|
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 September 05 2018 00:52 plasmidghost wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2018 00:50 Plansix wrote:
The problem with the White House’s move is they did it last Friday and the documents they have withheld are pretty much the entire 3 years that Kavanaugh worked at the Bush White House. There is a three year black hole in his legal record due to the White House’s last minute claim of privilege. It's absolutely crazy how much power Trump has, I didn't even know that he and the White House could do that (or any number of other things I've seen since January 2017). Does the White House have to have a valid reason for withholding these documents, or is it that they can do it pretty much at will?
Any branch of government can do anything it wants if the other branches refuse to keep them in check. The Republican Congress isn’t going to stop Trump, so they can withhold 100K worth of documents. People could file legal challenges, but those won’t be heard in time to stop the nomination. And the Court can’t stop the Senate from confirming a nominee.
The rules don’t matter if no one gives a shit. That is why Trump keeps getting to assert privilege through his staff, rather than saying “don’t produce that” as is normal when it comes to privilege.
|
On September 05 2018 00:52 ShoCkeyy wrote:
The White House didn't claim privilege though did they? Only the Republican Senate said the white house claim privilege from what it sounded like at the start of the hearing. Which is the reason why democrats are all riling up in the hearing.
The CNN and New York Times stories I read only referred to William Burck’s determinations on personals matters and various statutory and constitutional privileges in his capacity of lawyer for George W Bush reviewing records in his presidential library. The vast majority of the ~664,000 records he reviewed were released to the judiciary committee.
You can look at Burck’s letter yourself, it’s on the judiciary’s website. Dems are just grandstanding like Reps did in the Clinton hearings.
|
Steven Crowder did one of his things where he goes to colleges and pretends to be an honest actor, this time he did it with "socialism is evil, change my mind". He encountered a student who apparently, and I quote, "BTFO'd" him. Now I'm all for a bit of Crowder bashing from time to time, that's always fun, but I'm more interested in the fact that I'm fairly sure this student is a crypto- (barely crypto) fascist, given where he goes with his argument. Now, fascists pretending to be socialists to look more appealing isn't exactly a new thing, but hey, maybe I'm seeing things. Can you guys see what I see?
+ Show Spoiler +
|
This call between Bob Woodward(watergate reporter)and Trump is amazing. Trump is hyper focused on why Woodward didn’t talk to him, even though Woodward tired. The entire thing is Trump trying to assert this narrative that he is the best president ever, while also trying to find who to blame for not telling him about Woodward’s book.
The book appears to be a scathing recounting of reports about the inner working of the White House. And more importantly, that Trumps own attorneys feel he will criminally implicate himself if he is interviewed by Meuller’s team. The term aggrieved Shakespearean king is used to discribe Trumps behavior in a mock interview.
Finally, there are reports from former staffers that they would steal documents from Trump due to fears he would act on them.
It’s only Tuesday.
|
On September 05 2018 01:39 Nebuchad wrote:Steven Crowder did one of his things where he goes to colleges and pretends to be an honest actor, this time he did it with "socialism is evil, change my mind". He encountered a student who apparently, and I quote, "BTFO'd" him. Now I'm all for a bit of Crowder bashing from time to time, that's always fun, but I'm more interested in the fact that I'm fairly sure this student is a crypto- (barely crypto) fascist, given where he goes with his argument. Now, fascists pretending to be socialists to look more appealing isn't exactly a new thing, but hey, maybe I'm seeing things. Can you guys see what I see? + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-puqQYlbFM
Yeah I did some digging and I was right, this student was on the Nick Fuentes podcast, nazis have a hard-on for this "debate" on Twitter because it's going to "convert" the liberal conservatives. Here are some signs I noticed:
1. Self-serving definition of socialism. Socialism is about seizing the means of production from the ruling class and giving them to the people instead. He defines it as the state redistributing wealth from what it would be under a purely capitalist system, which may seem like an innocent mistake as people in the US are often confused about what different leftist ideologies are, but later on in the debate he clearly knows what social democracy is, so that's not a mistake on his part, that was deliberate. This allows him to have a libertarian vs authoritarian debate under the guise of having a socialism vs capitalism debate, and since the main difference between conservatism and fascism is the libertarian outlook, it's pretty easy to see how he would benefit from having that discussion.
2. He describes himself as an economic nationalist, which Crowder incorrectly says is "conservative socialism" (that would be a_flayer) when it's actually just the economic position of fascism.
3. His argument in favor of socialism is based on nationalism. The framing behind it is that of the capitalist elite being globalists and imposing multiculturalism so that they can make profit. Which is not false btw, but is also not really a problem if you're a socialist. Notice how he speaks of illegal immigrants coming here rather than about corporations delocalizing the work over there, which is a much bigger problem if you're a socialist.
4. While he does mention fairness as a cover, his argument against inequality isn't based on fairness, it's based on "social cohesion". That's a huge red flag for me, as it tells me that the class struggle isn't at the center of his preoccupation. Instead he argues as if he wants to, and I'm quoting the wikipedia page for fascism here, resolve "domestic class conflict within a nation in order to secure national solidarity."
