Orange is the new President

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 22615
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Jennifer » 26 Sep 2018, 16:25

They were not boo-ing Mr. Burns, they were saying "Boo-urns, boo-urns," sez Nikki Haley.

"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 12306
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Eric the .5b » 26 Sep 2018, 17:50

Jennifer wrote:
26 Sep 2018, 16:25
They were not boo-ing Mr. Burns, they were saying "Boo-urns, boo-urns," sez Nikki Haley.

Baghdad Bob lives!
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
"Cyberpunk never really gave the government enough credit for their ability to secure a favorable prenup during the Corporate-State wedding." - Shem

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 22615
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Jennifer » 26 Sep 2018, 18:03

I guess she figures Colin Powell is a role model: "Trashing his integrity to prop up a shitty president worked out SO well for him!"
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 12306
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Eric the .5b » 26 Sep 2018, 18:09

She has integrity?
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
"Cyberpunk never really gave the government enough credit for their ability to secure a favorable prenup during the Corporate-State wedding." - Shem

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 22615
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Jennifer » 26 Sep 2018, 18:18

She had a reputation for it, at least. After various Confederassholes gave her shit for taking the Confederate flag off the SC statehouse grounds (after Dylann Roof's mass murder), IIRC Reason posted an article comparing her behavior to the more openly racist Republicans and Republican enablers; something about how "the GOP needs to decide if they want to be the party of Ann Coulter or the party of Nikki Haley."
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 22615
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Jennifer » 26 Sep 2018, 18:21

[Searches Gryll-archive] Ah, here we are:

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1314&p=297613&hilit ... er#p297613

Jennifer wrote:
13 Jul 2015, 15:29
M. Welch wrote a piece on H&R today calling Trump the "Idiocracy candidate," but he has one good, Trump-free quote which IMO does a good job of summarizing the current GOP dilemma in a nutshell:
Republicans could be the party of South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, whose respectful-to-all-sides speech last month about lowering the Confederate battle flag over her state's capitol was one of the genuinely great pieces of recent American oratory. Or it can be the party of bestselling conservative entertainer Ann Coulter, who snorted ignorantly on Kennedy that Haley "is an immigrant and does not understand America's history," and then when called out on the collectivist error (Haley was born in South Carolina) tweeted out: "2d gen immigrant, as she constantly brags. Maj. Nidal Hasan, Anwar al-Awlaki, Octomom -we R getting the best ppl!"
The party of Haley might have a good political future in America, but the party of Coulter will only grow more irrelevant on a national scale (though it will still win elections in various places). Right now, the Coulterites seem to be sucking up most of the oxygen in the GOP tent.
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 12306
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Eric the .5b » 26 Sep 2018, 20:18

Jennifer wrote:
26 Sep 2018, 18:18
She had a reputation for it, at least.
Big difference. She may not have been a frothing true believer, but she is obviously a weathervane.

And really, I never knew why people kept throwing around "integrity" WRT Colin Powell, beyond that he was a general and we love our high-ranking officers. I saw him give a speech back in the mid-90s, and the guy gave me a slimy vibe when the topic got to politics; he got far too much enjoyment out of being coy about whether he was going to run for office. And at what may have been his very first chance he got to slow some actual integrity in his political career, he gleefully exploited his reputation to sell a bullshit war.
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
"Cyberpunk never really gave the government enough credit for their ability to secure a favorable prenup during the Corporate-State wedding." - Shem

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 22615
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Jennifer » 26 Sep 2018, 20:41

Eric the .5b wrote:
26 Sep 2018, 20:18
Jennifer wrote:
26 Sep 2018, 18:18
She had a reputation for it, at least.
Big difference. She may not have been a frothing true believer, but she is obviously a weathervane.

And really, I never knew why people kept throwing around "integrity" WRT Colin Powell, beyond that he was a general and we love our high-ranking officers. I saw him give a speech back in the mid-90s, and the guy gave me a slimy vibe when the topic got to politics; he got far too much enjoyment out of being coy about whether he was going to run for office. And at what may have been his very first chance he got to slow some actual integrity in his political career, he gleefully exploited his reputation to sell a bullshit war.
I didn't pay too much attention to national politics in the 90s, granted -- but I'd bet Powell had a far better reputation then, before he pulled that whole "OMG yes we DEFINITELY need to invade Iraq ALL FEAR THE YELLOWCAKE!!!" whargarble.

