question/answer? | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
On March 03 2017 01:20 Liquid`Drone wrote: That he asked whether he had been in contact with part of the russian government about the 2016 election, not during the election. If they were only talking about stuff entirely unrelated to the 2016 election, then he's technically truthful. Then what were they talking about at the RNC Convention a campaign event? | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On March 03 2017 01:15 farvacola wrote: lol, Danglars has resorted to attempting to use Claire McCaskill as cover, Sessions must really be done for. Forget the claim that he couldn't have been in contact as part of his Senatorial position so soon? Get your issues straight and we might have a discussion, if indeed you're interested in having one. | ||
|
KwarK
United States43282 Posts
On March 03 2017 01:20 Liquid`Drone wrote: That he asked whether he had been in contact with part of the russian government about the 2016 election, not during the election. If they were only talking about stuff entirely unrelated to the 2016 election, then he's technically truthful. Which is the best kind of truthful, obviously. It's like when your girlfriend asks you if you've been hanging out with that female coworker she's extremely suspicious of because all her friends tell her you're cheating. And you say "no". And then later on it turns out that you went out for a drink after work and you explain "yeah but that was like a work thing, we weren't technically hanging out so I didn't see any reason to not remove that instance from the breadth of your inquiry and answer purely the technical limitations of the question so I think you'll find that I never lied and it's your fault for providing ambiguity in the question that gave me grounds for tactical omission". Pretty sure that'd be fine, right? | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21969 Posts
On March 03 2017 01:21 Danglars wrote: The problem one was the surrogate question from Franken, not quoted. "About the 2016 election" is the operative word here. Do you need help finding the Franken question/answer? Right, so if he gets a good lawyer he might be able to avoid a technical Perjury. And yet we have Trump associate number 4? 5? I've lost count, who had meetings with Russian officials under questionable circumstances during the election. Even if you do not believe that anything happened and that Trump's cabinet is not associated in any form with Russia, at this point you have to understand why questions are being asked? Why people want an investigation? And its not just Democrats looking to score points. Proud Republicans in this thread are asking questions aswell. | ||
|
Liquid`Drone
Norway28716 Posts
On March 03 2017 01:21 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Then what were they talking about at the RNC Convention a campaign event? I don't know what they were talking about, and I find it overwhelmingly probable that there is actual fire to to along with the smoke here. But based on the specific question he was asked, I have not seen actual proof that he lied. Omitted truth, yes, but I'm guessing those are different from a legal pov? (Not a lawyer!) | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Other Games Organizations Other Games Dota 2 StarCraft: Brood War StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War |
|
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
OSC
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
The PondCast
Replay Cast
OSC
LAN Event
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
