|
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 May 21 2019 07:18 Danglars wrote:
Trump will appeal the ruling. Congressional democrats are trying to get around passing legislation to force any president to disclose his tax information. They also tried to get around legal action against the IRS to produce them by subpoenaing the accounting agency that prepares them. Pretty ridiculous, but that's this Congress. It will drag out in the courts for a while, maybe even past the 2020 election. Maybe we'll get a supreme court ruling on legitimate Congressional oversight vs separation of powers, and rights relating to private accountants and lawyers.
The DoJ's OLC released a memo on their legal opinion of McGahn testimony. The House subpoena'd him to testify about his testimony to Mueller. The lawyers of the OLC say that the DoJ legal opinion for the past 5 decades still holds. It includes a good quote from Janet Reno. It also draws the comparison to the President commanding Members of Congress to appear at the White House.
Is it the presidents job to oversea members of congress? Isn't it the legislative job to oversea remembers of the executive?
Wouldn't this be more like the DOJ asking members of congress to appear for an investigation? Which they 100% can do?
|
Just to poke my head in and correct a few things. I don't know how Israel is supposed to help anyone when its between a couple of countries that will never allow its airplanes to just freely fly over its airspace.
Two a war with Iran really only needs to accomplish taking the western third of the country and the southern coastline. Irans not the most strategically laid out country And most of its important bits are way in the south or right next to a decently built up roadway.
Iran has some bits and pieces of a modern military, but most of it its still probably based on the models that the Us military has been gearing to go against for decades and decades. The M1 Abram and its Chobham armor Invalidate almost everything anti-armor has been about since the English decided invented arrowheads to defeat chainmail.
In the end, its not really up to the US if the invasion would be successful. It would be up to the Iranian people to decide if they prefer to live in chains or join the modern world. The track record of that hasn't been that sucsessful for the area.
Edit: I put abrum instead of Abram. Chobham is the correct wording for its armor system though. It was invented by the british afterall.
|
On May 21 2019 07:23 Sermokala wrote:
The M1 Abrum and its Chobham armor Invalidate almost everything anti-armor has been about since the English decided invented arrowheads to defeat chainmail. Wow, wrong on both accounts. If you are going to "just to poke my head in and correct a few things", at least get the name of your national main battle tank correct if you are going to do some nationalistic chest beating.
|
On May 21 2019 07:23 Sermokala wrote:
Just to poke my head in and correct a few things. I don't know how Israel is supposed to help anyone when its between a couple of countries that will never allow its airplanes to just freely fly over its airspace.
Two a war with Iran really only needs to accomplish taking the western third of the country and the southern coastline. Irans not the most strategically laid out country And most of its important bits are way in the south or right next to a decently built up roadway.
Iran has some bits and pieces of a modern military, but most of it its still probably based on the models that the Us military has been gearing to go against for decades and decades. The M1 Abrum and its Chobham armor Invalidate almost everything anti-armor has been about since the English decided invented arrowheads to defeat chainmail.
In the end, its not really up to the US if the invasion would be successful. It would be up to the Iranian people to decide if they prefer to live in chains or join the modern world. The track record of that hasn't been that sucsessful for the area.
What world do you live in where people are greeted as liberators in this time frame? This isn't france getting freed from germany...
|
Also, Bloomberg put out a nice article summing up the global political change in the winds whose latest entry is the Australian election. Liberal (AU) PM Scott Morrison expressed support for President Donald Trump, despite Trump's unlikability abroad, and won. Like Trump and Brexit, the pollsters missed the result in advance. Unlike Trump and Brexit, the compelled-by-fine voting meant a 90%+ turnout, an element that would favor good polling. Labor had put climate change policy at the forefront, promising steep 45% cuts below 2005 levels by 2050, but Australians did not show enough interest in it to turn to Labor to do something about it.
The New Right Is Beating the New Left. Everywhere.
Sometimes political revolutions occur right before our eyes without us quite realizing it. I think that’s what’s been happening over the last few weeks around the world, and the message is clear: The populist “New Right” isn’t going away anytime soon, and the rise of the “New Left” is exaggerated.
