|
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 |
In other somewhat lighthearted news, everyone's favourite idiotic piece of shit congressperson that was too stupid to hide his campaign finance violations, Duncan Hunter, is in even deeper shit than he was already in. It was announced last week that his wife was pleading guilty to charges and was cooperating with prosecutors in the case against him, which seemed weird given she was his wife and all.
Well, now it all makes a bit more sense. Duncan Hunter not only paid for his kids' braces, groceries, trips, college tuition, and family restaurant outings with campaign funds, but he also left a paper trail of hotel rooms and restaurant tabs that he paid for with campaign funds while he was having multiple affairs with staffers and lobbyists.
It sounds like his wife could very well be waiving spousal privilege and testifying against him and there's a substantial paper trail, so his trial is not likely to go well. Naturally, instead of trying to defend himself he has been proclaiming that the entire thing is a "witch hunt" and "deep state conspiracy" against him.
His political career is apparently not likely to be long for this world as several other Republicans are already eyeing his seat with intent to replace him in the next election should his trial go poorly.
Don't mind me. I'm just over here enjoying watching this guy get what he deserves. His opponent in the 2018 election was half hispanic and half middle eastern so naturally Hunter ran a racist campaign against them and used anti-Muslim fear mongering extensively. He also has been a staunch defender of Edward Gallagher, the Navy SEAL who is currently in prison for war crimes that Trump considered pardoning before backing off after his crimes started to be better understood. As a refresher, Gallagher was the guy who murdered multiple civilians and then threatened the other SEALs in his squad when they tried to report what he was doing to people higher up. He also randomly blew up buildings that had people in them and picked people, including women and the elderly, from a sniper post. He was described as a mass murderer by the other SEALs under oath.
If Duncan Hunter somehow tripped and accidentally fell into a volcano, the world would likely be a better place.
|
On June 26 2019 15:01 Ben... wrote:
If Duncan Hunter somehow tripped and accidentally fell into a volcano, the world would likely be a better place.
I'm not sure a world where you can trip and randomly volcanoes pop up to swallow you is a better place 
|
Jared Kushners peace for the middle east plan is out!
https://www.whitehouse.gov/peacetoprosperity/
It's called Peace to Prosperity, and it's basically a 50 billion dollar private investment and loan plan to improve Palestina and surrounding countries Lebanon, Egypt and Jordan.
It's projected to give them 9% GDP growth every year for 10 years, 100k jobs every year for 10 years, support infrastructure building, increase legal safety for business owners, and create some sort of transport corridor between West Bank and Gaza.
If implemented, Peace to Prosperity will empower the Palestinian people to build the society that they have aspired to establish for generations. With the support of the international community, this vision is within reach. Ultimately, however, the power to unlock it lies in the hands of the Palestinian people. Only through peace can the Palestinians achieve prosperity.
However, there's nothing about what Palestinians would need to accept to 'unlock' this plan. There's nothing about any of the current problems that stop peace from happening. Nothing about territory or Jerusalem or anything. It's pretty much an investment plan with a requirement that 'peace' is needed.
I guess this is the steam early access version of a peace plan...
|
So his plan for "peace in the middle east" is to invest in their country if they agree to "have peace".
Masterplan. Can't see any faults here
|
On June 26 2019 20:08 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:Jared Kushners peace for the middle east plan is out! https://www.whitehouse.gov/peacetoprosperity/It's called Peace to Prosperity, and it's basically a 50 billion dollar private investment and loan plan to improve Palestina and surrounding countries Lebanon, Egypt and Jordan. It's projected to give them 9% GDP growth every year for 10 years, 100k jobs every year for 10 years, support infrastructure building, increase legal safety for business owners, and create some sort of transport corridor between West Bank and Gaza. Show nested quote +If implemented, Peace to Prosperity will empower the Palestinian people to build the society that they have aspired to establish for generations. With the support of the international community, this vision is within reach. Ultimately, however, the power to unlock it lies in the hands of the Palestinian people. Only through peace can the Palestinians achieve prosperity. However, there's nothing about what Palestinians would need to accept to 'unlock' this plan. There's nothing about any of the current problems that stop peace from happening. Nothing about territory or Jerusalem or anything. It's pretty much an investment plan with a requirement that 'peace' is needed. I guess this is the steam early access version of a peace plan...
