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

megaeliz Since: Mar, 2017
#238976: Apr 15th 2018 at 7:01:03 PM

[up][up]I think it's fair to say, that we all agree that enforcing the international norms against the use of chemical weapons is important. And whatever else they may have been, Friday's airstrikes were appropriate, limited, and effective, targeting Chemical Weapon facilities, while minimizing danger to Civilians.

The concerning bit to me, is that the President of France had to be the one to convince our President to actually do the right thing, and keep the strike limited to chemical weapons facilities, as well as staying in Syria entirely.

Also, James Comey's ABC Interview is on right now, just so people know.

edited 15th Apr '18 7:09:19 PM by megaeliz

archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#238977: Apr 15th 2018 at 7:19:31 PM

[up] As the damage assessments are coming out we're starting to see that the strikes may have been a bit too limited.

They should have sent a poet.
Ingonyama Since: Jan, 2001
#238978: Apr 15th 2018 at 8:26:53 PM

Trump may try to claw back as much as $60 billion from spending bill. This despite the fact that Republicans in both houses of Congress have told Trump and Mulvaney not to do this and that they won't vote for it. Specifically mentioned are Collins, Murkowski, and Thune in the Senate, and Rodney Frelinghuysen and Tom Cole in the House. But McCarthy seems to be on Mulvaney's side, so who knows what will happen.

The Republicans in general seem to be saying they won't support this, and that trying to change the budget again, especially when they have to do the next spending bill in September, would be reckless and wrong, since it could threaten another shutdown right before the midterms. But we all know the Republican track record in standing up to Trump, so...

DingoWalley1 Asgore Adopts Noelle Since: Feb, 2014 Relationship Status: Can't buy me love
Asgore Adopts Noelle
#238979: Apr 15th 2018 at 8:34:41 PM

[up] I'm surprised at how little he wants to cut; sure, 60 Billion Dollars is still big, but considering the Omnibus cost a total of $1.3 Trillion(!), that is relatively tiny. It doesn't even break 1/10th of the spending in it. And knowing Trump, the stuff he'll want to cut will harm the core Republican constituency the most (the 'minor' welfare programs that benefit the older and more rural citizens of America).

Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#238980: Apr 15th 2018 at 8:58:09 PM

Honestly I think this is one of the few times that Republicans would be willing to stand up to Trump, even to people as pathetic and irrational as the GOP catering to his self-destructive whims fails to pass the simplest cost/benefit analysis at this juncture.

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
megaeliz Since: Mar, 2017
#238981: Apr 15th 2018 at 9:01:48 PM

Thread by Renato Mariotti, on Cohen's latest attempt to challenge the search warrant in court.

THREAD: What should we make of the filing by Trump’s lawyers demanding that Trump be permitted to review the documents seized by the government and remove any he believes are privileged?

1/ The letter linked here, was sent by Trump’s lawyers to the judge overseeing Cohen’s challenge to the prosecution’s seizure of documents from Cohen’s office, home, and hotel room pursuant to search warrants signed by a federal judge.

2/ As a starting point, Cohen’s challenge to the search warrants is extraordinary, and Trump’s intervention into Cohen’s legal action is even more unusual. It’s not clear that Trump has the right to challenge the government’s review of documents seized from Cohen at this stage.

3/ Typically when the government executes a search warrant, the government uses a “taint team”—a group of lawyers walled off from the investigators—to deal with privilege issues. Taint teams often aren’t necessary but are required when a lawyer is involved.

4/ Although searches of lawyer’s offices are unusual, there are established Justice Department procedures for handling them. Those procedures typically include using a taint team. On Friday, Cohen objected to using a taint team and asked to review the documents himself.

5/ As you can imagine, this was a non-starter for the prosecutors. The reason prosecutors obtained the search warrant is because they convinced a judge that there was good reason to believe Cohen committed a crime and evidence of the crime was in his office, home, and hotel room.

6/ If Cohen had the ability to go through the documents and remove documents he didn’t want the prosecution to see, he could abuse that by removing documents that prove his guilt.

7/ The typical way that prosecutors obtain records in white collar cases is through subpoena, not search warrants. If the prosecutors sent Cohen a subpoena, he *could* have gone through the records on his own and removed some of them.

8/ Prosecutors typically use that process despite the risk because it’s more efficient and cost-effective for the prosecution. But in this case, they had a reason not to—they believed Cohen would not turn over everything. Using a search warrant takes Cohen out of the process.

9/ That’s why Cohen’s request was so incredible—he was essentially asking the court to transform the search warrant into a subpoena, which doesn’t require the government to prove things to a judge. It is likely to fail. So what about Trump’s filing?

10/ Trump is essentially asking the judge for the same thing Cohen is—he wants the right to go through Cohen’s documents and pull out ones he believes are privileged. In a way, that’s even more unusual because the documents aren’t his, although he has an interest in them.

11/ In the letter, Trump’s lawyers cite no law, rule, or legal opinion that grants Trump the right to go through documents seized by the government pursuant to the search warrant. They’re essentially asking the judge to do so based on “fairness.” (The exact word they use.)

12/ Even if the judge had the power to do that—I’m not sure she does—I highly doubt she will. One thing she may do is appoint a neutral “special master” to review the documents to determine if they’re privileged. That person would be a “taint team” but appointed by the court.

13/ Appointing a special master is not without precedent, but it wouldn’t get Cohen or Trump much as a practical matter. In a filing on Friday, prosecutors noted that they previously executed other search warrants on Cohen’s email accounts and found that he wasn’t practicing law.

14/ Only communications regarding legal advice are privileged, and even those communications can lose their privilege if they’re furthering a crime.

15/ If recent press reports are correct, the warrants sought communications between Trump and Cohen, which indicates that they were discussing a topic that relates to the crime under investigation by prosecutors.

16/ As a practical matter, a special master won’t make determinations about privilege that will be much different from a “taint team.” Given that these communications were sought by the warrant, I’d expect prosecutors will obtain what they were looking for. /end

I'd say this will get thrown out pretty quickly.

edited 15th Apr '18 9:11:00 PM by megaeliz

RedSavant Since: Jan, 2001
#238982: Apr 15th 2018 at 10:10:38 PM

So what you're saying is, Cohen is desperate enough to get a request made on the record that amounts to 'stop bengbeing mean to my frend, singed donny Trump', in crayon.

It's been fun.
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#238983: Apr 16th 2018 at 5:53:23 AM

Again, Trump and Cohen seem to be playing Connect-Four in the back yard with a classroom of toddlers, while Mueller and company are playing a hybrid of Risk and three-dimensional chess. It's not merely lopsided, it's actually somewhat pathetic.

edited 16th Apr '18 5:53:58 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Swanpride Since: Jun, 2013
#238984: Apr 16th 2018 at 5:58:46 AM

Trump is playing Tic Tac Toe and his first move was to pick one the middle edge squares.

FyodorDose Since: Mar, 2018
#238985: Apr 16th 2018 at 6:57:19 AM

Everyone knows the best strategy in that game is to claim the middle and hold the corners. Cohen was the president's middle.

megaeliz Since: Mar, 2017
#238986: Apr 16th 2018 at 7:25:33 AM

He's suprisingly restrained this morning.

Comey drafted the Crooked Hillary exoneration long before he talked to her (lied in Congress to Senator G), then based his decisions on her poll numbers. Disgruntled, he, Mc Cabe, and the others, committed many crimes!

Russia and China are playing the Currency Devaluation game as the U.S. keeps raising interest rates. Not acceptable!

I was expecting more after last nights Comey interview.

edited 16th Apr '18 7:26:55 AM by megaeliz

speedyboris Since: Feb, 2010
#238987: Apr 16th 2018 at 7:27:19 AM

I'll say he's restrained when he stops resorting to childish nicknames that apply more to him than her.

CrimsonZephyr Would that it were so simple. from Massachusetts Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
Would that it were so simple.
#238988: Apr 16th 2018 at 7:29:51 AM

[up][up]That tweet might have been ghostwritten, though. It's known that staffers write a significant portion of his Twitter feed.

"For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die."
BlueNinja0 The Mod with the Migraine from Taking a left at Albuquerque Since: Dec, 2010 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
The Mod with the Migraine
#238989: Apr 16th 2018 at 7:37:23 AM

his report may never be released to the public
It took 40+ years for some of the Nixon tapes to get released to the public in an uncensored form. I really don't want it to take that long for Trump's report to take that long. I might be dead without ever getting to see it.
People who would know think the Supreme Court is unlikely to go along with it.
I have my doubts. Since SCOTUS is 5:4 Republican and has proven willing to vote on partisan lines before.

The NYT editorial page is on a roll today, trying desperately to convince Republicans that Trump, like Nixon, is not above the law Full article text 

“This great nation can tolerate a president who makes mistakes,” declared Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah. “But it cannot tolerate one who makes a mistake and then breaks the law to cover it up.”

No, Hatch wasn’t talking about Donald Trump. It was 1999, and he was talking about Bill Clinton.