Start with Australia, where Prime Minister Scott Morrison won a surprising victory last week. Before the election, polls had almost uniformly indicated that his Liberal-National Coalition would have to step down, but voters were of another mind. With their support of Morrison, an evangelical Christian who has expressed support for President Donald Trump, Australians also showed a relative lack of interest in doing more about climate change. And this result is no fluke of low turnout: Due to compulsory voting, most Australians do turn out for elections.
Or how about the U.K.? The evidence is mounting that the Brexit Party will do very well in this week’s European Parliament elections. Right now that party, which did not exist until recently, is in the lead in national polls with an estimated 34% support. The Tories, the current ruling party, are at only 12%. So the hard Brexit option does not seem to be going away, and the right wing of British politics seems to be moving away from the center.
As for the European Parliament as a whole, by some estimates after this week’s election 35% of the chamber will be filled by anti-establishment parties, albeit of a diverse nature. You have to wonder at what margins the EU will become unworkable or lose legitimacy altogether.
Meanwhile in the U.S., polls show Joe Biden as the presumptive front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination. He is one of the party’s more conservative candidates, and maybe some primary voters value his electability and familiarity over the more left-wing ideas of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. That’s one sign the “hard left” is not in ascendancy in the U.S. Biden’s strategy of running against Trump is another. It’s hard to say how effective that will prove, but it is likely to result in an election about the ideas and policies of Trump, not those of Democratic intellectuals.
Meanwhile, the U.S. economy has remained strong, and Trump’s chances of re-election have been rising in the prediction markets.
One scarcely noticed factor in all of this has been the rising perception of China as a threat to Western interests. The American public is very aware that the U.S. is now in a trade war with China, a conflict that is likely to provoke an increase in nationalism. That is a sentiment that has not historically been very helpful to left-wing movements. China has been one of Trump’s signature causes for years, and he seems to be delighting in having it on center stage.
The Democratic Party is not well-positioned to make China a core issue. Democrats have been criticizing Trump’s tariffs for a while now, and it may be hard for them to adjust their message from “Tariffs Are Bad” to “Tariffs Are Bad But China Tariffs Are OK.” Their lukewarm support for free trade agreements — especially the Trans Pacific Partnership, which could have served as a kind of alternative China trade policy — also complicates matters. The net result is that Republicans will probably be able to use the China issue to their advantage for years to come.
Elsewhere, the world’s largest democracy just wrapped up a lengthy election. The results in India aren’t yet known, but exit polls show that Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s ruling coalition — and his philosophy of Hindu nationalism — will continue to be a major influence.
In all of this ferment, I am myself rooting for a resurgence of centrist cosmopolitanism. But I try to be honest about how my ideas are doing in the world. And in the last few weeks, I’ve seen a lot of evidence that a new political era truly is upon us.
Bloomberg
I like to sometimes draw a breath from the day-to-day political stories into the larger trends. The old left-right divide still exists to some extent, but the new divide approaches closer to Goodhart's "anywheres" vs "somewheres." The mobile global-citizen elites with more portable job outlooks, and the roots-based identity citizens that live and work somewhere--almost a geographical identity. Right-wing populist backlash, and the parties that gravitate that way, say that people with Anywhere interests have stopped caring about the interests of Somewhere type people, with respect to education, immigration, trade.
If Trump was the only data point, this would only merit cultural articles in places like The Atlantic for American audiences. After the success of the Brexit vote, and Australian vote, and steady gains in Euroskeptic parties in Europe, it's clear that right wing to center-right populism is on the rise globally.
|
On May 21 2019 07:39 IyMoon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2019 07:23 Sermokala wrote:
Just to poke my head in and correct a few things. I don't know how Israel is supposed to help anyone when its between a couple of countries that will never allow its airplanes to just freely fly over its airspace.
Two a war with Iran really only needs to accomplish taking the western third of the country and the southern coastline. Irans not the most strategically laid out country And most of its important bits are way in the south or right next to a decently built up roadway.
