|
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 |
The guardian released exclusive papers, alleging that putin did in fact order to support Trump in order to destabilize the US.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/15/kremlin-papers-appear-to-show-putins-plot-to-put-trump-in-white-house
The report – “No 32-04 \ vd” – is classified as secret. It says Trump is the “most promising candidate” from the Kremlin’s point of view. The word in Russian is perspektivny.
There is a brief psychological assessment of Trump, who is described as an “impulsive, mentally unstable and unbalanced individual who suffers from an inferiority complex”.
There is also apparent confirmation that the Kremlin possesses kompromat, or potentially compromising material, on the future president, collected – the document says – from Trump’s earlier “non-official visits to Russian Federation territory”.
The paper refers to “certain events” that happened during Trump’s trips to Moscow. Security council members are invited to find details in appendix five, at paragraph five, the document states. It is unclear what the appendix contains.
“It is acutely necessary to use all possible force to facilitate his [Trump’s] election to the post of US president,” the paper says.
It's factual that this meeting did happen - whether or not the document is real is up for debate i suppose. Though, do keep in mind that it got acquired by the guardian, paramount to the panama papers investigation, broke the news of obamas administration collecting phone records, revealed the existence of PRISM, etc pp.
They definitely have investigative journalism credentials.
At the very least, a fun read. To me personally, you can say about Putin what you want, but he's good at what he's doing (which usually is pretty awful stuff) and i actually find this pretty believable.
|
On July 15 2021 19:26 m4ini wrote:The guardian released exclusive papers, alleging that putin did in fact order to support Trump in order to destabilize the US. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/15/kremlin-papers-appear-to-show-putins-plot-to-put-trump-in-white-houseShow nested quote +The report – “No 32-04 \ vd” – is classified as secret. It says Trump is the “most promising candidate” from the Kremlin’s point of view. The word in Russian is perspektivny.
There is a brief psychological assessment of Trump, who is described as an “impulsive, mentally unstable and unbalanced individual who suffers from an inferiority complex”.
There is also apparent confirmation that the Kremlin possesses kompromat, or potentially compromising material, on the future president, collected – the document says – from Trump’s earlier “non-official visits to Russian Federation territory”.
The paper refers to “certain events” that happened during Trump’s trips to Moscow. Security council members are invited to find details in appendix five, at paragraph five, the document states. It is unclear what the appendix contains.
“It is acutely necessary to use all possible force to facilitate his [Trump’s] election to the post of US president,” the paper says. It's factual that this meeting did happen - whether or not the document is real is up for debate i suppose. Though, do keep in mind that it got acquired by the guardian, paramount to the panama papers investigation, broke the news of obamas administration collecting phone records, revealed the existence of PRISM, etc pp. They definitely have investigative journalism credentials. At the very least, a fun read. To me personally, you can say about Putin what you want, but he's good at what he's doing (which usually is pretty awful stuff) and i actually find this pretty believable. That Russia wanted Trump and supported his election is something we know happened and collaborated by all intelligence agencies and even the (at the time) Republican led Senate Intelligence committee.
The question is if, and in what way, the Trump campaign worked with Russia to help achieve this.
|
On July 15 2021 19:54 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On July 15 2021 19:26 m4ini wrote:The guardian released exclusive papers, alleging that putin did in fact order to support Trump in order to destabilize the US. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/15/kremlin-papers-appear-to-show-putins-plot-to-put-trump-in-white-houseThe report – “No 32-04 \ vd” – is classified as secret. It says Trump is the “most promising candidate” from the Kremlin’s point of view. The word in Russian is perspektivny.
There is a brief psychological assessment of Trump, who is described as an “impulsive, mentally unstable and unbalanced individual who suffers from an inferiority complex”.
There is also apparent confirmation that the Kremlin possesses kompromat, or potentially compromising material, on the future president, collected – the document says – from Trump’s earlier “non-official visits to Russian Federation territory”.
The paper refers to “certain events” that happened during Trump’s trips to Moscow. Security council members are invited to find details in appendix five, at paragraph five, the document states. It is unclear what the appendix contains.
“It is acutely necessary to use all possible force to facilitate his [Trump’s] election to the post of US president,” the paper says. It's factual that this meeting did happen - whether or not the document is real is up for debate i suppose. Though, do keep in mind that it got acquired by the guardian, paramount to the panama papers investigation, broke the news of obamas administration collecting phone records, revealed the existence of PRISM, etc pp. They definitely have investigative journalism credentials. At the very least, a fun read. To me personally, you can say about Putin what you want, but he's good at what he's doing (which usually is pretty awful stuff) and i actually find this pretty believable. That Russia wanted Trump and supported his election is something we know happened and collaborated by all intelligence agencies and even the (at the time) Republican led Senate Intelligence committee. The question is if, and in what way, the Trump campaign worked with Russia to help achieve this.
