US Politics Mega-thread - Page 472

On July 14 2018 05:17 xDaunt wrote:

Of course he's serious. The difference between us is that you're reading way more into it than I am.

On July 14 2018 01:46 m4ini wrote:


Ah, so you missed the part where he licked her boots apologising, accusing the Sun of all people to be fake news?

Right, right.

On July 14 2018 02:41 xDaunt wrote:


When I talk about the "Russian conspiracy stuff," I'm referring to the allegation that Trump colluded with Russians or is otherwise a Russian tool. I have never really doubted that the Russians engaged in various espionage activities during the last election.

Email Print
House conservatives are preparing a new push to oust Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, according to three conservative Capitol Hill sources — putting the finishing touches on an impeachment filing even as Rosenstein announced the indictment of 12 Russian intelligence officers for interfering in the 2016 election.

House Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows, in fact, had the impeachment document on the floor of the House at the very moment that Rosenstein spoke to reporters and TV cameras Friday.

Conservative GOP lawmakers have been plotting to remove Rosenstein for weeks, accusing him of slow-walking their probe of FBI agents they’ve accused of bias against President Donald Trump.

Democrats contend Republicans’ fixation on Rosenstein is really an effort to undermine special counsel Robert Mueller, who reports to Rosenstein and has been making inroads in his investigation of the Russian election interference plot. Mueller’s probe has entangled members of Trump’s inner circle and Trump has increasingly assailed it as a politically motivated “witch hunt” as it’s presented greater danger to him and his allies.

Conservative sources say they could file the impeachment document as soon as Monday, as Meadows and Freedom Caucus founder Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) look to build Republican support in the House. One source cautioned, however, that the timing was still fluid.

“It has not been filed today,” was all Meadows spokesman Ben Williamson would say. Williamson declined to rule out whether Meadows intended to file the document next week.

In his remarks Friday, Rosenstein urged the public to be wary of leaks surrounding the Mueller probe.

“We do not try cases on television or in congressional hearings. Most anonymous leaks are not from the government officials who are actually conducting these investigations,” he said.

“We follow the rule of law, which means that we follow procedures, and we reserve judgment,” he added. “We complete our investigations, and we evaluate all of the relevant evidence before we reach any conclusion. That is how the American people expect their Department of Justice to operate, and that is how our department is going to operate.”

On July 14 2018 05:27 Howie_Dewitt wrote:
White Nationalism (the belief that white identity politics should be accepted, allowed, and utilized to its fullest extent to "secure a future" or whatever) does not imply that other races are inferior; it's those people's way of saying "I think we should be on teams based on race, but only my team isn't allowed to play ball." It doesn't say that "those (non-white here)s aren't civilized enough for us proper people" or anything like that, the other groups can have their own ethnostate over there (I.e. anywhere not near me) in a white nationalist view.

White supremacy, however, is just straight up racism. No holds barred, no punches pulled, just straight up "you're savages who will never adapt to civilized life."

The problem, that I don't think people are explaining, is that white supremacists can co-opt and hijack the message of white nationalists because their short-term goals are awfully similar (whether you think this a coincidence or not, is up for you to decide). Vox Day added that 15th point to establish that he's not a racist (I still think he is, but that's not the point) and that he advocates for white nationalism and strictly not white supremacy. That's why xDaunt says it's not white supremacy, and he's right in that technical sense.

I still think it's a problem because it's so easy to turn into a white supremacist message by keeping every word of that point intact and just omitting the "races are equal" part because that first goal is the same. He's trying to say that white nationalists would stop at an ethnostate (I don't believe that for a second), but white supremacists would continue to campaign for the slow suffocation or the non-white peoples.

Edit--------
FWIW, I don't think there is a very large distinction, because "why would you not want to live with other races? What makes them bad enough neighbors that you want a pure nation?" The answer is usually gobbledygook about how multiculturalism is bad and that they won't assimilate to the majority or that "they want us below them! That's not equality, it's a power grab!" Those strike me as having racist subliminals, considering what I've seen in families with differing generations of immigrants (gf's grandpa refuses to learn English because it's inferior, her mom took the gaokao and specialized in English, gf can't speak Chinese perfectly well and uses English to everyone but her family) being unable to assimilate if just given time.

On July 14 2018 04:08 IgnE wrote:


you didnt quote the 15th point laid out there in the source post about how the alt right supposedly doesnt believe any race is superior to any other. xdaunt is reading "white supremacy" as not necessarily inherent to a white ethnostate hypothetically capable of peacefully coexisting with nonwhite ethnostates. its basically a vision of "separate but equal" and you can obviously question the coherence of such a view but plansix's constant harping on xdaunts posting of vox day is misrepresentative. xdaunt did put in bold that vox day's views were not his own

On Saturday, from Scotland, the US president tweeted: “The stories you heard about the 12 Russians yesterday took place during the Obama Administration, not the Trump Administration. Why didn’t they do something about it, especially when it was reported that President Obama was informed by the FBI in September, before the Election?”

According to widespread reporting and Obama aides including vice-president Joe Biden, chief of staff Denis McDonough and senior adviser Ben Rhodes, Obama attempted to formulate a bipartisan statement on Russian election interference in September 2016, two months before the election, but saw the effort “watered down” by Republican Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell.

In a memoir, Rhodes called McConnell’s action “staggeringly partisan and unpatriotic in its disregard for a foreign adversary undermining our democracy”.

After the election, Obama issued sanctions against Russia, expelled diplomats and closed Russian compounds in the US.

On July 14 2018 22:34 m4ini wrote:
So, not only is Obama to blame for crimea: according to Trump, he's also to blame for russians meddling in the election.



So.. I mean, of course. As we know, the russians didn't interfere with your election, except when they did - and Trump makes it clear that he knows they did (since he's blaming Obama for not doing anything about it), why are republicans still calling this a witch hunt? If you're trying to discredit an investigation that undeniably has already brought charges, convictions etc, you kinda make yourself look like you know that it's going to hurt you, so you try to stop it*.

*not that anyone with a hint of objectivity didn't believe that right from the start, but it's getting really desperate now.