Some people might even call it the Trump version of a peace plan.
|
On June 26 2019 10:28 xDaunt wrote:
Mueller is going to have a very bad time up there.
I wouldn't be so sure. The Republicans have been made to look like idiots the last couple of times this happened and you expected big things. It's going to be ideologues ranting at a seasoned legal professional who knows things, for the most part.
That doesn't usually play well for the ideologues.
|
On June 26 2019 20:40 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2019 10:28 xDaunt wrote:
Mueller is going to have a very bad time up there. I wouldn't be so sure. The Republicans have been made to look like idiots the last couple of times this happened and you expected big things. It's going to be ideologues ranting at a seasoned legal professional who knows things, for the most part. That doesn't usually play well for the ideologues. Lots of ranting by Republicans with very few questions so Mueller can't say something bad.
Democrats repeatedly trying to get Mueller to say Trump is guilty and Mueller refusing to do so and point to the report.
The one I want to have answered is the supposed talk between Barr and Mueller where Barr said Mueller didn't refuse to indict based on guidelines since that directly conflicts with what the report says.
|
On June 26 2019 20:16 Excludos wrote:
So his plan for "peace in the middle east" is to invest in their country if they agree to "have peace".
Masterplan. Can't see any faults here
It's a risky plan, Excludos. Let's see how it pans out.
On June 26 2019 20:54 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2019 20:40 iamthedave wrote:On June 26 2019 10:28 xDaunt wrote:
Mueller is going to have a very bad time up there. I wouldn't be so sure. The Republicans have been made to look like idiots the last couple of times this happened and you expected big things. It's going to be ideologues ranting at a seasoned legal professional who knows things, for the most part. That doesn't usually play well for the ideologues. Lots of ranting by Republicans with very few questions so Mueller can't say something bad. Democrats repeatedly trying to get Mueller to say Trump is guilty and Mueller refusing to do so and point to the report. The one I want to have answered is the supposed talk between Barr and Mueller where Barr said Mueller didn't refuse to indict based on guidelines since that directly conflicts with what the report says.
I would expect that there'll be a ton of questioning about his refusal to indict from the Democrats and Mueller clarifying exactly why he didn't, maybe a bit about his deferring to the AG.
|
United States41995 Posts
On June 26 2019 20:16 Excludos wrote:
So his plan for "peace in the middle east" is to invest in their country if they agree to "have peace".
Masterplan. Can't see any faults here
I think it's more just a general idea that if they had more investment then they'd have more money and jobs. It's like when he was having a child explain why the Palestinians are so upset to him and one of the things mentioned was that they don't have a functioning economy (because they're an occupied state) he just latched onto that and went "so you're saying if they had more economy then they'd be happier?".
|
But how can you run a business if you can't be sure if you can import the resources you need or export what you produce?
|
On June 26 2019 21:44 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2019 20:16 Excludos wrote:
So his plan for "peace in the middle east" is to invest in their country if they agree to "have peace".
Masterplan. Can't see any faults here I think it's more just a general idea that if they had more investment then they'd have more money and jobs. It's like when he was having a child explain why the Palestinians are so upset to him and one of the things mentioned was that they don't have a functioning economy (because they're an occupied state) he just latched onto that and went "so you're saying if they had more economy then they'd be happier?".
