Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
I find it unlikely a female Trump would have won the primary. Trump had a lot of support among the young white male demographic. I'm not sure if they'd support a woman. There's also the double standards with women being adulterers. I think a female Trump that bragged about grabbing men by the dick and had five children by three men would have sent them into fits.
I don't see a woman's candidacy surviving something like the Hollywood Access tape, no.
edited 8th Mar '17 7:39:06 PM by KarkatTheDalek
Oh God! Natural light!
Exactly. If you're a rude, smug, and elitist bastard, then everyone will think you're God's gift to humanity, but if you're a rude, smug, and elitist bitch, then you're just a bitch. Common sense people.
Exempt from exemptions?
Found this toay. Harsher in Hindsight.
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/obamacare-repeal-partisan-fight-235832
Democrats thwart progress on Obamacare repeal
Basically detailing ways that the Democrats stalled the Republicare bill in the House floor by doing things like forcing votes on other bills or even demanding a bills text be read out loud in full. Also:
http://theweek.com/speedreads/684867/democrats-are-trolling-republicans-obamacare-repeal-hearing-sassy-little-signs
Democrats are trolling Republicans at the ObamaCare repeal hearing with these sassy little signs
Democrat Congresscritters are putting up signs with #PayMoreForLess to make their feelings on this clear.
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/3/8/14856944/democrat-trolling-markup-health-policy
Democrats are trolling the House GOP’s health markup by throwing their own words back at them
A bit of Spoofed with Their Own Words, a Democrat rep introduced an amendment to the Republican health care bill saying that every member of the House voting on it issue a statement confirming they read the bill in its entirety. More specifically, he tool a bill a Republican tried on the earlier days of the ACA, crossed out that Rep's name, and wrote his own in.
edited 8th Mar '17 9:55:31 PM by sgamer82
The Republicans on the Hill are like the worst backseat drivers ever. You know the type. They whine endlessly to the driver — you're going the wrong way, go faster, go slower, change lanes already, take that shortcut, I could do so much better if I was at the wheel — all while spilling Cheeto-dust and beer everywhere in the backseat. When they are at the wheel themselves they of course get lost immediately and whine to the previous driver — now vainly trying to clean up the Cheeto-dust — that it's their fault for not giving them good advice and directions.
Disgusted, but not surprisedSo I just heard that Obama got "furious" over Drumpf's claims he ordered the wiretapping of Barad-dur. Exactly how "furious" did he get?
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/08/politics/house-health-care-markup/
The ACA repeal bill has made it through the Ways and Means Committee just before 4:30 am
edited 9th Mar '17 5:07:02 AM by sgamer82
Trump WAS NOT the target of any investigation, says Sean Spicer
. Meaning Trump's twitter fit was wrong, and like the coward he is, he sends Spicer out to 'apologize' for his idiocy.
Please, Congress, I'm begging you, do something, ANYTHING about Trump. This President is out of control! I don't care if it's just a "Don't do this again, okay Trump?", just please do something!
edited 9th Mar '17 9:13:30 AM by DingoWalley1
So, this Scott Pruitt guy, the EPA chief, just denied that CO 2 is the leading factor of climate change.
I bet it's all part of President Bannon's plan to dismantle every Washington agency by hiring the worst people for the jobs.
edited 9th Mar '17 12:27:07 PM by speedyboris
I wonder how any of them would actually benefit from the USA becoming Mad Max. I really don't see Bannon on a motorcycle making trick shots and outrunning explosions, and Trump probably wouldn't be able to figure out that Le Fancies might stop serving after an extinction event...
More on the Pruitt Story.
EPA chief doubts carbon dioxide's role in global warming
He told CNBC that measuring human impact on the climate was "very challenging" and there was "tremendous disagreement" about the issue.
Mr Pruitt instead insisted that officials needed "to continue the debate" on the issue.
His remarks contradict his own agency's findings on greenhouse gas emissions.
Mr Pruitt's views on CO 2 are unlikely to have much direct impact on scientists in the field, as the EPA itself does not fund much climate research, but the signal it sends on the integrity of the scientific method worries many.
In the international field, it puts the EPA at odds with almost every other environmental protection institution, in almost every country.
And according to Prof Hayhoe, there are will be other more direct effects of the anti-CO 2 stance the new director is signalling.
"Budget cuts to the EPA will potentially cut valuable and irreplaceable monitoring programmes, and these will have very real impacts for people's health."
Three guesses for who is supposed to defend their agency's budget...
edited 9th Mar '17 9:51:45 AM by CenturyEye
Look with century eyes... With our backs to the arch And the wreck of our kind We will stare straight ahead For the rest of our livesBut neoliberals are the real enemies who must be put down first, like the kulaks!*
Foreign Policy: WikiLeaks Has Joined the Trump Administration
As a presidential candidate, Donald Trump declared, “I love Wiki Leaks!” And he had good reason to display affection to this website run by accused rapist Julian Assange. By releasing reams of emails stolen from the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, Wiki Leaks helped tilt the 2016 election in Trump’s favor.
As president, Trump hasn’t come out and said anything laudatory about Wiki Leaks following its massive disclosure of CIA secrets on Tuesday — a treasure trove that some experts already believe may be more damaging than Edward Snowden’s revelations. But Trump hasn’t condemned Wiki Leaks. The recent entries on his Twitter feed — a pure reflection of his unbridled id — contain vicious attacks on, among other things, Arnold Schwarzenegger, the New York Times, and Barack Obama but not a word about Wiki Leaks. Did the president not notice that the intelligence community he commands has just suffered a devastating breach of security? Or did he simply not feel compelled to comment?
