|
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 29 2021 04:53 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2021 02:16 farvacola wrote:On May 29 2021 02:14 Mohdoo wrote:
I think Democrats used the 1/6 commission as a martyr for the filibuster. Its all about demonizing the fillibuster so they can pass the infrastructure package. They lose 2022 without that bill. All comes down to Manchin and Sinema. Manchin put out a very strong video (for him) on the subject of the commission where he rails against it in pretty loaded terms. I'm reading it as him trying communicate that this is his red line.
As I understand it, Manchin made it clear he wouldn't be ending the filibuster over this?
Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) said Thursday he is not willing to abolish the legislative filibuster if Republicans block the creation of a bipartisan commission to investigate the deadly Jan. 6
I'm not willing to destroy our government, no," Manchin said when asked if he would vote to end the filibuster if Republicans blocked the commission.
www.axios.com
Schumer reportedly has a plan to use the commission vote (maybe again), the "For the People Act" and possibly some other legislation to try to force discussion on filibuster reform (though that wouldn't come until the next session after the Senate comes back from another recess).
After leaving town Friday afternoon for a Memorial Day recess, the Senate is due to return the week of June 7 and work through June 25
“In the last week of the June work period, the Senate will vote on S. 1, the For the People Act, legislation that is essential to defending our democracy, reducing the influence of dark money and powerful special interests, and stopping the wave of Republican voter suppression happening in the states across the country in service of President Trump’s Big Lie,” Schumer wrote.
The elections bill is just one of a roster of measures Schumer plans to bring up next month that will reignite debate over the legislative filibuster, which requires a 60-vote threshold to move forward on most legislation.
“The June work period will be extremely challenging. I want to be clear that the next few weeks will be hard and will test our resolve as a Congress and a conference,” Schumer wrote in Friday’s letter.
www.rollcall.com
I don't think it's Manchin's red line.
|
The filibuster isn't going anywhere. The 1/6 commission is an obvious ploy to keep around as a campaign issue something that most Americans have already moved past, and the filibuster/Manchin/Sinema are providing cover for other Democrats who don't want to anger their lefty voters when they'd have to oppose things like S1. That's also why the a commission won't be an excuse to nuke the filibuster, it's not actually something most people care enough about. Once again our friends on the left suppose that their agenda is way more popular than it is, when the most significant thing 2020 demonstrated is that people were tired of the orange man. That's reflected in how the congressional races (in particular the House) came out and how Biden barely won the EC by being not Trump (about 45k votes distributed across a few states. Very much like 2016). That's why this is dead.
D's had overwhelming majorities after 2008, passed their pride-and-joy the ACA and then got stomped. But I would love to see Democrats self-immolate by trying to abolish the filibuster not with a solid 55+ seat majority, but at 50/50. Would be hilarious.
|
Manchin has said things both ways on the subject. At one point he was advocating a return to the talky filibuster.
The truth is that if it was just Manchin he would never vote alone. Sinema is a bigger concern than Manchin.
Self preservation is a pretty strong motivator, so I'm not at all going to be surprised if this really is a concern of Manchin's : he's the one who gets killed if they bust onto the chambers again.
|
On May 29 2021 05:53 Introvert wrote:
The filibuster isn't going anywhere. The 1/6 commission is an obvious ploy to keep around as a campaign issue something that most Americans have already moved past, and the filibuster/Manchin/Sinema are providing cover for other Democrats who don't want to anger their lefty voters when they'd have to oppose things like S1. That's also why the a commission won't be an excuse to nuke the filibuster, it's not actually something most people care enough about. Once again our friends on the left suppose that their agenda is way more popular than it is, when the most significant thing 2020 demonstrated is that people were tired of the orange man. That's reflected in how the congressional races (in particular the House) came out and how Biden barely won the EC by being not Trump (about 45k votes distributed across a few states. Very much like 2016). That's why this is dead.
D's had overwhelming majorities after 2008, passed their pride-and-joy the ACA and then got stomped. But I would love to see Democrats self-immolate by trying to abolish the filibuster not with a solid 55+ seat majority, but at 50/50. Would be hilarious.
