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
If he trashes the economy badly enough, he wont have much popular support (and, serious, what are the odds that he wont?). Then his erstwhile political allies will turn on him like a school of pirana.
I like "United Against Trump" myself. Its more positive and dignified.
I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.Not enough yet though. They're wavering.
I don't expect him to last out the year at this rate.
You're out of your mind. Republicans are already ignoring the majority of Americans, and they're going to keep doing it until the end.
The only possible reason they would have for removing him is if he is not profitable for them. And current signs show that's not gonna fucking happen anytime soon.
edited 13th Jan '17 4:39:51 PM by Eschaton
A few weeks ago, I declared the GOP "In for a penny, in for a pound of flesh", and that holds true-by driving out moderates, and forcing the party to hold together at figurative gunpoint, every one of them is now actively complicit. No 'votes of conscience', no abstaining or polite disagreement-do what you are told, or pay the price. Graham is cracking under pressure, Collins is toeing the line and has been otherwise silent-that leaves Mccain alone out in no man's land, and that is not likely to change soon.
The Republicans knew what they were getting into, and right now they are all in and doubling down because they have no choice. While effective, Trump's rhetoric also peeled away the "break glass in case of emergency" final safeguards. Politico talk and boiler plate are not just a longform 'no comment' to avoid saying something stupid when blindsided by an unprepared script; they also provide a line of defense when you get called to account for your platform and speeches. The Republican party can no longer hide behind dog whistles and legal doublespeak; their platform is there in the open for the perusal and adjudication of anyone who cares to prosecute.
The only reason the Republicans will consider impeachment will be the result of a choice forced by circumstance-throw Trump and his inner circle on the pyre and run for the hills, stand by him in front of a firing squad, or get pulled out of their offices by a lynch mob. At this point, the GOP have indicated that only imminent threats to their safety, security and wealth will dissuade them, and on the current course it might literally reach that point.
edited 13th Jan '17 5:34:32 PM by ViperMagnum357
Rand Paul voted against party, once, on a particular wonk of his, and has given no other indications of refusing to toe the party lines. Mccain and Graham have been the only Senators pushing Trump on Russia, and Collins was the only sitting Republican not to endorse him by the end. Collins and Graham look like they are about to fold; so until someone else from that side of the aisle shows some spine, I think Mccain is walking a lonely and thorny path.
edited 13th Jan '17 5:11:26 PM by ViperMagnum357
Gingrich says Trump should "break the elite press."
Just in case anybody didn't think we were going to be under authoritarian rule in a week's time. I'm sure Erdogan is getting prouder and prouder.
Also - John Lewis says he does not see Trump as the legitimate president.
He specifically cites Russian meddling as the thing that delegitimizes his supposed victory.
About damn time some of our Democratic leadership started saying this.
"We'll take the next chance, and the next, until we win, or the chances are spent."I wouldn't bet on it. What's needed is an independent investigation. Burr is, as far as I know, a diehard Trumpling, and if he's heading up the committee he has final say on what's made public and what isn't. So he can shield Trump from anything that would make him look bad.
"We'll take the next chance, and the next, until we win, or the chances are spent."Trump may have since learned, McLaughlin said, that "this community is not as easily cowed by snarky tweets and verbal barbs as some of his other targets. They are used to that. It goes with the territory."
Can anyone offer an idea of how durable the intelligence community's organizational culture actually is, particularly given their new bosses?
Also, the up and coming CIA Director stated "Congress should pass a law re-establishing collection of all metadata, and combining it with publicly available financial and lifestyle information into a comprehensive, searchable database. Legal and bureaucratic impediments to surveillance should be removed. That includes Presidential Policy Directive-28, which bestows privacy rights on foreigners and imposes burdensome requirements to justify data collection."
Just as a bonus using strong data security may raise red flags, being on the losing end of cyber campaigns notwithstanding. (This is a relatively old article, but it seems to go with the IC news).
edited 13th Jan '17 6:19:01 PM 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 livesI'd say it's pretty apparent that this is all credible.
It fits with the Russian MO.This is their plan which was published in 1997.
And here are the parts they've completed or on the verge of completing.
The United Kingdom should be cut off from Europe.
Georgia should be dismembered. Abkhazia and "United Ossetia" (which includes Georgia's South Ossetia) will be incorporated into Russia. Georgia's independent policies are unacceptable.
Russia needs to create "geopolitical shocks" within Turkey. These can be achieved by employing Kurds, Armenians and other minorities.
Ukraine should be annexed by Russia because "“Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning, no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic exclusiveness, its certain territorial ambitions represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics". Ukraine should not be allowed to remain independent, unless it is cordon sanitaire, which would be inadmissible
The book emphasizes that Russia must spread Anti-Americanism everywhere: "the main 'scapegoat' will be precisely the U.S."
Russia should use its special forces within the borders of the United States to fuel instability and separatism, for instance, provoke "Afro-American racists". Russia should "introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements – extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics.
![]()
If even half the actions we are seeing now are attributable to Russian Security influence, I would say that book is their bible in a literal sense. And moving forward would plunge most of the world into a shooting war in any scenario where someone not on Russia's payroll sits in the Oval Office. So...I am wondering, if even partially true, if a direct armed conflict for final control of the world is not just a possibility, but actually an end goal for anyone ascribing to that work. Also, "adopted as a part of Russian Education" is not something I want to hear about a work that advocates the wholesale destruction of Eurasia and labels the US as an absolute, ultimate enemy that must be completely destroyed.
EDIT: Any Russian tropers here familiar with the work?
edited 13th Jan '17 6:37:51 PM by ViperMagnum357
Russia sold 19.5% of Rosneft in December to Qatar's state run oil company and Glencore.
Rosneft was a client of Rudy Giuliani's law firm.
He also advised Qatar's state gun oil company and took money from them.
Former FSB agent and Rosneft official was found dead in Moscow in December.
It's all connected.
Trump is officially confirmed as a Russian traitor-puppet in my eyes.
edited 13th Jan '17 7:00:56 PM by MadSkillz
![]()
![]()
![]()
That was some real nice national sovereignty we had once. As of the 20th, we will basically be under indefinite foreign occupation. Or we might as well be.
![]()
Sweet Jesus, I hope so. A full-blown shooting war with China is one of the worst nightmare scenarios I can envision.
edited 13th Jan '17 7:08:04 PM by RBluefish
"We'll take the next chance, and the next, until we win, or the chances are spent."

Which protests can help accomplish. The main problem with Occupy was the lack of a coherent goal that everyone could rally around. Now we have one.
I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.