|
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. |
On July 22 2017 09:55 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2017 08:52 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 22 2017 08:38 Danglars wrote:On July 22 2017 07:28 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 22 2017 07:15 Nevuk wrote:Is this even legal?
Tenn. county inmates given reduced jail time if they get a vasectomy
Inmates in White County, Tennessee have been given credit for their jail time if they voluntarily agree to have a vasectomy or birth control implant, a popular new program that is being called “unconstitutional” by the ACLU.
On May 15, 2017 General Sessions Judge Sam Benningfield signed a standing order that allows inmates to receive 30 days credit toward jail time if they undergo a birth control procedure.
Women who volunteer to participate in the program are given a free Nexplanon implant in their arm, the implant helps prevent pregnancies for up to four years. Men who volunteer to participate are given a vasectomy, free of charge, by the Tennessee Department of Health.
County officials said that since the program began a few months ago 32 women have gotten the Nexplananon implant and 38 men were waiting to have the vasectomy procedure performed.
Judge Benningfield told Nashville-based WTVF that he was trying to break a vicious cycle of repeat offenders who constantly come into his courtroom on drug related charges, subsequently can’t afford child support and have trouble finding jobs.
“I hope to encourage them to take personal responsibility and give them a chance, when they do get out, to not to be burdened with children. This gives them a chance to get on their feet and make something of themselves,” Judge Benningfield said in an interview.
First elected in 1998, Judge Benningfield decided to implement the program after speaking with officials at the Tennessee Department of Health.
“I understand it won’t be entirely successful but if you reach two or three people, maybe that’s two or three kids not being born under the influence of drugs. I see it as a win, win,” he added.
Inmates in the White County jail were also given two days credit toward their jail sentence if they complete a State of Tennessee, Department of Health Neonatal Syndrome Education Program. The class aimed to educate those who are incarcerated about the dangers of having children while under the influence of drugs.
“Hopefully while they’re staying here we rehabilitate them so they never come back,” the judge said.
District Attorney Bryant Dunaway, who oversees prosecution of cases in White County said he is worried the program may be unethical and possibly illegal.
“It’s concerning to me, my office doesn’t support this order,” Dunaway said.
“It’s comprehensible that an 18-year-old gets this done, it can’t get reversed and then that impacts the rest of their life,” he added.
On Wednesday, the ACLU released this statement on the program:
"Offering a so-called 'choice' between jail time and coerced contraception or sterilization is unconstitutional. Such a choice violates the fundamental constitutional right to reproductive autonomy and bodily integrity by interfering with the intimate decision of whether and when to have a child, imposing an intrusive medical procedure on individuals who are not in a position to reject it. Judges play an important role in our community – overseeing individuals’ childbearing capacity should not be part of that role."
www.abc15.com Short answer: Yes, until the courts say no. But holy shit, you only get 30 days credit for a vasectomy. That's the real crime. That's gotta be worth at least a year. Seriously though, doesn't help when you think about this part. ![[image loading]](https://static.prisonpolicy.org/images/2010rates/TN_Rates_2010.png) ![[image loading]](https://static.prisonpolicy.org/images/disparities2010/TN_racial_disparities_2010.png) Just hoping some already infertile imprisoned people are able to take advantage. Got racial offender statistics? On July 22 2017 06:44 Wulfey_LA wrote:
I remember having all these stern arguments about the horrors of unmasking. How serious it was. How Hannity was totally right in his accusations that Susan Rice was UNMASKING AMERICAN PATRIOTS. And now for the lulz conclusion. Burr is the Republican Senate Chair of whatever sub-group is investigating Trump/Russia.
The pump fake so fast everybody misses it. The HPSCI will continue investigating; Susan Rice has been subpoena'd and will testify soon. So will Samantha Power. The fallout from that will be the senator's big chance to prove he's not full of shit. lol. Of all the related causes, I can count on you to lean on "racial offender statistics". Conceding for the moment that those statistics would show what you presume (higher offending rates among Black people) do you acknowledge that it's not a great representation of the actual rate of crime? Like if you looked at who and where cocaine arrests are made and tried to use that to make assumptions about it's criminal users you would be drastically off. As long as you can also admit that races that offend at higher rates can be expected to be a bigger share of incarcerated persons.
Of course. But in the example of drugs and as you've admitted, the rate at which people are arrested/tried/convicted is a poor measure of how much criminal activity is actually happening or who is committing it.