That's the beauty of blackmail. All you have to do is create situations where, if the person fucks up, they get punished. No communication necessary. Just create situations where the person is forced to help you. If they ever don't help you, they aren't useful, so you release the blackmail.
I truly think its entirely possible the Trump campaign made huge efforts to accommodate Russia without ever communicating with them. Or if they did, it was really early on. I basically think its totally possible Russia got everything they wanted, using blackmail, with almost zero evidence.
|
United States43468 Posts
It’s hard to know what Trump did due to blackmail and what Trump did due to insanity. If I wanted Biden to proudly announce that he had been seduced with letters from a man he met at a conference once and was now in love with that man I’d probably need Hunter at gunpoint. But when Trump announced that he had been receiving letters from a man, had been sending his own letters back, and that on the basis of those letters he was ready to publicly announce that he had “fallen in love” with his penpal (North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un) that’s just another day in the office. I don’t know if anyone made him do that. It’s weird but the whole presidency was very weird.
|
On July 18 2021 16:42 RKC wrote:
Partially or even fully vaccinated people can still be carriers and spread infection (90%+ effectiveness rate of vaccines against Delta variant is only against hospitalisation, not infection). UK Health Minister Sajid Javid just tested positive despite receiving double dose of Pfizer.
That's why it is rather unwise, if not irresponsible, for authorities to dangle 'vaccination' as a carrot for people to be exempted from SOPs on mask and social-distancing. Some small exemptions may be given (eg counted as 0 or 0.5 person in indoor crowd maximum limits), but not from all or major preventive measures.
Some people get vaccinated simply so that they can 'get their lives back to normal'. That's incredibly selfish and short-sighted, because they are likely to exert political pressure on governments to loosen restrictions (or go round without mask and not social distance). Vaccinated or not, just follow the rules and weather the storm. Vaccination shouldn't be seen as a 'privilege' or 'passport' to be above public health guidelines when the pandemic is still ongoing.
On July 18 2021 23:01 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2021 22:34 HolydaKing wrote:
Wouldn't it typically take more than 2 weeks for people to die? Especially if they get hospitalized. But yeah, no doubt that due to the vaccines there won't be that many people dying. How many people will get long covid though? And generally people getting ill isn't good so I'm not a fan of what the UK is doing, opening up when the numbers are skyrocketing. Who could have possibly predicted this would happen? It’s quite frustrating, yeah Covid times haven’t been fun for many but we couldn’t hold on a few months longer? It’s like running 25 miles of a marathon and then going ‘fuck it, I’m going home’ at the last stretch.
When Biden announced the 4th of July goal and indicated things would open whether we hit it or not it was clear to me that the economic/political motivations outweighed the science/public health considerations for the Biden administration (as well as many governors and mayors).
I suppose it's less bad/stupid than what Trump would do, but I imagine that's of little consolation to the people who will suffer/die as a result of it.
|
|
|
United States43468 Posts
It’s not UBI but the first monthly enhanced child tax credit payments just started going out. The mechanism by which UBI could be implemented, as tax policy using the IRS to make “refund” payments, is working. It remains to be seen how receiving money through the year, rather than as a lump sum, impacts families.
|
On July 19 2021 23:33 KwarK wrote:
It’s not UBI but the first monthly enhanced child tax credit payments just started going out. The mechanism by which UBI could be implemented, as tax policy using the IRS to make “refund” payments, is working. It remains to be seen how receiving money through the year, rather than as a lump sum, impacts families.
It should disabuse people of the notion it isn't even possible at minimum. We'll see if Democrats choice to make them last only 1 year in order to campaign on making them permanent at some point in the future pays off.
|
First prison term for capitol riots (8 months): https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57890937 That's actually more than I was expecting, given that particular guy didn't engage in violence. I wonder what the longest sentence will be. Will someone be actually charged with murder in connection to riots?
|
Will someone be actually charged with murder in connection to riots?
No, since they wouldn't be able to prove murder. All causes of death were released, and the most "prolific" one, the officer (Sicknick) who allegedly got hit by a fire extinguisher got ruled "death from natural causes".
