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
Lie detector test suggested option in hunt to find NYT op-ed author
Trump, during a gaggle with reporters aboard Air Force One on his way to Fargo, North Dakota, said that the idea has been suggested to him as a way to find out who penned the nearly 1,000-word piece that claimed some administration officials are actively working as a “resistance” against his impulsive decisions and have questioned his mental fitness behind the scenes.
Graham said he thinks the op-ed is s a new line of attack from the left because there’s no evidence to prove Trump has colluded with the Russians.
“This to me is a signal that there’s nothing there with Russia in terms of the president working with the Russians during his campaign,” Graham said. “The next line of attack is a man unfit for office, he’s crazy.”
But he ruled out hunting down the author with a lie detector.
“Cause what are you going to do? Take a lie detector test to the entire government?” Graham said.
Michael Cohen agrees to tear up nondisclosure agreement with Stormy Daniels
Cohen is arguing that this divests the court of jurisdiction over the contract dispute and is asking the court to dismiss her claim which seeks to invalidate the deal.
Daniels' lawyer also tweeted about the news, calling it a "legal stunt" in order to avoid the president being deposed in the case.
Essential Consultants also reserved the right to seek reimbursement of that $130,000 paid to Daniels as hush money.
"Today Essential Consultants LLC and Michael Cohen have effectively put an end to the lawsuits filed against them by Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels," Blakely said in a statement to ABC News. "The rescission of the Confidential Settlement Agreement will result in Ms. Clifford returning to Essential Consultants the $130,000 she received in consideration, as required by California law."
A Sept. 24 hearing is scheduled in the case in which the parties were expected to present their arguments on how to proceed in the wake of Cohen’s guilty pleas. Cohen and Trump want to extend the existing stay on the case, while Avenatti argued that the case should proceed with discovery and depositions, including Trump.
Avenatti had pushed for an expedited deposition of Trump just eight days earlier.
Why does that non-disclosure deal even still have any weight to tear? It's clear it was basically written on a napkin by a guy who barely counts as a lawyer and which didn't even get the proper signature of his client placed at the bottom of it. <confused>
Edited by Euodiachloris on Sep 8th 2018 at 3:46:31 PM
Regarding Merrick Garland. I understand why people have gone for it, especially since Kavanaugh, among others, have gone out of their way to praise Garland during the hearings, but I honestly think this is a fairly lousy position to put Garland in.
This is a complaint about judicial ethics, so there is only one obvious response for Garland to give — to recuse himself, thereby showing how judicial ethics is done.
Edited by Wyldchyld on Sep 8th 2018 at 3:52:57 PM
If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.I'm not sure Garland needs to recuse himself. Does Kavanaugh being a candidate for a job that Garland was once a candidate for constitute a conflict of interest? It's a funny coincidence, but the two don't actually have anything to do with one another.
Edited by TobiasDrake on Sep 8th 2018 at 9:03:03 AM
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.While I might normally agree with you they've just spent the hearings talking about how great Garland is, I don't think there's a practical need for this.
Fire them, if the author hasn't broken any laws they can't be jailed.
Furthermore there isn't really anything to be especially alarmed by, this will just create chaos within the White House and infuriate Trump. Both of which are good for our ends.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Sep 8th 2018 at 12:01:19 PM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangI am a bit more concerned that Congressional G.O.P. Agenda Quietly Falls Into Place Even as Trump Steals the Spotlight
.
I mean, Pence THE MYSTERY AUTHOR admitted to working to undermine and counteract his decisions. So. Yeah. That's pretty illegal.
"The resistance within the White House" is a fancy set of words for a conspiracy of espionage to defraud the President of the United States. Pence The Author can almost certainly go to jail for admitting to this.
I won't shed any tears either.
Just saying, yes, this is a crime.
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.No, Trump should destroy the guy.
We have the 25th amendment for a president who isn't competent. Either invoke that or accept the consequences. You don't get to play behind the scenes in a democracy like that.
Edited by CharlesPhipps on Sep 8th 2018 at 9:31:42 AM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.Revenge politics would be the probable accusation.
Don't forget that the Republicans once universally sang Mueller's praises, too. Now they're divided into those who smear him and those who turn a blind eye to the smears.
It's in Kavanaugh's interest to praise Garland; Garland is a political shadow over any Republican SC nomination — a passive political threat. If Garland starts investigating the complaint, he becomes an active political threat.
Yes. I mentioned in a previous post that the timing of the op-ed seems to be suspicious. I very much doubt the author acted on a whim. There's a reason why he posted the op-ed now. Covering Kavanaugh is the obvious theory, but it is possible that there could be a number of agendas supported by this move.
Edited by Wyldchyld on Sep 8th 2018 at 5:59:20 PM
If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.First of all if he does find out who did it or just gets tired of not finding them and picks a name out of a hat in a fit of insane whimsey (Go ahead, tell me he's not capable of that, I dare you) I will welcome the ensuing Republican civil war. The GOP needs to go the way of the Whigs so that an at least somewhat rational Conservative party can take it's pace.
Second, who is it? Barring any evidence my gut says Jared Kushner. My brain says it's actually a composite identity of several mid-to low level players.
On Garland reviewing Kavenaugh, the better part of me says yes, he should recuse himself on principle. The greater part of me says Fuck 'em. Piss on 'em. Set 'em all on fire.
Edited by tricksterson on Sep 8th 2018 at 5:09:58 AM
Trump delenda estI don't think somebody who's an actual member of Trump's family would've written that, so Kushner's probably out.
I mean, really, the list of people high ranking enough to consider the 25th amendment that've been around since the start of the administration is pretty short. What've we got, Pence, Sessions and Devos? Those are the only three I can think of. Sessions strikes me as the most likely to do this; he's a well documented supporter of the Republican agenda who also has good reason to dislike Trump.
This is absolutely trivial, but it’s one of those very small things that you need sometimes to keep going when you feel overwhelmed by how horrible everything is.
I don’t generally believe that actors need to be anything like their characters. I don’t generally WANT actors to be anything like the characters. But damn if I don’t appreciate how much Steve Rogers I see in Chris Evans.
@wisewillow: You usually can't be too much like Steve Rogers.
...Amusingly I'm wearing a Captain America T-shirt as I write this.
Leviticus 19:34

![[up] [up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png)
Basically, Garland was Obama's pick for the SCOTUS seat that opened up when Scalia died. But the GOP basically refused to even have hearings for 8 months, in an attempt to drag it behind the Presidential elections, to have a candidate to their liking.
"You can reply to this Message!"