At that time, the American system — and the flawed yet sometimes heroic people their fellow Americans choose to lead them — underwent, and passed, a hard test: The president, his financial dealings and his personal relationships were painstakingly investigated for years. Prosecutors ultimately accused Clinton of lying under oath, to cover up a sexual affair. The House of Representatives impeached him, but the Senate declined to convict, and Clinton stayed in office.

Now Hatch and his fellow lawmakers may be approaching a harsher and more consequential test. We quote his words not to level some sort of accusation of hypocrisy, but to remind us all of what is at stake.

News reports point to a growing possibility that Trump may act to cripple or shut down an investigation by the nation’s top law-enforcement agencies into his campaign and administration. Lawmakers need to be preparing now for that possibility because if and when it comes to pass, they will suddenly find themselves on the edge of an abyss, with the Constitution in their hands.

Make no mistake: If Trump takes such drastic action, he will be striking at the foundation of the American government, attempting to set a precedent that a president, alone among American citizens, is above the law. What can seem now like a political sideshow will instantly become a constitutional crisis, and history will come calling for Hatch and his colleagues.

For months, investigators have been examining whether Trump’s campaign conspired with the Russian government to undermine American democracy, and whether the president misused his power by obstructing justice in an effort to end that investigation.

Until the last few weeks, Trump had shown restraint, by his standards, anyway. He and his lawyers cooperated with investigators. Trump never tweeted directly about Robert Mueller, the special counsel, and spoke about him publicly only when asked.

Alas, that whiff of higher executive function is gone. Trump is openly attacking both Mueller and Rod Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, appointed by Trump himself. Rosenstein is overseeing the Russia investigation and signing off on Mueller’s actions.

Of course, this president has been known to huff and puff, to bluff and bluster, and he may be doing no more than that now. But if the president does move against the investigators, it will be up to Congress to affirm the rule of law, the separation of powers and the American constitutional order. The miserable polarization and partisan anger that have been rising in American life for decades will hit a new crescendo, and that will present congressional Republicans with a heavy burden indeed.

Many of them are not fans of this president. Republicans used to warn the nation about Trump openly, back when they thought they could still protect their party from him.

Yet if Trump goes after Mueller or Rosenstein, even Republicans who have misgivings about the president might be inclined to fall into line. They may resent what feels like an endless investigation, one that is endangering their agenda; or they may resent partisan attacks on Trump. Republicans may also find themselves tempted by the political running room they would have with the investigation ended and the three branches of government under their control.

Maybe — and this is the scariest contingency to contemplate — Republican leaders would calculate that with their support, or mere acquiescence, Trump could get away with it. The overwhelming majority of Americans, including most Republicans, want Mueller to keep his job, and perhaps a groundswell of revulsion at unchecked presidential power would follow any action against the special counsel. But many Americans, weary of the shouting in Washington, might dismiss the whole thing as another food fight.

Of course, it’s when overriding your principles is the easy thing to do that you have an urgent responsibility, and opportunity, to demonstrate that you have some.

A few senior Republicans have been saying the right things — including Hatch. He tweeted that anyone telling the president to fire Mueller “does not have the President or the nation’s best interest at heart.” Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., warned Trump that firing Mueller would be “the beginning of the end of his presidency.”

That’s all necessary and good. But it’s not enough. More Republicans need to make it clear that they won’t tolerate any action against either man, and that firing Mueller would be, as Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, said, “suicide.”

Mueller’s investigation has already yielded great benefit to the country, including the indictments of 13 Russians and three companies for trying to undermine the presidential election. None of us can know if prosecutors will eventually point the finger at the president himself. But should Trump move to hobble or kill the investigation, he would darken rather than dispel the cloud of suspicion around him. Far worse, he would free future presidents to politicize American justice.

The president is not a king but a citizen, deserving of the presumption of innocence and other protections, yet also vulnerable to lawful scrutiny. We hope Trump recognizes this. If he doesn’t, how Republican lawmakers respond will shape the future not only of this presidency and of one of the country’s great political parties, but of the American experiment itself.

No, Trump doesn't realize that the President is not a king nor a God-Emperor. And yes, we absolutely should be throwing Republican hypocrisy back in their faces. and also warning that pardons won't save Trump and his cronies the way he thinks. Full article text 

That’s the epitome of privilege right there, not considering armed nazis a threat to your life. - Silasw
TacticalFox88 from USA Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: Dating the Doctor
#238990: Apr 16th 2018 at 7:56:32 AM

So...the judge presiding over the Micheal Cohen case was briefly a playboy bunny.

...

I...