"brb, getting some economy"
|
|
|
On June 26 2019 20:08 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:Jared Kushners peace for the middle east plan is out! https://www.whitehouse.gov/peacetoprosperity/It's called Peace to Prosperity, and it's basically a 50 billion dollar private investment and loan plan to improve Palestina and surrounding countries Lebanon, Egypt and Jordan. It's projected to give them 9% GDP growth every year for 10 years, 100k jobs every year for 10 years, support infrastructure building, increase legal safety for business owners, and create some sort of transport corridor between West Bank and Gaza. Show nested quote +If implemented, Peace to Prosperity will empower the Palestinian people to build the society that they have aspired to establish for generations. With the support of the international community, this vision is within reach. Ultimately, however, the power to unlock it lies in the hands of the Palestinian people. Only through peace can the Palestinians achieve prosperity. However, there's nothing about what Palestinians would need to accept to 'unlock' this plan. There's nothing about any of the current problems that stop peace from happening. Nothing about territory or Jerusalem or anything. It's pretty much an investment plan with a requirement that 'peace' is needed. I guess this is the steam early access version of a peace plan...
I don't think your critique is fair. Kushner has said that this is only the economic part of the plan and that the political part will follow later.
Kushner told reporters his team would release the plan's political details, which remain secret, "when we're ready", adding: "We'll see what happens".
www.google.com
|
On June 27 2019 00:05 RvB wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2019 20:08 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:Jared Kushners peace for the middle east plan is out! https://www.whitehouse.gov/peacetoprosperity/It's called Peace to Prosperity, and it's basically a 50 billion dollar private investment and loan plan to improve Palestina and surrounding countries Lebanon, Egypt and Jordan. It's projected to give them 9% GDP growth every year for 10 years, 100k jobs every year for 10 years, support infrastructure building, increase legal safety for business owners, and create some sort of transport corridor between West Bank and Gaza. If implemented, Peace to Prosperity will empower the Palestinian people to build the society that they have aspired to establish for generations. With the support of the international community, this vision is within reach. Ultimately, however, the power to unlock it lies in the hands of the Palestinian people. Only through peace can the Palestinians achieve prosperity. However, there's nothing about what Palestinians would need to accept to 'unlock' this plan. There's nothing about any of the current problems that stop peace from happening. Nothing about territory or Jerusalem or anything. It's pretty much an investment plan with a requirement that 'peace' is needed. I guess this is the steam early access version of a peace plan... I don't think your critique is fair. Kushner has said that this is only the economic part of the plan and that the political part will follow later. Show nested quote +
Kushner told reporters his team would release the plan's political details, which remain secret, "when we're ready", adding: "We'll see what happens".
www.google.com
It's 100% fair because I am not sold that they have a political plan at all.
You can't release an incomplete plan and then go 'don't attack us, we have more we are not telling you yet'
|
On June 27 2019 00:05 RvB wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2019 20:08 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:Jared Kushners peace for the middle east plan is out! https://www.whitehouse.gov/peacetoprosperity/It's called Peace to Prosperity, and it's basically a 50 billion dollar private investment and loan plan to improve Palestina and surrounding countries Lebanon, Egypt and Jordan. It's projected to give them 9% GDP growth every year for 10 years, 100k jobs every year for 10 years, support infrastructure building, increase legal safety for business owners, and create some sort of transport corridor between West Bank and Gaza. If implemented, Peace to Prosperity will empower the Palestinian people to build the society that they have aspired to establish for generations. With the support of the international community, this vision is within reach. Ultimately, however, the power to unlock it lies in the hands of the Palestinian people. Only through peace can the Palestinians achieve prosperity. However, there's nothing about what Palestinians would need to accept to 'unlock' this plan. There's nothing about any of the current problems that stop peace from happening. Nothing about territory or Jerusalem or anything. It's pretty much an investment plan with a requirement that 'peace' is needed. I guess this is the steam early access version of a peace plan... I don't think your critique is fair. Kushner has said that this is only the economic part of the plan and that the political part will follow later. Show nested quote +
Kushner told reporters his team would release the plan's political details, which remain secret, "when we're ready", adding: "We'll see what happens".
www.google.com A peace plan is about the political details.