Iran has some bits and pieces of a modern military, but most of it its still probably based on the models that the Us military has been gearing to go against for decades and decades. The M1 Abrum and its Chobham armor Invalidate almost everything anti-armor has been about since the English decided invented arrowheads to defeat chainmail.
In the end, its not really up to the US if the invasion would be successful. It would be up to the Iranian people to decide if they prefer to live in chains or join the modern world. The track record of that hasn't been that sucsessful for the area. What world do you live in where people are greeted as liberators in this time frame? This isn't france getting freed from germany...
Probably the same world where China is communist because the ruling political party calls itself Communist. The same world where Iran wasn't complying with JCPOA. The same world where there is a legitimate reason for invading Iran.
|
|
|
On May 21 2019 07:39 IyMoon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2019 07:23 Sermokala wrote:
Just to poke my head in and correct a few things. I don't know how Israel is supposed to help anyone when its between a couple of countries that will never allow its airplanes to just freely fly over its airspace.
Two a war with Iran really only needs to accomplish taking the western third of the country and the southern coastline. Irans not the most strategically laid out country And most of its important bits are way in the south or right next to a decently built up roadway.
Iran has some bits and pieces of a modern military, but most of it its still probably based on the models that the Us military has been gearing to go against for decades and decades. The M1 Abrum and its Chobham armor Invalidate almost everything anti-armor has been about since the English decided invented arrowheads to defeat chainmail.
In the end, its not really up to the US if the invasion would be successful. It would be up to the Iranian people to decide if they prefer to live in chains or join the modern world. The track record of that hasn't been that sucsessful for the area. What world do you live in where people are greeted as liberators in this time frame? This isn't france getting freed from germany...
It doesn't matter about people being greeted as iberators long term. It only matters if people would rather live in the 2000's or the 1000's. Vietnam became pretty friendly to the US after everything and we did a lot of bad things over there.
On May 21 2019 07:58 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2019 07:39 IyMoon wrote:On May 21 2019 07:23 Sermokala wrote:
Just to poke my head in and correct a few things. I don't know how Israel is supposed to help anyone when its between a couple of countries that will never allow its airplanes to just freely fly over its airspace.
Two a war with Iran really only needs to accomplish taking the western third of the country and the southern coastline. Irans not the most strategically laid out country And most of its important bits are way in the south or right next to a decently built up roadway.
Iran has some bits and pieces of a modern military, but most of it its still probably based on the models that the Us military has been gearing to go against for decades and decades. The M1 Abrum and its Chobham armor Invalidate almost everything anti-armor has been about since the English decided invented arrowheads to defeat chainmail.
In the end, its not really up to the US if the invasion would be successful. It would be up to the Iranian people to decide if they prefer to live in chains or join the modern world. The track record of that hasn't been that sucsessful for the area. What world do you live in where people are greeted as liberators in this time frame? This isn't france getting freed from germany... Probably the same world where China is communist because the ruling political party calls itself Communist. The same world where Iran wasn't complying with JCPOA. The same world where there is a legitimate reason for invading Iran.
this is the part of the conversation where catdog forgets that the captalist parts of china are the explcit exception to the rule fo communism in china. That the majority of the nation still lives in a communist system includeing the government.
|
On May 21 2019 07:18 Danglars wrote:
Trump will appeal the ruling. Congressional democrats are trying to get around passing legislation to force any president to disclose his tax information. They also tried to get around legal action against the IRS to produce them by subpoenaing the accounting agency that prepares them. Pretty ridiculous, but that's this Congress. It will drag out in the courts for a while, maybe even past the 2020 election. Maybe we'll get a supreme court ruling on legitimate Congressional oversight vs separation of powers, and rights relating to private accountants and lawyers.
