|
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 February 01 2018 06:22 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 06:17 Gorsameth wrote:On February 01 2018 06:09 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:06 Leporello wrote:On February 01 2018 06:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 04:30 hunts wrote:On February 01 2018 04:22 Danglars wrote:On February 01 2018 04:04 hunts wrote:On February 01 2018 03:31 Danglars wrote:
They had their shot to be cooperative with oversight committees. Now, it’s time to release the summary memo and primary source documents supporting it. How are you still defending the party that sold America out to the russians? I thought the narrative was Republicans we’re all up on wild conspiracy theories. Hey, a new Red Scare! That’s the trick—Democrats. Well your people did try to shoot up a pizzaria to free non existant child hostages. If you had paid any attention to the actual happenings and not kept your nose in fox breitbart and zerohedge, you would see that republicans are very literally selling America out to the russians in front of everyones faces, it's literally not a conspiracy theory. Part of the reason the pizza place got shot up is because people genuinely believed there was something terrible happening (regardless of how crazy that was), and no one was doing anything to stop it. So as we all watch the President of the US "sell America out to the Russians" I wonder, what are liberals going to do if the entirety of the media, establishment of both parties, and the legal system is unable to stop him or punish him/his administration? Just shrug and move on? Obviously we'll gather our militias and AK47s and retake our freedom. We're being sarcastic, right? That wasn't what I meant to imply. I just mean selling out the country is a pretty big deal and I don't know how liberals could think we have a functioning system if they spend 4 years talking about how unbelievably unfounded and essentially criminal/treasonous the president is just for him to retire wealthier and more powerful than when he started and the US worse off? It would seem that would force their hand to admit the system is broken if it can't stop a president from selling us out to a foreign enemy. As a European I would say your system was already broken before Trump. But the people have a way to get rid of a such a President. Elect a Congress that will impeach him. The problem in this case imo isn't the system, its that one side is ok with whats happening. (funny enough in a non 2-party system where multiple parties hold Congress this may well not have happened) I agree it was broken before Trump when a bunch of big banks robbed people for billions of dollars and their punishment was using profits off free money to pay a portion of it back. Yet people continue banking with them, even as they add new and unreasonable fees. Your explanation still very much sounds like a problem with the system as well as with us as a people. It's not a "blame it on the Republicans" thing either. EDIT: broken may not be quite correct since the constitution was originally intended to empower rich, land owning, white males.
I don't know. As I said the US system has numerous defects at its core that many other democracies in the world have moved away from (like FPTP and congressional districts) that cause the system to 'broken' and open to exploitation but I can't look at a sub 20% approval rate for Congress over a decade (minus a small spike to sub 40 in '09) yet an 80-90% re-election rate and not put blame on the people who simply do not vote for another, any other, option. Vote for someone else ffs, its not like you can much worse then sub 20% approval.
|
On February 01 2018 06:41 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 06:34 Plansix wrote:
To be fair, that was every government out of Europe at the time, only if focused on title and heredity. Empowering educated men that were not connected to the aristocracy was a super liberal idea. One might say revolutionary. The land part was just because we didn’t have great ways of telling who belonged to which state. The previously existing aristocracy sure, but they very much made a new one here (with the slightest hint of meritocracy). We need look no further than the response to the state of the union.
You won’t get any argument from me on that front. But even they knew the system wasn’t perfect. They why they said “more perfect union”. It wasn’t a great plan, just better than being ruled by a mentally ill king. We’ve done ok since then, which some low notes recently.
|
On February 01 2018 06:47 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 06:22 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:17 Gorsameth wrote:On February 01 2018 06:09 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:06 Leporello wrote:On February 01 2018 06:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 04:30 hunts wrote:On February 01 2018 04:22 Danglars wrote:On February 01 2018 04:04 hunts wrote:How are you still defending the party that sold America out to the russians? I thought the narrative was Republicans we’re all up on wild conspiracy theories. Hey, a new Red Scare! That’s the trick—Democrats. Well your people did try to shoot up a pizzaria to free non existant child hostages. If you had paid any attention to the actual happenings and not kept your nose in fox breitbart and zerohedge, you would see that republicans are very literally selling America out to the russians in front of everyones faces, it's literally not a conspiracy theory. Part of the reason the pizza place got shot up is because people genuinely believed there was something terrible happening (regardless of how crazy that was), and no one was doing anything to stop it. So as we all watch the President of the US "sell America out to the Russians" I wonder, what are liberals going to do if the entirety of the media, establishment of both parties, and the legal system is unable to stop him or punish him/his administration? Just shrug and move on? Obviously we'll gather our militias and AK47s and retake our freedom. We're being sarcastic, right? That wasn't what I meant to imply. I just mean selling out the country is a pretty big deal and I don't know how liberals could think we have a functioning system if they spend 4 years talking about how unbelievably unfounded and essentially criminal/treasonous the president is just for him to retire wealthier and more powerful than when he started and the US worse off? It would seem that would force their hand to admit the system is broken if it can't stop a president from selling us out to a foreign enemy. As a European I would say your system was already broken before Trump. But the people have a way to get rid of a such a President. Elect a Congress that will impeach him. The problem in this case imo isn't the system, its that one side is ok with whats happening. (funny enough in a non 2-party system where multiple parties hold Congress this may well not have happened) I agree it was broken before Trump when a bunch of big banks robbed people for billions of dollars and their punishment was using profits off free money to pay a portion of it back. Yet people continue banking with them, even as they add new and unreasonable fees. Your explanation still very much sounds like a problem with the system as well as with us as a people. It's not a "blame it on the Republicans" thing either. EDIT: broken may not be quite correct since the constitution was originally intended to empower rich, land owning, white males. I don't know. As I said the US system has numerous defects at its core that many other democracies in the world have moved away from (like FPTP and congressional districts) that cause the system to 'broken' and open to exploitation but I can't look at a sub 20% approval rate for Congress over a decade (minus a small spike to sub 40 in '09) yet an 80-90% re-election rate and not put blame on the people who simply do not vote for another, any other, option. Vote for someone else ffs, its not like you can much worse then sub 20% approval.
I wasn't excusing the people who vote for them, I was pointing out that people pshhhd previous attempts to tell them the system is shit and I was merely hoping this would be incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. Particularly since Obama letting the banks off wasn't it.
On February 01 2018 06:47 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 06:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:34 Plansix wrote:
To be fair, that was every government out of Europe at the time, only if focused on title and heredity. Empowering educated men that were not connected to the aristocracy was a super liberal idea. One might say revolutionary. The land part was just because we didn’t have great ways of telling who belonged to which state. The previously existing aristocracy sure, but they very much made a new one here (with the slightest hint of meritocracy). We need look no further than the response to the state of the union. You won’t get any argument from me on that front. But even they knew the system wasn’t perfect. They why they said “more perfect union”. It wasn’t a great plan, just better than being ruled by a mentally ill king. We’ve done ok since then, which some low notes recently.
That don't impress me much.
