Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Ghengis Jon]

[hack]

Precisely. The numbers do not even cover that time when the VP started a war ongoing today becuase he owned a huge stake in a defense contractor. Maybe in early 2001 it made sense to buy that line about how they were only stock options, but if Americans want a proper democracy then it's time to stop playing games.

[Da Geezer]

Talent: That was a really good article regarding Brexit.

However, I suspect hack will once again reprimand you for posting from NRO.

[Wild Hoss]

Is it really new? Gabby Giffords may disagree. (Not to mention JFK RFK MLK Lincoln etc )

Threats of violence are also not new.

You are completely correct though that the world needs to stop going crazy any time now.

This was an attempt at mass-murder of politicians, in an apolitical setting no less. Yes, its new.

I don't expect the rhetoric to change however, even though the warning bell just got rung the political class. It might for Scalise.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Shooter was a white Bernie bro in his 60's from Illinois

[iam416]

Talent: That was a really good article regarding Brexit.

Yeah, I liked it. Interesting thoughts.

Shooter was a white Bernie bro in his 60's from Illinois

Fucking white males.

[Dr. Strangelove]

On behalf of the moderate white Bernie bros, I apologize and denounce this violence

[iam416]

As the shooter is a prog (if DSL's posts are to be believed) the focus of this shooting will most likely be on gun control.

If the shooter were a Trumpkin the focus would be on divisive hate and such, with gun control as an afterthought.

[iam416]

To balance out my article shares, an Op-Ed from the NYT on Cultural Misappropriation: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/14/o...ol-left-region

I did not share a link from the NRO on the efforts at the UN to make cultural misappropriation something akin to intellectual property infringement. I think it bad sign that the NYT actually feels like it can devote Op-Ed space to write on and chastise the SJW Progs. They're not ones to jump on and address conservative bogeymen.

[Da Geezer]

Regarding impeachment and "high crimes and misdemeanors": Lip service will always be given to criminal conduct, but impeachment is essentially a political act. Perjury or obstruction of justice are elastic enough to be usable to overcome this too-low bar for the House to vote to impeach. I suspect, should the Dems take the house in 2018 and an impeachment be voted upon, there would be heavy pressure on moderate Dems to vote to impeach. If the Dems are still in "resistance" mode, I think it likely articles of impeachment would be passed.

[Dr. Strangelove]

As the shooter is a prog (if DSL's posts are to be believed) the focus of this shooting will most likely be on gun control.

If the shooter were a Trumpkin the focus would be on divisive hate and such, with gun control as an afterthought.

And just as predictably the conservatives will counter with 'now's not the right time to talk about gun control. We'll let you know when the time is right'.

[Wild Hoss]

And just as predictably the conservatives will counter with 'now's not the right time to talk about gun control. We'll let you know when the time is right'.

Yes, we've danced this same tango time and again. That there are still people willing to engage in the tedious tailchasing is the part that amazes me.

[Da Geezer]

I did not share a link from the NRO on the efforts at the UN to make cultural misappropriation something akin to intellectual property infringement....

I think the whole idea of cultural misappropriation is a natural outcome of identity politics. So is "cultural imperialism".

I've just never understood why splitting a country into a bunch of ghettoized (physical or intellectual) groups serves any public interest. The "melting pot" was ultimately a boon to all.

[Ghengis Jon]

Geez-

Unless something new comes up, impeachment won't happen. Certainly some dems will call for it but really little more than gaining the limelight for a bit.

Russia? Trump doesn't have the intellectual firepower to attempt collusion, despite a moral bankruptcy that would clear the way. The Trumpanzees are are a rabid enough pack of froth mouthed zealots, but again the risks outweigh the rewards. The American public BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE should be up in arms about the Russian interference, which is an assault on our Republic. Where's the outrage? Obama tried a few things, but was pretty much pooh-poohed as a 'political act aimed at embarrassing Trump'.

Comey? Suggesting leniency for someone under investigation is not obstruction. The fact that Comey was fired for the Russian investigation is a non-starter, the FBI director serves at the President's pleasure, he doesn't need a reason.

Emoluments? Maybe. I don't know how Trump gets away with having a family member run his business and not see any conflict. If I'm a dignitary, lobbyist, or whatever, I'm going to stay at a Trump Hotel which financially benefits Trump regardless if he's running the show or not. And I'd make sure Trump knows where I'm staying. He should divest to remove/prevent any conflict, but won't, as the family business and making money is more important than ethics or serving the country cleanly.

I fully expect Not-My-President Chump to commit an impeachable act and then brag about it on Twitter. But it hasn't happened (yet) and so I do not believe impeachment will occur, even in the unlikely event the House flips in 2018. Further, I do not believe the dems are as groupthink as the repubs were during the Bill Clinton persecution. At least I pray they aren't.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Regarding impeachment and "high crimes and misdemeanors": Lip service will always be given to criminal conduct, but impeachment is essentially a political act. Perjury or obstruction of justice are elastic enough to be usable to overcome this too-low bar for the House to vote to impeach. I suspect, should the Dems take the house in 2018 and an impeachment be voted upon, there would be heavy pressure on moderate Dems to vote to impeach. If the Dems are still in "resistance" mode, I think it likely articles of impeachment would be passed.

Good point about elasticity of the OoJ charge in a political sense as a grounds for impeachment. That's not going to be enough, IMO, for the House to vote to impeach for now. The R's will lean on the legal arguments, the elements not being articulated in the case, to not impeach. The mid terms could change that but there is still the thing with the Senate. Low probability that realistically DJT is going to get impeached.

I agree with talent, even if the House, with either party in the majority, do vote to Impeach, the Senate won't see the House recommendation through to trial because the votes won't be there to convict no matter the evidence on OoJ. I've already affirmed I'm against impeachment (unless the facts change). I prefer the slower wheels of democracy that has the people voting to remove. That approach isn't anywhere near as exciting for the press though and that could be a problem...... the power of the current narrative thing that has already been mentioned.

I think if the business dealings stuff gets traction in the courts (i.e., the courts agree to hear any of the three civil cases now moving forward) that's another story altogether.

BTW, Hack, I agree with you about the corruption position (get it out of government) you've articulated. The problem with that as I see it, no matter how noble, and it is a noble position, history indicates, world and US, that's unrealistic.

While it is a distraction from governance, democracy's seem to do a pretty good job of curtailing it. It worked for Nixon, granted not for Cheney and he was guilty as fuck for a number of reasons, Italy got rid of Berlusconi, S. Korea got rid of Park and I'm sure there are other international examples.

The process of curtailing, hamstringing or removing the crooks that will always be present in politics is not perfect but I think it's unrealistic to expect that.