ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags donald trump , Trump administration , Trump controversies

Reply
Old 28th September 2019, 09:20 AM   #241
carlosy
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 164
Out of curiosity, what would be the right and legal way in the following situation:

Any US president suspects one of the presidential candidates to be involved in something illegal (maybe now or in the past) and goverments of another country might have serious information on this matter and could help.

What are the correct options?

a) Do nothing and wait until after the election so that the US citizen is not a presidential candidate anymore (risking that this person could then be actually the new president)?

b) Report/inform authorities: Which ones? FBI, CIA? Risking that someone in there then suspects the president/government to seek help from another country against a presidential candidate or trying to smear his campaign?

c) Possible illegal activities of US-citizens, especially presidential candidates, are not the presidents concern.

carlosy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 09:26 AM   #242
Delphic Oracle
Illuminator
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 3,564
Originally Posted by carlosy View Post
Out of curiosity, what would be the right and legal way in the following situation:

Any US president suspects one of the presidential candidates to be involved in something illegal (maybe now or in the past) and goverments of another country might have serious information on this matter and could help.

What are the correct options?

a) Do nothing and wait until after the election so that the US citizen is not a presidential candidate anymore (risking that this person could then be actually the new president)?

b) Report/inform authorities: Which ones? FBI, CIA? Risking that someone in there then suspects the president/government to seek help from another country against a presidential candidate or trying to smear his campaign?

c) Possible illegal activities of US-citizens, especially presidential candidates, are not the presidents concern.

1) collect evidence through proper methods.

2) decide if there is enough evidence to indict.

3) present evidence to a jury in a court of law.

Not sure why that was so hard.

ETA: assuming there is even a criminal act to investigate that the U.S. would have jurisdiction over.

Last edited by Delphic Oracle; 28th September 2019 at 09:27 AM.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 09:29 AM   #243
carlosy
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 164
And what would be the proper method to collect information from a different government? Or is this never an option?

I am not a US citizen, so just asking out of curiousity.
carlosy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 09:33 AM   #244
Fast Eddie B
Philosopher
 
Fast Eddie B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Mineral Bluff, GA
Posts: 5,776
I canít figure out if Kellyanne Conway is a truly reprehensible excuse for a human being, or just an actress portraying one.

__________________
ďI do solemnly swear (or affirm) that...I will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.Ē - President Donald J. Trump, January 20, 2017.
"And it's, frankly, disgusting the way the press is able to write whatever they want to write. And people should look into it." - President Donald J. Trump, October 11, 2017.
Fast Eddie B is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 09:34 AM   #245
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 22,399
Originally Posted by carlosy View Post
Out of curiosity, what would be the right and legal way in the following situation:

Any US president suspects one of the presidential candidates to be involved in something illegal (maybe now or in the past) and goverments of another country might have serious information on this matter and could help.

What are the correct options?

a) Do nothing and wait until after the election so that the US citizen is not a presidential candidate anymore (risking that this person could then be actually the new president)?

b) Report/inform authorities: Which ones? FBI, CIA? Risking that someone in there then suspects the president/government to seek help from another country against a presidential candidate or trying to smear his campaign?

c) Possible illegal activities of US-citizens, especially presidential candidates, are not the presidents concern.

What makes you believe that law enforcement and intelligence officers aren't better informed and situated and can pursue those matters without the President? This is a question of conflict of interests.

In this case Trump is using appropriated military funds as a lever to get a foreign government to go after a political rival. Whether Biden is as corrupt as Trump, doesn't justify Trump using American power in this way.
__________________
Try
Science, not superstition.
Reason, not revelation.
Education, not epiphanies
Intellect, not ignorance.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 09:36 AM   #246
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 22,399
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie B View Post
I canít figure out if Kellyanne Conway is a truly reprehensible excuse for a human being, or just an actress portraying one.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...c174f6396b.jpg
She's a reprehensible excuse.
__________________
Try
Science, not superstition.
Reason, not revelation.
Education, not epiphanies
Intellect, not ignorance.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 09:45 AM   #247
carlosy
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 164
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
What makes you believe that law enforcement and intelligence officers aren't better informed and situated and can pursue those matters without the President? This is a question of conflict of interests.
I am not trying to agitate. I'm just interested in the correct way to act for a president if he thinks he is in the situation I presented.