EDIT: So this pretty much confirms "shrug and move on"
|
On February 01 2018 06:39 Leporello wrote:
CNN killing it today -- reporting Strzok, the agent "so unfair" to our poor persecuted President, actually helped write the letter the FBI released a week before the election announcing Hillary was under investigation...
You get that, Danglars?
GH, your nation is undergoing a unique history, and the greatest political crime perhaps in the history of modern democracy. If you want to be indifferent (I wonder why), at least enjoy the show.
Reminder that Comey's letter was likely a necessary factor to Trump winning. That is to say, the FBI's actions helped Trump immensely during the campaign.
|
On February 01 2018 06:56 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 06:39 Leporello wrote:CNN killing it today -- reporting Strzok, the agent "so unfair" to our poor persecuted President, actually helped write the letter the FBI released a week before the election announcing Hillary was under investigation... You get that, Danglars? https://twitter.com/mviser/status/958812076612440064GH, your nation is undergoing a unique history, and the greatest political crime perhaps in the history of modern democracy. If you want to be indifferent (I wonder why), at least enjoy the show. Reminder that Comey's letter was likely a necessary factor to Trump winning. That is to say, the FBI's actions helped Trump immensely during the campaign.
Indeed.
I find it hilarious all these stories are breaking through CNN, Trump's favorite media target. The timing of these stories, and the fact that CNN is receiving them, is basically a direct "fuck you" from the FBI.
|
On February 01 2018 06:54 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 06:47 Gorsameth wrote:On February 01 2018 06:22 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:17 Gorsameth wrote:On February 01 2018 06:09 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:06 Leporello wrote:On February 01 2018 06:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 04:30 hunts wrote:On February 01 2018 04:22 Danglars wrote:On February 01 2018 04:04 hunts wrote:
[quote]
How are you still defending the party that sold America out to the russians? I thought the narrative was Republicans we’re all up on wild conspiracy theories. Hey, a new Red Scare! That’s the trick—Democrats. Well your people did try to shoot up a pizzaria to free non existant child hostages. If you had paid any attention to the actual happenings and not kept your nose in fox breitbart and zerohedge, you would see that republicans are very literally selling America out to the russians in front of everyones faces, it's literally not a conspiracy theory. Part of the reason the pizza place got shot up is because people genuinely believed there was something terrible happening (regardless of how crazy that was), and no one was doing anything to stop it. So as we all watch the President of the US "sell America out to the Russians" I wonder, what are liberals going to do if the entirety of the media, establishment of both parties, and the legal system is unable to stop him or punish him/his administration? Just shrug and move on? Obviously we'll gather our militias and AK47s and retake our freedom. We're being sarcastic, right? That wasn't what I meant to imply. I just mean selling out the country is a pretty big deal and I don't know how liberals could think we have a functioning system if they spend 4 years talking about how unbelievably unfounded and essentially criminal/treasonous the president is just for him to retire wealthier and more powerful than when he started and the US worse off? It would seem that would force their hand to admit the system is broken if it can't stop a president from selling us out to a foreign enemy. As a European I would say your system was already broken before Trump. But the people have a way to get rid of a such a President. Elect a Congress that will impeach him. The problem in this case imo isn't the system, its that one side is ok with whats happening. (funny enough in a non 2-party system where multiple parties hold Congress this may well not have happened) I agree it was broken before Trump when a bunch of big banks robbed people for billions of dollars and their punishment was using profits off free money to pay a portion of it back. Yet people continue banking with them, even as they add new and unreasonable fees. Your explanation still very much sounds like a problem with the system as well as with us as a people. It's not a "blame it on the Republicans" thing either. EDIT: broken may not be quite correct since the constitution was originally intended to empower rich, land owning, white males. I don't know. As I said the US system has numerous defects at its core that many other democracies in the world have moved away from (like FPTP and congressional districts) that cause the system to 'broken' and open to exploitation but I can't look at a sub 20% approval rate for Congress over a decade (minus a small spike to sub 40 in '09) yet an 80-90% re-election rate and not put blame on the people who simply do not vote for another, any other, option. Vote for someone else ffs, its not like you can much worse then sub 20% approval. I wasn't excusing the people who vote for them, I was pointing out that people pshhhd previous attempts to tell them the system is shit and I was merely hoping this would be incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. Particularly since Obama letting the banks off wasn't it.
Congress let the banks off. Or specifically, the people in the banks that were bad actors. They passed Dodd Frank, but no one went to jail. And again, that is the problem for congress because they never put the money into the FBI going after the banks. And if they don’t do that, there is no one to conduct those investigations and build cases. The president can’t really tell the FBI who to investigate. Well they can, but it wouldn’t go well.
|
On February 01 2018 07:02 Leporello wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 06:56 Doodsmack wrote:On February 01 2018 06:39 Leporello wrote:CNN killing it today -- reporting Strzok, the agent "so unfair" to our poor persecuted President, actually helped write the letter the FBI released a week before the election announcing Hillary was under investigation... You get that, Danglars? https://twitter.com/mviser/status/958812076612440064GH, your nation is undergoing a unique history, and the greatest political crime perhaps in the history of modern democracy. If you want to be indifferent (I wonder why), at least enjoy the show. Reminder that Comey's letter was likely a necessary factor to Trump winning. That is to say, the FBI's actions helped Trump immensely during the campaign. Indeed. https://twitter.com/chrislhayes/status/958817267420139520I find it hilarious all these stories are breaking through CNN, Trump's favorite media target. The timing of these stories, and the fact that CNN is receiving them, is basically a direct "fuck you" from the FBI.
*shakes fist*
Damn him for doing his job in good faith!