I think Judge Mehta is likely to get a kick in the ass on appeal. His basic argument is that Congress can subpoena these records as an exercise of its inherent investigative authority for the purpose of drafting legislation. And in making this argument, he fails to identify any reasonable bounds for when Congress may exceed this authority. That's an obvious problem. The most outrageous part of his opinion is where he refuses to stay the order pending appeal.
|
On May 21 2019 08:05 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2019 07:39 IyMoon wrote:On May 21 2019 07:23 Sermokala wrote:
Just to poke my head in and correct a few things. I don't know how Israel is supposed to help anyone when its between a couple of countries that will never allow its airplanes to just freely fly over its airspace.
Two a war with Iran really only needs to accomplish taking the western third of the country and the southern coastline. Irans not the most strategically laid out country And most of its important bits are way in the south or right next to a decently built up roadway.
Iran has some bits and pieces of a modern military, but most of it its still probably based on the models that the Us military has been gearing to go against for decades and decades. The M1 Abrum and its Chobham armor Invalidate almost everything anti-armor has been about since the English decided invented arrowheads to defeat chainmail.
In the end, its not really up to the US if the invasion would be successful. It would be up to the Iranian people to decide if they prefer to live in chains or join the modern world. The track record of that hasn't been that sucsessful for the area. What world do you live in where people are greeted as liberators in this time frame? This isn't france getting freed from germany... It doesn't matter about people being greeted as iberators long term. It only matters if people would rather live in the 2000's or the 1000's. Vietnam became pretty friendly to the US after everything and we did a lot of bad things over there. Show nested quote +On May 21 2019 07:58 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On May 21 2019 07:39 IyMoon wrote:On May 21 2019 07:23 Sermokala wrote:
Just to poke my head in and correct a few things. I don't know how Israel is supposed to help anyone when its between a couple of countries that will never allow its airplanes to just freely fly over its airspace.
Two a war with Iran really only needs to accomplish taking the western third of the country and the southern coastline. Irans not the most strategically laid out country And most of its important bits are way in the south or right next to a decently built up roadway.
Iran has some bits and pieces of a modern military, but most of it its still probably based on the models that the Us military has been gearing to go against for decades and decades. The M1 Abrum and its Chobham armor Invalidate almost everything anti-armor has been about since the English decided invented arrowheads to defeat chainmail.
In the end, its not really up to the US if the invasion would be successful. It would be up to the Iranian people to decide if they prefer to live in chains or join the modern world. The track record of that hasn't been that sucsessful for the area. What world do you live in where people are greeted as liberators in this time frame? This isn't france getting freed from germany... Probably the same world where China is communist because the ruling political party calls itself Communist. The same world where Iran wasn't complying with JCPOA. The same world where there is a legitimate reason for invading Iran. this is the part of the conversation where catdog forgets that the captalist parts of china are the explcit exception to the rule fo communism in china. That the majority of the nation still lives in a communist system includeing the government.
The USA has lost any right to talk about bringing people into the future after that abomination of an abortion bill passed.
It's beyond shameful that such legislation could even be considered anywhere in the western world.
|
On May 21 2019 07:21 IyMoon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2019 07:18 Danglars wrote:Trump will appeal the ruling. Congressional democrats are trying to get around passing legislation to force any president to disclose his tax information. They also tried to get around legal action against the IRS to produce them by subpoenaing the accounting agency that prepares them. Pretty ridiculous, but that's this Congress. It will drag out in the courts for a while, maybe even past the 2020 election. Maybe we'll get a supreme court ruling on legitimate Congressional oversight vs separation of powers, and rights relating to private accountants and lawyers. The DoJ's OLC released a memo on their legal opinion of McGahn testimony. The House subpoena'd him to testify about his testimony to Mueller. The lawyers of the OLC say that the DoJ legal opinion for the past 5 decades still holds. It includes a good quote from Janet Reno. It also draws the comparison to the President commanding Members of Congress to appear at the White House.https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1130556977287958534 Is it the presidents job to oversea members of congress? Isn't it the legislative job to oversea remembers of the executive? Wouldn't this be more like the DOJ asking members of congress to appear for an investigation? Which they 100% can do?