My question is unrelated to Trump/Biden
carlosy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 09:49 AM   #248
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9,861
Originally Posted by alfaniner View Post
Oh, I just figured it out! "Liddle'"-- the apostrophe represents "foot"!
So he's calling him Liddlefoot - like the dinosaur from The Land Before Time. What a genius way to make a snipe!

But then, there's the whole misspelling "little" thing...
I think he was going for the typographical form of a bullies' version of "little" which IMO would be "widdle." Using an apostrophe usually indicates a contraction, as in Lil' Kim (the hiphop artist and the dictator of North Korea).

But "little" or "liddle" isn't a contraction for anything.

The conspiracy aspect of the choice of the term liddle - too much for me to absorb right now.

A couple of tech questions:
- My search for Lil' Kim yielded 139,000,000 results in .68 seconds. How does Google do that?
- When Trump tweets, does everyone who follows him get a text? Because that sounds like it would be annoying even if you welcomed Trump's copious output of propaganda
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 09:52 AM   #249
shemp
a flimsy character...perfidious and despised
 
shemp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: People's Democratic Republic of Planet X
Posts: 31,740
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
She's a reprehensible excuse.
Correction: She's not a human being, she's a reptoid.
__________________
"Shemp, you are the one fixed point in an ever-changing universe." - Beady
"I don't want to live in a world without shemp." - Quarky
"Real name? Xavier Jorge Gladdius Horatio McShrimp. No wonder he goes by shemp." - wasapi
"...just as a magnet attracts iron filings, Trump shemp attracts, and is attracted to, louts." - George Will
shemp is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 09:54 AM   #250
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 11,927
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
I think he was going for the typographical form of a bullies' version of "little" which IMO would be "widdle." Using an apostrophe usually indicates a contraction, as in Lil' Kim (the hiphop artist and the dictator of North Korea).

But "little" or "liddle" isn't a contraction for anything.

The conspiracy aspect of the choice of the term liddle - too much for me to absorb right now.

A couple of tech questions:
- My search for Lil' Kim yielded 139,000,000 results in .68 seconds. How does Google do that?
- When Trump tweets, does everyone who follows him get a text? Because that sounds like it would be annoying even if you welcomed Trump's copious output of propaganda
The rapper can misspell her nickname however she wants, but the traditional spelling of the contraction of "little" is "li'l", because it is the sounds between the i and l which are omitted.
phiwum is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 09:56 AM   #251
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9,861
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
She's a reprehensible excuse.
I've wondered the same thing though. Sometimes she's so over the top I think she must be engaged in satire.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 09:59 AM   #252
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9,861
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
The rapper can misspell her nickname however she wants, but the traditional spelling of the contraction of "little" is "li'l", because it is the sounds between the i and l which are omitted.
But that only got 32 million results. Sometimes people get things wrong so often they become the new right. "Is comprised of," for example.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 09:59 AM   #253
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 22,399
Originally Posted by carlosy View Post
I am not trying to agitate. I'm just interested in the correct way to act for a president if he thinks he is in the situation I presented.

My question is unrelated to Trump/Biden
It really doesn't matter.

This isn't in his purview. It's overstepping his authority, it's also a conflict of interest.

It would be questionable if a candidate sent private investigators to a foreign country to dig up dirt on a political opponent. But to have the President use our national resources to do the same thing is definitely abusing his authority. Those resources and the power he wields doesn't belong to him.
__________________
Try
Science, not superstition.
Reason, not revelation.
Education, not epiphanies
Intellect, not ignorance.
.

