US Politics Mega-thread - Page 8626

On September 02 2017 02:42 oBlade wrote:
What do you mean? Even Politifact agrees he's rejected presidential salary so far.

On September 02 2017 02:42 Nevuk wrote:

The nest suggestion I've ever seen was that if they want to act like military to treat them like military. Give them military style tribunals and regulations and hold them to a higher standard. Currently it is legal, not just permissible, for a cop to knowingly break the law as long as he thinks he is upholding a different one.

On September 02 2017 02:11 Nevuk wrote:

This was posted a couple of pages back. Still one of the most unbelievable things I've seen involving police. Most of the shootings of unarmed black men weren't done with 4 other cops standing by watching silently and with the approval of those cop's supervisors. She's even an Olympic skier ffs. Not sure they could have acted in a dumber manner.

On September 02 2017 03:14 ticklishmusic wrote:


This article helped drive home how egregious police behavior can be. He did all this to get blood from a guy who was hit by the suspect which he had less than zero standing to do. There was no crime and race didn't play a role (the nurse was white). It's absolutely insane.

On September 02 2017 02:59 Plansix wrote:
https://twitter.com/AP/status/903242842256150528

I can see the future: nothing will happen. No one will go to jail, no one will be punished. This is a write off.

On September 02 2017 03:26 jcarlsoniv wrote:


If only predatory practices couldn't be so easily written off as cost of doing business.

On September 02 2017 02:59 Plansix wrote:
https://twitter.com/AP/status/903242842256150528

I can see the future: nothing will happen. No one will go to jail, no one will be punished. This is a write off.

On September 02 2017 03:34 CorsairHero wrote:

is the future the same even if Hillary won the election

On September 02 2017 03:34 CorsairHero wrote:

is the future the same even if Hillary won the election

WASHINGTON ― House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said Friday that President Donald Trump should not terminate a program protecting young undocumented immigrants who come to the U.S. as children, even though he and other Republicans have repeatedly tried to end it in Congress.

“I actually don’t think he should do that,” Ryan said concerning reports that Trump will end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which could be killed as early as Friday. “I believe that this is something that Congress has to fix.”

Trump said Friday afternoon that he will announce a decision on DACA, which has allowed nearly 800,000 so-called “Dreamers” to receive two-year work permits and deportation reprieve, later in the day or over the weekend. Attorneys general from 10 states threatened the president with legal action if he doesn’t terminate the program by Sept. 5, and there were reports on Thursday and Friday that he plans to do so, although the White House has said it is still under review.

Ryan is a longtime opponent of DACA. He said on Friday that President Barack Obama, who created the program in 2012, “did not have the legislative authority to do what he did” and that presidents cannot “write law out of thin air.”

“Having said all of that, there are people in limbo,” Ryan added. “These are kids that know no other country, who were brought here by their parents and don’t know another home, and so I really do believe there needs to be a legislative solution, that’s one that we’re working on.”

Trump vowed during his presidential campaign to end DACA, which he, like Ryan and other Republicans, has said is unconstitutional. If he followed through, current recipients would be unable to work legally and would be at risk of deportation. Although the Trump administration has said its focus is deporting criminals, it routinely detains other undocumented immigrants it encounters as well ― Dreamers among them.

Ending the program would also put intense pressure on Republicans in Congress to pass legislation to protect Dreamers, which many of them have opposed in the past. Along with attempting to end DACA, Ryan voted in 2010 against the Dream Act, which would give a path to citizenship to Dreamers, and declined to hold a vote on comprehensive immigration reform. He, like Trump, has also stated general support for Dreamers and allowing them to remain in the country.

Other Republicans have also voiced support for maintaining DACA as Trump weighs ending the program. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), an original sponsor of the Dream Act in 2001 who opposed it in 2010, issued a statement on Friday saying he had urged Trump not to terminate DACA and would work on legislation to help Dreamers.

Other Republicans have already backed legislation to give protections to Dreamers. Three Senate Republicans ― Sens. Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.), Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) ― are co-sponsors of the 2017 iteration of the Dream Act, which was also introduced in the House with support from two Republicans, Rep. Mike Coffman (R-Colo.) and Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.).

