All-purpose news and politics thread: Two Steps Beyond!(Part II)

[WestPhillyPunisher]

John McCain Aide Reads Senator’s Final Message To America

“Like most people, I have regrets. But I would not trade a day of my life, in good or bad times, for the best day of anyone else’s.” Meanwhile....

**********

CNN Panel Descends Into Chaos After Media Accused Of Politicizing McCain’s Death

Chris Cuomo and Rick Santorum get into it in heated segment.

**********

Veterans Group Calls Out Trump’s ‘Outrageous’ Response To John McCain’s Death

AMVETS called on the White House to “show appropriate respect” for the late Arizona lawmaker.

**********

Arizona Senate Candidate Calls Political Correctness ‘Cancer’ After Criticizing McCain

Kelli Ward’s campaign had suggested John McCain announced he was stopping his cancer treatment to distract from her primary race. Oh, WBEEEEEEEE....!

**********

Republicans Can Honor John McCain By Putting America Before Trump

The death of Senator John McCain throws into relief a new and even more alarming phase of the crisis facing American democracy. McCain was one of the few Republican senators willing to publicly warn Donald Trump of the bright lines that he must not cross.

Last week, as the latest successful prosecutions of Trump associates connected more dots between the criminal misconduct of his underlings and the president personally, we all waited for Republican leaders to distance themselves from Trump and to repeat warnings that Trump must not attempt to fire Attorney General Jeff Sessions or his deputy Rod Rosenstein, much less special counsel Robert Mueller.

But few such declarations were forthcoming. On the contrary, Sen. Chuck Grassley actually walked back a previous red line warning.

Grassley, as chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, declared last summer, seconded by South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, that he would not hold hearings to confirm a new attorney general if Sessions were fired.

Now, with Trump working himself into an anti-Sessions frenzy. Grassley says he could make time for confirmation hearings.

But of course it is one thing to vow unity in the face of peril in order to create a republic ― and quite another to pledge common allegiance to a thug who is destroying it.

As the waters keep rising around Trump and he becomes even more unhinged, he will be more and more tempted to fire Sessions, then Rosenstein and then Mueller.

To head off a Saturday Night Massacre, those Republicans who have been contributing an outpouring of fatuous tributes to the integrity and courage of John McCain should draw on his example.

They should intensify their warnings to Trump to stop trashing the American system of criminal justice, and to keep his hands off the Mueller investigation. Perhaps the memory of McCain will give the Republicans a moment of pause and shame.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

So I assume you think all laws against murder are worthless since this guy killed people too, or that anything other than banning all theft would be successful at doing 'enough'? I've stayed away from the tournament shooting story because I don't want to see the footage and figure some view-hungry website is going to spring it on me the first chance it gets, but from the little I have heard it doesn't look like this was predictable or preventable short of there being no guns. Just like we could have prevented Trump's election by there being no lies allowed. I mean why do we even have laws against Perjury if people like Donnie will still lie, 'free speech' after all.

As for Parkland and focusing on one shooting that wouldn't have been prevented compared to many others that could have been:



E: Life isn't a video game, only rarely do you get instant rewards and/or instant solutions to complicated problems.

Laws against murder = don’t murder or you go to jail

That’s not what you are advocating for with guns

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

Republicans still control Congress, the White House and many of the Courts.

The first step to actually seeing anyone try to pass gun control legislation of any kind is taking back the government. That means voting.

How many mass shootings have there been in the last 30 years? Republicans weren’t in control for all of them

[Mister Mets]

So what passed since Parkland? Mets was the perfect example for me. Someone listed a bunch of Democratic policies for gun control, he instantly applied it to this scenario and said none of them would have prevented it, and the discussion died lol. That's exactly the paradox your stuck in. They are going to kill all your compromise measures by pointing out all the places it would have done nothing or next to nothing. Then at the same time they are cutting off your actual arguments for being uneffective, they are going to rally their base and say "they really just want to get rid of the 2nd Amendment because that's the only way to get the outcomes they actually want" which of course they are mostly right about it. So you lose twice on it.