As for Haley--the kindest thing I can think to say about her now is, she must be abysmally short-sighted, if she doesn't think her "Oh, the UN General Assembly was laughing to show how much they respect Trump" will make her look good in the eyes of anybody other than her dipshit boss and his dipshit supporters.
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Pham Nuwen
Posts: 6596
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 02:17

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Pham Nuwen » 27 Sep 2018, 10:51

What the fuck? Why is George Washington being brought up? Whyyyyyyyy????
Goddamn libertarian message board. Hugh Akston

leave me to my mescaline smoothie in peace, please. dhex

User avatar
Kolohe
Posts: 13414
Joined: 06 May 2010, 10:51

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Kolohe » 27 Sep 2018, 13:54

I heard that motherfucker had like 30 goddamn dicks.
when you wake up as the queen of the n=1 kingdom and mount your steed non sequiturius, do you look out upon all you survey and think “damn, it feels good to be a green idea sleeping furiously?" - dhex

User avatar
Shem
Posts: 7153
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 00:27

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Shem » 27 Sep 2018, 18:16

Of course he'd be rejected for the court. He once held an opponent's wife's hand. In a jar of acid. At a party.
"VOTE SHEMOCRACY! You will only have to do it once!" -Loyalty Officer Aresen

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 24382
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Warren » 27 Sep 2018, 20:08

He totally lied about not being able to tell a lie.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
Hugh Akston
Posts: 17166
Joined: 05 May 2010, 15:51
Location: El Pueblo de Nuestra Señora Reina de los Angeles

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Hugh Akston » 27 Sep 2018, 23:37

Washington was held in contempt for refusing to disclose why he killed his sensei in a duel.
"Is a Lulztopia the best we can hope for?!?" ~Taktix®
"Inexplicably cockfighting monsters that live in your pants" ~Jadagul

User avatar
Pham Nuwen
Posts: 6596
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 02:17

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Pham Nuwen » 28 Sep 2018, 00:28

Hugh Akston wrote:
27 Sep 2018, 23:37
Washington was held in contempt for refusing to disclose why he killed his sensei in a duel.
Anime?
Goddamn libertarian message board. Hugh Akston

leave me to my mescaline smoothie in peace, please. dhex

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 12306
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Eric the .5b » 28 Sep 2018, 01:54

Pham Nuwen wrote:
28 Sep 2018, 00:28
Hugh Akston wrote:
27 Sep 2018, 23:37
Washington was held in contempt for refusing to disclose why he killed his sensei in a duel.
Anime?


NSFW.
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
"Cyberpunk never really gave the government enough credit for their ability to secure a favorable prenup during the Corporate-State wedding." - Shem

User avatar
dhex
Posts: 15416
Joined: 05 May 2010, 16:05
Location: 'murica

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by dhex » 28 Sep 2018, 07:22

ate opponents brains and invented cocaine
"I do wear my New Balance tennis shoes when I'm wearing cargo shorts, though, because truth in advertising." - lunch

User avatar
Taktix®
Posts: 7751
Joined: 07 May 2010, 05:29
Location: The Caribbean

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Taktix® » 28 Sep 2018, 13:40

Prediction/Interpretation of the Sequence of Events this Week: Trump has been plotting get rid of Rosenstein as soon as he feasibly could because of his stubborn insistence on protecting the Mueller investigation. So they leak that wiretapping bullshit on Friday, and then pressure him to resign over the weekend, going so far as to set a meeting on Monday and to start leaking Rosenstein's ouster to the press.

But Rosenstein refused to resign, so Trump decides to just fire him Monday instead. This is significant because the difference between firing the DAG and his resigning is that Trump could be at risk of obstructing justice if he initiates the firing.

This is how it ties into Kavanaugh. If BK is confirmed, Trump doesn't have to worry about obstructing justice because BK will let him slide if issues relating to his shutting down the Mueller investigation get to the SCOTUS.