|
On February 01 2018 07:15 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 06:54 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:47 Gorsameth wrote:On February 01 2018 06:22 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:17 Gorsameth wrote:On February 01 2018 06:09 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:06 Leporello wrote:On February 01 2018 06:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 04:30 hunts wrote:On February 01 2018 04:22 Danglars wrote:
[quote]
I thought the narrative was Republicans we’re all up on wild conspiracy theories. Hey, a new Red Scare! That’s the trick—Democrats. Well your people did try to shoot up a pizzaria to free non existant child hostages. If you had paid any attention to the actual happenings and not kept your nose in fox breitbart and zerohedge, you would see that republicans are very literally selling America out to the russians in front of everyones faces, it's literally not a conspiracy theory. Part of the reason the pizza place got shot up is because people genuinely believed there was something terrible happening (regardless of how crazy that was), and no one was doing anything to stop it. So as we all watch the President of the US "sell America out to the Russians" I wonder, what are liberals going to do if the entirety of the media, establishment of both parties, and the legal system is unable to stop him or punish him/his administration? Just shrug and move on? Obviously we'll gather our militias and AK47s and retake our freedom. We're being sarcastic, right? That wasn't what I meant to imply. I just mean selling out the country is a pretty big deal and I don't know how liberals could think we have a functioning system if they spend 4 years talking about how unbelievably unfounded and essentially criminal/treasonous the president is just for him to retire wealthier and more powerful than when he started and the US worse off? It would seem that would force their hand to admit the system is broken if it can't stop a president from selling us out to a foreign enemy. As a European I would say your system was already broken before Trump. But the people have a way to get rid of a such a President. Elect a Congress that will impeach him. The problem in this case imo isn't the system, its that one side is ok with whats happening. (funny enough in a non 2-party system where multiple parties hold Congress this may well not have happened) I agree it was broken before Trump when a bunch of big banks robbed people for billions of dollars and their punishment was using profits off free money to pay a portion of it back. Yet people continue banking with them, even as they add new and unreasonable fees. Your explanation still very much sounds like a problem with the system as well as with us as a people. It's not a "blame it on the Republicans" thing either. EDIT: broken may not be quite correct since the constitution was originally intended to empower rich, land owning, white males. I don't know. As I said the US system has numerous defects at its core that many other democracies in the world have moved away from (like FPTP and congressional districts) that cause the system to 'broken' and open to exploitation but I can't look at a sub 20% approval rate for Congress over a decade (minus a small spike to sub 40 in '09) yet an 80-90% re-election rate and not put blame on the people who simply do not vote for another, any other, option. Vote for someone else ffs, its not like you can much worse then sub 20% approval. I wasn't excusing the people who vote for them, I was pointing out that people pshhhd previous attempts to tell them the system is shit and I was merely hoping this would be incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. Particularly since Obama letting the banks off wasn't it. Congress let the banks off. Or specifically, the people in the banks that were bad actors. They passed Dodd Frank, but no one went to jail. And again, that is the problem for congress because they never put the money into the FBI going after the banks. And if they don’t do that, there is no one to conduct those investigations and build cases. The president can’t really tell the FBI who to investigate. Well they can, but it wouldn’t go well.
Congress too sure. But let's not pretend like Obama didn't purposefully turn our attention away with the "let's not look back" stuff (not limited to the banks though). To which the banks were like "how about we use that free money you gave us to pay back some of the money we stole to pay out some bonuses to the people who robbed you the best first, instead?"
Liberals inability to fault anyone but Republicans in congress for all of their failures is part of why it's clear "the shrug" is coming.
|
On February 01 2018 07:18 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 07:02 Leporello wrote:On February 01 2018 06:56 Doodsmack wrote:On February 01 2018 06:39 Leporello wrote:CNN killing it today -- reporting Strzok, the agent "so unfair" to our poor persecuted President, actually helped write the letter the FBI released a week before the election announcing Hillary was under investigation... You get that, Danglars? https://twitter.com/mviser/status/958812076612440064GH, your nation is undergoing a unique history, and the greatest political crime perhaps in the history of modern democracy. If you want to be indifferent (I wonder why), at least enjoy the show. Reminder that Comey's letter was likely a necessary factor to Trump winning. That is to say, the FBI's actions helped Trump immensely during the campaign. Indeed. https://twitter.com/chrislhayes/status/958817267420139520I find it hilarious all these stories are breaking through CNN, Trump's favorite media target. The timing of these stories, and the fact that CNN is receiving them, is basically a direct "fuck you" from the FBI. *shakes fist* Damn him for doing his job in good faith!
nonsense. if he’s a dem he’s tainted the entire org. they’re literally the deep state now.
but yea there’s a big surprise. integrity. doing ones job. it’s like we’ve forgotten so much what it is that we can’t accept that it still happens. projection.
i hope everyone that leaves the FBI comes out looking as good as Comey, but if we have to settle for a Strzok too i’ll really enjoy the coming months.
|
On February 01 2018 07:20 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 07:15 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 06:54 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:47 Gorsameth wrote:On February 01 2018 06:22 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:17 Gorsameth wrote:On February 01 2018 06:09 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:06 Leporello wrote:On February 01 2018 06:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 04:30 hunts wrote:
[quote]
Well your people did try to shoot up a pizzaria to free non existant child hostages. If you had paid any attention to the actual happenings and not kept your nose in fox breitbart and zerohedge, you would see that republicans are very literally selling America out to the russians in front of everyones faces, it's literally not a conspiracy theory. Part of the reason the pizza place got shot up is because people genuinely believed there was something terrible happening (regardless of how crazy that was), and no one was doing anything to stop it. So as we all watch the President of the US "sell America out to the Russians" I wonder, what are liberals going to do if the entirety of the media, establishment of both parties, and the legal system is unable to stop him or punish him/his administration? Just shrug and move on? Obviously we'll gather our militias and AK47s and retake our freedom. We're being sarcastic, right? That wasn't what I meant to imply. I just mean selling out the country is a pretty big deal and I don't know how liberals could think we have a functioning system if they spend 4 years talking about how unbelievably unfounded and essentially criminal/treasonous the president is just for him to retire wealthier and more powerful than when he started and the US worse off? It would seem that would force their hand to admit the system is broken if it can't stop a president from selling us out to a foreign enemy. As a European I would say your system was already broken before Trump. But the people have a way to get rid of a such a President. Elect a Congress that will impeach him. The problem in this case imo isn't the system, its that one side is ok with whats happening. (funny enough in a non 2-party system where multiple parties hold Congress this may well not have happened) I agree it was broken before Trump when a bunch of big banks robbed people for billions of dollars and their punishment was using profits off free money to pay a portion of it back. Yet people continue banking with them, even as they add new and unreasonable fees. Your explanation still very much sounds like a problem with the system as well as with us as a people. It's not a "blame it on the Republicans" thing either. EDIT: broken may not be quite correct since the constitution was originally intended to empower rich, land owning, white males. I don't know. As I said the US system has numerous defects at its core that many other democracies in the world have moved away from (like FPTP and congressional districts) that cause the system to 'broken' and open to exploitation but I can't look at a sub 20% approval rate for Congress over a decade (minus a small spike to sub 40 in '09) yet an 80-90% re-election rate and not put blame on the people who simply do not vote for another, any other, option. Vote for someone else ffs, its not like you can much worse then sub 20% approval. I wasn't excusing the people who vote for them, I was pointing out that people pshhhd previous attempts to tell them the system is shit and I was merely hoping this would be incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. Particularly since Obama letting the banks off wasn't it. Congress let the banks off. Or specifically, the people in the banks that were bad actors. They passed Dodd Frank, but no one went to jail. And again, that is the problem for congress because they never put the money into the FBI going after the banks. And if they don’t do that, there is no one to conduct those investigations and build cases. The president can’t really tell the FBI who to investigate. Well they can, but it wouldn’t go well. Congress too sure. But let's not pretend like Obama didn't purposefully turn our attention away with the "let's not look back" stuff. To which the banks were like "how about we use that free money you gave us to pay back some of the money we stole to pay out some bonuses to the people who robbed you the best first, instead?" Liberals inability to fault anyone but Republicans in congress for all of their failures is part of why it's clear "the shrug" is coming.