Groups of Republicans have also pushed for the Bridge Act, which would be a stopgap measure to temporarily extend Dreamers’ protections until a longer-term solution could be reached. Coffman said Thursday that he would attempt to force a vote on the bill.

Rep. Carlos Curbelo (R-Fla.) recently introduced the Recognizing America’s Children, or RAC Act, which would create a path to citizenship to Dreamers but with more restrictions than the Dream Act. He has 18 co-sponsors, all of them Republicans, including Coffman and Ros-Lehtinen.

Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) reportedly plans to introduce a similar bill to the RAC Act.

Republicans have previously said any legal status for undocumented immigrants must be coupled with other measures, such as increased border security and interior enforcement. Top White House officials reportedly were considering pushing for a deal that would give protections to Dreamers in exchange for border wall funding, slashing legal immigration and putting more requirements on employers to check immigration status of hires.

Democrats have agreed in the past to tie enforcement and border security measures to legal status for undocumented immigrants, as they did in the 2013 comprehensive immigration reform bill. But they will only go so far. Leading Democrats immediately shot down the reported deal under consideration by White House officials, saying Dreamers should not be used as a bargaining chip.

WASHINGTON — The special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, has obtained a letter that President Trump and a top political aide drafted in the days before Mr. Trump fired the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, which explains the president’s rationale for why he planned to dismiss the director.

The May letter had been met with opposition from Donald F. McGahn II, the White House counsel, who believed that some of its contents were problematic, according to interviews with a dozen administration officials and others briefed on the matter.

Mr. McGahn successfully blocked the president from sending Mr. Comey the letter, which Mr. Trump had composed with Stephen Miller, one of the president’s top political advisers. A different letter, written by the deputy attorney general, Rod J. Rosenstein, and focused on Mr. Comey’s handling of the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server, was ultimately sent to the F.B.I. director on the day he was fired.

The contents of the original letter appear to provide the clearest rationale that Mr. Trump had for firing Mr. Comey. The Times has not seen a copy of the letter and it is unclear how much of Mr. Trump’s rationale focuses on the Russia investigation. Mr. Trump told aides at the time he was angry that Mr. Comey refused to publicly say that Mr. Trump himself was not under investigation, something Mr. Comey had told the president privately.

Mr. Comey later confirmed in testimony to Congress in June that he had told the president that he was not under investigation, but said he didn’t make that public because the status could change in the future.

Mr. Mueller is conducting a wide-ranging investigation into Russia and associates of Mr. Trump, including whether the president obstructed justice when he dismissed the F.B.I. director.

The Justice Department turned over a copy of the letter to Mr. Mueller in recent weeks.

Ty Cobb, a White House lawyer, declined to discuss the letter or its contents. “To the extent the special prosecutor is interested in these matters, we will be fully transparent with him,’’ he said.

Mr. Miller drafted the letter at the urging of Mr. Trump during a weekend in May, when Mr. Trump and his team were at the president’s private golf club in Bedminster, N.J. During that same weekend, as Mr. Trump and a small group of aides were in Bedminster devising a rationale for Mr. Comey’s dismissal, Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Mr. Rosenstein were working on a parallel effort to fire Mr. Comey.

During testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee in May, Mr. Comey gave the first detailed explanation for his handling of the investigation of Hillary Clinton, saying “it makes me mildly nauseous to think that we might have had some impact on the election.”

His conduct during the hearing added to concerns held by Mr. Sessions and Mr. Rosenstein that the F.B.I. director had botched the Clinton investigation and had overstepped the boundaries of his job.

Two days after Mr. Comey’s testimony, Mr. Rosenstein had a meeting with a White House lawyer at the Justice Department, where Mr. Rosenstein expressed concern about how the F.B.I. director had handled the Clinton investigation. The White House lawyer relayed the details of the conversation to his bosses at the White House.

Mr. Comey was fired on May 9.

On September 02 2017 03:55 Plansix wrote:

I disagree with your false equivalency, but I’ll let that slide because I have a better argument.

Who cares? Its still bullshit. The existence of a centrist candidate for president does not make this less bullshit. If that is the only argument you have, go get a better one.

On September 02 2017 06:02 brian wrote:
threatening a dying man i don't know..