Last edited by acbytesla; 28th September 2019 at 10:03 AM.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 10:03 AM   #254
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 22,399
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
I've wondered the same thing though. Sometimes she's so over the top I think she must be engaged in satire.
It does seem that way.
__________________
Try
Science, not superstition.
Reason, not revelation.
Education, not epiphanies
Intellect, not ignorance.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 10:08 AM   #255
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9,861
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
It really doesn't matter.

This isn't in his purview. It's overstepping his authority, it's also a conflict of interest.

It would be questionable if a candidate sent private investigators to a foreign country to dig up dirt on a political opponent. But to have the President use our national resources to do the same thing is abusing his authority. Those resources and the power he wields doesn't belong to him.
He's oblivious to that thought. I mean, how hard would it have been form him to just do all this in secret? Doesn't he have some 2019 version of CREEP to do his dirty work while giving Trump plausible deniability? How did he think any of this is OK? He's not afraid of being caught - he truly seems to not understand how his actions could be perceived as improper.

ETA: Any moment he could tweet out that every president does this kind of stuff. I read that one of his initial disagreements with Tillerson was about paying bribes to foreign officials. Trump saw nothing wrong with it.

Last edited by Minoosh; 28th September 2019 at 10:12 AM.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 10:18 AM   #256
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,006
Originally Posted by carlosy View Post
And what would be the proper method to collect information from a different government? Or is this never an option?

I am not a US citizen, so just asking out of curiousity.
It would depend on the country involved.

We have agreements and a system with Ukraine (whose acronym slips my mind an the moment) where the State Department submits a request on behave of whatever law enforcement agency believes there is information in the other country. Ukraine reviews the request and returns what information they have, what other cooperation might be acceptable, and decides if they want to commit investigative resources to this.

At no point, besides perhaps submitting initial evidence to whatever US law enforcement agency would be appropriate for the suspected wrongdoing, is the President's personal lawyer involved. The AG isn't even supposed to be directly involved. It is standardized and bureaucratic specifically to avoid political interference because such a thing would be wrong, illegal, and damage future international relationships as well as internal trust in the legal system.

What Trump et al have done is clearly corrupt and illegal. Anyone pretending it isn't simply isn't being reasonable.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 10:18 AM   #257
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 11,927
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
But that only got 32 million results. Sometimes people get things wrong so often they become the new right. "Is comprised of," for example.
And sometimes, the fact that lots of people get the same thing wrong is no reason to regard it as right.

The apostrophe indicates missing sounds. Hence, "li'l" and not "lil'". And I don't give a damn how many go for the latter. That's not how the apostrophe works.
phiwum is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 10:19 AM   #258
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 22,399
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
He's oblivious to that thought. I mean, how hard would it have been form him to just do all this in secret? Doesn't he have some 2019 version of CREEP to do his dirty work while giving Trump plausible deniability? How did he think any of this is OK? He's not afraid of being caught - he truly seems to not understand how his actions could be perceived as improper.

ETA: Any moment he could tweet out that every president does this kind of stuff. I read that one of his initial disagreements with Tillerson was about paying bribes to foreign officials. Trump saw nothing wrong with it.
I know. He thinks it just business.
__________________
Try
Science, not superstition.
Reason, not revelation.
Education, not epiphanies
Intellect, not ignorance.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 10:23 AM   #259
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,006
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie B View Post
I canít figure out if Kellyanne Conway is a truly reprehensible excuse for a human being, or just an actress portraying one.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...c174f6396b.jpg
Becoming the mask is a sad thing.

Unless it is becoming The Mask, then it might be fun.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 10:24 AM   #260
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 9,758
We've had a couple of memoirs from Obama administration members who describe exactly the problem that a President faces:
there was overwhelming evidence that Trump was engaged in shady businesses, but the fact that he was a candidate made it almost impossible to start an investigation that wouldn't look like an abuse of power.

So the AG and IC focused on groups that Trump might have contact with in his criming, like Russian Oligarchs, the Russian Embassy, etc., or followed up leads given to them by other intelligence agencies.

We know from several sources that in the run-up to the election, Obama took great pains to never be alone in a room with Eric Holder, and made clear that he wouldn't discuss Trump with him.

Last edited by The Great Zaganza; 28th September 2019 at 10:25 AM.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 10:26 AM   #261
Delphic Oracle
Illuminator
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 3,564
Originally Posted by carlosy View Post
And what would be the proper method to collect information from a different government? Or is this never an option?

I am not a US citizen, so just asking out of curiousity.
Through an official request in writing to the appropriate agency. This should probably be done without any mention of potential rewards or consequences in completely unrelated areas.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 10:58 AM   #262
Delphic Oracle
Illuminator
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 3,564
Justice Department says they "did not and could not make out a criminal campaign finance violation."

Ok, that's nice. What if his behavior was not a campaign finance violation, but some other kind of illegal activity.


"You ran a red light and t-boned a school bus full of kids."

"I was not speeding, so unfair!"
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 11:05 AM   #263
Aridas
Crazy Little Green Dragon
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 5,439
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
I think that what gets Trump supporters so worked up is not that Trump does so many obviously ****** things:
it's their perception that Dems/Libs/etc. seem to get away with their scandals whereas Trump can't seem to crime properly as to not leave obvious proof.
A vague feeling that is heavily reinforced by the RW media. This is actually pretty much in line with what the reaction that I saw from Republicans about the electoral fraud in NC. The ones that I know seemed to mostly react with... "But what about all those times that Democrats were cheating? The ONLY reason the media's making a big deal of that is because Republicans did it." If they deigned to back up their claims, well... it was to cite stuff like Right-Wingers getting outraged at legitimately cast Democratic votes actually being counted in the first place and stuff that wasn't much better than that.

It's a lot like their sudden obsession with antifa. Speaking of antifa, though... I thought that this piece made for a fine read.

The Hokoana trial: Inside the 'Antifa' shooting incident the media don't want to talk about

Also, just to keep it clear, the shooting was done by a right-winger who was there to cause trouble and done to a left-winger who was acting to limit the trouble. And, well... **** Milo and right wing lack of standards.

Quote:
The confusion arose because Yiannopoulos claimed in his speech inside Kane Hall that it had been one of his alt-right fans who had been shot outside the event by an antifascist, making it a reason to continue speaking: “If I stopped my event now, we are sending a clear message that they can stop our events by killing people. I am not prepared to do that," he told the audience.

Breitbart News and The Daily Caller both reported the same. The Daily Caller wound up writing a story that corrected the facts but, notably, did not explain that it was a correction of the site's previous reportage. Breitbart, meanwhile, not only never bothered to correct its reportage, but it instead (without a hint of irony) accused the UW president of changing her story about the event, and left the shooting utterly unmentioned in its subsequent reportage.
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie B View Post
I can’t figure out if Kellyanne Conway is a truly reprehensible excuse for a human being, or just an actress portraying one.
For practical purposes, why should we care? If, for example, a Republican senator pushes through legislation that pretty much everyone knows will hurt people and help... no one, I'm definitely not going to care whether he actually personally supports such or if he's just acting a part.

In random other news...

FEC Chair Releases Its Digest To Public After Trump Lackey Tries To Suppress It

Yet more evidence of the Party of Trump's utter disdain for the 1st Amendment.

Also... As Trump's trade war upends markets, his bailouts to farmers hit $28 billion

There's a couple quite pertinent points there, like...

Quote:
If you want to know whether that's a lot of money in the grand government scheme of things, it's over double what the government ended up paying to save the U.S. automotive industry during the 2008 Great Recession. Those efforts, by both Bush and Obama, had Republicans absolutely spittle-flecked in their outrage. A chap named Mitt Romney wrote a now-famous op-ed condemning the plan; Trump and his mini-me vice president both have themselves been vocal in their opposition to that bailout.
And the fact that there's no expectation for the farmers to pay the money back, unlike the auto industry. Yet... there's no right-wing outrage worth noting. All the more reason to treat the right-wing as being utterly bereft of actual principle until such time as they can actually friggin' demonstrate it in a scenario where it's not really friggin' obviously just intended to harm political opponents and rivals.