I faulted congress on that one, which was controlled by Democrats. My point was that if you are going to blame someone, blame the entity that has the power and responsibility to address the problem. Obama’s job during the crisis was to make sure those banks didn’t fail further. Congress could have put the FBI back on wall street all a low key and let Obama talk about moving as much as he wanted. To be honest, that would have been the best plan, IMO.
|
On February 01 2018 07:27 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 07:20 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 07:15 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 06:54 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:47 Gorsameth wrote:On February 01 2018 06:22 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:17 Gorsameth wrote:On February 01 2018 06:09 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:06 Leporello wrote:On February 01 2018 06:05 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
Part of the reason the pizza place got shot up is because people genuinely believed there was something terrible happening (regardless of how crazy that was), and no one was doing anything to stop it.
So as we all watch the President of the US "sell America out to the Russians" I wonder, what are liberals going to do if the entirety of the media, establishment of both parties, and the legal system is unable to stop him or punish him/his administration?
Just shrug and move on? Obviously we'll gather our militias and AK47s and retake our freedom. We're being sarcastic, right? That wasn't what I meant to imply. I just mean selling out the country is a pretty big deal and I don't know how liberals could think we have a functioning system if they spend 4 years talking about how unbelievably unfounded and essentially criminal/treasonous the president is just for him to retire wealthier and more powerful than when he started and the US worse off? It would seem that would force their hand to admit the system is broken if it can't stop a president from selling us out to a foreign enemy. As a European I would say your system was already broken before Trump. But the people have a way to get rid of a such a President. Elect a Congress that will impeach him. The problem in this case imo isn't the system, its that one side is ok with whats happening. (funny enough in a non 2-party system where multiple parties hold Congress this may well not have happened) I agree it was broken before Trump when a bunch of big banks robbed people for billions of dollars and their punishment was using profits off free money to pay a portion of it back. Yet people continue banking with them, even as they add new and unreasonable fees. Your explanation still very much sounds like a problem with the system as well as with us as a people. It's not a "blame it on the Republicans" thing either. EDIT: broken may not be quite correct since the constitution was originally intended to empower rich, land owning, white males. I don't know. As I said the US system has numerous defects at its core that many other democracies in the world have moved away from (like FPTP and congressional districts) that cause the system to 'broken' and open to exploitation but I can't look at a sub 20% approval rate for Congress over a decade (minus a small spike to sub 40 in '09) yet an 80-90% re-election rate and not put blame on the people who simply do not vote for another, any other, option. Vote for someone else ffs, its not like you can much worse then sub 20% approval. I wasn't excusing the people who vote for them, I was pointing out that people pshhhd previous attempts to tell them the system is shit and I was merely hoping this would be incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. Particularly since Obama letting the banks off wasn't it. Congress let the banks off. Or specifically, the people in the banks that were bad actors. They passed Dodd Frank, but no one went to jail. And again, that is the problem for congress because they never put the money into the FBI going after the banks. And if they don’t do that, there is no one to conduct those investigations and build cases. The president can’t really tell the FBI who to investigate. Well they can, but it wouldn’t go well. Congress too sure. But let's not pretend like Obama didn't purposefully turn our attention away with the "let's not look back" stuff. To which the banks were like "how about we use that free money you gave us to pay back some of the money we stole to pay out some bonuses to the people who robbed you the best first, instead?" Liberals inability to fault anyone but Republicans in congress for all of their failures is part of why it's clear "the shrug" is coming. I faulted congress on that one, which was controlled by Democrats. My point was that if you are going to blame someone, blame the entity that has the power and responsibility to address the problem. Obama’s job during the crisis was to make sure those banks didn’t fail further. Congress could have put the FBI back on wall street all a low key and let Obama talk about moving as much as he wanted. To be honest, that would have been the best plan, IMO.
Or Obama could have got people as angry as they should have been and pointed them toward their solutions, instead he wanted to avoid looking back at all the problems people naively sent him there to address (though not solve alone).
|
On February 01 2018 07:29 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 07:27 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 07:20 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 07:15 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 06:54 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:47 Gorsameth wrote:On February 01 2018 06:22 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:17 Gorsameth wrote:On February 01 2018 06:09 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:06 Leporello wrote:
[quote]
Obviously we'll gather our militias and AK47s and retake our freedom.
We're being sarcastic, right? That wasn't what I meant to imply. I just mean selling out the country is a pretty big deal and I don't know how liberals could think we have a functioning system if they spend 4 years talking about how unbelievably unfounded and essentially criminal/treasonous the president is just for him to retire wealthier and more powerful than when he started and the US worse off? It would seem that would force their hand to admit the system is broken if it can't stop a president from selling us out to a foreign enemy. As a European I would say your system was already broken before Trump. But the people have a way to get rid of a such a President. Elect a Congress that will impeach him. The problem in this case imo isn't the system, its that one side is ok with whats happening. (funny enough in a non 2-party system where multiple parties hold Congress this may well not have happened) I agree it was broken before Trump when a bunch of big banks robbed people for billions of dollars and their punishment was using profits off free money to pay a portion of it back. Yet people continue banking with them, even as they add new and unreasonable fees. Your explanation still very much sounds like a problem with the system as well as with us as a people. It's not a "blame it on the Republicans" thing either. EDIT: broken may not be quite correct since the constitution was originally intended to empower rich, land owning, white males. I don't know. As I said the US system has numerous defects at its core that many other democracies in the world have moved away from (like FPTP and congressional districts) that cause the system to 'broken' and open to exploitation but I can't look at a sub 20% approval rate for Congress over a decade (minus a small spike to sub 40 in '09) yet an 80-90% re-election rate and not put blame on the people who simply do not vote for another, any other, option. Vote for someone else ffs, its not like you can much worse then sub 20% approval. I wasn't excusing the people who vote for them, I was pointing out that people pshhhd previous attempts to tell them the system is shit and I was merely hoping this would be incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. Particularly since Obama letting the banks off wasn't it. Congress let the banks off. Or specifically, the people in the banks that were bad actors. They passed Dodd Frank, but no one went to jail. And again, that is the problem for congress because they never put the money into the FBI going after the banks. And if they don’t do that, there is no one to conduct those investigations and build cases. The president can’t really tell the FBI who to investigate. Well they can, but it wouldn’t go well. Congress too sure. But let's not pretend like Obama didn't purposefully turn our attention away with the "let's not look back" stuff. To which the banks were like "how about we use that free money you gave us to pay back some of the money we stole to pay out some bonuses to the people who robbed you the best first, instead?" Liberals inability to fault anyone but Republicans in congress for all of their failures is part of why it's clear "the shrug" is coming. I faulted congress on that one, which was controlled by Democrats. My point was that if you are going to blame someone, blame the entity that has the power and responsibility to address the problem. Obama’s job during the crisis was to make sure those banks didn’t fail further. Congress could have put the FBI back on wall street all a low key and let Obama talk about moving as much as he wanted. To be honest, that would have been the best plan, IMO. Or Obama could have got people as angry as they should have been and pointed them toward their solutions, instead he wanted to avoid looking back at all the problems people naively sent him there to address (though not solve alone).
