not going to link rhe actual article
He looks like a tortoise that just popped his head out from his shell
US Politics
- Thread starter Nick 0208 Ldn
- Start date
He looks like a tortoise that just popped his head out from his shell
All big companies in US are, including "Do no evil" Google
Him and Cruz bitching about Democrats not being bipartisan is the most hilarious thing ever.
not going to link rhe actual article
This will get interesting.
Wow who could have predicted that? Someone quote all the posts on here about how he is exactly what the Democrats need to defeat trump
Is there a difference between being arrested for suspicion of domestic violence as opposed to just domestic violence?
Both his ex-wife and current estranged wife have released statements or made comments that neither reported it and both backed him up apparently so it's either a different woman or a fake report from Wohl & co which would be monumentally stupid on their part (and thus entirely believable).
Maybe its a set-up where they hired some woman to meet up with him and file a fake claim. The wing nuts on the right have been going crazy about him since the Kavanaugh trial
Or maybe he really did assault a woman and the police have taken him in custody.
What do you guys know about the Liberty Amendments? It's Charles Koch long term plan and ultimate goal, reshape the Constitution, to do that there's a plan to do an Amendments Convention, it requires 34 states to agree on that, 30 already did that, these are the amendments proposed:
- Impose Congressional term limits
- Repeal the Seventeenth Amendment, returning the election of Senators to state legislatures
- Impose term limits for Supreme Court Justices and restrict judicial review
- Require a balanced budget and limit federal spending and taxation
- Define a deadline to file taxes (one day before the next federal election)
- Subject federal departments and bureaucratic regulations to periodic reauthorization and review
- Create a more specific definition of the Commerce Clause
- Limit eminent domain powers
- Allow states to more easily amend the Constitution by bypassing Congress
- Create a process where two-thirds of the states can nullify federal laws
- Require photo ID to vote and limit early voting
Most of stuff there looks perfectly reasonable and better than the mess which is now.
It looks like that on the surface, but read more closely and you will see that is not the case, take nº2, it would mean the end of social security, medicare and other welfare programs.
It's a Republican utopia. Kill it with fire.
That Avenatti thing is weird. The initial 'scoop' was that he was arrested on charges brought by his ex-wife. But she has released a statement saying she wasn't anywhere near him, certainly wasn't abused and that he has, to her knowledge, never abused anyone. Ie, 'it wasn't me'.
I know I'm rusty on legal studies 101, but if the charge was brought by an accuser, an the accuser steps up and says they have no idea what is going on, do the police then look into where the charge actually came from?
I know I'm rusty on legal studies 101, but if the charge was brought by an accuser, an the accuser steps up and says they have no idea what is going on, do the police then look into where the charge actually came from?
everyone involved in this is untrustworthy: avenatti, jacob wohl, lapd
I don't know what is 17th Amendment, but stuff like Congressional Term Limit, term limits for Justices (instead of lifetime appointments), deadline to file taxes, and photo ID required to vote (as long as for ID you can use one of normal ID, driving patent and passport) look perfectly reasonable to me.
2 would reduce peopthe average citizen's voting power.
4 could end up being a disaster in case of a major conflict, natural disaster, financial crisis etc.
7, 8, 9 and 10 is just code for letting rich people and corporations write the laws.
I also notice there's nothing in there about limiting the influence of money in politics.
It's worth noting that anything the two main Koch brothers advocate for is solely for their own gain in some form or fashion. They are the epitome of greed.
7 and 4 will kill all social programs. 6 would help- if a review happened when the right was in power, that program is dead. I think 10 is aimed at civil rights, voting rights, and other equality laws.
8 maybe ok but might refer to ranchers who want unlimited grazing in lands that are currently public, I don't know.
2 is anti-democraric and a massive source of corruption (it's similar to the Indian system).
1&3 are fine, though illI probably have to think about it a bit if the kochs support it.
The June 22 2017 interview here about the kochs was very informative for me.
No they are awful as well. They are part of a systematic attempt to maximize the influence of money on politics and reduce any chance of grassroots actions. (1) seems simple but its deceptive - it will increase Congressional turnover. Increasing congressional turnover with no limits on money increases the influence of money on elections and lobbyists on the governing process.