But suddenly, on Monday, the Ford testimony gets put off until Thursday and BK's nomination is put in doubt. So Trump delays the Rosenstein meeting, by no coincidence whatsoever, to Thursday. (By the way, this administration’s ineptitude is why this is playing out in public versus the behind-the-scenes way this is usually done).

As the BK nomination begins to look less certain over the week, Trump decides to wait until BK gets through before firing Rosenstein, lest he give the Dems more stalling fodder.

So now this meeting with Rosenstein will supposedly be next week, which, again by no coincidence, happens to be roughly when the full Senate will vote on BK.

You see, this only makes sense if you view it through the lens of Trump's narcissism. Sure, he promised the Religious right he'd get an anti-Roe court for them, which answers the question "why the fuck does the supposedly moral religious community still support Trump?" But he doesn't really care about abortion and has no qualms about reneging on a deal.

What he does care about is saving his own skin, and that's what makes BK unique. I'm certain he could find another anti-Roe replacement nominee, but can he find another spoiled, corrupt, frat boy shit who has risen to the top to let him off the hook when the time comes?

I’ll consider myself correct in this prediction when Trump fires Rosenstein the second BK’s nomination is out of danger. Just watch.


Sent from my SM-J727T1 using Tapatalk


"Guilty as charged. Go ahead and ban me from the mall." - Ellie

User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 14476
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Aresen » 28 Sep 2018, 14:41

Don't see how firing Rosenstein will do any good. By January 4th, the House will be in Team Blue's hands and nothing can stop them from starting a Judicial Subcommittee investigation.

As for SCOTUS, the Watergate rulings against Nixon were almost always unanimous. I don't see how Kavanaugh can change the court ruling if the House committee starts issuing subpoenas.
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Never bring a knife to a joke fight" - dhex

User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 17905
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by D.A. Ridgely » 28 Sep 2018, 15:28

Aresen wrote:
28 Sep 2018, 14:41
Don't see how firing Rosenstein will do any good. By January 4th, the House will be in Team Blue's hands and nothing can stop them from starting a Judicial Subcommittee investigation.

As for SCOTUS, the Watergate rulings against Nixon were almost always unanimous. I don't see how Kavanaugh can change the court ruling if the House committee starts issuing subpoenas.
I have tried to explain to any number of my liberal friends that, whatever the legal merits may be, the Justice Dept position that a sitting president cannot be the subject of a criminal prosecution has nothing to do with impeachment and nothing to do with whether he could be prosecuted the day he left office. Crickets. They are all certain Kavanaugh's entire purpose is to keep Trump from impeachment, prosecution, prison, whatever. It's insane.

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 26245
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by thoreau » 28 Sep 2018, 16:01

While you are right that no judge or prosecutor can shield a president from impeachment, Congress's willingness to impeach and convict will depend on what sorts of facts are brought to light. And bringing those facts to light will be much easier if the Mueller investigation is allowed to run its course. Doesn't mean that Mueller will definitely find what people are hoping he'll find, but if such evidence is out there to be found he's in a better position to find it than Congress is.

So Rosenstein's continuance in his job matters. If Trump or his company challenge investigative moves in court, judicial rulings matter. All of this will affect what information investigators can dig for and bring to Congress's attention.
"ike Wile E. Coyote salivating over a "4000 Ways To Prepare Roadrunner" cookbook without watching his surroundings, the Road Runner of Societal Inertia snuck up on them both and beepbeeped them off the mesa."
--Shem

User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 17905
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by D.A. Ridgely » 28 Sep 2018, 16:15

thoreau wrote:
28 Sep 2018, 16:01
While you are right that no judge or prosecutor can shield a president from impeachment, Congress's willingness to impeach and convict will depend on what sorts of facts are brought to light. And bringing those facts to light will be much easier if the Mueller investigation is allowed to run its course. Doesn't mean that Mueller will definitely find what people are hoping he'll find, but if such evidence is out there to be found he's in a better position to find it than Congress is.

