US Politics Mega-thread - Page 3444

On January 20 2022 03:56 Mohdoo wrote:


The goal of large changes is never to play a perfect game. "zero impact" is a ridiculous metric to meet. In any large corporation or organization, big decisions are made every day where there are always pros and cons. Anyone in this thread who manages big number budgets or works in "big deal" roles is well familiar with the idea that almost every decision we make has a list of pros and cons. I am honestly perplexed by the bizarre requirements people like Drone are putting forth. It is possible some people's careers don't force them into positions where decisions need to be made quickly, with giant repercussions, with limited information, with multiple choices possible, each with their own disadvantages. The world simply doesn't work in this idealistic way you are striving for. We are not going to solve the student debt crisis in some kinda Disney Princess Movie way. There is no such thing. Obamacare had a long list of negatives despite being an overall net positive.

When making big deal decisions, it is important to recognize what damage/problems are CURRENTLY in effect and to recognize that there is a benefit to those problems going away. Shying away from a solution because it is imperfect rarely makes sense. In general, a problem does not boil over to gain people's attention without having some pretty bad qualities.

If we were playing a game of heroes of might and magic 3, yes, I would say we should make sure to plan each move diligently and make sure we operate with nothing but breakneck efficiency. It would be appropriate to just save the game, take some time off, think about it for a bit, then pick it back up tomorrow. But since this is an actual real-world situation with measurable, very negative impacts on society yesterday, today and tomorrow, it does not make sense to tell ourselves to wait until we have solved the issue in its most complete, efficient form. That is not how any important decision is ever made in any large-scale complex. It is fictitious.

On January 20 2022 04:50 Zambrah wrote:
The latest military budget Congress passed was for 768 billion dollars. Yearly. They gave the military nearly 30 billion a year more than they requested, too, lol.

We definitely have the money, we just don't want to spend it on something that doesn't enrich politicians and their friends.

WASHINGTON (AP) — In a rebuff to former President Donald Trump, the Supreme Court is allowing the release of presidential documents sought by the congressional committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection.

The justices on Wednesday rejected a bid by Trump to withhold the documents from the committee until the issue is finally resolved by the courts.

Following the high court’s action, there is no legal impediment to turning over the documents, which are held by the National Archives and Records Administration. They include presidential diaries and visitor logs.

Alone among the justices, Clarence Thomas said he would have granted Trump’s request to keep the documents on hold.

On January 20 2022 09:03 Sermokala wrote:
That is monumentally shocking.



Even the justices he appointed wouldn't back him up.

On January 20 2022 09:03 Sermokala wrote:
That is monumentally shocking.



Even the justices he appointed wouldn't back him up.

On January 20 2022 09:38 Doc.Rivers wrote:
Access to documents doesn't mean the dem pipe dream that trump is criminally responsible for the mob's actions will come true. The oath keeper indictment undercuts the theory was trump was acting as a puppet master, as the oath keepers texted among themselves complaining that trump wasn't doing anything.

On January 20 2022 11:55 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:


If your boss tells you to do something and then doesn't show up you might wonder why he isn't there.

On January 20 2022 13:03 Doc.Rivers wrote:


The hope that trump can be taken down is presumably the motivation behind seeking WH docs. After all, there's no actual reason to believe the WH was somehow involved in the mob's actions on Jan 6th (aside from the general notion that Trump’s statements over the preceding weeks and months riled up the rabble). I didn't provide the full text message quote from the indictment but this is it:

"All I see Trump doing is complaining. I see no intent by him to do anything. So the patriots are taking it into their own hands."

Pretty clear that trump was not actually directing the mob or the oath keepers. The mob got out of hand on its own.

On January 20 2022 14:48 WombaT wrote:
It would seem Trump’s behaviour lies somewhere between entirely proper and criminally prosecutable. Closer to the latter for me.

Being grossly irresponsible by rabble rousing isn’t a crime. Perhaps they find something in these documents that changes that calculus.

I’m sure there’s plenty of the ‘vote blue no matter who’ crowd who just want Trump in jail regardless of the particulars of anything, at least on here I don’t imagine of us actually believe Trump crossed the line into actually coordinating January 6th. For one, you’d be assuming Trump had the ability to logistically coordinate anything.

On the plus side Trump has so many bullets with his name on it that surely eventually one of them will hit the target and he might go down for something.

Now, it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our democracy. And after this, we're going to walk down, and I'll be there with you, we're going to walk down, we're going to walk down.

Anyone you want, but I think right here, we're going to walk down to the Capitol, and we're going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we're probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them.

Because you'll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated.

On January 20 2022 04:26 EnDeR_ wrote:


If you'd like to have a discussion on this topic, you will have to make some arguments rather than simple assertions, otherwise it doesn't make much sense.