US Politics Mega-thread - Page 7314

The Trump administration on Monday signalled much broader grounds for future military intervention in Syria, suggesting it might retaliate against the Assad regime for barrel bomb attacks.

On the eve of a critical visit to Moscow at a time of high US-Russian tensions over Syria, the US secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, appeared to go even further, saying his country would come to the defence of innocent civilians “anywhere in the world”.

The administration had initially stressed strictly limited objectives for a cruise missile strike last week on a Syrian air force base, saying it was intended to deter the repeat of a chemical attack on Tuesday against civilians and that the focus of US efforts in Syria remains combating the Islamic State (Isis).

On Monday, however, the White House spokesman, Sean Spicer, widened the criteria for retaliation. “When you watch babies and children being gassed, and suffer under barrel bombs, you are instantaneously moved to action,” he said. “I think this president’s made it very clear that if those actions were to continue, further action will definitely be considered by the United States.”

US intelligence believes Assad carried out last week’s attack with the chemical agent sarin, killing dozens of civilians including children. But Spicer made the first mention of the use of barrel bombs – crude munitions that can cause indiscriminate casualties.

Pressed on whether chemical warfare as opposed to conventional warfare constitutes a red line, he replied: “I think the president’s been very clear that there were a number of lines crossed last week ... The answer is if you gas a baby, if you put a barrel bomb into innocent people, I think you will see a response from this president. That is unacceptable.”

The White House said later that Spicer was referring to barrel bombs carrying industrial chemicals like chlorine. But that would still represent a substantial expansion of the US rules of engagement in Syria. The regime is suspected of using chlorine gas in its attacks on dozens of occasions since 2013.

Tillerson made his remarks during a visit to the site of a 1944 Nazi massacre in Italy, but they clearly referred to the Trump administration’s decision on Thursday to launch missile strikes against a Syrian airbase from which the US said a regime chemical attack had been launched against civilians in a rebel-held town.

Tillerson was in Italy for a G7 foreign ministers’ meeting in Lucca that was dominated by discussion of western policy towards Damascus and Moscow. The UK foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, who cancelled his own planned visit to Moscow on Monday, said the ministers would be “discussing the possibility of further sanctions certainly on some of the Syrian military figures and indeed on some of the Russian military figures who have been involved in coordinating the Syrian military effort”.

The ministers will discuss Syria again on Tuesday in Lucca before Tillerson flies on to Moscow. According to one G7 source, Tillerson plans to offer the Putin regime a bald choice, between cutting Bashar al-Assad loose and being rewarded with a thaw in relations with the west; or continuing to back him, and risking a Libyan-style outcome. The Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi, was violently deposed and killed in 2011 by rebels lent air support by Nato powers, including the UK.

Whitehall sources say Britain has been instrumental in helping to persuade the US to support the idea that Assad – and his family – must be removed from power before progress can be made. Foreign ministers are meeting on Monday evening, but the main discussion about Syria will take place on Tuesday, and Johnson will push for the strongest possible conclusion, including the threat of targeted sanctions against Syrian and Russian military commanders – a proposal he judges more likely to win support than wider economic penalties against Moscow.

The decision to approve the missile strike on the Shayrat Syrian air force base marked a sharp change in direction for Donald Trump, who had furiously opposed any such intervention by the Obama administration, and had pledged an “America first” foreign policy that would focus on counter-terrorism and narrowly defined US national interests.

Trump emphasised the child victims of the poison gas in justifying the launch of 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles aimed at infrastructure at the Shayrat base, Spicer’s comments suggested the president’s concern for Syrian children extended to victims of conventional bombing too. Over half a million people have been killed in the six years of the Syrian war. Tillerson’s comments suggested that the administration was even open to humanitarian intervention elsewhere.

On April 11 2017 06:49 xDaunt wrote:
I wonder what Trump told Xi that resulted in China sending 150,000 troops to the North Korean border.

On April 11 2017 09:37 GreenHorizons wrote:


"Anonymous person floats unsubstantiated rumor, escalating tensions and ensuring people will repeat as if fact."

For the first time in the era of the modern automobile, the most valuable U.S. car maker is not based in Detroit.

Silicon Valley's Tesla Inc (TSLA.O) overtook General Motors (GM.N) on Monday to become the U.S. car maker with the largest market capitalization as the century-old automobile industry increases its reliance on software and cutting-edge energy technology.