You can read more about the specific application of it at lawfare. It all goes back to separation of powers. The President cannot be well advised by his staff if political appointees may compel the substance of their advice into the public. From the 1982 memo cited:
The President is a separate branch of government. He may not compel congressmen to appear before him. As a matter of separation of powers, Congress may not compel him to appear before it. The President’s close advisors are an extension of the President.
Before that, Rehnquist:
The President and his immediate advisers—that is, those who customarily meet with the President on a regular or frequent basis—should be deemed absolutely immune from testimonial compulsion by a congressional committee. They not only may not be examined with respect to their official duties, but they may not even be compelled to appear before a congressional committee.
Just imagine if Boehner could summon President Obama into the House whenever he had an idea that he was somehow connected to discussed legislation. Obama's independence would be abrogated by having to submit to summons from Congress, as well as his close advisers, and open to harassment to influence their actions (addressed in article). Oversight does not preclude separation of powers. I recommend you read the entire article and linked memorandum if you have further questions about why this is straightforward and the consensus of administrations dating back at least 5 decades.
|
On May 21 2019 08:52 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2019 07:18 Danglars wrote:
Trump will appeal the ruling. Congressional democrats are trying to get around passing legislation to force any president to disclose his tax information. They also tried to get around legal action against the IRS to produce them by subpoenaing the accounting agency that prepares them. Pretty ridiculous, but that's this Congress. It will drag out in the courts for a while, maybe even past the 2020 election. Maybe we'll get a supreme court ruling on legitimate Congressional oversight vs separation of powers, and rights relating to private accountants and lawyers. I think Judge Mehta is likely to get a kick in the ass on appeal. His basic argument is that Congress can subpoena these records as an exercise of its inherent investigative authority for the purpose of drafting legislation. And in making this argument, he fails to identify any reasonable bounds for when Congress may exceed this authority. That's an obvious problem. The most outrageous part of his opinion is where he refuses to stay the order pending appeal.
I agree on the bounds thing. Just pass a law compelling the production of tax records if you're elected to the presidency or Congress.
I think it's also short sighted. If and when Republicans take over Congress, can you imagine using this legal theory to go after political activists they don't like. Let's say Justice Democrats, La Raza, CAIR. Also, to go after other members of Congress they don't like. Schiff, Nadler, Pelosi ... give us everything in your financial life that your accountants have ever produced. We need it for legitimate legislative purposes cheap opposition research. And Congress never leaks, right?
|
The transcripts I mentioned previously of Cohen's closed door hearings from February 28th and March 6th are now out. I am just starting to read them now but I've seen a couple snippets from it on Twitter. It looks like he becomes much more blunt about just how shitty of a person Trump is and outlines at least 3 crimes he believes Trump has committed. It'll be interesting to read, I'm sure.
|
On May 21 2019 08:52 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2019 07:18 Danglars wrote:
Trump will appeal the ruling. Congressional democrats are trying to get around passing legislation to force any president to disclose his tax information. They also tried to get around legal action against the IRS to produce them by subpoenaing the accounting agency that prepares them. Pretty ridiculous, but that's this Congress. It will drag out in the courts for a while, maybe even past the 2020 election. Maybe we'll get a supreme court ruling on legitimate Congressional oversight vs separation of powers, and rights relating to private accountants and lawyers. I think Judge Mehta is likely to get a kick in the ass on appeal. His basic argument is that Congress can subpoena these records as an exercise of its inherent investigative authority for the purpose of drafting legislation. And in making this argument, he fails to identify any reasonable bounds for when Congress may exceed this authority. That's an obvious problem. The most outrageous part of his opinion is where he refuses to stay the order pending appeal.
So what, we should prefer the alternative raised by the WH of the executive getting to decide when they should be investigated?