Oh and how loud is the Parkland student movement that was supposed to change everything right now? It isn't as loud as it used to be is it? Weird, it's like it ended up like every single other mass shooting. We all got mad for awhile, then nothing happened.

Again your point would be valid, if you weren't losing precisely because people like Mets can come out and say all the little solutions you want won't really do anything. Oh and by the way, Mets was right. Those solutions wouldn't have stopped this incident. So you are left defending making a policy pass that wouldn't have stopped this.

There are three potential explanations for what Democrats want to do, and since the party members aren't a monolithic entity, you'll probably have some in all three categories.

The first explanation is that they do want to make a difference on the margins. Background checks at gun shows, banning bump stocks, etc. won't stop most mass shootings, but it could save lives in the future, especially when focusing on a particular type of criminal (someone without a criminal record who snaps) who isn't savvy enough to get guns illegally.

The second explanation is that they're playing politics, overpromising on change in a country with a robust second amendment and more guns than people. They could be focusing on an issue that matters (Sepsis kills 250,000 Americans each year, Nuclear power could provide cheap energy without climate change, There are 11-12 million immigrants in the US without documentation) but this is something that excites the base and gets media attention. So they go for suggestions on things that seem scary but are relatively unlikely (bans on "assault weapons" when handguns are used in an overwhelming majority of shootings; a conflation of mass shootings with crazed gunmen and mass shootings with career criminals to make statistics scarier, showy gun buybacks that result in people who weren't likely to commit crimes getting rid of rusty inherited firearms.)

The third explanation is that they want to go a lot further, but it's not politically advantageous to do so. They're waiting for the public to be more supportive of robust gun control, and then they'll go for it (a parallel might be gay marriage, where the Senate shifted very quickly.) This is exacerbated by a rural/ urban divide, as Democrats are less likely to represent areas where hunting is common, or where the closest police officer may be miles away.

[Kirby101]

How many mass shootings have there been in the last 30 years? Republicans weren’t in control for all of them

They controlled at least one Branch of Government for all but 5 of the last 30 years. In 1994 when they did control both, they passed the Assault Weapon Ban.

So yeah, pretty much the GOP stopping it.

[Kevinroc]

How many mass shootings have there been in the last 30 years? Republicans weren’t in control for all of them

That they were looking for a "bipartisan solution."

In this new era of partisanship, I'm curious to see how far Democrats actually take things when they regain power.

Also this:

They controlled at least one Branch of Government for all but 5 of the last 30 years. In 1994 when they did control both, they passed the Assault Weapon Ban.

So yeah, pretty much the GOP stopping it.

The change has to come from the public itself.

[InformationGeek]

Leave it to the NRA to victim blame.

GRANT STINCHFIELD (HOST): If you look at that video and can we play it with the audio up because I want to show you something that’s very, very important of that gaming video there. If we could pull it up. And I want you to listen to the shots as it happens. What I really want is the other video. You can hear the shots in the background here, I count 15 of them, but the other video where the cellphone is over the shoulder of the person as they’re playing. Just scroll through this for one second because, this is so important. Here it is.

If you listen over the talking that person doesn’t hear the shots. Why? Because their headphones are on. This is another example of people not being aware of their surroundings. I heard at least four, or five, or six shots while that person was taking a cellphone video of the game. There’s no running for cover, there’s not even any looking around. They’re still focused on the screen in front of them as someone is firing a handgun through the crowd. You’ve got to be aware of your surroundings at all places. I know it’s hard when you’re wearing headphones, but we talk about this all the time, whether you’re jogging and wearing headphones, whether you’re at a video game wearing headphones, if they’re so loud you can’t hear what’s going on around you, you are living in your own world. That can become deadly.

[SuperiorIronman]

You wanna know what is going to flat-out solve this?