They had a lot going on and were super focused on not going into the great depression 2.0. I’m with you, but the President isn’t the person that can make that push. They needed the banks to lend money to everyone and they wouldn’t’ do that if Obama is also threatening them with FBI investigations. It should have happened. But slapping around the banking industry is all congress.
|
On February 01 2018 07:36 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 07:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 07:27 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 07:20 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 07:15 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 06:54 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:47 Gorsameth wrote:On February 01 2018 06:22 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:17 Gorsameth wrote:On February 01 2018 06:09 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
That wasn't what I meant to imply. I just mean selling out the country is a pretty big deal and I don't know how liberals could think we have a functioning system if they spend 4 years talking about how unbelievably unfounded and essentially criminal/treasonous the president is just for him to retire wealthier and more powerful than when he started and the US worse off?
It would seem that would force their hand to admit the system is broken if it can't stop a president from selling us out to a foreign enemy. As a European I would say your system was already broken before Trump. But the people have a way to get rid of a such a President. Elect a Congress that will impeach him. The problem in this case imo isn't the system, its that one side is ok with whats happening. (funny enough in a non 2-party system where multiple parties hold Congress this may well not have happened) I agree it was broken before Trump when a bunch of big banks robbed people for billions of dollars and their punishment was using profits off free money to pay a portion of it back. Yet people continue banking with them, even as they add new and unreasonable fees. Your explanation still very much sounds like a problem with the system as well as with us as a people. It's not a "blame it on the Republicans" thing either. EDIT: broken may not be quite correct since the constitution was originally intended to empower rich, land owning, white males. I don't know. As I said the US system has numerous defects at its core that many other democracies in the world have moved away from (like FPTP and congressional districts) that cause the system to 'broken' and open to exploitation but I can't look at a sub 20% approval rate for Congress over a decade (minus a small spike to sub 40 in '09) yet an 80-90% re-election rate and not put blame on the people who simply do not vote for another, any other, option. Vote for someone else ffs, its not like you can much worse then sub 20% approval. I wasn't excusing the people who vote for them, I was pointing out that people pshhhd previous attempts to tell them the system is shit and I was merely hoping this would be incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. Particularly since Obama letting the banks off wasn't it. Congress let the banks off. Or specifically, the people in the banks that were bad actors. They passed Dodd Frank, but no one went to jail. And again, that is the problem for congress because they never put the money into the FBI going after the banks. And if they don’t do that, there is no one to conduct those investigations and build cases. The president can’t really tell the FBI who to investigate. Well they can, but it wouldn’t go well. Congress too sure. But let's not pretend like Obama didn't purposefully turn our attention away with the "let's not look back" stuff. To which the banks were like "how about we use that free money you gave us to pay back some of the money we stole to pay out some bonuses to the people who robbed you the best first, instead?" Liberals inability to fault anyone but Republicans in congress for all of their failures is part of why it's clear "the shrug" is coming. I faulted congress on that one, which was controlled by Democrats. My point was that if you are going to blame someone, blame the entity that has the power and responsibility to address the problem. Obama’s job during the crisis was to make sure those banks didn’t fail further. Congress could have put the FBI back on wall street all a low key and let Obama talk about moving as much as he wanted. To be honest, that would have been the best plan, IMO. Or Obama could have got people as angry as they should have been and pointed them toward their solutions, instead he wanted to avoid looking back at all the problems people naively sent him there to address (though not solve alone). They had a lot going on and were super focused on not going into the great depression 2.0. I’m with you, but the President isn’t the person that can make that push. They needed the banks to lend money to everyone and they wouldn’t’ do that if Obama is also threatening them with FBI investigations.
I don't blame Obama exclusively but I also am not absolving him as you are trying. That said we can agree the Democratic congress failed miserably too.
I think what you're describing is basically caving to hostage takers and then not even bothering to lock them up afterwords while they laugh in your face and make it rain with your money.
|
On February 01 2018 07:38 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 07:36 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 07:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 07:27 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 07:20 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 07:15 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 06:54 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:47 Gorsameth wrote:On February 01 2018 06:22 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:17 Gorsameth wrote:
[quote]
As a European I would say your system was already broken before Trump.
But the people have a way to get rid of a such a President. Elect a Congress that will impeach him.
The problem in this case imo isn't the system, its that one side is ok with whats happening.
(funny enough in a non 2-party system where multiple parties hold Congress this may well not have happened) I agree it was broken before Trump when a bunch of big banks robbed people for billions of dollars and their punishment was using profits off free money to pay a portion of it back. Yet people continue banking with them, even as they add new and unreasonable fees. Your explanation still very much sounds like a problem with the system as well as with us as a people. It's not a "blame it on the Republicans" thing either. EDIT: broken may not be quite correct since the constitution was originally intended to empower rich, land owning, white males. I don't know. As I said the US system has numerous defects at its core that many other democracies in the world have moved away from (like FPTP and congressional districts) that cause the system to 'broken' and open to exploitation but I can't look at a sub 20% approval rate for Congress over a decade (minus a small spike to sub 40 in '09) yet an 80-90% re-election rate and not put blame on the people who simply do not vote for another, any other, option. Vote for someone else ffs, its not like you can much worse then sub 20% approval. I wasn't excusing the people who vote for them, I was pointing out that people pshhhd previous attempts to tell them the system is shit and I was merely hoping this would be incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. Particularly since Obama letting the banks off wasn't it. Congress let the banks off. Or specifically, the people in the banks that were bad actors. They passed Dodd Frank, but no one went to jail. And again, that is the problem for congress because they never put the money into the FBI going after the banks. And if they don’t do that, there is no one to conduct those investigations and build cases. The president can’t really tell the FBI who to investigate. Well they can, but it wouldn’t go well. Congress too sure. But let's not pretend like Obama didn't purposefully turn our attention away with the "let's not look back" stuff. To which the banks were like "how about we use that free money you gave us to pay back some of the money we stole to pay out some bonuses to the people who robbed you the best first, instead?" Liberals inability to fault anyone but Republicans in congress for all of their failures is part of why it's clear "the shrug" is coming. I faulted congress on that one, which was controlled by Democrats. My point was that if you are going to blame someone, blame the entity that has the power and responsibility to address the problem. Obama’s job during the crisis was to make sure those banks didn’t fail further. Congress could have put the FBI back on wall street all a low key and let Obama talk about moving as much as he wanted. To be honest, that would have been the best plan, IMO. Or Obama could have got people as angry as they should have been and pointed them toward their solutions, instead he wanted to avoid looking back at all the problems people naively sent him there to address (though not solve alone). They had a lot going on and were super focused on not going into the great depression 2.0. I’m with you, but the President isn’t the person that can make that push. They needed the banks to lend money to everyone and they wouldn’t’ do that if Obama is also threatening them with FBI investigations. I don't blame Obama exclusively but I also am not absolving him as you are trying. That said we can agree the Democratic congress failed miserably too. I think what you're describing is basically caving to hostage takers and then not even bothering to lock them up afterwords while they laugh in your face.
