|
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On January 09 2019 06:36 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2019 06:27 Gorsameth wrote:On January 09 2019 06:15 Plansix wrote:On January 09 2019 05:56 m4ini wrote:I have a hard time with the “There are solutions, other nations that have almost zero resemblance to the US in scale, scope and makeup have solved this problem” argument when it has nothing else to back it up.
And that isn't exceptionalism. Right. Actually, there's plenty of stuff backing up that claim. You'd need to explain why in fact it wouldn't be working in the US, and with a bit more depth than "well we're bigger, also more special, so there". Start with gerrymandering, and why many other countries were able to fix it (while still having it in place, where others simply abolished the practice altogether). You're right that european style health care (the good health care) wouldn't be working in the US, that's where "scale" actually makes sense. Fixing political processes/systems has nothing to do with scale. It doesn't matter if you gerrymander 5 million or 500 million people. It's not a "necessity" to democracy, it's a way to manipulate it. By arguing that everything is the way it is because the US is big and special, you're part of the problem. Why isn't it fixable in the US, or rather, why is it impossible to fix due to size and general specialness? Of course, you can't turn the US overnight into a parliamentary monarchy - but to argue that shit can't be fixed is stupid. You don't need to revamp the entire system (or "abolish" it) - you need to fix the glaring problems with it that cause bullshit at the end. Like a president that the majority of your country didn't actually vote for. This is the entire "we can't fix healthcare" bullshit all over again. We can't get a 100% great system to work, so we rather watch people die on the streets instead of improving what we have. Exceptional. Now you are putting word in my mouth. I never said that the problems in the US couldn’t be fixed by adapting the lessons learned by the EU nations. I’m all about using the systems of other governments to improve our own. I won’t even stop at healthcare. I’m sure some EU nation has a better system for police and police oversight. But that isn’t what we are talking about. We are talking about when governments fail to accomplish the basic things they are required to do on a basic level. Parliamentary systems are not magically immune to voters electing shitty people who don’t understand the government and cause parts of it to fail. There is no magical cure for an apathetic electorate. Just because your government isn’t stupid today doesn’t mean it is immune to being stupid at a later date. On January 09 2019 06:04 IyMoon wrote:On January 09 2019 05:59 iamthedave wrote:
And I think in P6s defense also, the US is in the unique position of a large part of it hating the federal government with a blinding, searing passion normally reserved for lifelong enemies, and multiple people in the government whose literal stated goals are to kill it.
We don't have - snark aside - many politicians actively trying to destroy their own government. That's what's going on with the US government. I've seen a post on here not too long ago in response to the shutdown which was, verbatim 'Shut that shit down. And keep it shut down.'
The US people have a... complicated relationship with the Fed.
See how many people in the US went FUCKING MENTAL at the idea of the EBUL GOVERNMENT handling healthcare over the ACA. And they did this only because the government was doing it.
There's a very different relationship between the common man and the government over there. you guys don't really understand. There are elements of our nation that really don't want a federal gov and those elements somehow got people into the federal government The Freedom Caucus got into the House and immediately sought out ways to force the federal government to shut down. They discovered that the debt ceiling was raised about once a year as part of funding the government and refused to raise it, risking the US defaulting on our debts. That was the entire plan, to force shutdowns and try to get budget cuts because of the shut downs. Stupid people can indeed get elected. But a congress that can't/won't govern won't actually last very long But how long will they be allowed to last? Months? Weeks? The first time they fail to pass a budget in time, most likely.
|
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/08/us/politics/manafort-trump-campaign-data-kilimnik.html
So an apparent 'gaffe' by the Manafort legal team allowed 'redacted' information from the court proceedings to be leaked. I can't imagine this was actually a mistake as it's so painfully stupid but I wouldn't be surprised at this point.
Interestingly, unless I'm misreading, Manafort didn't challenge these claims so how will the GOP/Trump spin this one?
The famous 'No contacts with Russians' has now become 'My campaign manager illegally shared internal campaign data with Russia agents', among other things already known in the public sphere. I can't imagine what the Mueller investigation has that has yet to leak.
It would appear between the DNC data hack and Trump handing over their own internal data, Russia had all the information in the world to start their disinformation campaign. Shooting fish in a barrel.
|
On January 09 2019 08:19 crms wrote:https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/08/us/politics/manafort-trump-campaign-data-kilimnik.htmlSo an apparent 'gaffe' by the Manafort legal team allowed 'redacted' information from the court proceedings to be leaked. I can't imagine this was actually a mistake as it's so painfully stupid but I wouldn't be surprised at this point. Interestingly, unless I'm misreading, Manafort didn't challenge these claims so how will the GOP/Trump spin this one? The famous 'No contacts with Russians' has now become 'My campaign manager illegally shared internal campaign data with Russia agents', among other things already known in the public sphere. I can't imagine what the Mueller investigation has that has yet to leak. It would appear between the DNC data hack and Trump handing over their own internal data, Russia had all the information in the world to start their disinformation campaign. Shooting fish in a barrel.