If Republicans can’t get behind condemning and investigating a physical attack on the Capitol, and >50% of Republican voters think the election was stolen, I don’t see how this doesn’t end in mass political violence.
|
On May 29 2021 07:45 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2021 05:53 Introvert wrote:
The filibuster isn't going anywhere. The 1/6 commission is an obvious ploy to keep around as a campaign issue something that most Americans have already moved past, and the filibuster/Manchin/Sinema are providing cover for other Democrats who don't want to anger their lefty voters when they'd have to oppose things like S1. That's also why the a commission won't be an excuse to nuke the filibuster, it's not actually something most people care enough about. Once again our friends on the left suppose that their agenda is way more popular than it is, when the most significant thing 2020 demonstrated is that people were tired of the orange man. That's reflected in how the congressional races (in particular the House) came out and how Biden barely won the EC by being not Trump (about 45k votes distributed across a few states. Very much like 2016). That's why this is dead.
D's had overwhelming majorities after 2008, passed their pride-and-joy the ACA and then got stomped. But I would love to see Democrats self-immolate by trying to abolish the filibuster not with a solid 55+ seat majority, but at 50/50. Would be hilarious. If Republicans can’t get behind condemning and investigating a physical attack on the Capitol, and >50% of Republican voters think the election was stolen, I don’t see how this doesn’t end in mass political violence.
You are talking about that silly fascist insurrection as if that was really relevant, but do you know what really needs more investigating?
Hillary Clintons Email Server.
I think it has become more and more clear over the years that the "basket of deplorables" comment was actually pretty on-point. Through decades of propaganda and misinformation, about a quarter of the US population is now completely removed from anything resembling factual reality. Those same people are also surprisingly okay with fascism and autocracy, considering how much they claim to love freedom.
And i honestly have no idea how one can reasonably deal with that. It seems absurd and hopeless. You can not really "win", because those people don't disappear even if you win an election or two. And they are not going to crawl out of their rabbit hole of crazy either. Hoping that they eventually die off in a few decades doesn't work either, because they perpetuate their indoctrination in their children.
|
Meanwhile, Russian intelligence got hold of a US government media account.
What might they have used it to publish, I wonder?
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/28/us/politics/russia-hack-usaid.html
"USAID Special Alert: Donald Trump has published new documents on election fraud" - > documents loaded with malware
Image:
+ Show Spoiler +
It's self-evident that America's enemies continue to see Trump as an opportunity, and benefit from the damage he has done to US democracy.
The more we talk about Americans having "moved on", without dealing with the wilful blindness that made an attempted coup by a sitting president possible, the more pleased those enemies will be.
|
On May 29 2021 05:53 Introvert wrote:
The filibuster isn't going anywhere. The 1/6 commission is an obvious ploy to keep around as a campaign issue something that most Americans have already moved past, and the filibuster/Manchin/Sinema are providing cover for other Democrats who don't want to anger their lefty voters when they'd have to oppose things like S1. That's also why the a commission won't be an excuse to nuke the filibuster, it's not actually something most people care enough about. Once again our friends on the left suppose that their agenda is way more popular than it is, when the most significant thing 2020 demonstrated is that people were tired of the orange man. That's reflected in how the congressional races (in particular the House) came out and how Biden barely won the EC by being not Trump (about 45k votes distributed across a few states. Very much like 2016). That's why this is dead.
D's had overwhelming majorities after 2008, passed their pride-and-joy the ACA and then got stomped. But I would love to see Democrats self-immolate by trying to abolish the filibuster not with a solid 55+ seat majority, but at 50/50. Would be hilarious.
You're right, it would be absurd for people to be as concerned about an armed insurrection as they were about, oh I don't know, Hillary's emails. The two aren't even comparable. #letsmoveon
|
The ridiculousness of the responses aside, the idea that a commission with staffers chosen by Pelosi et al., who have already decided they know so much about that day that they impeached the president because of it, would be a neutral fact-finding operation is obviously nonsense. Might as well let a congressional committee do it, where we already know these are politicians with their minds made up.
|
On May 29 2021 12:51 Introvert wrote:
The ridiculousness of the responses aside, the idea that a commission with staffers chosen by Pelosi et al., who have already decided they know so much about that day that they impeached the president because of it, would be a neutral fact-finding operation is obviously nonsense. Might as well let a congressional committee do it, where we already know these are politicians with their minds made up.