I don’t know who did what behind the scenes during those two years. And I don’t put a lot of stock in public statements by a President trying instill confidence during a recession. Everyone should have pushed for criminal charges against the idiots that cause that crash. But at the end of the day, it was congress’s job and they didn’t even try. And its shows today, because the banks are just as dumb as they were before.
|
On February 01 2018 07:38 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 07:36 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 07:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 07:27 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 07:20 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 07:15 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 06:54 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:47 Gorsameth wrote:On February 01 2018 06:22 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:17 Gorsameth wrote:
[quote]
As a European I would say your system was already broken before Trump.
But the people have a way to get rid of a such a President. Elect a Congress that will impeach him.
The problem in this case imo isn't the system, its that one side is ok with whats happening.
(funny enough in a non 2-party system where multiple parties hold Congress this may well not have happened) I agree it was broken before Trump when a bunch of big banks robbed people for billions of dollars and their punishment was using profits off free money to pay a portion of it back. Yet people continue banking with them, even as they add new and unreasonable fees. Your explanation still very much sounds like a problem with the system as well as with us as a people. It's not a "blame it on the Republicans" thing either. EDIT: broken may not be quite correct since the constitution was originally intended to empower rich, land owning, white males. I don't know. As I said the US system has numerous defects at its core that many other democracies in the world have moved away from (like FPTP and congressional districts) that cause the system to 'broken' and open to exploitation but I can't look at a sub 20% approval rate for Congress over a decade (minus a small spike to sub 40 in '09) yet an 80-90% re-election rate and not put blame on the people who simply do not vote for another, any other, option. Vote for someone else ffs, its not like you can much worse then sub 20% approval. I wasn't excusing the people who vote for them, I was pointing out that people pshhhd previous attempts to tell them the system is shit and I was merely hoping this would be incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. Particularly since Obama letting the banks off wasn't it. Congress let the banks off. Or specifically, the people in the banks that were bad actors. They passed Dodd Frank, but no one went to jail. And again, that is the problem for congress because they never put the money into the FBI going after the banks. And if they don’t do that, there is no one to conduct those investigations and build cases. The president can’t really tell the FBI who to investigate. Well they can, but it wouldn’t go well. Congress too sure. But let's not pretend like Obama didn't purposefully turn our attention away with the "let's not look back" stuff. To which the banks were like "how about we use that free money you gave us to pay back some of the money we stole to pay out some bonuses to the people who robbed you the best first, instead?" Liberals inability to fault anyone but Republicans in congress for all of their failures is part of why it's clear "the shrug" is coming. I faulted congress on that one, which was controlled by Democrats. My point was that if you are going to blame someone, blame the entity that has the power and responsibility to address the problem. Obama’s job during the crisis was to make sure those banks didn’t fail further. Congress could have put the FBI back on wall street all a low key and let Obama talk about moving as much as he wanted. To be honest, that would have been the best plan, IMO. Or Obama could have got people as angry as they should have been and pointed them toward their solutions, instead he wanted to avoid looking back at all the problems people naively sent him there to address (though not solve alone). They had a lot going on and were super focused on not going into the great depression 2.0. I’m with you, but the President isn’t the person that can make that push. They needed the banks to lend money to everyone and they wouldn’t’ do that if Obama is also threatening them with FBI investigations. I don't blame Obama exclusively but I also am not absolving him as you are trying. That said we can agree the Democratic congress failed miserably too. I think what you're describing is basically caving to hostage takers and then not even bothering to lock them up afterwords while they laugh in your face and make it rain with your money.
are you ok with blaming all of congress for taking inadequate action against the banks? if so I can agree to that.
oh and plansix, i'm no tsure the bankers actually broke much in terms of criminal law.
|
On February 01 2018 07:48 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 07:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 07:36 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 07:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 07:27 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 07:20 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 07:15 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 06:54 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:47 Gorsameth wrote:On February 01 2018 06:22 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
I agree it was broken before Trump when a bunch of big banks robbed people for billions of dollars and their punishment was using profits off free money to pay a portion of it back. Yet people continue banking with them, even as they add new and unreasonable fees.
Your explanation still very much sounds like a problem with the system as well as with us as a people. It's not a "blame it on the Republicans" thing either.
EDIT: broken may not be quite correct since the constitution was originally intended to empower rich, land owning, white males. I don't know. As I said the US system has numerous defects at its core that many other democracies in the world have moved away from (like FPTP and congressional districts) that cause the system to 'broken' and open to exploitation but I can't look at a sub 20% approval rate for Congress over a decade (minus a small spike to sub 40 in '09) yet an 80-90% re-election rate and not put blame on the people who simply do not vote for another, any other, option. Vote for someone else ffs, its not like you can much worse then sub 20% approval. I wasn't excusing the people who vote for them, I was pointing out that people pshhhd previous attempts to tell them the system is shit and I was merely hoping this would be incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. Particularly since Obama letting the banks off wasn't it. Congress let the banks off. Or specifically, the people in the banks that were bad actors. They passed Dodd Frank, but no one went to jail. And again, that is the problem for congress because they never put the money into the FBI going after the banks. And if they don’t do that, there is no one to conduct those investigations and build cases. The president can’t really tell the FBI who to investigate. Well they can, but it wouldn’t go well. Congress too sure. But let's not pretend like Obama didn't purposefully turn our attention away with the "let's not look back" stuff. To which the banks were like "how about we use that free money you gave us to pay back some of the money we stole to pay out some bonuses to the people who robbed you the best first, instead?" Liberals inability to fault anyone but Republicans in congress for all of their failures is part of why it's clear "the shrug" is coming. I faulted congress on that one, which was controlled by Democrats. My point was that if you are going to blame someone, blame the entity that has the power and responsibility to address the problem. Obama’s job during the crisis was to make sure those banks didn’t fail further. Congress could have put the FBI back on wall street all a low key and let Obama talk about moving as much as he wanted. To be honest, that would have been the best plan, IMO. Or Obama could have got people as angry as they should have been and pointed them toward their solutions, instead he wanted to avoid looking back at all the problems people naively sent him there to address (though not solve alone). They had a lot going on and were super focused on not going into the great depression 2.0. I’m with you, but the President isn’t the person that can make that push. They needed the banks to lend money to everyone and they wouldn’t’ do that if Obama is also threatening them with FBI investigations. I don't blame Obama exclusively but I also am not absolving him as you are trying. That said we can agree the Democratic congress failed miserably too. I think what you're describing is basically caving to hostage takers and then not even bothering to lock them up afterwords while they laugh in your face and make it rain with your money. are you ok with blaming all of congress for taking inadequate action against the banks? if so I can agree to that.
I feel like that should be obvious, but yes, I also blame the minority party and the people who vote for both.
i'm no tsure the bankers actually broke much in terms of criminal law.
Pretty sure they didn't pay billions of dollars in fines (even if they were a fraction of what they made/took) for operating on the up and up.