Back to the general topic of the whistleblower, though.

Team Trump worked heavily to get Trump's Saudi-Arabia calls leakfree

Calls with Putin, too, to what should be no one's surprise.

And with who else, we can wonder, for that matter, and how much has Trump outright betrayed the US in pursuit of personal gain?
__________________
So sayeth the crazy little dragon.

Last edited by Aridas; 28th September 2019 at 11:43 AM. Reason: minor correction
Aridas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 11:07 AM   #264
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 9,758
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
Justice Department says they "did not and could not make out a criminal campaign finance violation."

...

The reason being that they can't establish that investigating Biden would be a thing of value.


...

WHAT?
The DOJ can't estimate how much an investigation by a Federal Prosecutor into a domestic company and members of its board would cost?
It is something Federal Prosecutors do literally every day.

Even if you think this might just be Campaign Finance, their excuses are *********.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 11:11 AM   #265
Aridas
Crazy Little Green Dragon
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 5,439
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
Justice Department says they "did not and could not make out a criminal campaign finance violation."

Ok, that's nice. What if his behavior was not a campaign finance violation, but some other kind of illegal activity.


"You ran a red light and t-boned a school bus full of kids."

"I was not speeding, so unfair!"
Did Barr put his unrecused hand into a matter where he was directly implicated?
__________________
So sayeth the crazy little dragon.
Aridas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 11:19 AM   #266
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 9,758
Originally Posted by Aridas View Post
Did Barr put his unrecused hand into a matter where he was directly implicated?
as long as Barr insists there was no crime, there can't have been a cover-up, so there can't have been obstruction, so there can't be a need for Recusal.

The only crime Trump can commit, according to Barr, is to admit that he committed a crime.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 11:27 AM   #267
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9,861
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
I remain surprised at just how many worker bees there are in the White House and beyond that aren't tRump's buddies. Seems like an awful lot more people are witnesses to what's going on than I would have imagined.

Trump's probably so used to minimum wages workers around him he doesn't realize there are actually educated intelligent people that work in the WH.
I'm not that fond of CNN these days but this morning they had a good piece breaking down who all the players are. I called it up from a news app on my phone & would link but not sure how on tablet. Google who's who Ukraine CNN.

Last edited by Minoosh; 28th September 2019 at 11:39 AM.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 11:38 AM   #268
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9,861
I started disliking CNN right around when Trump won. I felt that they were telegraphing bias and even though I was largely sympathetic their tone bothered me. This morning's piece played it straight. It included the Ukrainians mentioned as well. I'll link if I figure out how.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 11:50 AM   #269
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9,861
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
And sometimes, the fact that lots of people get the same thing wrong is no reason to regard it as right.

The apostrophe indicates missing sounds. Hence, "li'l" and not "lil'". And I don't give a damn how many go for the latter. That's not how the apostrophe works.
I'm trying to think of a contraction that doesn't end with the last letter of the phrase, as in "can't," "I'd," etc.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 11:55 AM   #270
Aridas
Crazy Little Green Dragon
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 5,439
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
I started disliking CNN right around when Trump won. I felt that they were telegraphing bias and even though I was largely sympathetic their tone bothered me. This morning's piece played it straight. It included the Ukrainians mentioned as well. I'll link if I figure out how.
CNN was focused more on profiting off of Trump's outrageousness than just about any other concerns, really, since before he was President. That didn't really change, by the look of it? Multiple owners of the so called liberal media, including CNN's, I thought, outright declared that Trump, while he might be bad for the country, was great for their ratings, and thus, their profits.
__________________
So sayeth the crazy little dragon.
Aridas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 12:12 PM   #271
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 76,046
Originally Posted by carlosy View Post
Out of curiosity, what would be the right and legal way in the following situation:

Any US president suspects one of the presidential candidates to be involved in something illegal (maybe now or in the past) and goverments of another country might have serious information on this matter and could help.

What are the correct options?

a) Do nothing and wait until after the election so that the US citizen is not a presidential candidate anymore (risking that this person could then be actually the new president)?

b) Report/inform authorities: Which ones? FBI, CIA? Risking that someone in there then suspects the president/government to seek help from another country against a presidential candidate or trying to smear his campaign?

c) Possible illegal activities of US-citizens, especially presidential candidates, are not the presidents concern.

Really, that's how you see it?

OK, why withhold the aid money?
Why not look at what is already known (or have your people look into it)?
Why isn't this something the DoJ, FBI or the CIA are charged to look into? Your rationale is seriously full of plot holes.
"Risking that someone in there then suspects the president/government to seek help from another country against a presidential candidate or trying to smear his campaign?"
Indeed, what the hell does that even mean? How does Trump know about this supposed transgression during the Obama administration?
Then there is the option of having another country look into it, such as France?

Under no circumstances does 'it's up to Trump to uncover it" make any sense whatsoever.
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 28th September 2019 at 12:13 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 12:14 PM   #272
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9,861
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
Justice Department says they "did not and could not make out a criminal campaign finance violation."
That's Barr tailoring a statement just broad enough to cover his ass.

I have a feeling about Barr, that he really wants credibility among his fellow lawyers. But he doesn't want it badly enough to assert himself in a way that might get him in trouble with Trump.

Reminds me, this past week someone posted about Jeff Sessions being on hand in the Senate basement. What significance would that have?
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 12:15 PM   #273
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 76,046
Originally Posted by carlosy View Post
And what would be the proper method to collect information from a different government? Or is this never an option?

I am not a US citizen, so just asking out of curiousity.


Really? Which country? Russia?
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 12:17 PM   #274
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 76,046
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
I've wondered the same thing though. Sometimes she's so over the top I think she must be engaged in satire.
She consults the revised edition of the Karl Rove Playbook.
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 12:23 PM   #275
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 76,046
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
I'm not that fond of CNN these days but this morning they had a good piece breaking down who all the players are. I called it up from a news app on my phone & would link but not sure how on tablet. Google who's who Ukraine CNN.
CNN: Trump's Ukraine scandal: Who's who?
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 12:26 PM   #276
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 76,046
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
That's Barr tailoring a statement just broad enough to cover his ass.

I have a feeling about Barr, that he really wants credibility among his fellow lawyers. But he doesn't want it badly enough to assert himself in a way that might get him in trouble with Trump.

Reminds me, this past week someone posted about Jeff Sessions being on hand in the Senate basement. What significance would that have?
From something John Dean said when discussing why people in Nixon's inner circle broke the law for him: People close to the POTUS are star-struck. It explains so many of Trump's upper echelon followers like Lindsay Graham. Barr fits the mold.
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 12:27 PM   #277
WilliamSeger
Philosopher
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,018
Originally Posted by carlosy View Post
And what would be the proper method to collect information from a different government? Or is this never an option?

I am not a US citizen, so just asking out of curiousity.
You would take whatever reason you had to suspect someone to the proper authorities in that country. If it's just unfounded suspicions, I wouldn't expect much of a reaction.
WilliamSeger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 12:31 PM   #278
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 45,555
Originally Posted by Trebuchet View Post
He doesn't ask, he commands. It's a royal edict.
Hope we don't have to use the same methods to get rid of Kind Donald the First we had to use to get rid of King George The Third.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 12:33 PM   #279
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 45,555
Originally Posted by shemp View Post
Correction: She's not a human being, she's a reptoid.
I knew it! I knew Kelly was a Skrull !
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 12:35 PM   #280
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 45,555
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
That's Barr tailoring a statement just broad enough to cover his ass.

I have a feeling about Barr, that he really wants credibility among his fellow lawyers. But he doesn't want it badly enough to assert himself in a way that might get him in trouble with Trump.

Reminds me, this past week someone posted about Jeff Sessions being on hand in the Senate basement. What significance would that have?
So he is trying to do the impossible.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:47 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.