That doesn't mean that nobody is responsible for his death, but it'd be a manslaughter charge, not murder.
|
Bisutopia19300 Posts
On July 19 2021 23:33 KwarK wrote:
It’s not UBI but the first monthly enhanced child tax credit payments just started going out. The mechanism by which UBI could be implemented, as tax policy using the IRS to make “refund” payments, is working. It remains to be seen how receiving money through the year, rather than as a lump sum, impacts families.
My issue with it is that it I didn't realize I had to opt-out of it and thought it was an opt-in program. I'm removing my family from receiving the early payments. I remember after the Trump tax cuts which increased monthly pay checks, that people flipped when their return amount was much lower. I'm curious how the public will react when that amount is reduced even further by this.
Note: Please correct me if I'm wrong on how this works. My assumption is that this is a now then later payout and not just free/extra money in addition to returns. I've been rather busy and am behind on reading material for this. I am only now paying attention since I received a check in the mail
|
On July 20 2021 22:23 BisuDagger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2021 23:33 KwarK wrote:
It’s not UBI but the first monthly enhanced child tax credit payments just started going out. The mechanism by which UBI could be implemented, as tax policy using the IRS to make “refund” payments, is working. It remains to be seen how receiving money through the year, rather than as a lump sum, impacts families. My issue with it is that it I didn't realize I had to opt-out of it and thought it was an opt-in program. I'm removing my family from receiving the early payments. I remember after the Trump tax cuts which increased monthly pay checks, that people flipped when their return amount was much lower. I'm curious how the public will react when that amount is reduced even further by this. Note: Please correct me if I'm wrong on how this works. My assumption is that this is a now then later payout and not just free/extra money in addition to returns. I've been rather busy and am behind on reading material for this. I am only now paying attention since I received a check in the mail
Can someone elaborate on why they wouldn't want the earlier money?
|
Bisutopia19300 Posts
On July 20 2021 22:30 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2021 22:23 BisuDagger wrote:On July 19 2021 23:33 KwarK wrote:
It’s not UBI but the first monthly enhanced child tax credit payments just started going out. The mechanism by which UBI could be implemented, as tax policy using the IRS to make “refund” payments, is working. It remains to be seen how receiving money through the year, rather than as a lump sum, impacts families. My issue with it is that it I didn't realize I had to opt-out of it and thought it was an opt-in program. I'm removing my family from receiving the early payments. I remember after the Trump tax cuts which increased monthly pay checks, that people flipped when their return amount was much lower. I'm curious how the public will react when that amount is reduced even further by this. Note: Please correct me if I'm wrong on how this works. My assumption is that this is a now then later payout and not just free/extra money in addition to returns. I've been rather busy and am behind on reading material for this. I am only now paying attention since I received a check in the mail Can someone elaborate on why they wouldn't want the earlier money?
I have no overdo bills and do not need the money ahead of time. As someone who plans fiscally around my true income, getting monthly payments will inflate what I actually earn. And since this applies to the 2021 tax year only, I would prefer to have the payout schedule remain consistent on a year to year basis so I can have a clear look at how I'm doing monthly. There are aggressive people out there who might ask why I don't take the extra money and just invest it early for extra interest gained, but I'm happy with the way I plan and handle finances and it's okay if I don't earn marginally extra in the next six months. If this were a permanent thing to opt in-out of every year, it wouldn't make sense to not opt-in unless there's a benefit to letting the government hold your money for the year like how withholdings work.
edit- non-personal real reasons:
https://www.forbes.com/advisor/taxes/why-you-might-want-to-opt-out-of-the-monthly-child-tax-credit-payments/
1. Your Income Has Increased - if you pass a threshold you will owe quite a bit on your taxes by getting money you don't qualify more
2. You Want to Reduce Your 2021 Taxes or Increase Your Tax Refund - If you would rather receive your entire tax credit at once, either to get a larger refund or to lower a tax bill you suspect you’ll owe, you may want to opt out.
|
According to my sister who works at the federal reserve in KC, if you receive the child tax credit, you don't have to pay it back in next year's taxes and they don't deduct it from your refund. You can get half now and half later when you file your taxes for next year. Like Bisu said, if you think you might owe, you shouldn't take it.
|
Texas passed a bill dropping the requirement for the Ku Klux Klan to be taught as morally wrong.
Among other changes to schooling requirements in Texas, the bill also targets MLK's I Have a Dream speech, Susan B. Anthony's writings on women's suffrage, and Native American history.