It is very important to remember who in the Trump admin kept saying there was unlikely to be any actual Russian contact. No tower meeting, nothing.
They have always lied, lied, lied. Yet people still wonder if maybe this is it. Sure, shared information, but nothing besides that! Yeah, right.
|
what i'm getting from this is that manafort is really fucking bad at PDF's.
|
United States24731 Posts
I know people who work in information security and screwed up digital redactions in the past. If you haven't already done it a bunch you have to be super careful because it's easy to redact something only for it to be easily unredacted by another user. It's completely plausible that lawyers would screw up redacting some information if they don't normally do it.
|
On January 09 2019 08:40 ticklishmusic wrote:
what i'm getting from this is that manafort is really fucking bad at PDF's.
I think its a last resort plea for help from Trump. If I was to think of Manafort's situation as walking towards a cliff, I think we are now at a point where his toes are no longer touching the ground. If Mueller really has Manafort on actual straight up collusion, which very fucking likely had Trump involved in some way, he's running out of options. If Trump is going to save Manafort, it needs to be right away. Once all of this comes out, it'll be too late.
|
|
|
On January 09 2019 08:45 micronesia wrote:
I know people who work in information security and screwed up digital redactions in the past. If you haven't already done it a bunch you have to be super careful because it's easy to redact something only for it to be easily unredacted by another user. It's completely plausible that lawyers would screw up redacting some information if they don't normally do it.
for regular people, adobe acrobat lets you redact stuff very easily and is bulletproof. it completely scrubs the text from the document and replaces it with |||||||||||.
i assume manafort hired some pretty top tier lawyers and is paying them some exorbitant hourly rate. they really should know how to use their fancy redlining software properly. did they like, try to highlight in black or something?
|
On January 09 2019 08:45 micronesia wrote:
I know people who work in information security and screwed up digital redactions in the past. If you haven't already done it a bunch you have to be super careful because it's easy to redact something only for it to be easily unredacted by another user. It's completely plausible that lawyers would screw up redacting some information if they don't normally do it.
It is so easy to screw up that my firm doesn’t even allow for digital redacting. Physical redaction only and we just keep two sets of documents around.
On January 09 2019 08:50 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2019 08:45 micronesia wrote:
I know people who work in information security and screwed up digital redactions in the past. If you haven't already done it a bunch you have to be super careful because it's easy to redact something only for it to be easily unredacted by another user. It's completely plausible that lawyers would screw up redacting some information if they don't normally do it. for regular people, adobe acrobat lets you redact stuff very easily and is bulletproof. it completely scrubs the text from the document and replaces it with |||||||||||. i assume manafort hired some pretty top tier lawyers and is paying them some exorbitant hourly rate. they really should know how to use their fancy redlining software properly. did they like, try to highlight in black or something?
It isn’t about ease, it is about the sheer volume of documents. It is a repetitive task and it is way to lose focus. I used to joke about going blind doing it because it is so dull. It is even duller to review afterwords.
Also manfort’s attorneys might be bad.
|
This wasn't a matter of not marking an item that should have been redacted, it's a matter of completely fucking up the redaction itself though.
|
On January 09 2019 06:49 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2019 06:36 Plansix wrote:On January 09 2019 06:27 Gorsameth wrote:On January 09 2019 06:15 Plansix wrote:On January 09 2019 05:56 m4ini wrote:I have a hard time with the “There are solutions, other nations that have almost zero resemblance to the US in scale, scope and makeup have solved this problem” argument when it has nothing else to back it up.
And that isn't exceptionalism. Right. Actually, there's plenty of stuff backing up that claim. You'd need to explain why in fact it wouldn't be working in the US, and with a bit more depth than "well we're bigger, also more special, so there". Start with gerrymandering, and why many other countries were able to fix it (while still having it in place, where others simply abolished the practice altogether). You're right that european style health care (the good health care) wouldn't be working in the US, that's where "scale" actually makes sense. Fixing political processes/systems has nothing to do with scale. It doesn't matter if you gerrymander 5 million or 500 million people. It's not a "necessity" to democracy, it's a way to manipulate it. By arguing that everything is the way it is because the US is big and special, you're part of the problem. Why isn't it fixable in the US, or rather, why is it impossible to fix due to size and general specialness? Of course, you can't turn the US overnight into a parliamentary monarchy - but to argue that shit can't be fixed is stupid. You don't need to revamp the entire system (or "abolish" it) - you need to fix the glaring problems with it that cause bullshit at the end. Like a president that the majority of your country didn't actually vote for. This is the entire "we can't fix healthcare" bullshit all over again. We can't get a 100% great system to work, so we rather watch people die on the streets instead of improving what we have. Exceptional. Now you are putting word in my mouth. I never said that the problems in the US couldn’t be fixed by adapting the lessons learned by the EU nations. I’m all about using the systems of other governments to improve our own. I won’t even stop at healthcare. I’m sure some EU nation has a better system for police and police oversight. But that isn’t what we are talking about. We are talking about when governments fail to accomplish the basic things they are required to do on a basic level. Parliamentary systems are not magically immune to voters electing shitty people who don’t understand the government and cause parts of it to fail. There is no magical cure for an apathetic electorate. Just because your government isn’t stupid today doesn’t mean it is immune to being stupid at a later date. On January 09 2019 06:04 IyMoon wrote:On January 09 2019 05:59 iamthedave wrote:
And I think in P6s defense also, the US is in the unique position of a large part of it hating the federal government with a blinding, searing passion normally reserved for lifelong enemies, and multiple people in the government whose literal stated goals are to kill it.