Surely you don't actually think that there are so many more black criminals in Tennessee than there are white (per 100k)?
|
On July 22 2017 10:05 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2017 08:49 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:On July 22 2017 08:45 Danglars wrote:On July 22 2017 08:27 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
In which reporters leap over denials of campaign strategy to arrive at denials of policy conversations in wiggle room "campaign-related." It just refuses to end. Right, nothing where he was under oath and thus committed perjury. He didn't say anything contradictory in his sworn testimony. You're just like these reporters grasping at straws.
Do you remember the sorts of things you said were grasping at straws 3 months ago?
|
On July 22 2017 10:05 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2017 09:55 Danglars wrote:On July 22 2017 08:52 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 22 2017 08:38 Danglars wrote:On July 22 2017 07:28 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 22 2017 07:15 Nevuk wrote:Is this even legal?
Tenn. county inmates given reduced jail time if they get a vasectomy
Inmates in White County, Tennessee have been given credit for their jail time if they voluntarily agree to have a vasectomy or birth control implant, a popular new program that is being called “unconstitutional” by the ACLU.
On May 15, 2017 General Sessions Judge Sam Benningfield signed a standing order that allows inmates to receive 30 days credit toward jail time if they undergo a birth control procedure.
Women who volunteer to participate in the program are given a free Nexplanon implant in their arm, the implant helps prevent pregnancies for up to four years. Men who volunteer to participate are given a vasectomy, free of charge, by the Tennessee Department of Health.
County officials said that since the program began a few months ago 32 women have gotten the Nexplananon implant and 38 men were waiting to have the vasectomy procedure performed.
Judge Benningfield told Nashville-based WTVF that he was trying to break a vicious cycle of repeat offenders who constantly come into his courtroom on drug related charges, subsequently can’t afford child support and have trouble finding jobs.
“I hope to encourage them to take personal responsibility and give them a chance, when they do get out, to not to be burdened with children. This gives them a chance to get on their feet and make something of themselves,” Judge Benningfield said in an interview.
First elected in 1998, Judge Benningfield decided to implement the program after speaking with officials at the Tennessee Department of Health.
“I understand it won’t be entirely successful but if you reach two or three people, maybe that’s two or three kids not being born under the influence of drugs. I see it as a win, win,” he added.
Inmates in the White County jail were also given two days credit toward their jail sentence if they complete a State of Tennessee, Department of Health Neonatal Syndrome Education Program. The class aimed to educate those who are incarcerated about the dangers of having children while under the influence of drugs.
“Hopefully while they’re staying here we rehabilitate them so they never come back,” the judge said.
District Attorney Bryant Dunaway, who oversees prosecution of cases in White County said he is worried the program may be unethical and possibly illegal.
“It’s concerning to me, my office doesn’t support this order,” Dunaway said.
“It’s comprehensible that an 18-year-old gets this done, it can’t get reversed and then that impacts the rest of their life,” he added.
On Wednesday, the ACLU released this statement on the program:
"Offering a so-called 'choice' between jail time and coerced contraception or sterilization is unconstitutional. Such a choice violates the fundamental constitutional right to reproductive autonomy and bodily integrity by interfering with the intimate decision of whether and when to have a child, imposing an intrusive medical procedure on individuals who are not in a position to reject it. Judges play an important role in our community – overseeing individuals’ childbearing capacity should not be part of that role."
www.abc15.com Short answer: Yes, until the courts say no. But holy shit, you only get 30 days credit for a vasectomy. That's the real crime. That's gotta be worth at least a year. Seriously though, doesn't help when you think about this part. Just hoping some already infertile imprisoned people are able to take advantage. Got racial offender statistics? On July 22 2017 06:44 Wulfey_LA wrote:I remember having all these stern arguments about the horrors of unmasking. How serious it was. How Hannity was totally right in his accusations that Susan Rice was UNMASKING AMERICAN PATRIOTS. And now for the lulz conclusion. Burr is the Republican Senate Chair of whatever sub-group is investigating Trump/Russia. https://twitter.com/yashar/status/888488364843970561 https://twitter.com/MZHemingway/status/888489491182346240The pump fake so fast everybody misses it. The HPSCI will continue investigating; Susan Rice has been subpoena'd and will testify soon. So will Samantha Power. The fallout from that will be the senator's big chance to prove he's not full of shit. lol. Of all the related causes, I can count on you to lean on "racial offender statistics". Conceding for the moment that those statistics would show what you presume (higher offending rates among Black people) do you acknowledge that it's not a great representation of the actual rate of crime? Like if you looked at who and where cocaine arrests are made and tried to use that to make assumptions about it's criminal users you would be drastically off. As long as you can also admit that races that offend at higher rates can be expected to be a bigger share of incarcerated persons. Of course. But in the example of drugs and as you've admitted, the rate at which people are arrested/tried/convicted is a poor measure of how much criminal activity is actually happening or who is committing it. Surely you don't actually think that there are so many more black criminals in Tennessee than there are white (per 100k)?