Actually there is a third, even more discomfiting, possibility: Perhaps Trump is staying silent because he stands to benefit from Wiki Leaks’ latest revelations.Perhaps Trump is staying silent because he stands to benefit from Wiki Leaks’ latest revelations.
On Saturday, recall, Trump was making wild-eyed accusations that Obama had ordered the U.S. intelligence community to wiretap him. “How low has President Obama gone to tapp (sic) my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!” The White House could not come up with one iota of evidence to support this irresponsible allegation, which was denied by FBI Director James Comey and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. But Trump would not be dissuaded from pursuing this charge, which serves as a convenient distraction from the far more serious accusations of possible collusion between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin while Russia was interfering with the presidential campaign.
Is it just a coincidence that Wiki Leaks dumped a massive database pertaining to CIA hacking and wiretapping just three days after Trump made wiretapping a major political issue? Perhaps so. But there is cause for suspicion.
In the first place, Wiki Leaks has often timed its leaks for maximum political impact. It released 20,000 stolen DNC emails just three days before the Democratic National Convention on July 25, 2016. As expected, Wiki Leaks generated headlines about DNC staffers disparaging Sen. Bernie Sanders, buttressing a Trump campaign effort to prevent Clinton from consolidating Sanders supporters. DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz resigned as a result, and the Clinton campaign suffered significant public relations damage.
In the second place, Wiki Leaks, which has often leaked American but never Russian secrets, has been identified by the U.S. intelligence community as a front for Russian intelligence. In January, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence released a declassified estimate that found “with high confidence that Russian military intelligence … relayed material to Wiki Leaks.” This was done with a definite purpose: “Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him.”
Trump has consistently resisted the intelligence agency’s conclusions, insisting that some 400-pound couch potato might have committed the hacking before grudgingly accepting the findings but continuing to claim that the Russian hack had no impact on the election. (Given that 70,000 votes in three states were his margin of victory, how does he know what affected the outcome and what didn’t? And if Wiki Leaks was so inconsequential, why did he tout its revelations in almost every appearance during the last month of the campaign?)
The intelligence community’s finding that Putin helped him win the election spurred Trump to pursue a vendetta against it. For example, he accused the spooks — with no support — of being behind Buzz Feed’s publication of a damning dossier compiled by a former British intelligence officer claiming that the Kremlin had compiled compromising materials on him. Trump outrageously tweeted: “Intelligence agencies should never have allowed this fake news to ‘leak’ into the public. One last shot at me. Are we living in Nazi Germany?” His animus against the intelligence agencies has continued down to his more recent accusations that they allowed themselves to be used by Obama to wiretap him. The consistent (if hardly believable) storyline from Trump is that he has no connections to Russia, and that he is a victim of the nefarious machinations of the American “deep state.”
It is significant, therefore, that one of the major storylines to emerge from the latest Wiki Leaks release is that the CIA supposedly has a program to reuse computer codes from foreign hackers, thus disguising CIA fingerprints on a hacking operation. Never mind that there is no evidence that the codes used to break into the DNC were part of this CIA database. Right-wing outlets are nevertheless trumpeting these revelations with headlines such as this one on Breitbart: “Wiki Leaks: CIA Uses ‘Stolen’ Malware to ‘Attribute’ Cyberattacks to Nations Like Russia.” Russian-controlled Internet “bots” are also said to be playing up these claims online.
The implication is clear. Trump was a victim of a “false flag” operation wherein CIA hackers broke into the DNC and blamed the Russians. This may be nutty, but it’s eminently believable to an audience conditioned to believe that 9/11 was an inside job and that the Sandy Hook massacre was staged — favorite tropes of the radio talk-show host Alex Jones, whose work Trump has praised. Other Wiki Leaks revelations — for instance, that the CIA can use Samsung smart T Vs as listening devices — lend further credence to Trump’s charge that he was secretly wiretapped.
Quite apart from its specifics, the Wiki Leaks release changes the subject after a bad few days for Trump highlighted by Attorney General Jeff Sessions’s decision to recuse himself from any Kremlingate probe after he was revealed to have lied under oath when he denied meeting any Russian representatives. Last week it was Trump on the defensive. Now it’s his nemeses in the U.S. intelligence community who are answering embarrassing questions about how this leak could have occurred and the contents of the leaked information.
Again, maybe this is entirely coincidental, but Wiki Leaks’ history of being used by Russian intelligence to support Trump should lead to much greater scrutiny not only of who leaked this information — is there a mole in the CIA? — but why it was released now. Even if there is no active collusion between the White House and the Kremlin, the extent to which their agendas coincide is striking. Both Putin and Trump want to discredit the U.S. intelligence community because they see it as an obstacle to their power.
On a somewhat more humorous(?) note, someone plastered posters of The Paranoid Old Man's pussy monologue all over New York.
I guess some people are just into that sort of thing.
edited 9th Mar '17 10:31:19 AM by kkhohoho
...I can't remember if it was Trevor Noah or Stephen Colbert who said it, but Trump getting information from Wiki Leaks merits the same response as him getting intel from Breitbart and being a conspiracy theorist: "It's like he just woke up and forgot he's the President of the United States."
What IS he?
edited 9th Mar '17 10:34:30 AM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.One of my professors pointed out the irony/humor? idkw of Trump asking Congress to investigate if he had been wire tapped, when he could, you know, pick up the phone and call the agencies "responsible." (The same agencies who can and will use "executive privilege" against a Congressional inquiry launched on the basis of mad speculation).

I kind of thought that a hypothetical female Trump would just be dismissed as a bitch or something...
Do not obey in advance.