Removed the redundancy.
I missed this one. Now it all makes sense.
Dave
Staff member
Also, sanctions against Venezuela.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...estimony-pr-execs-who-worked-manafort-n796066
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...estimony-pr-execs-who-worked-manafort-n796066
He wants to undo everything he thought Obama was part of, even though Arpaio was convicted by a judge appointed by Bush.
Probably neither Trump nor Arpaio understand that acceptance of a pardon is admission of guilt.
Tell that to the people he tortured just because they were browner then you or I.
I think you misunderstood. I'm saying who gives a shit that he technically admitted to a crime. If there is no punishment for committing a crime, it might as well be legal.
It sounded like you were saying people getting wound up about the pardon needed to shut up. "He's just as free..." would have been clearer.
You may have heard of this thing called civil court.
Stormfront has been kicked off the internet by its service provider. About fucking time.
I agree "no" but it made me think of something else:
There was a plot point in a later Tom Clancy novel after *spoiler* was president, in that he'd PRE-SIGNED a number of pardons, where you could fill in the blank for the name of the pardon, because he'd basically set up a PRIVATE intelligence agency (think Kingsmen), and wanted them to be able to get out of trouble. One character asked another if it was constitutional. The reply was "we'll see if it becomes necessary." It never was in the course of the books I read, but it was an interesting mention.
Y'all should've got CBS to invite Trump to be a contestant on Big Brother a couple years ago (and then bring him back for another shot, like they did with Paul) .
GasBandit
Staff member
The militarization of the police can now continue once again, unabated.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-police-equipment-idUSKCN1B81TI?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews
Great.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-police-equipment-idUSKCN1B81TI?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews
Great.
Of course he did, he's a fascist who wants to be a dictator.The militarization of the police can now continue once again, unabated.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-police-equipment-idUSKCN1B81TI?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews
Great.
... okay?
Trump, in this case, historic is bad.
Did he just thank the floods?
And he'll insist that the networks interrupt football games and the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade coverage to do it, because it'll make his ratings better.
Yup.
Ya? And in the age of telephones (so, like the last 100 years) when has a politician traveling to a disaster site ever been about more than a photo op? What ends up happening is that resources get diverted away from helping people to making sure that the VIP is safe. The odd politician who's district it is will be seen sandbagging (or bucket brigade, or whatever) and THAT helps (probably), but anybody who has "actual political power" can wield it as well or better from the seat of power, not on-site. They're not functioning as a good "community organizer" (pun/implications intended) while on-site. They're not ACTUALLY helping. Their main job should be saying "yes" whenever an actual disaster response individual/agency requests more money. THAT they can do, but again, best done from the other end of a phone. Otherwise they're just in the way.
So it's a photo op, but no different than any other politician doing the same. There are very few exceptions (that DO exist), but most of the time it's just this.
And yet they will be attacked for staying away from the disaster scene FOR THIS VERY REASON. Obama was explicitly asked to stay home from one particular incident that otherwise escapes memory, yet that didn't stop a long argument in here about him not going.
I've got a better reply than @Eriol, I think:
Why the fuck would you want Trump to do anything?
Oh I know that happens. Hopefully I wasn't on the "pro they should go" side of any such discussion, since I'll feel shame about that. My opinion on this applies across the political spectrum.
Hell, even in the most EXTREME circumstance I can think of, where Carter was at/near 3 Mile Island while it was still in a "there's still bad shit happening" time, AND he was a former Nuclear Submarine Captain (and therefore HAD an understanding of what was happening, not a total rube), I'm still fairly sure they didn't communicate anything he couldn't have been told on the phone from Washington (and the same in return, he could just SAY it on the phone). In that case, you may have had the additional optics of "If the President is there, then it's not going to be a total disaster, as they wouldn't let him get that close," but still, I don't think he was a "benefit" beyond what he would have been on the telephone. But that's a judgement call. At least it's far enough in the past to have some perspective on it.
I don't know. Getting information to the President would not have been easy without the internet. If there was a lot of info/intel/data for Carter to assimilate (or at least glance over) in a timecrunch, it would probably have been easier for him to go to the source of that info then to send it along to him.
That could be 100% right, but only because he had knowledge of Nuclear Reactors before the crisis started. For every other president (probably without exception) such information could have been worse than useless, as it would be better for a layman to rely on other experts, who COULD be on-site.
As I said, an exceptional situation. Nowadays, that doesn't EVER apply except for political/photo-op purposes.
He's wearing tan pants, so un-presidential.