You don't show off a peace plan without the part about how you get peace.
|
United States41995 Posts
On June 27 2019 00:16 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2019 00:05 RvB wrote:On June 26 2019 20:08 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:Jared Kushners peace for the middle east plan is out! https://www.whitehouse.gov/peacetoprosperity/It's called Peace to Prosperity, and it's basically a 50 billion dollar private investment and loan plan to improve Palestina and surrounding countries Lebanon, Egypt and Jordan. It's projected to give them 9% GDP growth every year for 10 years, 100k jobs every year for 10 years, support infrastructure building, increase legal safety for business owners, and create some sort of transport corridor between West Bank and Gaza. If implemented, Peace to Prosperity will empower the Palestinian people to build the society that they have aspired to establish for generations. With the support of the international community, this vision is within reach. Ultimately, however, the power to unlock it lies in the hands of the Palestinian people. Only through peace can the Palestinians achieve prosperity. However, there's nothing about what Palestinians would need to accept to 'unlock' this plan. There's nothing about any of the current problems that stop peace from happening. Nothing about territory or Jerusalem or anything. It's pretty much an investment plan with a requirement that 'peace' is needed. I guess this is the steam early access version of a peace plan... I don't think your critique is fair. Kushner has said that this is only the economic part of the plan and that the political part will follow later.
Kushner told reporters his team would release the plan's political details, which remain secret, "when we're ready", adding: "We'll see what happens".
www.google.com A peace plan is about the political details. You don't show off a peace plan without the part about how you get peace.
In fairness they released the investment plan without the part about how you get investment. They’re consistent at least.
|
On June 26 2019 09:28 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2019 09:14 ShambhalaWar wrote:On June 26 2019 08:27 xDaunt wrote:On June 26 2019 07:53 KwarK wrote:On June 26 2019 07:48 xDaunt wrote:On June 26 2019 07:43 KwarK wrote:On June 26 2019 07:38 xDaunt wrote:On June 26 2019 07:24 KwarK wrote:
xDaunt you’re not remotely addressing the issue. You're doing the exact same thing you always do which is insisting that the issue is something completely unrelated to what the subject is, creating a straw man defence for the unrelated issue, and then complaining that everyone else is talking about the wrong thing.
If you weren't doing it intentionally I'd think you had some kind of disability.
Please feel free to stop making a fool out of yourself whenever you like and address the quid pro quo issue and not whether lawyers are required to have absolutely no opinions which appears to be a straw man you introduced. Complaining about Trump’s ability to pick who he wants for AG is even dumber than complaining about Barr. It’s his constitutional right. It is checked by the confirmation process and, if necessary, impeachment. Again you're dodging the issue. The issue is whether Trump selecting a guy to control an investigation into Trump is a conflict. You're answering the question of whether the constitution gives Trump the authority to select an AG and using that answer to somehow prove that there is no conflict because of a mystery step which you neglected to cover. You're responding to me pointing out that you only ever answer different questions to the ones asked by answering a different question to the one asked. You're a cliché. I am not dodging anything. It’s not a material conflict for the reasons I already discussed. It’s not a serious issue. You discussed whether Barr is entitled to have opinions earlier. That wasn't the issue. Try again. Maybe try reading the post before responding to it. That way you'll be able to see what you're meant to be responding to and can tailor your response. If you're still struggling you can probably ask literally any other person to explain the issue to you. I wasn't paying attention to your response to my first where you shifted the focus completely away from Barr and on Trump. But like I said, focusing on the conflict of interest that Trump had in picking Barr to be his AG is even dumber than asking about Barr's conflict of interest. Every president has this same conflict because every president picks his AG. It simply isn't a material issue. You might as well ask whether water is wet. And like I pointed out, there are multiple checks on this exercise of presidential authority, so it isn't a problem. Presidents prior to trump picked an AG based on qualifications to do the job, trump picked barr because he agreed to shut down the mueller investigation. On that fact alone they are both guilty of obstruction. I think Barr did shut down the Mueller investigation, but I think he did it for very different reasons than you think he did.