So Rosenstein's continuance in his job matters. If Trump or his company challenge investigative moves in court, judicial rulings matter. All of this will affect what information investigators can dig for and bring to Congress's attention.
Even acknowledging that the Democratic members of Congress can be every bit as stupid as the Republicans, the only case in which I see an actual impeachment on the horizon would be following a 2020 re-election of Trump. At that point, sure, maybe they'd have nothing to lose; but if they want to hold on to the House and take the Senate, which they'd have a fair shot at in 2020 absent a huge screw-up on their part, they'll bide their time and mostly use the two years to thwart as much of the Trump / Republican agenda as possible.

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 24382
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Warren » 28 Sep 2018, 16:48

D.A. Ridgely wrote:
28 Sep 2018, 16:15
if [the Democrats] want to hold on to the House and take the Senate ... in 2020 absent a huge screw-up on their part ...
What's the Vegas line on that? I might want a piece of that action.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
Mo
Posts: 22966
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Mo » 28 Sep 2018, 17:51

D.A. Ridgely wrote:I have tried to explain to any number of my liberal friends that, whatever the legal merits may be, the Justice Dept position that a sitting president cannot be the subject of a criminal prosecution has nothing to do with impeachment and nothing to do with whether he could be prosecuted the day he left office. Crickets. They are all certain Kavanaugh's entire purpose is to keep Trump from impeachment, prosecution, prison, whatever. It's insane.
The tradition of not prosecuting political opponents and “looking forward, not backwards” does the heavy lifting there. If the next administration tried to try Trump or his family for crimes, there would be a full court press by Rs on how this is what “banana republics” do. What ever happened to those CIA agents that committed torture? Or the senior CIA official that destroyed evidence related to said torture?
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 24382
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Warren » 28 Sep 2018, 17:58

Mo wrote:
28 Sep 2018, 17:51
D.A. Ridgely wrote:I have tried to explain to any number of my liberal friends that, whatever the legal merits may be, the Justice Dept position that a sitting president cannot be the subject of a criminal prosecution has nothing to do with impeachment and nothing to do with whether he could be prosecuted the day he left office. Crickets. They are all certain Kavanaugh's entire purpose is to keep Trump from impeachment, prosecution, prison, whatever. It's insane.
The tradition of not prosecuting political opponents and “looking forward, not backwards” does the heavy lifting there. If the next administration tried to try Trump or his family for crimes, there would be a full court press by Rs on how this is what “banana republics” do. What ever happened to those CIA agents that committed torture? Or the senior CIA official that destroyed evidence related to said torture?
There has to be political will to prosecute government agents. Most people don't think that's a crime in the first place, and if it is they were heroes for doing what had to be done at the risk of criminal prosecution.

It's unlikely there will be the will to prosecute Trump once he's out of office because the motivation driving those that want him prosecuted is to remove him from office. Once he's out it's mute, and no one will give a shit about the crimes he committed.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 17905
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by D.A. Ridgely » 28 Sep 2018, 18:03

Mo wrote:
28 Sep 2018, 17:51
D.A. Ridgely wrote:I have tried to explain to any number of my liberal friends that, whatever the legal merits may be, the Justice Dept position that a sitting president cannot be the subject of a criminal prosecution has nothing to do with impeachment and nothing to do with whether he could be prosecuted the day he left office. Crickets. They are all certain Kavanaugh's entire purpose is to keep Trump from impeachment, prosecution, prison, whatever. It's insane.
The tradition of not prosecuting political opponents and “looking forward, not backwards” does the heavy lifting there. If the next administration tried to try Trump or his family for crimes, there would be a full court press by Rs on how this is what “banana republics” do. What ever happened to those CIA agents that committed torture? Or the senior CIA official that destroyed evidence related to said torture?
I largely agree, but the weight of tradition, let alone a prudent regard for the notion that what goes around comes around, isn't nearly as reliable as it used to be. Regardless, that's entirely separate from whether sitting presidents should be temporarily exempt from having to face criminal charges because the key word there all along has been "temporarily." No one has ever, as far as I know, taken it as a legal position that presidents ipso fact get a lifetime pass for whatever crimes they may have committed. That something doesn't happen is one thing; that it couldn't happen as a matter of law is quite another.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests