|
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 November 11 2023 19:40 Simberto wrote:
Okay, but also, why is the Florida state legislature discussing a ceasefire in Israel? Isn't that something that they have nothing at all to do with?
Isn't external policy a federal thing in the US? And shouldn't the Florida state legislature be busy discussing Florida state stuff?
I dunno. Here even at a local level the municipal council votes on motions to put out a statement in support of Ukraine and stuff. It is obviously meaningless, but presumably it informs higher levels of government about support from regions for something? Or maybe it's just that politicians want to feel they're doing something about causes they believe in. However small and meaningless?
|
On November 11 2023 19:40 Simberto wrote:
Okay, but also, why is the Florida state legislature discussing a ceasefire in Israel? Isn't that something that they have nothing at all to do with?
Isn't external policy a federal thing in the US? And shouldn't the Florida state legislature be busy discussing Florida state stuff?
Yes, the whole thing is meaningless virtue signaling. Nixon wanted to score points with the left with a resolution that does nothing. That’s why it was rejected, not because people agree with Salzman.
Salzman’s comment was stupid. Possibly meant until we get all of Hamas, but maybe actually meant a Palestinian genocide. So she’s an idiot either way.
I’d prefer that she wasn’t representing any area of the US, but the whole thing is a big nothing. Basically the same as a drunk in a bar saying we should nuke somebody.
|
On November 11 2023 19:51 Neneu wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2023 05:47 GreenHorizons wrote:
A Palestinian refugee confronts her Senator, Warren (D-MA), for refusing to call for a ceasefire
I hope it ruined her night personally. To me it almost sounds like those students prefer US to continue to be world police. Isn't that something you disagree with?
I don't hear that. Yes, I disagree with the US being world police. But hey, Warren didn't respond with "all of them" so that's practically something to be proud of for Democrats/their supporters.
|
On November 11 2023 19:57 RenSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2023 19:40 Simberto wrote:
Okay, but also, why is the Florida state legislature discussing a ceasefire in Israel? Isn't that something that they have nothing at all to do with?
Isn't external policy a federal thing in the US? And shouldn't the Florida state legislature be busy discussing Florida state stuff? Yes, the whole thing is meaningless virtue signaling. Nixon wanted to score points with the left with a resolution that does nothing. That’s why it was rejected, not because people agree with Salzman. Salzman’s comment was stupid. Possibly meant until we get all of Hamas, but maybe actually meant a Palestinian genocide. So she’s an idiot either way. I’d prefer that she wasn’t representing any area of the US, but the whole thing is a big nothing. Basically the same as a drunk in a bar saying we should nuke somebody.
The vote against it has nothing to do with a protest against meaningless virtue signaling resolutions. Even if the Florida legislature could enforce a ceasefire tomorrow they would still vote against it. The reason Israel can always bank on the US's support is because money talks.
|
Northern Ireland27015 Posts
On November 12 2023 08:29 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2023 19:57 RenSC2 wrote:On November 11 2023 19:40 Simberto wrote:
Okay, but also, why is the Florida state legislature discussing a ceasefire in Israel? Isn't that something that they have nothing at all to do with?
Isn't external policy a federal thing in the US? And shouldn't the Florida state legislature be busy discussing Florida state stuff? Yes, the whole thing is meaningless virtue signaling. Nixon wanted to score points with the left with a resolution that does nothing. That’s why it was rejected, not because people agree with Salzman. Salzman’s comment was stupid. Possibly meant until we get all of Hamas, but maybe actually meant a Palestinian genocide. So she’s an idiot either way. I’d prefer that she wasn’t representing any area of the US, but the whole thing is a big nothing. Basically the same as a drunk in a bar saying we should nuke somebody. The vote against it has nothing to do with a protest against meaningless virtue signaling resolutions. Even if the Florida legislature could enforce a ceasefire tomorrow they would still vote against it. The reason Israel can always bank on the US's support is because money talks.
Agree with everything else but I don’t think it’s a monetary arrangement, it’s much more ideological than that
|
Northern Ireland27015 Posts
|
|
|
Northern Ireland27015 Posts
On November 12 2023 10:28 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2023 09:10 WombaT wrote:On November 12 2023 08:29 BlackJack wrote:On November 11 2023 19:57 RenSC2 wrote:On November 11 2023 19:40 Simberto wrote:
Okay, but also, why is the Florida state legislature discussing a ceasefire in Israel? Isn't that something that they have nothing at all to do with?
Isn't external policy a federal thing in the US? And shouldn't the Florida state legislature be busy discussing Florida state stuff? Yes, the whole thing is meaningless virtue signaling. Nixon wanted to score points with the left with a resolution that does nothing. That’s why it was rejected, not because people agree with Salzman. Salzman’s comment was stupid. Possibly meant until we get all of Hamas, but maybe actually meant a Palestinian genocide. So she’s an idiot either way. I’d prefer that she wasn’t representing any area of the US, but the whole thing is a big nothing. Basically the same as a drunk in a bar saying we should nuke somebody. The vote against it has nothing to do with a protest against meaningless virtue signaling resolutions. Even if the Florida legislature could enforce a ceasefire tomorrow they would still vote against it. The reason Israel can always bank on the US's support is because money talks. Agree with everything else but I don’t think it’s a monetary arrangement, it’s much more ideological than that I’d agree, democracy would be my first go too. But I mean…. https://www.timesofisrael.com/this-shocking-exhibit-reexamines-age-old-anti-semitic-trope-of-jews-and-money/amp/
Democracy wouldn’t be my first go-to either.
Jewish Americans are a bloody influential lobby, add to that various flavours of Christianity that are very pro-Israel.
Historically we’ve been the beneficiaries given the strong sentiments of Irish Americans, which saw the US act as chief arbiter in a negotiated peace over here. Also saw the IRA grab rather a lot of funding and equipment back in the day before 9/11 saw terrorism strike America and it became untenable to fundraise it elsewhere.
I wouldn’t say this is some particular triumph of democracy though, for whatever reason certain demographic cohorts have more sway than others.
Thanks for the link, I do see a lot of the age-old anti-Semitic tropes raise their head on the daily and it’s important to be vigilant in this regard. Although if you’re implying BJ is invoking them I’d say that’s a bit of a stretch
|
While there's lots of concern about a rise in hateful rhetoric it's important to know who Democrats are aligning themselves with. In the case of the "March for Israel" in DC (with actual paid protesters), it's John Hagee.
|
|
|
While the US scrambles to send $100 billion+ to help foreign militaries, it's worth noting that after several years of trying, the DoD still can't find almost $2,000,000,000,000 of their own assets.
The Pentagon has failed its annual audit for the sixth year in a row, according to the Defense Department’s chief financial officer.
Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin “feels we need to be doing better at this and moving faster,” but a successful audit is still years away, he added.
Federal law since the early 1990s requires mandatory audits for all government agencies. The Pentagon didn’t begin auditing itself until 2018 and has only had incremental improvement yearly.
This time around, 1,600 auditors combed through DOD’s $3.8 trillion in assets and $4 trillion in liabilities, conducting some 700 site visits. They found that half of DOD’s assets can’t be accounted for.
thehill.com
I have to remind people that the "assets" include things like tanks, planes, military bases, etc. you know, stuff that's hard to misplace.
|
On November 17 2023 09:09 GreenHorizons wrote:While the US scrambles to send $100 billion+ to help foreign militaries, it's worth noting that after several years of trying, the DoD still can't find almost $2,000,000,000,000 of their own assets. Show nested quote +The Pentagon has failed its annual audit for the sixth year in a row, according to the Defense Department’s chief financial officer.
Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin “feels we need to be doing better at this and moving faster,” but a successful audit is still years away, he added.
Federal law since the early 1990s requires mandatory audits for all government agencies. The Pentagon didn’t begin auditing itself until 2018 and has only had incremental improvement yearly.
This time around, 1,600 auditors combed through DOD’s $3.8 trillion in assets and $4 trillion in liabilities, conducting some 700 site visits. They found that half of DOD’s assets can’t be accounted for. thehill.comI have to remind people that the "assets" include things like tanks, planes, military bases, etc. you know, stuff that's hard to misplace.
It's kind of impossible to even wrap my head around how much money that is that's been "disappeared". We could make college free for a generation, foot the bill for single payer healthcare, solve homelessness and repair the country's sorry infrastructure, and probably more with that kind of money. If only we could find the money somewhere in next year's budget...
Not to mention the things I listed actually end up paying for themselves. We're fucked up on Stockholm Syndrome pretty bad.
|
While true, thats assuming the money lost, wasn't actually spent.
|
On November 17 2023 13:54 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2023 09:09 GreenHorizons wrote:While the US scrambles to send $100 billion+ to help foreign militaries, it's worth noting that after several years of trying, the DoD still can't find almost $2,000,000,000,000 of their own assets. The Pentagon has failed its annual audit for the sixth year in a row, according to the Defense Department’s chief financial officer.
Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin “feels we need to be doing better at this and moving faster,” but a successful audit is still years away, he added.
Federal law since the early 1990s requires mandatory audits for all government agencies. The Pentagon didn’t begin auditing itself until 2018 and has only had incremental improvement yearly.
This time around, 1,600 auditors combed through DOD’s $3.8 trillion in assets and $4 trillion in liabilities, conducting some 700 site visits. They found that half of DOD’s assets can’t be accounted for. thehill.comI have to remind people that the "assets" include things like tanks, planes, military bases, etc. you know, stuff that's hard to misplace. It's kind of impossible to even wrap my head around how much money that is that's been "disappeared". We could make college free for a generation, foot the bill for single payer healthcare, solve homelessness and repair the country's sorry infrastructure, and probably more with that kind of money. If only we could find the money somewhere in next year's budget... Not to mention the things I listed actually end up paying for themselves. We're fucked up on Stockholm Syndrome pretty bad.