I hope most leftists will be able to tell, but I'm wondering. I think he did a pretty good job of passing. Pretty sure he knew what he was doing too.
|
Favorite part was calling him out for being a shill, Crowder getting all huffy about it, then a few minutes later selling pamphlets to the onlookers.
|
Crowder doesn't let the kid speak which makes him actually look better than he deserved to. The kid does have an interesting strategy in linking capitalist interests to 'mass migration' which puts Crowder in a position where he would have to defend immigration (which as a conservative I guess he doesn't want to do?). I think it's interesting that traditional conservatives now have to debate this new breed of conservatism that is taking nationalism and xenophobia way more seriously. Either way, not the most fascinating 18 minutes. I was way more entertained to check out who Nick Fuentes is - Youtube is now where all 20 year old sociopaths hang out.
|
From today’s hearing. He didn’t even talk with the father and walked away. This is more damning than any documents that would have been produced. The man is a feckless coward.
|
Here is the clip of the encounter.
You gotta wonder what the father said, Kavanaugh can't even feign interest.
|
From reports, the father said is name and identified himself. The Judge could have been caught flatfooted, but he didn’t even respond or even say I am sorry. He just walked away.
|
On September 05 2018 02:19 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2018 01:39 Nebuchad wrote:Steven Crowder did one of his things where he goes to colleges and pretends to be an honest actor, this time he did it with "socialism is evil, change my mind". He encountered a student who apparently, and I quote, "BTFO'd" him. Now I'm all for a bit of Crowder bashing from time to time, that's always fun, but I'm more interested in the fact that I'm fairly sure this student is a crypto- (barely crypto) fascist, given where he goes with his argument. Now, fascists pretending to be socialists to look more appealing isn't exactly a new thing, but hey, maybe I'm seeing things. Can you guys see what I see? + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-puqQYlbFM Yeah I did some digging and I was right, this student was on the Nick Fuentes podcast, nazis have a hard-on for this "debate" on Twitter because it's going to "convert" the liberal conservatives. Here are some signs I noticed: I hope most leftists will be able to tell, but I'm wondering. I think he did a pretty good job of passing. Pretty sure he knew what he was doing too.
I don't think most on the left will be able to see the links to fascism from that clip, to be honest. But the podcast with Nick Fuentes was pretty telling.
|
Kavanaugh doesn't care about the damage this is doing to the judiciary in the eyes of the public. If he did he'd ask to delay his own hearing until Congress got to properly vet him. But we know he wont do that because he is a feckless coward who just wants the job. This was immediately evident in his first press conference with Trump when literally the first words out his mouth were a lie to suck up to Trump (he said Trump had a great respect for the judiciary).
I haven't watched the tape yet but I hope somebody asks his opinion on the lack of vetting.
|
Kavanaugh seems weirdly unconcerned with all the stuff surrounding his hearing. It feels like his single objective is to be on the court and nothing else matters to him. Kind of creepy because after watching the stuff he said about Trump, it seems very easy to conclude him and Trump have come to an understanding about what Trump wants in return.
This is a huge sham and really damaging to our country.
|
What a fucking shitshow. Judicial aid to Trump and Republicans throwing up the white power sign during the hearing. That's about as natural a hand position as saying "monkey it up" is a normal saying. No doubt they will say it was unintended. Just one more dog whistle for the pile.
Source and video:
Edited for format.
|
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?36921 Posts
Everyone, please take note that I will start handing out mod actions soon if this keeps up.
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.
If you're going to provide tweets as a means of source, then please explain what the tweet is about BEFORE you link it.
|
On September 05 2018 04:47 Seeker wrote:
Everyone, please take note that I will start handing out mod actions soon if this keeps up.
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.
If you're going to provide tweets as a means of source, then please explain what the tweet is about BEFORE you link it.
Are you saying what On_Slaught posted was not in accordance with the rules?
|
Yeah it wasn't (before I edited it).
|
On September 05 2018 04:36 On_Slaught wrote:What a fucking shitshow. Judicial aid to Trump and Republicans throwing up the white power sign during the hearing. That's about as natural a hand position as saying "monkey it up" is a normal saying. No doubt they will say it was unintended. Just one more dog whistle for the pile. Source and video: https://twitter.com/girlsreallyrule/status/1037052707884990475Edited for format.
Can you link how this is a white power symbol? When I first saw it I see it as the dumb meme that gets you punched if you look at it
|
On September 05 2018 04:47 Seeker wrote:
Everyone, please take note that I will start handing out mod actions soon if this keeps up.
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.
If you're going to provide tweets as a means of source, then please explain what the tweet is about BEFORE you link it.
I find this warning confusing; because it's been an established thread rule for a good while now, with many people moderated for violating it already. So I don't understand why you'd give this note instead of just directly giving those red mod warnings to offenders (and scaling up based on how many previous times they violated the rule). i.e. the notion that you'd "start" handing out mod action if it keeps up seems odd, given that the threads moderators have already handed out mod actions in the past, many times, for the same violations.
is that clear enough about why it's confusing?
|
On September 05 2018 04:54 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2018 04:47 Seeker wrote:
Everyone, please take note that I will start handing out mod actions soon if this keeps up.
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.
If you're going to provide tweets as a means of source, then please explain what the tweet is about BEFORE you link it. Are you saying what On_Slaught posted was not in accordance with the rules?
My posts have also lead with the tweet/article, rather than my own comments. It’s a bad habit from phone posting thae results in me using the article as an opening to my argument.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