On February 01 2018 07:48 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 07:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 07:36 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 07:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 07:27 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 07:20 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 07:15 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 06:54 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:47 Gorsameth wrote:On February 01 2018 06:22 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
I agree it was broken before Trump when a bunch of big banks robbed people for billions of dollars and their punishment was using profits off free money to pay a portion of it back. Yet people continue banking with them, even as they add new and unreasonable fees.
Your explanation still very much sounds like a problem with the system as well as with us as a people. It's not a "blame it on the Republicans" thing either.
EDIT: broken may not be quite correct since the constitution was originally intended to empower rich, land owning, white males. I don't know. As I said the US system has numerous defects at its core that many other democracies in the world have moved away from (like FPTP and congressional districts) that cause the system to 'broken' and open to exploitation but I can't look at a sub 20% approval rate for Congress over a decade (minus a small spike to sub 40 in '09) yet an 80-90% re-election rate and not put blame on the people who simply do not vote for another, any other, option. Vote for someone else ffs, its not like you can much worse then sub 20% approval. I wasn't excusing the people who vote for them, I was pointing out that people pshhhd previous attempts to tell them the system is shit and I was merely hoping this would be incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. Particularly since Obama letting the banks off wasn't it. Congress let the banks off. Or specifically, the people in the banks that were bad actors. They passed Dodd Frank, but no one went to jail. And again, that is the problem for congress because they never put the money into the FBI going after the banks. And if they don’t do that, there is no one to conduct those investigations and build cases. The president can’t really tell the FBI who to investigate. Well they can, but it wouldn’t go well. Congress too sure. But let's not pretend like Obama didn't purposefully turn our attention away with the "let's not look back" stuff. To which the banks were like "how about we use that free money you gave us to pay back some of the money we stole to pay out some bonuses to the people who robbed you the best first, instead?" Liberals inability to fault anyone but Republicans in congress for all of their failures is part of why it's clear "the shrug" is coming. I faulted congress on that one, which was controlled by Democrats. My point was that if you are going to blame someone, blame the entity that has the power and responsibility to address the problem. Obama’s job during the crisis was to make sure those banks didn’t fail further. Congress could have put the FBI back on wall street all a low key and let Obama talk about moving as much as he wanted. To be honest, that would have been the best plan, IMO. Or Obama could have got people as angry as they should have been and pointed them toward their solutions, instead he wanted to avoid looking back at all the problems people naively sent him there to address (though not solve alone). They had a lot going on and were super focused on not going into the great depression 2.0. I’m with you, but the President isn’t the person that can make that push. They needed the banks to lend money to everyone and they wouldn’t’ do that if Obama is also threatening them with FBI investigations. I don't blame Obama exclusively but I also am not absolving him as you are trying. That said we can agree the Democratic congress failed miserably too. I think what you're describing is basically caving to hostage takers and then not even bothering to lock them up afterwords while they laugh in your face. I don’t know who did what behind the scenes during those two years. And I don’t put a lot of stock in public statements by a President trying instill confidence during a recession. Everyone should have pushed for criminal charges against the idiots that cause that crash. But at the end of the day, it was congress’s job and they didn’t even try. And its shows today, because the banks are just as dumb as they were before.
And what did the leader of their party do to hold them accountable? Absolutely nothing.
|
fines can happen for SEC violations that aren't criminal actions. idunno which were involved in the banks' case.
i'm just saying tehre's a lot of stuff that's not on the up and up but isn't a criminal offense either.
|
On February 01 2018 07:48 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 07:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 07:36 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 07:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 07:27 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 07:20 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 07:15 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 06:54 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:47 Gorsameth wrote:On February 01 2018 06:22 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
I agree it was broken before Trump when a bunch of big banks robbed people for billions of dollars and their punishment was using profits off free money to pay a portion of it back. Yet people continue banking with them, even as they add new and unreasonable fees.
Your explanation still very much sounds like a problem with the system as well as with us as a people. It's not a "blame it on the Republicans" thing either.
EDIT: broken may not be quite correct since the constitution was originally intended to empower rich, land owning, white males. I don't know. As I said the US system has numerous defects at its core that many other democracies in the world have moved away from (like FPTP and congressional districts) that cause the system to 'broken' and open to exploitation but I can't look at a sub 20% approval rate for Congress over a decade (minus a small spike to sub 40 in '09) yet an 80-90% re-election rate and not put blame on the people who simply do not vote for another, any other, option. Vote for someone else ffs, its not like you can much worse then sub 20% approval. I wasn't excusing the people who vote for them, I was pointing out that people pshhhd previous attempts to tell them the system is shit and I was merely hoping this would be incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. Particularly since Obama letting the banks off wasn't it. Congress let the banks off. Or specifically, the people in the banks that were bad actors. They passed Dodd Frank, but no one went to jail. And again, that is the problem for congress because they never put the money into the FBI going after the banks. And if they don’t do that, there is no one to conduct those investigations and build cases. The president can’t really tell the FBI who to investigate. Well they can, but it wouldn’t go well. Congress too sure. But let's not pretend like Obama didn't purposefully turn our attention away with the "let's not look back" stuff. To which the banks were like "how about we use that free money you gave us to pay back some of the money we stole to pay out some bonuses to the people who robbed you the best first, instead?" Liberals inability to fault anyone but Republicans in congress for all of their failures is part of why it's clear "the shrug" is coming. I faulted congress on that one, which was controlled by Democrats. My point was that if you are going to blame someone, blame the entity that has the power and responsibility to address the problem. Obama’s job during the crisis was to make sure those banks didn’t fail further. Congress could have put the FBI back on wall street all a low key and let Obama talk about moving as much as he wanted. To be honest, that would have been the best plan, IMO. Or Obama could have got people as angry as they should have been and pointed them toward their solutions, instead he wanted to avoid looking back at all the problems people naively sent him there to address (though not solve alone). They had a lot going on and were super focused on not going into the great depression 2.0. I’m with you, but the President isn’t the person that can make that push. They needed the banks to lend money to everyone and they wouldn’t’ do that if Obama is also threatening them with FBI investigations. I don't blame Obama exclusively but I also am not absolving him as you are trying. That said we can agree the Democratic congress failed miserably too. I think what you're describing is basically caving to hostage takers and then not even bothering to lock them up afterwords while they laugh in your face and make it rain with your money. are you ok with blaming all of congress for taking inadequate action against the banks? if so I can agree to that. oh and plansix, i'm no tsure the bankers actually broke much in terms of criminal law.
zlefin, trust me. They did. There was a lot of handing out goverment backed loans to should never have been originated. There was an entire purchase of bad loans that were goverment backed because assumed the goverment would just pay. It was called Countrywide. There is no one who worked in that industry who didn't know it was a house of card. Just trust me on this, it was shocking how brazen they were. They didn't get caught because the FBI doesn't work on those cases any more.