Banning guns wholesale. Fuck your second amendment rights, they got made for owning slaves and your not going to do jack-shit to the military should there be a coup anyways. I'm sorry potential Rambo, you're not going to do dick to a tank or an AC-130 flying overhead raining death on your town. It's not happening.

Sure, criminals will always find firearms, that's a given. But we have more guns than people and a mass shooting every month or two, and largely at schools. I have no sympathy anymore for your small dicks that need a pick-me-up via shooting rifles. Enough people are dying over this, it's over. Gun blueprints are online, you can 3d print a gun, you can buy kits legally without any problem and at the end of the day put together an untraceable weapon. You can get them off the street and even in my town get them right outside the goddamn salon. Enough is enough, you've fucked up enough.

Introduce a tax incentive to turn in firearms for disassembly regardless of them being registered or not. If you turn them in, the government cannot give you trouble over turning them in if it means saving lives, turn in bullets for similar tax incentives. Add a major tax for owning a firearm. Those who do must pay more for owning a registered weapon to De-incentivize the ownership. The more weapons you own, the higher you have to pay. As I said, you are not going to do jack-shit to the military should one come rolling in so get selective.
Thus the government can have a database on who owns what and how much to not only keep an eye out for potential shooters but are able to relay this information to authorities in need.

But I'm sure somebody from the NRA is going to say that's stupid and so I say; may god have mercy on you and your children, it could just as easily be you in the firing line.

This needs to stop now.

[Mister Mets]

I'd imagine this gentleman will be out of a job soon.

CALABASAS (CBSLA) – A Los Angeles County prosecutor appeared intoxicated when he was involved in a collision with renowned radio host “Big Boy” this week in Calabasas.

Big Boy, whose real name is Kurt Alexander, was riding in a Nissan SUV Tuesday afternoon when he tells CBS2 his vehicle was rear-ended by a BMW sedan on Parkway Calabasas.

The driver of the BMW was identified by authorities as Michael Pettersen, a longtime attorney with the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office.

Following the collision, video from the scene shows a clearly woozy suspect taking hits from a bottle of alcohol in the driver’s seat while Alexander and his party stand on the side of the road.

"If I would have written that as a bit or a movie, you would say everything was believable until that part,” Alexander told CBS2 Wednesday in an interview.

The video then shows as Los Angeles County Sheriff’s deputies struggle to drag Pettersen into a patrol vehicle as he collapses onto the ground, appearing drunk. He was booked on felony DUI charges.

Meanwhile, Alexander’s driver had to be taken by ambulance to a hospital with undisclosed injuries.

Pettersen worked for the DA’s office for 28 years before being placed on leave in January 2017. His law license was suspended in September 2017. However, he remains an employee of the department, the DA’s office told CBS2 in a statement.

He was previously arrested on drunken driving charges in Ventura County back in December 2014, according to court records. A warrant was issued for his arrest when he failed to appear for a court hearing.

In September 2016, he was cited for driving with a suspended license. In January of this year, another warrant was issued for his arrest when he also failed to appear for his court hearing in that case.

“I don’t know how long he did his job, but now somebody is about to do a job on him,” Alexander said. “You know, I think he deserves everything. And I understand that, you know, he has a problem. But you got to pay your tuition into the school of experience. And he has to pay for that. And I’m not talking about paying me. I mean, he could have really killed someone.”

The miracle is that his job security was so great he hadn't been fired yet.

[Mister Mets]

Elizabeth Warren gave an interview with Franklin Foer for the Atlantic detailing how she wants to save capitalism.

Franklin Foer: All the investment bankers who have voodoo dolls of you might be a bit surprised that you recently described yourself as “capitalist to the bone.” What did you mean?

Elizabeth Warren: I believe in markets and the benefits they can produce when they work. Markets with rules can produce enormous value. So much of the work I have done—the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, my hearing-aid bill—are about making markets work for people, not making markets work for a handful of companies that scrape all the value off to themselves. I believe in competition.