I thought the commission was going to be chosen in a completely bipartisan manner? Although, to be fair, I suppose your criticism applies equally well to the many Republicans who dismissed the insurrection as "no big deal".
|
On May 29 2021 13:05 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2021 12:51 Introvert wrote:
The ridiculousness of the responses aside, the idea that a commission with staffers chosen by Pelosi et al., who have already decided they know so much about that day that they impeached the president because of it, would be a neutral fact-finding operation is obviously nonsense. Might as well let a congressional committee do it, where we already know these are politicians with their minds made up. I thought the commission was going to be chosen in a completely bipartisan manner? Although, to be fair, I suppose your criticism applies equally well to the many Republicans who dismissed the insurrection as "no big deal".
The staffers who do most of the work would not be, so far as I know. And the lead GOP sponsor of the House bill was someone who voted to impeach. Democrats are trying to echo the "9/11 commission" when these two events aren't even in the same universe.
|
The facts themselves aren't neutral. What does a tilted investigation look like? They uncover that the Republicans who made no effort to hide their involvement were, in fact, involved? This is not in question. It happened, with open support from certain congressmen. It's the basics to simply have an open acknowledgement of the facts. They had something to gain by obstructing the commission, and it's not because they were innocent.
|
Avoiding having a trial because you think it's going to be a show trial doesn't make logical sense.
|
On May 29 2021 13:08 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2021 13:05 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 29 2021 12:51 Introvert wrote:
The ridiculousness of the responses aside, the idea that a commission with staffers chosen by Pelosi et al., who have already decided they know so much about that day that they impeached the president because of it, would be a neutral fact-finding operation is obviously nonsense. Might as well let a congressional committee do it, where we already know these are politicians with their minds made up. I thought the commission was going to be chosen in a completely bipartisan manner? Although, to be fair, I suppose your criticism applies equally well to the many Republicans who dismissed the insurrection as "no big deal". The staffers who do most of the work would not be, so far as I know. And the lead GOP sponsor of the House bill was someone who voted to impeach. Democrats are trying to echo the "9/11 commission" when these two events aren't even in the same universe.
On May 29 2021 13:10 NewSunshine wrote:
The facts themselves aren't neutral. What does a tilted investigation look like? They uncover that the Republicans who made no effort to hide their involvement were, in fact, involved? This is not in question. It happened, with open support from certain congressmen. It's the basics to simply have an open acknowledgement of the facts. They had something to gain by obstructing the commission, and it's not because they were innocent.
See, minds are already made up! Facts already known! This is a ploy to keep in the public memory something Democrats thought they could run on. They tried in the Texas special election and it backfired, but they would really like to keep the House in 2022 so they figure they need to keep Trump around as an enemy. You know congressional committees can also issues subpoenas and the like?
On May 29 2021 13:12 Nevuk wrote:
Avoiding having a trial because you think it's going to be a show trial doesn't make logical sense.
What? It makes perfect sense, espeically when the very nature of the trial is unavoidably political.
***
The stated rationale for this "commission" is obviously unconvincing even if facially it merits consideration. Just let Congress do it, they will anyways.
|
Also another reminder that for every event like this where Republicans do something heinous and people "have moved on", if a Democratic president had some something even vaguely similar I would die before we stop hearing about it. Some people have moved on, but shall we say, they're assuming way more people believe as they do than is actually true.
