TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

The General US Politics Thread

Go To

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

Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#236976: Mar 28th 2018 at 7:49:01 PM

Hopefully they don't give it back this time.

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
megaeliz Since: Mar, 2017
#236977: Mar 28th 2018 at 8:39:25 PM

Alternate take on the idea of a pardon:

Why Dangling a Pardon Could Be an Obstruction of Justice—Even if the Pardon Power is Absolute

While acting as Donald Trump’s personal lawyer, John Dowd reportedly discussed the possibility of presidential pardons for Michael Flynn and Paul Manafort in separate conversations with their lawyers. Reports by the New York Times and Washington Post on Wednesday suggest that Dowd’s intent might have been to influence Flynn and Manafort’s decisions on whether to plead guilty and cooperate in the investigations, but that legal experts are divided on whether Dowd’s offers could constitute obstruction of justice.

Some experts have argued that the pardon power is absolute and that the President’s motives in issuing a pardon thus could not be questioned, while others contend that it could be a crime to issue a pardon for corrupt purposes (such as in exchange for cash). But the debate over the absolute nature of the pardon power is actually not relevant to the alleged incidents involving Trump’s lawyer. Indeed, that entire debate can be set aside for the moment. Why? Because there’s been no pardon. Instead, a pardon has only been dangled before Flynn and Manafort, and the analysis of whether that action could become part of an obstruction case against Trump raises entirely different considerations.

If Trump actually pardoned Flynn and Manafort, he would have to do so publicly and accept the political consequences of this profound act. As Jack Goldsmith suggests in the New York Times story, for those who believe that the pardon power is absolute and cannot be scrutinized by courts, the remedy for a corrupt pardon is in the political arena: elections or impeachment. What’s more, if Trump actually pardoned Flynn and Manafort, then the two men could no longer assert their Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination because their pardons would erase their federal criminal liability, and therefore Mueller could call both to testify in the Grand Jury and in any subsequent trial. If they continued to assert their Fifth Amendment privilege on the basis of state criminal exposure, Mueller could obtain an order granting them so-called “use immunity” which would ensure that their testimony could not be used against them in any way in state court either. Manafort and Flynn would then be compelled to testify, or risk jail for contempt of court.

The pardon dangle works completely differently—and in important respects has the opposite effects. First, this kind of dangle is not a public act. Therefore, as long as it remained secret, it could be done without incurring any of the political downstream consequences that come with actually pardoning someone. It hides the President from scrutiny rather than exposes him to it as a potential check on the use of the power. Second, the objective of the dangle appears to have been to foreclose the prospect of Flynn and Manfort’s cooperating or testifying. Once again, this is the opposite effect of an actual exercise of the pardon. The message of the dangle was sufficiently clear: hang in there and keep fighting (do not cut a deal with the special counsel) because you will be pardoned before you spend a day in jail. The President and his lawyer’s hope would have been that with the threat of jail eliminated, neither former aid would feel compelled to plead guilty and cooperate with Mueller to reduce his sentence. But, since they were not actually pardoned or not yet anyway, they still kept their Fifth Amendment privileges, and so Mueller could not simply demand they testify before the Grand Jury. In this way, the dangle could operate to stop any cooperation from Flynn and Manafort, who could then be pardoned later if and when they were indicted or even after their cases went through pretrial, trial and appeal. Indeed, you also have to put yourself back at the time these events all took place: before Manafort was indicted and Flynn pleaded guilty. That’s when the dangle could work its magic.

Because a pardon dangle is secret and seeks to discourage cooperation with an ongoing investigation without public scrutiny or consequences, it should be analyzed differently than a pardon when it comes to an obstruction case. Because of the way a pardon dangle operates, it should acquire none of the deference that might be afforded an actual pardon, and if the dangle is found to be orchestrated with a corrupt motive, it should qualify as a potential act of obstruction of justice.

Dowd now vociferously denies that there was any dangle at all, but if one occurred it will be fairly easy to prove. Dowd also has every reason to try to deny it. Not only does it look bad in the court of public opinion. It is bad in the court of law. The fact that Dowd made the offer—as Trump’s personal lawyer—means presumptively this was also no official act. As Marty Lederman has noted, Dowd himself may be prosecutable for involvement in what amounts to criminal activity here. At bottom, a key to understanding this issue is not to be distracted by debates about the scope or absolute nature of the pardon power. The dangling pardon is a different creature, necessitating a very different analytic inquiry.

So even if they were pardoned, it wouldn't be the end of the world, as they loose their right to fifth Amendment Privilege, meaning that Mueller could literally just Subpoena them to testify. And the idea was discussed as a way to stop him from cutting a deal, it could just as easily qualify for Obstruction.

edited 28th Mar '18 8:52:53 PM by megaeliz

speedyboris Since: Feb, 2010
#236978: Mar 28th 2018 at 8:46:10 PM

Re: Assange losing internet: Should've been done years ago.

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#236979: Mar 28th 2018 at 9:03:47 PM

He lost it before, but they gave it back. I hope this time they don't give it back...but I doubt it.

Disgusted, but not surprised
Grafite Since: Apr, 2016 Relationship Status: Less than three
#236980: Mar 29th 2018 at 3:53:27 AM

@ironballs16: Actually, if you look closely into the image, you can see all the letters there, his initials K and R, and also her ones, the A and the M. She should stay in jail for a long time.

Anyway, this new VA secretary might have good qualifications, but Trump undoubtely hired him not based on experience, but because he praised the president's good health to no end many times.