It could also be that those line items were never purchased or sent anywhere. It's probably literally someone saying "Send invoice for 35 Abram tanks to Ukraine. *wink wink*" and while it was entered into the computer, nothing physical was sent and it was just a cash transcaction. "Operational budget for XYZ in Mali" could be money used for a black site ops. There's any number of ways that money could have been used and they just used creative accounting.
It's still fucking disgusting. Just giving some idea of where it could have potentially gone. Pentagon has been given too much latitude in operating without really having to answer for their shit. Now the chickens have come to home and they're essentially scrambling. Nothing will come of it besides "Fuck we suck at accounting" and people will move on.
|
Yeah. I know it's not as simple as saying the money could be spent elsewhere. The "assets" could've been lost, given away, unaccounted for, or never produced in the first place. It could be anything. But the insane scale of our military budget and how little oversight we give it is in a class of its own.
The real story is that we hem and we haw, and we listen to the higher-ups always moaning about how there just isn't money for things that would actually make a big difference in America, but the truth is, if our government makes it a priority, it fucking gets done, and has obscene amounts of money thrown at it to make it happen. It just goes to show where this country's priorities are, and where they aren't.
|
On November 18 2023 02:47 NewSunshine wrote:
Yeah. I know it's not as simple as saying the money could be spent elsewhere. The "assets" could've been lost, given away, unaccounted for, or never produced in the first place. It could be anything. But the insane scale of our military budget and how little oversight we give it is in a class of its own.
The real story is that we hem and we haw, and we listen to the higher-ups always moaning about how there just isn't money for things that would actually make a big difference in America, but the truth is, if our government makes it a priority, it fucking gets done, and has obscene amounts of money thrown at it to make it happen. It just goes to show where this country's priorities are, and where they aren't.
I 100000% agree. No rebuttal from me on that front. I'd never defend this corrupt ass government besides saying that things are more complex than we give consideration. But at the end of the day, it's exactly as you say. If they wanted to fix the ills of this country, it'd be done within a generation at max.
|
United States44121 Posts
Trump is still pushing the accounting firms disclaimer that they’re not responsible for any fraud in his numbers as a defence and the judge already ruled unfavourably on that matter before this trial. It’s a very strange strategy. The disclaimer in question says that Trump, not the accounting firm, is responsible for the accuracy of the numbers and that users should not trust them. It’s intended to absolve the accounting firm and place any blame for fraud on Trump. He’s presenting it as if a warning that there may be fraud absolves him of fraud, despite it placing the blame for that fraud solely on him.
It’s an odd defence for a few reasons. Firstly, it’s damning to him and he ought to know that. Secondly, the judge already ruled on it and therefore the matter is settled. Thirdly, there is no jury to convince as they didn’t request one, the judge decides this and he’s already ruled on that. Fourthly, he didn’t introduce it into evidence and kept trying to pull notes out of his pockets as a surprise witness move to beat the judge. Fifthly, he kept trying to read it whenever asked to testify on unrelated questions.
It’s as if he’s trying to give the worst possible defence in the hood of winning a mistrial verdict over pissing off the judge. He’s almost gone full gold fringe admiralty law in terms of simply refusing to accept the basic premise of the court.
|
On November 21 2023 17:11 KwarK wrote:
Trump is still pushing the accounting firms disclaimer that they’re not responsible for any fraud in his numbers as a defence and the judge already ruled unfavourably on that matter before this trial. It’s a very strange strategy. The disclaimer in question says that Trump, not the accounting firm, is responsible for the accuracy of the numbers and that users should not trust them. It’s intended to absolve the accounting firm and place any blame for fraud on Trump. He’s presenting it as if a warning that there may be fraud absolves him of fraud, despite it placing the blame for that fraud solely on him.
It’s an odd defence for a few reasons. Firstly, it’s damning to him and he ought to know that. Secondly, the judge already ruled on it and therefore the matter is settled. Thirdly, there is no jury to convince as they didn’t request one, the judge decides this and he’s already ruled on that. Fourthly, he didn’t introduce it into evidence and kept trying to pull notes out of his pockets as a surprise witness move to beat the judge. Fifthly, he kept trying to read it whenever asked to testify on unrelated questions.
It’s as if he’s trying to give the worst possible defence in the hood of winning a mistrial verdict over pissing off the judge. He’s almost gone full gold fringe admiralty law in terms of simply refusing to accept the basic premise of the court.
He's doing the sovereign citizen defense. Best of luck to him on it because he's going to need a miracle.
|
Just an alert for us Us politics Sickos out there De santis is going on fox news this thursday at 8pm Central time in a debate moderated by Hannity against Gruesome Newsom himself in a 90 minute time limit contest. Both are obviously squareing up for the prize fight in 4 years but I think both are looking to take a pelt to bring back a prize for their base.
Newsom has to be feeling something strong if hes willing to go into enemy territory like this. Everything he says is going to get chopped up and spat out in the worst light possible but if he can overcome that and come out with a win he will be able to ride this for a while. Definitly puts him in pole position if something happens to biden.
|
There will be no "winner" or "loser"
Im not a huge fan of this whole ordeal. Giving any hint of legitamacy to Hannity doesnt make sense. No one who watches fox news is going to change their mind.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