Foer: To what end?

Warren: Markets create wealth. Okay, so I used to teach contract law, and if you really want to go back to first principles: On the first day, I used to take my watch off and I would sell it to someone in class. We'd agree on a price, $20. Then the question I always asked the students was: What did the buyer value the watch at? Much of the class would say $20.

That’s not the right answer. All we know is that the person would rather have the watch than have the $20 bill. What did you know about the value I placed on it? Exactly the inverse. I'd rather have the $20 bill than have the watch. Now, most people think the benefit of markets is: I walked away with a $20 bill, great, which I valued more highly than the watch, and you walked away with the watch that you valued more highly than the $20, but look at all the excess value there.

Maybe you wanted that watch because it completed your fabulous watch collection or you desperately needed a watch or it was so attractive to you that the value you placed on it would be in the hundreds of dollars. You got all that surplus value, and me, I really needed that $20. I had an investment opportunity over here for that $20 that has yielded a manyfold return for me. That’s how markets create additional value.

Foer: But markets right now are doing a good job of producing wealth. Yes?

Warren: Right.

Foer: your description, that's markets working.

Warren: The problem is that when the rules are not enforced, when the markets are not level playing fields, all that wealth is scraped in one direction. For example, leading up to the financial crash, there were a lot of mortgage brokers out there selling mortgages. Wow, did they get rich doing it. Families thought they were buying a product they could afford, whose payments they understood. Many of them lost everything That's a market that clearly was not working. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, after it passed, the first thing we did there at the bureau was to put new rules in place about mortgages. Not so that you could control the mortgage market, but so that the market would work.

I don't know if you've ever looked at the rules, but the rules were basically to say you can compete, but you've got to be real clear about the things you're competing on. Things like: Information has to be put in the same place on each of the forms, so people can lay the forms down next to each other and see what's there and you don't get to put it back on page 32 in fine print.

Foer: Oftentimes, it seems that you’re not really criticizing the behavior of markets—you’re describing outright theft and deception.

Warren: Exactly. Theft is not capitalism. Right?

Foer: There’s so much talk right now on the left about socialism, which seems somewhat misguided given everything you say capitalism has to recommend itself.

Warren: I love the competition that comes with a market that has decent rules. I love the structure that encourages anyone with a good idea to try their hand in business.

Foer: When Franklin Roosevelt talked about the crisis in capitalism, he looked and he saw the left and alternatives to capitalism emerging, and that was one of the things that he was able to argue to the country—to say, "Look, we need these reforms in order to save this system, in order to prevent something dangerous from happening in another direction."

Warren: Okay. You're taking it to a hundred thousand feet, which is great, but my argument is far more personal. We need to make capitalism work for your family and we need to make democracy work for your family ... It's not that you're wrong, I'm just saying this is where I land it, right with how families experience this economy. A rising stock market is not helpful to the half of all America who own not one single share of stock. Rising productivity that doesn't translate into rising wages for the people who actually do the work is not building a better future for them. Costs that are skyrocketing for education and health care and housing put a squeeze on families that are struggling with flat wages, so every one of those is about the lived experience, and that's what colors our view of both capitalism and democracy in 2018.

It's an interesting strategy for her, and probably a good General Election move. I am quite happy to see a prominent Democrat articulating the good of capitalism.

[InformationGeek]

And here goes Inhofe, wanting to get in on the asshole train today.

Inhofe, a senior member of Senate Armed Services Committee, was highly complimentary of McCain but when asked about the flag flap he attributed it to the late senator's public spat with President Donald Trump in recent years. He described both men as "strong willed people."

"Well, you know, frankly, I think that John McCain is partially to blame for that because he is very outspoken. He disagreed with the President in certain areas and wasn't too courteous about it," Inhofe said.

Not too courteous about it!? Oh f**k off.