That milestone is likely to be on the minds of Tesla Chief Executive Elon Musk and GM Chief Executive Mary Barra as they and other CEOs visit the White House on Tuesday to discuss tax reform and infrastructure with President Donald Trump.

Helped by an analyst's recommendation, Tesla rose 3.26 percent to a record high of $312.39 on Monday. Its market value of $50.887 billion exceeded GM's by about $1 million.

Over the past month, the luxury electric car maker has surged 35 percent as investors bet that Musk will revolutionize the automobile and energy industries.

That compares to a declining share performance by GM in recent years that recently led billionaire investor David Einhorn to propose splitting the stock into two classes to help boost its price.

Tesla's market capitalization is now equivalent to $102,000 for every car it plans to make in 2018, or $667,000 per car sold last year. By comparison, GM's market capitalization is equivalent to $5,000 per car it sold in 2016.

The Palo Alto, California company is rushing to launch its mass-market Model 3 sedan in the second half of 2017 and quickly ramp up its factory to reach a production target of 500,000 cars per year in 2018. Last year it sold 76,230, missing its target of at least 80,000 vehicles. By comparison, GM sold 10 million cars and Ford sold 6.7 million.

With its stock down nearly 20 percent since 2013, GM has scaled back operations outside the United States while pushing to improve its profitability. It announced in March it would sell its European operations.

Reflecting Wall Street's worries, GM's stock trades at 6 times its expected earnings, the lowest multiple among companies in the S&P 500.

Proponents believe Tesla, which is not profitable, argue its stock price is justified based on long-term expectations for Tesla's growth.

They also point to opportunities from Tesla's acquisition last year of money-losing solar panel installer SolarCity and Tesla's Nevada battery cell plant aimed at driving down manufacturing costs.

A federal judge has ruled — for the second time — that Texas lawmakers intentionally discriminated against Latino and black voters in passing a strict voter identification law in 2011.

U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos ruled Monday that Texas “has not met its burden” in proving that lawmakers passed the nation’s strictest photo ID law, know as Senate Bill 14, without knowingly targeting minority voters.

The 10-page ruling, if it withstands almost certain appeals, could ultimately put Texas back on the list of states needing outside approval before changing election laws. A 2013 Supreme Court ruling sprung Texas and other states with a history of discrimination from that list.

U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals last July ruled that the Texas law disproportionally targeted minority voters who were less likely to have one of the seven forms of state-approved photo ID — a violation of the U.S. Voting Rights Act. And Texas conducted the 2016 General Elections under a court-ordered relaxation of the rules.


But the appeals court asked Ramos, of Corpus Christi, to reconsider her previous ruling that lawmakers discriminated on purpose, calling parts of her conclusion “infirm.”

After reweighing the evidence, she came to the same conclusion, according to Monday’s ruling. Her decision did not identify what some have called a smoking gun showing intent to discriminate, but it cited the state’s long history of discrimination; “virtually unprecedented radical departures from normal practices” in fast-tracking the 2011 bill through the Legislature; the legislation's “unduly strict” terms; and lawmakers' “shifting rationales” for passing a law that some said was needed to crack down on voter fraud.

On April 11 2017 10:11 LegalLord wrote:
California-based bubble overtakes real, if troubled, car companies in Detroit in stock market valuation despite no particularly good fundamentals or financials to justify that price?

Don't get me wrong, it is impressive how long it's managed to sustain this illusion, but Tesla is a complete and utter cult stock.

On April 11 2017 11:39 LegalLord wrote:

Yes, taking "the Amazon excuse" to anyone noticing a company being financially unfeasible is an excellent way to run a money laundering venture. It doesn't make the company feasible though.

Though if Musk has proven anything, there are a lot of people who are a combination of well-meaning and gullible, so he continues to have an income.

On April 11 2017 11:54 LegalLord wrote:
No, I just hate scam artists. People who abuse public goodwill for "building the future" in order to line their own pockets on unfeasible ventures does upset me.

I do notice that people who fanboy Musk always seem to try to find a reason to discredit anyone who is not too fond of him for that matter.

On April 11 2017 11:39 LegalLord wrote:

Yes, taking "the Amazon excuse" to anyone noticing a company being financially unfeasible is an excellent way to run a money laundering venture. It doesn't make the company feasible though.

Though if Musk has proven anything, there are a lot of people who are a combination of well-meaning and gullible, so he continues to have an income.