|
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 August 09 2018 11:45 Doodsmack wrote:
What I really want to see is what happens if the Democrats win the the House in November, and after that Mueller writes a report saying there was obstruction.
EDIT: Or even if Mueller writes that report before November I guess.
I can see the report happening before November to affect the outcome, just like Comey did for the Presidency.
|
'If Sessions doesn't recuse and Mueller doesn't clear the president, we're the only ones'
I hope this sounds worse than what he actually ment
|
Somewhat off topic, but I read this quote recently and thought it summed up GHs views pretty concisely and elegantly. It was a woman’s suffrage activist who vandalized a property in the early 1900s, and the building guards came out and said...
“Why did you break our windows? We didn’t do anything!”
And her response was...
“It’s because you didn’t do anything that I broke your windows.”
Chiasmus are cool.
|
|
|
Nunes is now claiming they haven’t impeached Rosenstein because of "timing". I just want someone to yell “Its because you don’t have the votes, bitch.”
|
TBH I don't think Kavanaugh on SCOTUS can protect Trump from a subpoena; he'd still just one of 9 justices and arguably the last among equals. Gorsuch likely would vote with him. Thomas and Alito, maybe. Roberts I feel would be pretty unlikely. And then the entire liberal wing would be like heeeeeeeell naw.
|
Roberts seems dead set not becoming the ref in this political fight, so I doubt he would rule against he special counsel or subpoena.
|
On August 09 2018 22:34 Plansix wrote:
Nunes is now claiming they haven’t impeached Rosenstein because of "timing". I just want someone to yell “Its because you don’t have the votes, bitch.”
What's odd is that he's claiming this behind closed doors to donors which means he's either a) bullshitting donors to give the impression they're sure to do it post-Kavanaugh (most likely), b) he and the people he's talking to are so disconnected from reality that they believe they have the votes, or c) they actually do somehow have the votes and we're the ones disconnected from reality.
Pretty sure it's not c), but you never know.
|
They don’t have the votes and it will never come to the floor. Impeachment is a trial before the senate, which is half control by Democrats and filled with more moderate republicans. The impeachment would be a complete shit show. He is making shit up to please donors who failed civics 101.
|
On August 09 2018 23:26 Plansix wrote:
They don’t have the votes and it will never come to the floor. Impeachment is a trial before the senate, which is half control by Democrats and filled with more moderate republicans. The impeachment would be a complete shit show. He is making shit up to please donors who failed civics 101.
It's like telling someone you are going to commit a school shooting, although you never intend to actually do it. It's so dangerous that they have to take you at your word. I take him at his word. Everyone else should too.
|
On August 09 2018 23:37 Ayaz2810 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2018 23:26 Plansix wrote:
They don’t have the votes and it will never come to the floor. Impeachment is a trial before the senate, which is half control by Democrats and filled with more moderate republicans. The impeachment would be a complete shit show. He is making shit up to please donors who failed civics 101. It's like telling someone you are going to commit a school shooting, although you never intend to actually do it. It's so dangerous that they have to take you at your word. I take him at his word. Everyone else should too. Firing Rosenstein and replacing him with someone willing to then fire Mueller is pretty much a best case scenario for anyone who wants Trump gone. I don't have to be afraid of it.
|
On August 09 2018 23:42 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2018 23:37 Ayaz2810 wrote:On August 09 2018 23:26 Plansix wrote:
They don’t have the votes and it will never come to the floor. Impeachment is a trial before the senate, which is half control by Democrats and filled with more moderate republicans. The impeachment would be a complete shit show. He is making shit up to please donors who failed civics 101. It's like telling someone you are going to commit a school shooting, although you never intend to actually do it. It's so dangerous that they have to take you at your word. I take him at his word. Everyone else should too. Firing Rosenstein and replacing him with someone willing to then fire Mueller is pretty much a best case scenario for anyone who wants Trump gone. I don't have to be afraid of it.
That's assuming that the American people care enough to do something if that happens.
The four boxes of liberty is an idea that proposes: "There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury and ammo. Please use in that order."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_boxes_of_liberty
|
|
|
United States24701 Posts
I live in between Charlottesville and DC. Sometimes I fly into the Charlottesville airport on the weekend. I think I will avoid both cities this weekend. Things could be crazy in northern Virginia too, so we’ll see.
|
How many votes are needed to impeach Rosenstein?
|
On August 10 2018 01:49 Mohdoo wrote:
How many votes are needed to impeach Rosenstein?
properly speaking; to impeach (which is just like charging, it's not actually removing) is a simple majority of the House.
|
On August 10 2018 01:57 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2018 01:49 Mohdoo wrote:
How many votes are needed to impeach Rosenstein? properly speaking; to impeach (which is just like charging, it's not actually removing) is a simple majority of the House.
Then it goes to senate? Or whole thing done in house?
|
Impeachment means that the case then moves to a trial by the senate. It should be noted that once the House moves to impeach someone, they send a order of notice to the Senate. Then the Senate sends a order of notice back to the House, saying they are reading to receive the appointed case managers from the House. The Senate could, in theory, ignore the impeachment order if the chamber felt there was no merits to the House's action.
|
|
|
This article illustrates a interesting consequence of the trade war. A ship carrying tons of soybeans tried to beat the deadline before tariffs kicked in but missed by a few hours because of bad weather. Now it's just sailing in circles outside the port, waiting to see if something changes. However, because prices increased the value of its cargo also went up, though not enough to clear the import tax hurdle.
Not part of the article, but China seems to have been hurt more by the trade war so far. I think it's likely due to the more centralized nature of their economy, compared to the US which is more reliant on consumer spending. However, many manufacturing businesses in the US are feeling the pinch - it's just taking longer for it to trickle down and for the US to feel the squeeze, I think. While we're probably able to weather the impact than China, we're going to learn that there are no winners in trade wars the hard way soon enough.
A shipment of soya beans worth more than $20m (£15.5m) has been bobbing aimlessly in the Pacific Ocean for a month, a casualty of the escalating trade war between China and the US.
Lingering uncertainty over the cargo’s fate offered a timely reminder of the fallout from a dispute that intensified on Wednesday, as the US president, Donald Trump, unveiled a second round of tariffs on $16bn of Chinese goods, prompting Beijing to respond in kind.
The Peak Pegasus, a 229 metre bulk carrier weighing 43,000 tonnes, has become the reluctant symbol of the potential consequences of this tit-for-tat trade spat.
The ship, owned by JP Morgan Asset Management, was scheduled to unload about 70,000 tonnes of American soya beans in the Chinese port of Dalian on 6 July, shortly after Trump imposed a first round of tariffs on $34bn-worth of goods.
As it rushed to shore in the hope of clearing customs before Beijing imposed retaliatory tariffs, the ship – and its protein-rich cargo – became an unlikely internet sensation on the Chinese social media platform Weibo.
However, the vessel arrived just too late and has been sailing around in circles ever since while the cargo’s owners, understood to be the agricultural commodity trading house Louis Dreyfus, decide what to do.
The Amsterdam-based company is thought to be paying about $12,500 a day to continue chartering the ship, which is idling in the Yellow Sea off the coast of China, indicating extra costs so far of more than $400,000.
Source
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