Life is unfair...
speedyboris Since: Feb, 2010
#236981: Mar 29th 2018 at 5:24:17 AM

Can't remember if it's been brought up before in this thread, but anybody else disturbed that Trump wants to do a line-item veto on the next budget that reaches his desk? This isn't allowed by the Constitution that he claims to respect so much.

sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#236982: Mar 29th 2018 at 5:25:40 AM

[up] It came up right after the omnibus bill passed. I think the fact he can't do it prompted concern up pass quickly, though it was noted that was apparently something allowed in the Confederate States of America.

MorningStar1337 The Encounter that ended the Dogma from 🤔 Since: Nov, 2012
The Encounter that ended the Dogma
#236983: Mar 29th 2018 at 5:28:01 AM

[up]

apparently something allowed in the Confederate States of America.

Which should set off more alarm bells.

megaeliz Since: Mar, 2017
#236984: Mar 29th 2018 at 5:37:16 AM

[up] Not that he knows that though.

edited 29th Mar '18 5:37:54 AM by megaeliz

Ominae Since: Jul, 2010
#236985: Mar 29th 2018 at 6:39:17 AM

Been hearing reports that some hearings on students who don’t join the pro-gun controls in schools. Are they must of an isolated case?

sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#236986: Mar 29th 2018 at 6:50:21 AM

[up] Could you clarify please? Are you saying that pro gun control students are being punished?

Ominae Since: Jul, 2010
#236987: Mar 29th 2018 at 7:01:41 AM

Read up stories on local news sites that students beat up on those who don’t join in pro-gun control marches.

TheWanderer Student of Story from Somewhere in New England (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: Wishfully thinking
Student of Story
#236988: Mar 29th 2018 at 7:08:12 AM

Can't remember if it's been brought up before in this thread, but anybody else disturbed that Trump wants to do a line-item veto on the next budget that reaches his desk? This isn't allowed by the Constitution that he claims to respect so much.

Line item veto was briefly in place in the 90s and quickly struck down by the Supreme Court. Trump isn't getting his grubby little hands on it.

[up] My initial Gut Feeling is to say this sounds like either rumor mongering at best, or active BS at worst. (Ala the Republican woman who claimed a black Obama supporter carved up her face in 2008 after seeing her McCain bumper sticker and admitted a few days later that she did it)

Not saying it's impossible, people certainly keep lowering my already low expectations for them, but this just doesn't feel kosher.

edited 29th Mar '18 7:14:15 AM by TheWanderer

| Wandering, but not lost. | If people bring so much courage to this world...◊ |
RedSavant Since: Jan, 2001
#236990: Mar 29th 2018 at 7:17:56 AM

A quick Google search suggests that "Mark Pantano" is the author of a book called Destroying Trump: The Left's Obsession to Take Down the President and What It Means for America.

Sounds like a reliable news source.

It's been fun.
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#236991: Mar 29th 2018 at 7:19:41 AM

Welp I ain't clicking that link then. Any chance of finding something from the local station or source apparently reporting this to begin with?

[down] Or the original local report, at least.

edited 29th Mar '18 7:20:42 AM by sgamer82

Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#236992: Mar 29th 2018 at 7:19:42 AM

Yeah, calling horseshit on this one until reliable national/international sources offer insight.

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
carbon-mantis Collector Of Fine Oddities from Trumpland Since: Mar, 2010 Relationship Status: Married to my murderer
Collector Of Fine Oddities
#236993: Mar 29th 2018 at 7:31:51 AM

[1]

Edit- scratch that, photos are from a gofundme to support the student's medical bills.

This news site claims he messaged another student and accused him of using the walkout to skip school, after which they argued heatedly and the offender then attacked him at school.

edited 29th Mar '18 7:39:23 AM by carbon-mantis

3of4 Just a harmless giant from a foreign land. from Five Seconds in the Future. Since: Jan, 2010 Relationship Status: GAR for Archer
Just a harmless giant from a foreign land.
#236994: Mar 29th 2018 at 7:34:25 AM

[up]pretty non-saying, beyond that it was over political differences. Without more context you'd only guess.

"You can reply to this Message!"
Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#236995: Mar 29th 2018 at 7:40:50 AM

Trump is being told by his external "advisors" (re: friends and old contacts with zero political chops) that he doesn't need a Communications Director or a Chief of Staff in the traditional sense.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/29/politics/trump-staffing/index.html

If those positions are left empty, then the previous year and a bit will look orderly compared to what comes next.

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
Deadbeatloser22 from Disappeared by Space Magic (Great Old One) Relationship Status: Tsundere'ing
Hodor2 Since: Jan, 2015
#236997: Mar 29th 2018 at 7:52:58 AM

Makes me think of that saying, "A lie can walk halfway around the world before truth can get his boots on."

RainehDaze Nero Fangirl (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
Nero Fangirl
#236998: Mar 29th 2018 at 7:54:07 AM

Is that a saying? I thought it was from The Truth.

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#236999: Mar 29th 2018 at 7:59:06 AM

News portraying the protesting students in a bad light turned out to be bullshit? I'm totally (not) shocked!

edited 29th Mar '18 8:00:32 AM by M84

Disgusted, but not surprised
ironballs16 Since: Jul, 2009 Relationship Status: Owner of a lonely heart
#237000: Mar 29th 2018 at 8:04:36 AM

[up][up]

I'm reasonably sure that Mark Twain came up with that saying.

Nix that - Twain was a case of Beam Me Up, Scotty!, and the saying (or at least the sentiment) is far older than the 1900s.

edited 29th Mar '18 8:06:04 AM by ironballs16

"Why would I inflict myself on somebody else?"

Total posts: 417,856
Top