(2) also seems deceptive because liberals are all mad about Bart. but restrict judicial review? Hell no. That's another attempt to limit a check and balance on lobbyist influence on policy. They don't want their conservative biased laws challenged by the SC so they try to restrict the check and balance from the SC.
All of these are just transparent power grabs for the richest to lobby with little check and balance.
I agree with your logic on 1, though I know there are a lot of arguments going both ways (NYC had a referendum on term limits and there were a ton of leftist articles on both sides of it, none of which I read).
About the judiciary - I genuinely don't know. The Warren court is the one time in the US when the courts were unambiguously good - they led other parts of government on civil rights and individual liberties. But for a lot of time, courts have blocked progressive legislation (minimum wage, for example, and huge chunks of the New Deal), increased corporate power (Citizens United, some of the recent union cases), and even reversed the gains they previously led (voting rights rollback). They didn't stand up to the travel ban. But they are the obvious avenue if someone tries something explicitly authoritarian.
I am not sure what to make of it all.
If you're interested, this is the case against the courts:
https://jacobinmag.com/2017/06/donald-trump-neil-gorsuch-judiciary
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2018/10/supreme-court-senate-electoral-college-undemocratic
I understand what the author is arguing but I disagree. Limiting judicial review is an awful suggestion for the long term. Also imposing term limits on Justices its intent is to weaken the judicial branch in general and make the appointments for Justice even more dependent on the big money political process. Those arguments in Jacobin in this case are lightweight and don't really understand the historical and long term impolications. Over the long term, having an independent judiciary with the power of judicial review is more important to stopping authoritarianism. The Kochs aren't stupid, they've done their research and they know that even with their Justices, its easier to push their agenda if they simply didn't have to worry about that check and balance.
Even if you dislike Kavanaugh, I'd rather have the SC check in place than just allowing the Koch's to throw money to create new policy without real checks on their power. The Democrats just need to get rid of this toxic "lets just compromise with Republicans when we are in power because its easier" mentality. Obama should have pushed far harder for Garland or even better nominated a female/PoC judge that would have made the Republicans look even worse - Garland's nomination itself was a concession to the right wingers.
Congressional Dems rushing to support ‘Green New Deal’ plan pushed by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
https://www.rawstory.com/2018/11/co...ew-deal-plan-pushed-alexandria-ocasio-cortez/
One less reason to vote green party.
https://www.rawstory.com/2018/11/co...ew-deal-plan-pushed-alexandria-ocasio-cortez/
One less reason to vote green party.
https://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2018/11/death_of_hhs_official_daniel_b.html
HHS Official who worked hard to lower prescription prices has committed suicide.
Cause of death was “multiple blunt traumas”.
Not far from the old Russian classic of “two self inflicted bullet wounds to the back of the head before hanging himself”
HHS Official who worked hard to lower prescription prices has committed suicide.
Cause of death was “multiple blunt traumas”.
Not far from the old Russian classic of “two self inflicted bullet wounds to the back of the head before hanging himself”
Mmhmm. Never heard of someone beating the shit out of themselves to death.
I would assume multiple blunt force trauma is the cause of death when someone jumps from a building.
I'm guessing when it says he was found near the exit of his apartment building they mean on the outside.
gavin mcinnes...welcome to the resistance
Except she doesn't say that at all...
except she totally does say that
Defending and upholding your values against right wing groups by gutting said values, what a magnificent concept
But it really highlights again how she was able lose the 2016 election against this buffoon.
She’s a truly vile individual.
Europe must curb immigration, largely coming from regions she played a part in destroying. feck those Libyans, let them drown. More important to elect centrists.
feck off already you irrelevant bitch.
Europe must curb immigration, largely coming from regions she played a part in destroying. feck those Libyans, let them drown. More important to elect centrists.
feck off already you irrelevant bitch.
You think Europe should be admitting as many refugees as there are?except she totally does say that
Defending and upholding your values against right wing groups by gutting said values, what a magnificent concept
But it really highlights again how she was able lose the 2016 election against this buffoon.