I think the attempt to cite their proportion of the population and their incarceration rates means the offense rates are closer than makes for pretty graphs. I know if you take all those convicted of drug crimes out of prisons, you still get racial division.
|
The fact that the WSJ and NYT have still yet to report on Sessions is starting to make me wonder if the info WaPo has is too vague and unconfirmed to be of real significance.
Time may prove me wrong still.
|
For Sessions to discuss "prospects for bilateral relations under a Trump administration" and "Russia related policy under a Trump administration" is very clearly "campaign related". The campaign is for the purpose of becoming a "Trump administration". If you say "but they weren't talking about poll numbers" you're kind of splitting hairs.
Sessions has said the Kislyak meetings were solely related to his Senatorial duties, which would appear to be an outright lie. I'm not sure if he made that particular statement under oath but he at least made it to the media.
It would be hard to believe that the timing of this leak, coming after Trump's stated distaste of Sessions, is coincidental. The Trump administration is a circus act.
|
United States43746 Posts
That's far worse for me than something specifically campaign related, like poll numbers. That's explicitly "this is what you get out of us winning", not a conversation that members of the Trump campaign should be having with the hostile nation trying to help them win. It's conversation Danglars and xDaunt said we'd never find (well, one of the many things they said we'd never find, most of which have been found).
|
On July 22 2017 10:50 KwarK wrote:
That's far worse for me than something specifically campaign related, like poll numbers. That's explicitly "this is what you get out of us winning", not a conversation that members of the Trump campaign should be having with the hostile nation trying to help them win. It's conversation Danglars and xDaunt never said we'd find (well, one of the many things they never said we'd find, most of which have been found).
Not trying to nitpick, but do you mean "said we'd never find" instead of "never said we'd find?" Because the second doesn't make sense to me.
Also, I think it is most likely that this Sessions leak came from people within the Trump WH, because Trump clearly wants a new AG who isn't recused from the Russia probe who can then fire Mueller.
|
United States43746 Posts
|
On July 22 2017 10:05 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2017 08:49 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:On July 22 2017 08:45 Danglars wrote:In which reporters leap over denials of campaign strategy to arrive at denials of policy conversations in wiggle room "campaign-related." It just refuses to end. Right, nothing where he was under oath and thus committed perjury. He didn't say anything contradictory in his sworn testimony. You're just like these reporters grasping at straws.
You seem like a pretty smart guy to me, which is why I'm confused as to why you are continuing to defend Trump over his Russian ties.
It is plain as day that there is a host of unsavory characters with strong ties to the Russian government swirling in Trump's orbit. After so many concealed interactions with these characters, and the number of lies that have been told in service to the coverup, how can you not ask, "What is this man hiding?"
|
On July 22 2017 10:56 KwarK wrote:
yep, my bad
Hey did you see my post on Uranium One above? If you could link me to your old post on the matter, I'd be grateful. Thanks!
|
United States43746 Posts
On July 22 2017 11:00 TheLordofAwesome wrote:Hey did you see my post on Uranium One above? If you could link me to your old post on the matter, I'd be grateful. Thanks!
Forgot to reply.
I found this, not sure if it's the post you're after.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/general/383301-us-politics-mega-thread?page=5634#112671
The basic problem with the Uranium One stories go as follows
1) Russia didn't get any uranium
2) Russia didn't get the company, a Russian guy bought some mines
3) Clinton wasn't paid by Russia
4) Clinton wasn't in a position to give them the company on her own authority, had she been paid
5) The guy who gave the Clinton Foundation money did not, in fact, work for Uranium One and hadn't for many years by the time the deal was meant to have been struck
6) The Clinton Foundation donation happened many years before Clinton was in a position to approve any deal (Bush was still in charge)
7) Russia doesn't need American uranium, they have their own
8) Uranium One never had American uranium, they had a uranium mine in Kazakhstan or some shit
9) Again, Russia never got any uranium, no uranium left the country, that would need a separate export license which was never requested or granted
10) The Clinton Foundation isn't actually a slush fund
11) A half dozen government agencies, which are not alleged to have been bribed, all signed off on the deal
The basic premise is that the ex owner of a mining company paid the former First Lady of former President Clinton by making a donation to a charitable foundation on the assumption that a decade later she'd be one of a dozen people with oversight over a deal whereby uranium mines in the former Soviet Union could be sold to some Russians, thus allowing Russians to enter the markets of the former Soviet Union and possibly unlock the power of the atom. Although he didn't personally gain anything out of this because he sold the company before the donation, and long before the company was sold, he just really wanted to make sure that the deal would go through and he thought the only way to do that was to make a donation to the charitable foundation of the Clintons.
|
On July 22 2017 10:59 TheLordofAwesome wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2017 10:05 Danglars wrote:On July 22 2017 08:49 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:On July 22 2017 08:45 Danglars wrote:In which reporters leap over denials of campaign strategy to arrive at denials of policy conversations in wiggle room "campaign-related." It just refuses to end. Right, nothing where he was under oath and thus committed perjury. He didn't say anything contradictory in his sworn testimony. You're just like these reporters grasping at straws. You seem like a pretty smart guy to me, which is why I'm confused as to why you are continuing to defend Trump over his Russian ties. It is plain as day that there is a host of unsavory characters with strong ties to the Russian government swirling in Trump's orbit. After so many concealed interactions with these characters, and the number of lies that have been told in service to the coverup, how can you not ask, "What is this man hiding?"
Manafort - on Russian payroll through Ukranian Russia party payoffs, paid 40 million by Russia to influence american politics in 2013, moves to Trump tower that year http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/old-memos-show-former-trump-aide-manafort-offered-promote-russian-interests-ap-reports/
Manafort bonus - he was in the 17$ to some Russian business interests when he joined the campaign and Mueller is going after him for money laundering. http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/paul-manafort-owed-17-million-to-russian-interests-before-joining-trump-campaign-report/article/2629173
Flynn - part of the Kushner back channel scheme, has link with RT and Putin (see meeting photo), thrown out for lying about Russian meetings http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/13/politics/michael-flynn-white-house-national-security-adviser/index.html
Don JR - setting up meetings with DJT's Russian business parters to get dirt on Clinton through Russian government proxy (Veselnitskaya), meeting ends up being about sanctions (when they say adoptions, they mean adoption ban in response to Magnitsky act sanctions) https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/07/donald-trumps-jrs-email-exchange/533244/
Kushner - deeply indebted and went to a dirty Russian bank for money, tries to set up clandestine back channel through Russian embassy, attents Clinton Dirt meeting http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/06/06/how-to-understand-kushners-back-channel-215232 http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-kushner-russian-bank-meeting-20170602-story.html
Sessions - repeatedly lied under oath (both the WHOLE TRUTH and nothing but the truth) about extent and nature of communications with Russian ambassador https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/sessions-discussed-trump-campaign-related-matters-with-russian-ambassador-us-intelligence-intercepts-show/2017/07/21/3e704692-6e44-11e7-9c15-177740635e83_story.html
Boris Epstyn - born in Russia, thrown out of WH under mysterious circumstances, runs the lowest of the low propaganda for Trump, I actually don't know what this guy's deal was http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/house-russia-probers-contact-former-trump-aide-boris-epshteyn-n766391
Carter Page - out and out Russian agent, thoroughly compromised during his 2016 trip to Russia https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/anyone--with-a-pulse-how-a-russia-friendly-adviser-found-his-way-into-the-trump-campaign/2017/05/25/32438f72-4014-11e7-8c25-44d09ff5a4a8_story.html?utm_term=.2c3884d75f3a
Goldstone and Emin and Agalarov - the other guys at the Don JR meeting, these guys are DJT's friends and business partners from the 2013 russia miss universe context https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/07/who-is-emin-agalarov/533127/ http://www.latimes.com/politics/washington/la-na-essential-washington-updates-eighth-man-at-trump-tower-meeting-also-1500404743-htmlstory.html
Tillerson - when he was CEO of Exxon, Exxon was breaking the sanctions on Russia. Tillerson's only qualification for office is his previous dealings with russia http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/07/exxon-fined-2-million-for-violating-russia-sanctions-while-tillerson-was-ceo/
DJT himself - big buys (100 million$+) of his properties are anonymous LLC fronts for Russian gangsters, numerous Russian money laundering rings broken up in Trump tower http://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-trump-property/ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4336112/FBI-wiretapped-Russian-crime-ring-Trump-Tower.html
And as a bonus, every character here has lied about everything here and had it come out shortly after. But hey, no evidence right? All made up and stuff! Yes, the Don JR email really is the lynch pin here. It is definitive proof of an attempt by the top 3 guys in the DJT campaign to collude with Russia. Taken in light of the rest .... the evidence is overwhelming. I am pretty sure only Bannon isn't compromised.
|
Sounds like this Trump guy keeps good company.
|
On July 22 2017 11:27 Wulfey_LA wrote:And as a bonus, every character here has lied about everything here and had it come out shortly after. But hey, no evidence right? All made up and stuff! Yes, the Don JR email really is the lynch pin here. It is definitive proof of an attempt by the top 3 guys in the DJT campaign to collude with Russia. Taken in light of the rest .... the evidence is overwhelming. I am pretty sure only Bannon isn't compromised.
The fact that Donald Trump was a New York real estate developer since forever should be enough to tell you that he has no qualms doing shit like taking bribes from mobsters and doing a little bit of money laundry. The fact that people still don't believe that he has serious issues with Russia and doesn't really give a shit about the United States is mindboggling because it would be the most logical 1970s New York real estate tycoon thing to do.
|
I still think there's a lot of jumping to conclusions going on here.
Out of the apparent several sources that WaPo had, only one went as far as to say Sessions discussed policy issues. Furthermore, other reputable news outlets haven't confirmed the reports yet, so there seems to be some skepticism/hesitation on their end.
This may turn out to be big still, but it's way too early to be talking about perjury trials and how this is "discussions of what Russia gets when Trump wins" imo.
I don't really have strong doubts that policy was discussed, but there's reasons to be a little skeptical this is necessarily the smoking gun.
That said, it could still evolve further.
|
I think this story is like 70/30 true (not the worst anonymous source stuff but not anywhere near the best-few numbers, few actual stated allegiances/offices, lots of "US officials with access to intelligence"), but it's also almost certainly leaked by someone in the White House. Smells like a trial balloon to try to finally get enough blood in the water to dismiss Sessions-who Trump basically said this week was a fuckup. That's more warning than he gave Comey.
It does kind of fit with Comey's testimony about Sessions though. And of course continues to corroborate the Steele dossier.
|
I don't know. If you want to put blood in the water (from the WH's perspective), why only leak to one news outlet? Why not several?
And aren't there cleaner ways to get rid of Sessions? Ones that don't involve pouring more gasoline on the Trump-Russia fire? If Trump just asked Sessions to resign, I feel like there's a decent chance he would.
Then again, this is an administration that's shown countless times that assuming competence on their part is just a mistake.
|
On July 22 2017 13:04 mozoku wrote:
I don't know. If you want to put blood in the water (from the WH's perspective), why only leak to one news outlet? Why not several?
And aren't there cleaner ways to get rid of Sessions? Ones that don't involve pouring more gasoline on the Trump-Russia fire? If Trump just asked Sessions to resign, I feel like there's a decent chance he would.
Then again, this is an administration that's shown countless times that assuming competence on their part is just a mistake.
Well, in this case it's quite possible they leaked to several and only WaPo ran the story because the others didn't think it had enough details. Or WaPo got enough evidence corroborating before the others felt comfortable running it-it wouldn't be the first time, they tend to leap on these stories before NYT.
There aren't that many cleaner ways to get rid of Sessions if you're Bannon or Priebus or anyone else in the weird, GoT level backstabbing White House circle. I mean, who else would leak this? The "deep state" people? No big incentive there, they don't want Sessions gone because it puts Mueller at risk, especially dovetailing so closely with Trump shitting on Sessions.
|
I thought, hey maybe Trump is smart enough to play this. Then I forgot the number 1 rule, no he isn't that smart. WaPo had the intercept in June. Adam Entous is the writer.
|
On July 22 2017 13:27 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2017 13:04 mozoku wrote:
I don't know. If you want to put blood in the water (from the WH's perspective), why only leak to one news outlet? Why not several?
And aren't there cleaner ways to get rid of Sessions? Ones that don't involve pouring more gasoline on the Trump-Russia fire? If Trump just asked Sessions to resign, I feel like there's a decent chance he would.
Then again, this is an administration that's shown countless times that assuming competence on their part is just a mistake. Well, in this case it's quite possible they leaked to several and only WaPo ran the story because the others didn't think it had enough details. Or WaPo got enough evidence corroborating before the others felt comfortable running it-it wouldn't be the first time, they tend to leap on these stories before NYT. There aren't that many cleaner ways to get rid of Sessions if you're Bannon or Priebus or anyone else in the weird, GoT level backstabbing White House circle. I mean, who else would leak this? The "deep state" people? No big incentive there, they don't want Sessions gone because it puts Mueller at risk, especially dovetailing so closely with Trump shitting on Sessions.
Oh, fair enough. I thought you meant Trump himself ordered the leaked, which is what I wouldn't quite understand. It makes total sense if it's coming from Bannon or Preibus or someone else involved in the intra-WH war that seems to be going on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
