News:

And we're back!

Main Menu

Recent posts

#41
Off the Record / Re: What does a TRUMP presiden...
Last post by The Minsky Moment - August 10, 2022, 10:44:27 AM
Aides don't carry boxes out without orders to do so.  Someone had to give those orders.  Trump has been very skillful using buffers Godfather II style, but its hard to see how this call doesn't work its way back to him.  Documents don't end up in one's personal safe by accident.

And it is going to be very hard to pull off an intent defense given what is likely to be a record of correspondence with Archives and DOJ and given that there will likely be evidence that Trump was repeatedly informed of records rules while in office. 
#42
Off the Record / Re: Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-1...
Last post by OttoVonBismarck - August 10, 2022, 10:30:19 AM
I consider it highly unlikely Ukraine ever gets Crimea back, it would require Putin to be dead and his successors to decide they would rather have normalized relations than land that they never really needed in any case other than pride related reasons.

On top of that I think basically the entire peninsula is now Russian expats or strongly pro-Russian Ukrainians, I think they would be pretty resistant to being merged back with Kiev.
#43
Off the Record / Re: What does a TRUMP presiden...
Last post by OttoVonBismarck - August 10, 2022, 10:27:27 AM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on August 10, 2022, 09:44:50 AMDavid Petraeus kept a kind of diary that included his daily schedules and notes he took at meetings; some of the information was classified, some was not. When he resigned his government post, he returned classified docs in his possession but held on to notebooks.  For that act he pled guilty to mishandling classified information and received 2 years probation.

The potential allegations against Trump are far more serious than that.  And they are much more serious than those against HRC.  Clinton was heavily investigated and charges were not brought because (among many other things) there was no evidence that she intended to mishandle classified docs (intent being a required element of the crime).  Clinton's fault was using personal email services, a fault which reports indicate was widely engaged in by much of the Trump White House, including Trump himself.  That's unfortunate, but it is categorically different from deliberately packing boxes of official state documents in trucks and stealing them.  That is straight up gangsterism.

Even if none of the docs were classified - or if Trump could make up a claim that he instantaneously declassified them in the hours before Biden's inauguration, the deliberate removal, conveyance, concealment or destruction of official public records is a felony.  Unless I am missing something, there is a clear and un-rebuttable violation here, with the only possible defense being a constitutional one seeking reversal of Nixon v. GSA.

1. Petraeus shared some of his information specifically to impress a paramour, which showed clear criminal intent and knowing he was doing something was wrong. He also transmitted some of his information by writing a "draft" in a Gmail account that his lover had access to, she would log in to the account and read it. That shows a deliberate effort to conceal what he was doing, which likewise shows bad motive.

2. Trump very likely carried zero boxes out of the White House or anywhere else. Aides would have done this, and he can always argue that he never intended an aide to take anything they weren't supposed to--additionally he can point to his lengthy quasi-cooperation as evidence he was just trying to act in good faith.

3. "As far as I know we took documents we were allowed to take, for my Presidential library." I don't think it's a slam dunk to prove that an infamously ignorant of details and stupid person was ignorant of the law, which would undermine the intent aspect.
#44
Off the Record / Re: Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-1...
Last post by Zoupa - August 10, 2022, 10:17:24 AM
I wonder what can be done with current inhabitants of Crimea once/if Ukraine takes it back.

The 2014 referendum was rigged of course, but I think even if it hadn't been, with international observers giving it an A+, the "join russia" option probably would have won.
#45
Off the Record / Re: Facebook Follies of Friend...
Last post by viper37 - August 10, 2022, 10:16:20 AM
Change of subject
https://fb.watch/ePx63RnFL4/

Is the Air Force smarter? :P
#46
Off the Record / Re: What does a TRUMP presiden...
Last post by Josquius - August 10, 2022, 09:46:27 AM
Just me getting Al Caponey vibes here?

Trump has done some real dire shit.... could this be the one to bring him down?
#47
Off the Record / Re: What does a TRUMP presiden...
Last post by The Minsky Moment - August 10, 2022, 09:44:50 AM
David Petraeus kept a kind of diary that included his daily schedules and notes he took at meetings; some of the information was classified, some was not. When he resigned his government post, he returned classified docs in his possession but held on to notebooks.  For that act he pled guilty to mishandling classified information and received 2 years probation.

The potential allegations against Trump are far more serious than that.  And they are much more serious than those against HRC.  Clinton was heavily investigated and charges were not brought because (among many other things) there was no evidence that she intended to mishandle classified docs (intent being a required element of the crime).  Clinton's fault was using personal email services, a fault which reports indicate was widely engaged in by much of the Trump White House, including Trump himself.  That's unfortunate, but it is categorically different from deliberately packing boxes of official state documents in trucks and stealing them.  That is straight up gangsterism.