Also, the Dems need to hurry up and go to court on the IRS request. That is the most surefire path to the records given its unambiguous legal basis.
|
The inherent authority comes from the constitutional obligation to conduct oversight of the executive. Anyone making the argument about drafting legislation is doing so because the last refuge they can find.
|
On May 21 2019 10:07 On_Slaught wrote:
So what, we should prefer the alternative raised by the WH of the executive getting to decide when they should be investigated? One situation I think of a lot regarding this bizarre opinion Barr put forth is this: If that opinion had been put forth at the height of the Benghazi hearings and Obama used it in justifying shutting down the investigation that targeted a member of the Executive Branch since he theoretically viewed the investigation as without merit, what would have happened? It would have been a nuclear meltdown of a reaction from the Republicans, wouldn't it? How is it suddenly acceptable now, doubly so since there has been evidence put forth that easily justifies the many investigations into Trump? Thinking this legal opinion should apply for Trump, but not for other presidents would be pretty hypocritical, wouldn't it?
Though I guess this gets to another point that people who know they have done nothing wrong aren't nearly as scared of investigations and tend to cooperate in order to clear their names. Did Obama or Hillary Clinton try and mess with the investigations into Benghazi? No. Likely because they knew nothing would come of it, and it would likely end with Trey Gowdy and company looking like they had been on some wild goose chase. Sure enough, that's what happened.
|
Congress: *exists for the sake of oversight and checks and balances*
Fox news: anyone think Congress is acting really inappropriately?
|
On May 21 2019 10:07 On_Slaught wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2019 08:52 xDaunt wrote:On May 21 2019 07:18 Danglars wrote:
Trump will appeal the ruling. Congressional democrats are trying to get around passing legislation to force any president to disclose his tax information. They also tried to get around legal action against the IRS to produce them by subpoenaing the accounting agency that prepares them. Pretty ridiculous, but that's this Congress. It will drag out in the courts for a while, maybe even past the 2020 election. Maybe we'll get a supreme court ruling on legitimate Congressional oversight vs separation of powers, and rights relating to private accountants and lawyers. I think Judge Mehta is likely to get a kick in the ass on appeal. His basic argument is that Congress can subpoena these records as an exercise of its inherent investigative authority for the purpose of drafting legislation. And in making this argument, he fails to identify any reasonable bounds for when Congress may exceed this authority. That's an obvious problem. The most outrageous part of his opinion is where he refuses to stay the order pending appeal. So what, we should prefer the alternative raised by the WH of the executive getting to decide when they should be investigated? Also, the Dems need to hurry up and go to court on the IRS request. That is the most surefire path to the records given its unambiguous legal basis.
Congress does not and should not have carte blanche to investigate the private business affairs of the president or any other private citizen. Hell, law enforcement doesn't have that power unless there's probable cause of a crime.
|
|
|
On May 21 2019 11:09 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2019 10:07 On_Slaught wrote:On May 21 2019 08:52 xDaunt wrote:On May 21 2019 07:18 Danglars wrote:
Trump will appeal the ruling. Congressional democrats are trying to get around passing legislation to force any president to disclose his tax information. They also tried to get around legal action against the IRS to produce them by subpoenaing the accounting agency that prepares them. Pretty ridiculous, but that's this Congress. It will drag out in the courts for a while, maybe even past the 2020 election. Maybe we'll get a supreme court ruling on legitimate Congressional oversight vs separation of powers, and rights relating to private accountants and lawyers. I think Judge Mehta is likely to get a kick in the ass on appeal. His basic argument is that Congress can subpoena these records as an exercise of its inherent investigative authority for the purpose of drafting legislation. And in making this argument, he fails to identify any reasonable bounds for when Congress may exceed this authority. That's an obvious problem. The most outrageous part of his opinion is where he refuses to stay the order pending appeal. So what, we should prefer the alternative raised by the WH of the executive getting to decide when they should be investigated? Also, the Dems need to hurry up and go to court on the IRS request. That is the most surefire path to the records given its unambiguous legal basis. Congress does not and should not have carte blanche to investigate the private business affairs of the president or any other private citizen. Hell, law enforcement doesn't have that power unless there's probable cause of a crime.
May I ask what disadvantage there is to investigating the president? What do we lose when the president is investigated?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