I think that would be insane amounts of wishful thinking on your part. To think that the investigation was a witch hunt and barr is some kind of savior, justifiably shutting it down.
Seems much more likely to me that barr is a stooge hired because he would shut the investigation down, for any reason, reason not required.
The more likely reality is that trump at the very least, committed crimes worthy of impeachment, simply based on the fact he is bumbling through the job as president and doesn't even realize when he is breaking laws (though I think he has also consciously broken laws).
He clearly demonstrates every week, he is in completely over his head.
The very observable fact about trump that every week in interviews and in the public eye, he is flipping, lying, and bumbling through his job. He admitted in an interview that he would now take help from a foreign nation to influence our elections. That is after all the investigations, and news, and actual interference, he continues to welcome it again. I think, mostly because he is incompetent.
Trump and republican congress have also done jack shit about securing our elections from further interference in 2020.
|
On June 26 2019 10:27 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2019 09:41 IgnE wrote:On June 26 2019 09:10 KwarK wrote:On June 26 2019 09:03 xDaunt wrote:On June 26 2019 08:57 KwarK wrote:On June 26 2019 08:54 xDaunt wrote:On June 26 2019 08:49 KwarK wrote:On June 26 2019 08:38 xDaunt wrote:On June 26 2019 08:32 Gorsameth wrote:On June 26 2019 08:27 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
I wasn't paying attention to your response to my first where you shifted the focus completely away from Barr and on Trump. But like I said, focusing on the conflict of interest that Trump had in picking Barr to be his AG is even dumber than asking about Barr's conflict of interest. Every president has this same conflict because every president picks his AG. It simply isn't a material issue. You might as well ask whether water is wet. And like I pointed out, there are multiple checks on this exercise of presidential authority, so it isn't a problem. How many of those Presidents were under investigation by the DoJ at the time they picked their AG? It doesn't matter. First, AG's, as attorneys, are bound by their own rules of ethical conduct. If there's a real conflict, they have to recuse. But there's no real conflict per my prior post discuss Barr at length. Second, the appointment of the AG is still subject to congressional approval. Lastly, the AG isn't responsible for prosecuting a sitting president anyway. That has to be dealt with by Congress through impeachment proceedings. And again, let me remind you that the investigation had already been delegated to a special counsel at the time of Barr's appointment and Barr let the special counsel complete the investigation. There's not even a whiff of impropriety here. 1) "Let me answer the question of whether Trump is conflicted with a sudden change of subject. Did you know Barr is a lawyer? Lawyers are subject to ethical standards. I trust that answers the question of whether Trump is conflicted." 2) "Let me answer the question of whether Trump is conflicted with some trivia about the political process. Did you know that the AG nomination is reviewed by the party that controls the house. I trust that answers the question of whether Trump is conflicted." 3) "Let me answer the question of whether Trump is conflicted with some misdirection. The AG, although in a position to conclude on what the report said and preemptively exonerate Trump in conflict with the text of the report, is not responsible for prosecution. I trust that answers the question of whether Trump is conflicted." You managed to cram three different introducing of new and separate issues into a single response. It's a rare triple daunt. Three different answers to questions that nobody was asked which fail to address the issue. He asked whether the conflict was material, and I directly explained why it wasn't. This isn't hard. You didn't even address the conflict. You just introduced three new issues and rested your case. How does Barr being a lawyer make Trump less conflicted when choosing who to nominate? It's the nomination process that Trump is conflicted over. Lawyers being subject to ethical standards is completely irrelevant to the nomination process. Why do I need to address the conflict when the conflict doesn't matter? Your point boils down to "water is wet." Big fucking deal. Who cares? It's neither interesting nor profound nor worthy of discussion for the reasons that I have given. And no, I did not introduce three new issues. I gave three reasons why the conflict does not matter. Here's what's really going on: you are avoiding the reality that you're asking an incredibly stupid question that is predicated upon a poor understanding of how the