Edit: GH, you need to move away from this binary shit. I didn't say don't hold him accountable at all. I said focus your criticism on the party should have acted. The Democrats in congress were not going to go after the banks. I'm sure Sanders and others pushed for it. But it didn't happen.
|
On February 01 2018 07:58 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 07:48 zlefin wrote:On February 01 2018 07:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 07:36 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 07:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 07:27 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 07:20 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 07:15 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 06:54 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:47 Gorsameth wrote:
[quote]
I don't know. As I said the US system has numerous defects at its core that many other democracies in the world have moved away from (like FPTP and congressional districts) that cause the system to 'broken' and open to exploitation but I can't look at a sub 20% approval rate for Congress over a decade (minus a small spike to sub 40 in '09) yet an 80-90% re-election rate and not put blame on the people who simply do not vote for another, any other, option. Vote for someone else ffs, its not like you can much worse then sub 20% approval. I wasn't excusing the people who vote for them, I was pointing out that people pshhhd previous attempts to tell them the system is shit and I was merely hoping this would be incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. Particularly since Obama letting the banks off wasn't it. Congress let the banks off. Or specifically, the people in the banks that were bad actors. They passed Dodd Frank, but no one went to jail. And again, that is the problem for congress because they never put the money into the FBI going after the banks. And if they don’t do that, there is no one to conduct those investigations and build cases. The president can’t really tell the FBI who to investigate. Well they can, but it wouldn’t go well. Congress too sure. But let's not pretend like Obama didn't purposefully turn our attention away with the "let's not look back" stuff. To which the banks were like "how about we use that free money you gave us to pay back some of the money we stole to pay out some bonuses to the people who robbed you the best first, instead?" Liberals inability to fault anyone but Republicans in congress for all of their failures is part of why it's clear "the shrug" is coming. I faulted congress on that one, which was controlled by Democrats. My point was that if you are going to blame someone, blame the entity that has the power and responsibility to address the problem. Obama’s job during the crisis was to make sure those banks didn’t fail further. Congress could have put the FBI back on wall street all a low key and let Obama talk about moving as much as he wanted. To be honest, that would have been the best plan, IMO. Or Obama could have got people as angry as they should have been and pointed them toward their solutions, instead he wanted to avoid looking back at all the problems people naively sent him there to address (though not solve alone). They had a lot going on and were super focused on not going into the great depression 2.0. I’m with you, but the President isn’t the person that can make that push. They needed the banks to lend money to everyone and they wouldn’t’ do that if Obama is also threatening them with FBI investigations. I don't blame Obama exclusively but I also am not absolving him as you are trying. That said we can agree the Democratic congress failed miserably too. I think what you're describing is basically caving to hostage takers and then not even bothering to lock them up afterwords while they laugh in your face and make it rain with your money. are you ok with blaming all of congress for taking inadequate action against the banks? if so I can agree to that. oh and plansix, i'm no tsure the bankers actually broke much in terms of criminal law. zlefin, trust me. They did. There was a lot of handing out goverment backed loans to should never have been originated. There was an entire purchase of bad loans that were goverment backed because assumed the goverment would just pay. It was called Countrywide. There is no one who worked in that industry who didn't know it was a house of card. Just trust me on this, it was shocking how brazen they were. They didn't get caught because the FBI doesn't work on those cases any more. Edit: GH, you need to move away from this binary shit. I didn't say don't hold him accountable at all. I said focus your criticism on the party should have acted. The Democrats in congress were not going to go after the banks. I'm sure Sanders and others pushed for it. But it didn't happen.
I don't know what you're talking about with the "binary shit", I'm saying the entire party failed, top to bottom. Instead of siding with the people who spoke up, they doubled down (Obama included) on the people that told them to shut up and move along or the whole house of cards would come down.
|
On February 01 2018 07:58 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2018 07:48 zlefin wrote:On February 01 2018 07:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 07:36 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 07:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 07:27 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 07:20 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 07:15 Plansix wrote:On February 01 2018 06:54 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 01 2018 06:47 Gorsameth wrote:
[quote]
I don't know. As I said the US system has numerous defects at its core that many other democracies in the world have moved away from (like FPTP and congressional districts) that cause the system to 'broken' and open to exploitation but I can't look at a sub 20% approval rate for Congress over a decade (minus a small spike to sub 40 in '09) yet an 80-90% re-election rate and not put blame on the people who simply do not vote for another, any other, option. Vote for someone else ffs, its not like you can much worse then sub 20% approval. I wasn't excusing the people who vote for them, I was pointing out that people pshhhd previous attempts to tell them the system is shit and I was merely hoping this would be incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. Particularly since Obama letting the banks off wasn't it. Congress let the banks off. Or specifically, the people in the banks that were bad actors. They passed Dodd Frank, but no one went to jail. And again, that is the problem for congress because they never put the money into the FBI going after the banks. And if they don’t do that, there is no one to conduct those investigations and build cases. The president can’t really tell the FBI who to investigate. Well they can, but it wouldn’t go well. Congress too sure. But let's not pretend like Obama didn't purposefully turn our attention away with the "let's not look back" stuff. To which the banks were like "how about we use that free money you gave us to pay back some of the money we stole to pay out some bonuses to the people who robbed you the best first, instead?" Liberals inability to fault anyone but Republicans in congress for all of their failures is part of why it's clear "the shrug" is coming. I faulted congress on that one, which was controlled by Democrats. My point was that if you are going to blame someone, blame the entity that has the power and responsibility to address the problem. Obama’s job during the crisis was to make sure those banks didn’t fail further. Congress could have put the FBI back on wall street all a low key and let Obama talk about moving as much as he wanted. To be honest, that would have been the best plan, IMO. Or Obama could have got people as angry as they should have been and pointed them toward their solutions, instead he wanted to avoid looking back at all the problems people naively sent him there to address (though not solve alone). They had a lot going on and were super focused on not going into the great depression 2.0. I’m with you, but the President isn’t the person that can make that push. They needed the banks to lend money to everyone and they wouldn’t’ do that if Obama is also threatening them with FBI investigations. I don't blame Obama exclusively but I also am not absolving him as you are trying. That said we can agree the Democratic congress failed miserably too. I think what you're describing is basically caving to hostage takers and then not even bothering to lock them up afterwords while they laugh in your face and make it rain with your money. are you ok with blaming all of congress for taking inadequate action against the banks? if so I can agree to that. oh and plansix, i'm no tsure the bankers actually broke much in terms of criminal law. zlefin, trust me. They did. There was a lot of handing out goverment backed loans to should never have been originated. There was an entire purchase of bad loans that were goverment backed because assumed the goverment would just pay. It was called Countrywide. There is no one who worked in that industry who didn't know it was a house of card. Just trust me on this, it was shocking how brazen they were. They didn't get caught because the FBI doesn't work on those cases any more. Edit: GH, you need to move away from this binary shit. I didn't say don't hold him accountable at all. I said focus your criticism on the party should have acted. The Democrats in congress were not going to go after the banks. I'm sure Sanders and others pushed for it. But it didn't happen.
which criminal statutes did they violate?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