|
On May 29 2021 13:13 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2021 13:08 Introvert wrote:On May 29 2021 13:05 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 29 2021 12:51 Introvert wrote:
The ridiculousness of the responses aside, the idea that a commission with staffers chosen by Pelosi et al., who have already decided they know so much about that day that they impeached the president because of it, would be a neutral fact-finding operation is obviously nonsense. Might as well let a congressional committee do it, where we already know these are politicians with their minds made up. I thought the commission was going to be chosen in a completely bipartisan manner? Although, to be fair, I suppose your criticism applies equally well to the many Republicans who dismissed the insurrection as "no big deal". The staffers who do most of the work would not be, so far as I know. And the lead GOP sponsor of the House bill was someone who voted to impeach. Democrats are trying to echo the "9/11 commission" when these two events aren't even in the same universe. Show nested quote +On May 29 2021 13:10 NewSunshine wrote:
The facts themselves aren't neutral. What does a tilted investigation look like? They uncover that the Republicans who made no effort to hide their involvement were, in fact, involved? This is not in question. It happened, with open support from certain congressmen. It's the basics to simply have an open acknowledgement of the facts. They had something to gain by obstructing the commission, and it's not because they were innocent. See, minds are already made up! Facts already known! This is a ploy to keep in the public memory something Democrats thought they could run on. They tried in the Texas special election and it backfired, but they would really like to keep the House in 2022 so they figure they need to keep Trump around as an enemy. You know congressional committees can also issues subpoenas and the like? Show nested quote +On May 29 2021 13:12 Nevuk wrote:
Avoiding having a trial because you think it's going to be a show trial doesn't make logical sense. What? It makes perfect sense, espeically when the very nature of the trial is unavoidably political. *** The stated rationale for this "commission" is obviously unconvincing even if facially it merits consideration. Just let Congress do it, they will anyways.
What I mean is this : if fear of a show trial should prevent a trial, then no public figure should ever face a trial. That just seems like a strange standard.
|
Amusingly enough, that's kind of how I feel the whole capitol incident is being treated! I mean go ahead, run on "1/6" in 2022 and we'll see what happens I guess. To Democrats nowadays everything a Republican does is and end-of-days level event and it looks the same way from the other side.
On May 29 2021 13:20 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2021 13:13 Introvert wrote:On May 29 2021 13:08 Introvert wrote:On May 29 2021 13:05 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 29 2021 12:51 Introvert wrote:
The ridiculousness of the responses aside, the idea that a commission with staffers chosen by Pelosi et al., who have already decided they know so much about that day that they impeached the president because of it, would be a neutral fact-finding operation is obviously nonsense. Might as well let a congressional committee do it, where we already know these are politicians with their minds made up. I thought the commission was going to be chosen in a completely bipartisan manner? Although, to be fair, I suppose your criticism applies equally well to the many Republicans who dismissed the insurrection as "no big deal". The staffers who do most of the work would not be, so far as I know. And the lead GOP sponsor of the House bill was someone who voted to impeach. Democrats are trying to echo the "9/11 commission" when these two events aren't even in the same universe. On May 29 2021 13:10 NewSunshine wrote:
The facts themselves aren't neutral. What does a tilted investigation look like? They uncover that the Republicans who made no effort to hide their involvement were, in fact, involved? This is not in question. It happened, with open support from certain congressmen. It's the basics to simply have an open acknowledgement of the facts. They had something to gain by obstructing the commission, and it's not because they were innocent. See, minds are already made up! Facts already known! This is a ploy to keep in the public memory something Democrats thought they could run on. They tried in the Texas special election and it backfired, but they would really like to keep the House in 2022 so they figure they need to keep Trump around as an enemy. You know congressional committees can also issues subpoenas and the like? On May 29 2021 13:12 Nevuk wrote:
Avoiding having a trial because you think it's going to be a show trial doesn't make logical sense. What? It makes perfect sense, espeically when the very nature of the trial is unavoidably political. *** The stated rationale for this "commission" is obviously unconvincing even if facially it merits consideration. Just let Congress do it, they will anyways. What I mean is this : if fear of a show trial should prevent a trial, then no public figure should ever face a trial. That just seems like a strange standard.
Ah, the addition of the words "fear of" a show trial are important, so much meaning can hide in there!
No, it WOULD be a show trial. Might as well not pretend. The moniker of "1/6 commission" is proof enough.
|
On May 29 2021 13:23 Introvert wrote:
Amusingly enough, that's kind of how I feel the whole capitol incident is being treated! I mean go ahead, run on "1/6" in 2022 and we'll see what happens I guess. To Democrats nowadays everything a Republican does is and end-of-days level event and it looks the same way from the other side.