system works and the specific facts in this instance. And we finally get to it. After six different attempts to answer different questions and change the issue, each of which was rejected, you finally state that accusing Trump of being conflicted when nominating a guy to oversee the investigation into Trump is like saying water is wet. But in a sudden twist we switch to gaslighting. "Why do you even care about the conflict? You're stating the obvious. Water is wet. Who fucking cares? Big fucking deal". Your problem, xDaunt, is that I know what you're doing. After you've been unable to successfully change the subject to something other than the conflict you're now insisting that the conflict doesn't even matter. So naturally I'm going to do my part in this game and call you out again. You can't just go "big fucking deal" and make everyone agree that it's a small chaste deal. so Trump appointed a lap dog and Congress approved it. i’m not sure what you are getting at? are you trying to get xdaunt to restate this and explicitly agree with you? or do you think a law has been broken? that the bar association should disbar Barr? My stance is that Trump nominating the guy who would subsequently summarize the investigation into Trump and then subsequently shut down the investigation is an obvious conflict of interest and something which any president even remotely interested in the appearance of propriety would have given to a bipartisan committee. However xDaunt contested that for a long time before backtracking and insisting that he never contested it because it wasn't important. The quid pro quo was naked, Barr wrote to Trump's legal defence saying he believed the investigation should be shut down, Trump appointed Barr to AG and Barr then shut the defence down. That is a wholly accurate summary, something which incidentally Barr did not provide. As with the rest of the shit with this administration there aren't specific laws against the president abusing his power, or at least not laws that are actually enforced. He's not meant to be running his businesses. He's not meant to be charging secret service millions of dollars for Trump hotels and golf courses. He's not meant to be introducing his daughter and son in law to politicians around the world and helping them set up business deals. He's not meant to be openly saying that he would accept foreign interference in elections and wouldn't report it to the FBI. He's not meant to lie to the people on a daily basis. He's not meant to refuse to hold press conferences and threaten to shut down hostile media. In a working system he'd have been impeached a while ago for this shit. But generally laws get made after they're shown to be necessary. Trump is the guy who is the reason we're going to need a bunch of new laws saying shit like that the President can't float pardons to his allies in exchange for their noncooperation into an investigation of him. As for whether Barr should be disbarred, I think yes. But that's step two of the conflict of interest issues and we spent forever trying to get xDaunt to understand step 1. Barr is in no way impartial in the question of Trump's for three reasons. Firstly, he was hired on an explicit understanding that he would absolve Trump of wrongdoing, a quid pro quo, he gets a job, Trump gets influence. Secondly, as a Trump appointee he is not a disinterested party in the investigation of obstruction of justice. By definition he cannot be, whenever Barr gets involved the question of obstruction of justice immediately gets reopened because of his previous statements on the report (before he'd even seen the contents) and his appointment by Trump with the understanding that he would obstruct the report. Thirdly, Barr's career, power, influence, and wealth are directly tied to Trump's administration. He has a direct and material stake in the outcome of the investigation and therefore should recuse himself.
Preach. I think you nailed it.
|
Well, if 2018 showed anything is that the blue wave is a coming... I think by 2020, we're going to have way more voters registered. Especially with how much school shootings are going on...
|
So to get back to a fun subject
The concentration camps cost about 775 a day per detainee to run. This is only for temporary shelters though, for the permanent ones, its a nice low 256 per day. That is 256 a day WITHOUT enough soap or blankets.
The average hotel room in the US is 129 a night. We could just rent out ever motel 6 on the boarder, give everyone their own room and put guards around the outside to make sure nobody comes in our out and save a shit ton of cash.
Good thing we got rid of that program that cost 40 bucks a day per family and had a 90% success rate at getting people to show up to their hearings.... that was such a bad program
https://www.gq.com/story/trump-detention-camps-cost
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