[SuperiorIronman]

I'm so glad that we honor heroes of our country with the flag.
That is unless you once got into an argument with somebody in politics, and thus who gives a shit about honor.

It's all honor and tradition if you are a mindless zombie to the party kids!

[Mister Mets]

"Cohen's lawyer says he's completely flipped and will give evidence that Trump colluded with Russia"

"Lanny Davis, the attorney representing President Donald Trump's former longtime personal lawyer Michael Cohen, said Wednesday that Cohen knew of efforts by Trump to conspire with Russia to rig the 2016 presidential election. Davis had previously teased that Cohen had "knowledge on certain subjects that should be of interest to the special counsel," but he came right out and suggested a smoking gun on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" on Wednesday morning.

Cohen pleaded guilty in federal court on Tuesday to multiple charges, including campaign finance violations that he said he committed on the direction of Trump. While discussing the possible implications for Trump, Davis went on to give some details about information he said Cohen had that relate to the special counsel's investigation into Russian election interference. Specifically, he said Cohen was willing to provide the special counsel Robert Mueller with evidence that Trump worked with Russia to sway the election.

"Michael Cohen knows information that would be of interest to the special counsel regarding both knowledge about a conspiracy to corrupt American democracy by the Russians and the failure to report that knowledge to the FBI," Davis said..."

https://nordic.businessinsider.com/l...spiracy-2018-8

Mr. Davis now regrets lying about that story.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article...mp-tower-story

Attorney Lanny Davis says he was an anonymous source in a July CNN story that reported his client, Michael Cohen, had privately claimed that President Trump had advance knowledge of the infamous Trump Tower meeting between his son and Russians — contradicting Davis's own words on CNN's air last week.

In the story, Cohen was reported to claim he had personally witnessed Donald Trump Jr. informing then-candidate Trump about the June 2016 meeting. Such a claim from Cohen would directly contradict Trump’s statements about his knowledge of the meeting, where Russians were set to offer dirt on Hillary Clinton.

CNN’s July 26 story has come under fresh scrutiny in recent days after Davis acknowledged he had served as an anonymous source for multiple news outlets who were seeking to confirm the CNN article in the hours after it published. Davis has backed away from the story in recent days, telling the Washington Post that he is not certain if the claim is accurate, and that he could not independently corroborate it.

Last week, Davis told Anderson Cooper, “I think the reporting of the story got mixed up in the course of a criminal investigation. We were not the source of the story.”

On Monday evening, Davis told BuzzFeed News that he regrets both his role as an anonymous source and his subsequent denial of his own involvement.

Davis told BuzzFeed News that he did, in fact, speak anonymously to CNN for its story, which cited “sources with knowledge” — meaning more than one person.

“I made a mistake,” Davis said. Regarding his comments about a month later to Cooper, he added, “I did not mean to be cute.”

After Davis publicly backtracked from the claims, the New York Post and the Washington Post outed him as their confirming source and published apologies from Davis, a lawyer and communications expert who became well known for his work for Bill Clinton. The original CNN story — broadcast during Chris Cuomo’s prime-time show and written by Jim Sciutto, Marshall Cohen, and Watergate reporting legend Carl Bernstein — said that Davis had “declined to comment.” His involvement in the story, on so-called “background,” has not been previously reported.

[Starter Set]

Beside that very important guns control question one thing who kinda amazes me is the number of crazies capable to commit mass murders you have around in the states.

I mean, that something who could be worth taking a look at, at some point.

Guns availability doesn't explain everything. (as much as i am for strict laws about it)

[Iron Maiden]

And here goes Inhofe, wanting to get in on the asshole train today.



Not too courteous about it!? Oh f**k off.

McCain wasn't courteous? Boy that's rich. Defending Trump against the man who spent 5 years in the Hanoi Hilton. The same Trump who says being a POW doesn't make you a hero. Yeah, he can talk a long walk off a short pier into shark infested waters.