Can reality go back to making sense?

edited 16th Apr '18 8:31:18 AM by TacticalFox88

New Survey coming this weekend!
MarqFJA The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer from Deserts of the Middle East (Before Recorded History) Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
#238991: Apr 16th 2018 at 8:22:37 AM

So...the judge presiding over the Micheal Cohen case is briefly a playboy bunny.
is briefly a playboy bunny
a playboy bunny
... Excuse me???

edited 16th Apr '18 8:23:28 AM by MarqFJA

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#238992: Apr 16th 2018 at 8:25:48 AM

I'm not sure why that's exactly shocking?

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#238993: Apr 16th 2018 at 8:29:52 AM

With regards to the Supreme Court and this issue, while Republicans do control the court (you really need to look into depoliticizing the judiciary, if that's even possible without a wholesale purge), you've got ones like Roberts and Kennedy who aren't as willing to do blatantly biased rulings if they feel the court's reputation is at risk. And since this looks pretty clear cut...I'd say our chances are decent to good.

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
Steven (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
#238994: Apr 16th 2018 at 8:47:53 AM

Reality ain't gonna come back. I learned that way a long time ago.

edited 16th Apr '18 8:48:41 AM by Steven

Remember, these idiots drive, fuck, and vote. Not always in that order.
Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#238995: Apr 16th 2018 at 9:13:35 AM

[up]X4 I assume a spelling error and Tactical Fox means “was briefed by a playboy bunny” or “is briefing a playboy bunny”, as Trump is also sledged to have had an affair with a playboy bunny.

[up]X3 Playboy bunnies tend to not go on to become judges.

edited 16th Apr '18 9:14:16 AM by Silasw

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
Hodor2 Since: Jan, 2015
#238996: Apr 16th 2018 at 9:33:33 AM

No, really.

I looked it up and was kind of confused because I would have thought the detail would be publicized.

The Judge is Kimba Wood, and she was a Military Brat with a rather privileged upbringing that involved a lot of time spent in Europe. During the 1960's, when she was in England, she briefly took part in a Playboy Bunny training.

So. technically accurate, but misleading, since it gives the impression of someone whose age and other details are more akin to those of Karen Mc Dougal.

Izeinsummer Since: Jun, 2013
#238997: Apr 16th 2018 at 9:35:49 AM

Given how very many playboy bunnies there have been, I would not be in any way surprised to find a former one in any profession under the sun.

TheRoguePenguin Since: Jul, 2009
#238998: Apr 16th 2018 at 9:36:23 AM

It just means reality is not without a sense of humor.

Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#238999: Apr 16th 2018 at 9:40:15 AM

Five days training while a student isn’t realy being a playboy bunny, still it’s a weird coincidence.

Though it could be deliberate, she might well be the only relevant judge to have non-client interaction with people in the industry.

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
megaeliz Since: Mar, 2017
#239000: Apr 16th 2018 at 10:07:16 AM

More trump lawyer woes.

Another white collar lawyer turns down Trump [1]

(CNN) Another white collar lawyer has turned down the opportunity to represent President Donald Trump, citing an unidentified conflict, as the President struggles to add to the legal team representing him in the special counsel investigation.

People close to Trump contacted New York attorney Steven Molo, a former prosecutor who specializes in white collar defense and court room litigation, in recent weeks following the departure of attorney John Dowd from Trump's personal legal team.

Molo has a depth of courtroom experience, which could suggest the kind of skills Trump's legal team is seeking as it prepares to decide whether the President will be interviewed by Mueller. The approach to Molo followed the March announcement that attorneys Joseph di Genova and Victoria Toensing would not join the Trump team because of conflicts.

Trump's lawyer Jay Sekulow declined to comment.

Molo also said conflicts played a role in his decision to turn down the offer to represent the President, a client that some lawyers have said is too difficult to manage. Trump's lawyers are still having trouble finding attorneys to join their team.

"I regret a current conflict related to the investigation prevents me from representing the President at this time," Molo told CNN.

"Conflicts", seems to be the catch all for "I don't want to take him as a client because he doesn't listen and is known for not paying people. This isn't good for Trump though. He's already absurdly outmatched, and this does not help matters at all.

This is a problem for Trump, because Jay Sekulow is completely unqualified to represent him in the Mueller investigation. Trump should consider using the attorney representing him in the Cohen matter, Joanna Hendon, who would be qualified. [[2]

Personally, I'm waiting for him to fire all of his lawyers, and try to represent himself, because he's obviously the best at it.

edited 16th Apr '18 10:28:31 AM by megaeliz


Total posts: 417,856
Top