The first one is more immediately alarming, but good lord, America actively trying to make it's people stupider and more vile. I can only say I wish I was surprised, but these are the days of doubling down on the most evil parts of America and it's history.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/texas-senate-education-bill-white-supremacy_n_60f50cf6e4b01f11895b2dc3
|
On July 21 2021 04:11 Zambrah wrote:Texas passed a bill dropping the requirement for the Ku Klux Klan to be taught as morally wrong. Among other changes to schooling requirements in Texas, the bill also targets MLK's I Have a Dream speech, Susan B. Anthony's writings on women's suffrage, and Native American history. The first one is more immediately alarming, but good lord, America actively trying to make it's people stupider and more vile. I can only say I wish I was surprised, but these are the days of doubling down on the most evil parts of America and it's history. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/texas-senate-education-bill-white-supremacy_n_60f50cf6e4b01f11895b2dc3
Hm. How important is that inpractice? If i understand correctly, this just doesn't force teachers to discuss those things. But it also doesn't force them not to. Pretty much any politics or social stuff teacher i have ever met was pretty left-ish. Is that different in the US? Because if not, the teachers will just keep on teaching those things.
I mean, it really sucks as a first step in the wrong direction, but unless the US teachers are substantially different from German ones, it won't immediately have bad effects on the actual teaching in schools. (And as a teacher myself, i obviously prefer anything that gives me more freedom to decide on my own what i teach)
|
|
|
Northern Ireland26225 Posts
On July 21 2021 04:11 Zambrah wrote:Texas passed a bill dropping the requirement for the Ku Klux Klan to be taught as morally wrong. Among other changes to schooling requirements in Texas, the bill also targets MLK's I Have a Dream speech, Susan B. Anthony's writings on women's suffrage, and Native American history. The first one is more immediately alarming, but good lord, America actively trying to make it's people stupider and more vile. I can only say I wish I was surprised, but these are the days of doubling down on the most evil parts of America and it's history. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/texas-senate-education-bill-white-supremacy_n_60f50cf6e4b01f11895b2dc3
I’m filing this in the ‘it can’t possibly be as bad as it looks on the surface level, surely not?’ section of my brain, unfortunately lately it seems a lot of stuff is as bad as it first appears.
It’s something we’re getting more of in this country (see the U.K. thread) but Jesus the juxtaposition of ‘free speech’ rhetoric, ‘not indoctrinating kids’ and ‘don’t teach any of the bad parts of our history’ is really breathtakingly brazen.
|
On July 21 2021 04:55 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2021 04:42 Simberto wrote:On July 21 2021 04:11 Zambrah wrote:Texas passed a bill dropping the requirement for the Ku Klux Klan to be taught as morally wrong. Among other changes to schooling requirements in Texas, the bill also targets MLK's I Have a Dream speech, Susan B. Anthony's writings on women's suffrage, and Native American history. The first one is more immediately alarming, but good lord, America actively trying to make it's people stupider and more vile. I can only say I wish I was surprised, but these are the days of doubling down on the most evil parts of America and it's history. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/texas-senate-education-bill-white-supremacy_n_60f50cf6e4b01f11895b2dc3 Hm. How important is that inpractice? If i understand correctly, this just doesn't force teachers to discuss those things. But it also doesn't force them not to. Pretty much any politics or social stuff teacher i have ever met was pretty left-ish. Is that different in the US? Because if not, the teachers will just keep on teaching those things. I mean, it really sucks as a first step in the wrong direction, but unless the US teachers are substantially different from German ones, it won't immediately have bad effects on the actual teaching in schools. (And as a teacher myself, i obviously prefer anything that gives me more freedom to decide on my own what i teach) Theoretically what you're saying makes sense, but the rules were put in because the opposite was being taught. I think in a huge % it will be like you say but in smaller towns it will not be. It also takes away the ability for admin to discipline or fire a teacher for teaching things many of us would not want our kids taught. It is also kind of scary that the people in power see this as a popular move with their base.
Its also the case that many people won't so explicitly state, "The KKK were morally in the right." Like when the Civil War is taught in such a way that slavery isnt REALLY a principle part of why its happened, it's framed as a "states rights" issue in order to make the Confederacy not be the side of literal traitors who fought for the right to keep black people as slaves. I'm worried more about a subtle sanitization of the KKK as "not really that bad" more so than them being taught as "pretty good actually."
Wouldn't be surprised for plenty of people to skip straight to "the KKK was pretty good actually" immediately though, given the state of things.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