We don't have - snark aside - many politicians actively trying to destroy their own government. That's what's going on with the US government. I've seen a post on here not too long ago in response to the shutdown which was, verbatim 'Shut that shit down. And keep it shut down.'
The US people have a... complicated relationship with the Fed.
See how many people in the US went FUCKING MENTAL at the idea of the EBUL GOVERNMENT handling healthcare over the ACA. And they did this only because the government was doing it.
There's a very different relationship between the common man and the government over there. you guys don't really understand. There are elements of our nation that really don't want a federal gov and those elements somehow got people into the federal government The Freedom Caucus got into the House and immediately sought out ways to force the federal government to shut down. They discovered that the debt ceiling was raised about once a year as part of funding the government and refused to raise it, risking the US defaulting on our debts. That was the entire plan, to force shutdowns and try to get budget cuts because of the shut downs. Stupid people can indeed get elected. But a congress that can't/won't govern won't actually last very long But how long will they be allowed to last? Months? Weeks? The first time they fail to pass a budget in time, most likely.
I'm not sure what happens when a party doesn't find a way to govern but is actually ok with that situation though. Like Mitch McConnell. It's normal here that when a government can't find a compromise, the ministers will offer their resignation. But what if they don't? I'm not sure how well our system holds up if people are willing to break unwritten rules for good governance, just to fuck the system.
|
This new information begs the question of why Manafort was sending internal polling data to a Russian spy, especially when there was so much publically available poll data. Given that we know the Russians orchestrated a disinformation campaign which was intended to help Trump/hurt Clinton, one very real possibility we have to consider was that the data was intended to help the Russians better focus their disinformation campaign. GG on collusion/conspiracy/treason/whatever you want to call it, if Mueller finds evidence of that.
|
On January 09 2019 08:47 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2019 05:30 Plansix wrote:On January 09 2019 05:09 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
You know Plansix, you do this a lot. This American exceptionalism that you beleive take place simply because a country has larger area or has a larger population. That USA's constitution allows for the rather unique position of an unfunded government shutdown is exclusive of population or area. Being large is not exceptional. It is just fact. We are a big country. New England is not the Midwest is not the South. I have a hard time with the “There are solutions, other nations that have almost zero resemblance to the US in scale, scope and makeup have solved this problem” argument when it has nothing else to back it up. And finally, our government completely not shut down. Only part of it is. Several agencies within the Federal government. All 50 state governments are fully functional, with Florida and Missouri being Florida and Missouri levels of functional. The majority of the Federal Government is funded. I get that it is weird for people in the EU to think about that. But you know what is weird for people in the US? A government failing and just holding elections out of no place. Or snap elections. The concept of a parliamentary system as a whole is pretty wild for people in the US who are not used to reading about it. We're larger and we don't have shut downs. We have less people, but as I pointed out during the elections portion of discussion that makes our logistics more difficult and yet our election results are way faster.
You can't have a fair discussion of the matter without factoring in the fact that half of the US (at least) hates the government. Not is disgruntled with, not likes to bitch about, hates the government. Believes the government is legitimately evil, is after them personally, is planning to kill them level of hatred. Half of the politicians in the US campaign for office based on how evil the actual government they're being elected into is.
There's no fair discussion to be had without understanding that. Half of them don't go there to make the government better, they want to curb it or outright destroy it (see the EPA under Trump. Actually, see a lot of departments under Trump).
|
Yawn. As expected a bunch of lies and misinformation.
For example, it's s widely known that the VAST majority of drugs come in via vehicles, not illegal crossers. Wall wont do shit.
|
It is time for some bullshit.
|
"Politicians live with walls and fences, so why are they opposed to mine?"
I... I don't get this.
|
On January 09 2019 11:09 PhoenixVoid wrote:
"Politicians live with walls and fences, so why are they opposed to mine?"
I... I don't get this.
You have to be really stupid, then it makes sense.
And seeking asylum is a legal right. It isn’t illegal to come to the us and request asylum. No matter what Steve Miller believes.
|
And there is the greatest insult of all. The idea that if you pay 5b, which is at best like 20% of the total cost to build the wall, and build a steel barrier then you will suddenly cause all these bad hombres to stop getting in. He thinks you are stupid enough to think that if only we had a wall all these people wouldnt be dying to illegals. Insulting, yet his supporters will eat it up.
|
clearly trump never watched mulan. or pacific rim.
|
Wonderful speech. Absolutely love my president. Hopefully something gets done soon. Our borders have been insecure for far too long.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