Even if none of the docs were classified - or if Trump could make up a claim that he instantaneously declassified them in the hours before Biden's inauguration, the deliberate removal, conveyance, concealment or destruction of official public records is a felony.  Unless I am missing something, there is a clear and un-rebuttable violation here, with the only possible defense being a constitutional one seeking reversal of Nixon v. GSA.
#48
Off the Record / Re: TV/Movies Megathread
Last post by Grey Fox - August 10, 2022, 09:42:03 AM
Quote from: Berkut on August 06, 2022, 04:30:38 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on August 03, 2022, 03:21:30 PMSaw, The Gentleman (Netflix) on my son's recommendation - and loved it.  A lot of great dark humour.  Pacing is great.

High Grant is fantastic and Colin Farrell steals the show.


Just watched this last night, I am sure I would not have other then you mentioning it. It was quite good. How had this never even pinged my radar?
It was first marketed as a Matthew McConaughey movie.
#49
Off the Record / Re: Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-1...
Last post by Legbiter - August 10, 2022, 09:36:47 AM
Quote from: celedhring on August 10, 2022, 09:23:25 AMI love all the clips from Russians saying they are so sad about what's happening, like it's some sort of natural disaster they couldn't do anything about.

Yeah annoying wistful sadness like this is a bad forest fire...
#50
Off the Record / Re: Brexit and the waning days...
Last post by Josquius - August 10, 2022, 09:30:58 AM
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on August 10, 2022, 09:06:25 AMRight but I think you're reading the tea leaves wrong. I don't think working class voters care about redistributive projects as much as they cared about a sense that the government was going to make sure they had a job, through control of national industries and essentially guaranteed positions. I think a lefty politician, with a fancy education, probably read that as broad support for socialism. The workers were likely much more concerned with the meat and potato issue of their job and their livelihood.

Most people who care about the Marxist parts of socialism are the highly educated, and the wealthy (who generally oppose it as a class), the proletariats generally care about the kitchen table issues. Labour has frankly remained decently leftist, albeit not as leftist as it once was, but it seems fairly separated from many of the expressed concerns of its historical working class base--and prone to dismissing them entirely when they conflict with how the educated elite who run the party want things to be.

Labour isn't Marxist though. Not many in the party concerned with 'revolution'. Where Labour supports nationalism its out of a genuine well supported belief that this is the way to deliver the best value services possible.

Where Labour struggles is as Sheilbh keeps saying that many people support a platform of "Nationalise the trains and hang the paedos". That is, pretty brown rather than red.
With the conservatives adopting culture war tactics they're able to get people to vote against what is in their best interests in order to chase bigger picture fundamental threats to our way of life like gay people being allowed to look after kids or a balanced view of history where the sun doesn't shine out of Britains arse and slavery might have been a bit of a bad thing that we were very guilty of pre-abolition.

Labour has always been a coalition of working class labour socialism and more middle class academic socialism. Traditionally this has worked well where organised labour communities retained their strength and contained enough people bright enough to recognise say, the civil rights struggle in America as part of the general working class struggle rather than a threat.

These days as many of the working class communities have fallen by various means...its far shakier. With targeted advertising weak links in these communities are easily plucked off by pointing the finger of blame at marginalised groups.
A particular issue around this is the massive demographic shifts in the country as a lot of poor traditional labour seats have become grey- a group more likely to vote tory and to vote overall- with those young who are likely to vote tending to pack into the cities which has lots of issues even beyond this surface level one of how they vote.

The key for Labour in the short term going forward is not to be drawn into the Tories attempts to make the fight about identity politics. They have to keep everyone's focus solidly on jobs, the cost of living, collapsing public services, etc... If they can keep the focus on these issues then even the blackest of browns, if they could overlook tribalism for just a moment, might be swayed, never mind normal working people.

At the same time as doing this however, they can't afford to throw minorities under the bus. The Labour has a disadvantage that the Tories don't have to such a degree that there are various socially liberal parties only too able and keen to take voters from them. Plus, you know, morality and doing the right thing.

In the longer term, its levelling up. Its been revealed that the Tories are all talk on this. Labour have a solid record as the  traditional party of levelling up and they really have to reclaim this. Its the sensible thing to do for the well being of the country, its the moral thing to do, and, its the thing to do in order to ensure right wing populism gets thrown into the sea.