So you think it was no big deal that violent insurgents attacked the capitol (and that they were even able to do so?), and that Republicans were live-tweeting the locations of Democrats in the Senate at the time? Do you think it didn't happen, or that it's overplayed? Do you think it was just happenstance that a bunch of ass-clowns with guns were able to walk into the capitol? No, this must be a show trial, because your mind is made up that it is. My mind is made up on what happened, yes, because I was paying attention to what happened. Based on what you're saying here and now, I can only conclude you have no idea what happened.
|
On May 29 2021 13:08 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2021 13:05 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 29 2021 12:51 Introvert wrote:
The ridiculousness of the responses aside, the idea that a commission with staffers chosen by Pelosi et al., who have already decided they know so much about that day that they impeached the president because of it, would be a neutral fact-finding operation is obviously nonsense. Might as well let a congressional committee do it, where we already know these are politicians with their minds made up. I thought the commission was going to be chosen in a completely bipartisan manner? Although, to be fair, I suppose your criticism applies equally well to the many Republicans who dismissed the insurrection as "no big deal". The staffers who do most of the work would not be, so far as I know. And the lead GOP sponsor of the House bill was someone who voted to impeach. Democrats are trying to echo the "9/11 commission" when these two events aren't even in the same universe.
Agreed. One of those two events was an act of terrorism performed by foreign agents who were trying to undermine our democracy, while the other was an act of terrorism performed by Americans who were trying to undermine our democracy. The former event united us, while the latter event continued to divide us.
Depending on the criteria, it's not really hard to make one look way more devastating than the other. For example, the body count "win" goes to 9/11, while the central instigator "win" goes to 1/6. And yes, having the president / leader of a major political party orchestrate a coup as he continues to try and retain power that he lost in a fair election is wayyy more undermining than OBL's attack, especially since tens of millions of Americans still support Trump.
|
On May 29 2021 13:23 Introvert wrote:
Amusingly enough, that's kind of how I feel the whole capitol incident is being treated! I mean go ahead, run on "1/6" in 2022 and we'll see what happens I guess. To Democrats nowadays everything a Republican does is and end-of-days level event
Given that Trump's top-three greatest hits were:
-removing protections from climate change
-exacerbating a global pandemic
-trying to overthrow our democracy
I can't imagine why people would treat his actions like the literal end-of-days.
|
On May 29 2021 13:26 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2021 13:23 Introvert wrote:
Amusingly enough, that's kind of how I feel the whole capitol incident is being treated! I mean go ahead, run on "1/6" in 2022 and we'll see what happens I guess. To Democrats nowadays everything a Republican does is and end-of-days level event and it looks the same way from the other side. So you think it was no big deal that violent insurgents attacked the capitol, and that Republicans were live tweeting the locations of Democrats in the Senate at the time?
On May 29 2021 13:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2021 13:08 Introvert wrote:On May 29 2021 13:05 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 29 2021 12:51 Introvert wrote:
The ridiculousness of the responses aside, the idea that a commission with staffers chosen by Pelosi et al., who have already decided they know so much about that day that they impeached the president because of it, would be a neutral fact-finding operation is obviously nonsense. Might as well let a congressional committee do it, where we already know these are politicians with their minds made up. I thought the commission was going to be chosen in a completely bipartisan manner? Although, to be fair, I suppose your criticism applies equally well to the many Republicans who dismissed the insurrection as "no big deal". The staffers who do most of the work would not be, so far as I know. And the lead GOP sponsor of the House bill was someone who voted to impeach. Democrats are trying to echo the "9/11 commission" when these two events aren't even in the same universe. Agreed. One of those two events was an act of terrorism performed by foreign agents who were trying to undermine our democracy, while the other was an act of terrorism performed by Americans who were trying to undermine our democracy. The former event united us, while the latter event continued to divide us. Depending on the criteria, it's not really hard to make one look way more devastating than the other. For example, the body count "win" goes to 9/11, while the central instigator "win" goes to 1/6. And yes, having the president / leader of a major political party orchestrate a coup as he continues to try and retain power that he lost in a fair election is wayyy more undermining than OBL's attack, especially since tens of millions of Americans still support Trump.
Again, I have no love lost for the guilty in this matter and as I said at the time they should all have the book thrown at them.
But both of the above posts are detached from reality, and I was really hoping I wouldn't find that here, but apparently I have.
Yes, I'm going to go way out on a limb and say 9/11 was worse for America, by whatever metric you use, than the capitol riot. If that's not agreed upon then I suppose we are done here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://static01.nyt.com/images/2021/05/27/multimedia/27DC-cyber/27DC-cyber-superJumbo-v2.jpg?quality=90&auto=webp)
