All Purpose News and Politics Thread Part IV: The Center Cannot Hold

[Astral Disaster]

That hadn’t occurred to me. Yeah, I wouldn’t put it past Trump to hold the government hostage as a means to end the inquiry. As a government worker, this concerns me.

Of course that could easily backfire on him as well, previous shutdowns haven't been all that well-received.

[Tendrin]

Hey, Siri, what does retaliation look like?

President Donald Trump has ordered a substantial reduction in the staff of the National Security Council, according to five people familiar with the plans, as the White House confronts an impeachment inquiry touched off by a whistle-blower complaint related to the agency’s work.

Some of the people described the staff cuts as part of a White House effort to make its foreign policy arm leaner under new National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien.

The request to limit the size of the NSC staff was conveyed to senior agency officials by acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney and O’Brien this week. The whistle-blower complaint, focused on Trump’s conduct in a July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, has been followed by damaging reports on the president’s private conversations with other world leaders.
The New York Times has reported that the whistle-blower was a CIA officer who was at one point detailed to the White House. The complaint has become the driving motivation behind House Democrats’ impeachment effort, which House Speaker Nancy Pelosi began last week.
Two of the people familiar with the decision to shrink the NSC insisted it was largely rooted in both the transition to O’Brien’s leadership as well as Trump’s desire to increase efficiency at the agency, which grew under former President Barack Obama. About 310 people currently work at the NSC.

https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/a...whistle-blower

[Mister Mets]

How does the timeline work in the United States for the politicial parties to select their presidential candidate? I know that they have the primaries and then the convention. But if Trump were to be pushed out only after the primaries were all over and the GOP had to select a presidential candidate at the last minute, could they do that? Or would they be left high and dry without someone they could put forward, because it was too late in the process?

If a candidate resigns at any point, they could be replaced by the party.

In 1972, Democratic Vice-Presidential nominee Thomas Eagleton was dropped just over two weeks after the Democratic convention after news reports that he had received electroshock therapy for clinical depression during the 1960s. The Democratic ticket went on to lose 49 states.

After the "grab them by the pussy" video came out, Republicans considered replacing Trump with Pence.

If the nominee doesn't want to go, it will be quite hard to replace them. The main weapon Trump has is his shamelessness. He's not going to be convinced to do anything for the good of the country.

[worstblogever]

And what of the fact that the GOP has already locked other candidates out of primaries in red states? Can THEY get on the ballot, or will they be blocked from doing so because of the Republican Party's already-undemocratic actions?

[Tami]

And what of the fact that the GOP has already locked other candidates out of primaries in red states? Can THEY get on the ballot, or will they be blocked from doing so because of the Republican Party's already-undemocratic actions?

Even if they can't carry some states, if Trump is no longer in the running for whatever reason, one of the remaining GOP candidates can still win. I don't think there is any rule that says that, in order to win a national election primary, the candidate has to be voted on in every State.

Assuming a hypothetical that Trump either resigns or is impeached and removed from office by the Senate before the Primary. Then the election is open for the remaining candidates.

If that happens after the Primary, then the GOP can choose. If they were smart, they would choose the GOP candidate that came in 2nd to Trump. That candidate would have the best chance in November.

[Jack Dracula]

Trump’s order will deny visas to immigrants who lack health-care coverage

More victims of Trumps war on "Job-killing Regulations".

[Mister Mets]

Americans now support impeachment 51% to 39% against in a new YouGov poll. If Senate Republicans ignore that majority and do not give the 2/3 necessary to impeach and the public is forced to wait until the 2020 election, the same poll also notes that Americans favor a generic Democrat over Trump by 11 points.

Generic candidates often poll pretty well, because they're blank slates. It's that person with a telegenic family who has served for 4-8 years as Governor or 6-10 years as Senator of an important state, following an impressive career in business, law, medicine, public policy and/ or the military. And he/she agrees with you on most of the major issues.

Real candidates will have all sorts of flaws, like minor scandals and unpopular votes/ positions.

Right wing politics are founded on a fairly simple principle - when resources are limited, you can either enrich a few people at the expense of everyone else, or attempt to share the wealth and end up depriving everyone. First world countries have the luxury of outsourcing our exploitation to other countries, so that we can tell ourselves that we live in a free and open society even though those freedoms depend on the suppression of people we don't care to think about much. Developing nations aren't able to do this, and left wing governments who promise land reform and social justice inevitably deliver only a brief sugar high before competition over scarce resources devolves society back into corruption and chaos. This in turn leads to right wing strongmen taking power under the guise of restoring law and order, until people get sick of that again and the cycle repeats itself.

A major facet of right wing politics is the belief is that it leads to greater wealth. The right will argue that I think capitalism has done more to lift billions out of poverty and improve the quality of life than all the efforts at sharing the wealth. It may be more important to grow the pie than to go with a bigger slice.

I can't help but wonder what happens if trump wins again.
A Massive fracture in our country he mentioned if He was impeached....
But for all the people complaining online about this guy I have a feeling that If hes re elected it'll be a similar fracture.

If everyone screaming and yelling for his blood every day on Twitter realize that screaming and yelling does Nothing to sway the minds of half "Or" so of the people.
It seems to me that too many people really want to Thanos snap half the others away

It would depend on how Trump wins.

One thing a Trump win could mean is that Democrats overplayed their hand, or expressed really unpopular positions, if enough voters decide they would prefer the least popular major party candidate ever.

And what of the fact that the GOP has already locked other candidates out of primaries in red states? Can THEY get on the ballot, or will they be blocked from doing so because of the Republican Party's already-undemocratic actions?

The scenario seemed to be about a different situation (the primaries have ended and the candidate who won no longer wishes to be the nominee.)

However, parties have a lot of legal leeway into how they choose candidates.

Neither party is legally obligated to go with anything democratic. They do it because they think it yields better candidates, that going away from it would result in a backlash, and because they see benefits in party unity months before the convention. They'll have trouble changing rules during an election, but they've got a lot of flexibility for what they can do in the future. The parties could decide that state party leaders should have secret processes for selecting delegates in the future elections.

https://www.vox.com/a/presidential-p...ries-explained

The legal difficulty would be in overturning earlier elections. A party can't decide to go with a secret process after a primary with clearly defined delegate allocation has passed.

[Theleviathan]

Fucker Carlson seems to be leading the pivot on impeachment. As in, no longer deny the problem, but scold the degree of consequences.

[Tami]

Four homeless men killed in New York city street attacks

Four men who are believed to be homeless were attacked and killed on Saturday in New York city’s Chinatown area.

New York Police Department Detective Annette Shelton said that a fifth man remained in critical condition Saturday after also being struck with a long metal object that authorities recovered.

Police responded to a 911 call just before 2 am local time as one assault was in progress in Manhattan’s Chinatown neighborhood.

A 24-year-old suspect is in custody but has yet to be charged, the detective said.

The victims apparently were asleep when they were attacked in three different locations. The first died of blunt trauma to the head. A second man was attacked nearby but survived. He was taken to New York Downtown Hospital in critical condition.

The other three victims, attacked about a block away, also died of trauma to the head. The identities of the victims have not been released. Authorities were investigating the motive for the killings.

[SquirrelMan]

Trump fired back at Romney on Twitter: "Somebody please wake up Mitt Romney and tell him that my conversation with the Ukrainian President was a congenial and very appropriate one, and my statement on China pertained to corruption, not politics," he wrote Saturday in tweets that also attacked Romney personally.

Read more here: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nat...#storylink=cpy

Trump knows he can safely do this because Mitt has no spine.

Mitt Romney never knew how to win. He is a pompous “ass” who has been fighting me from the beginning, except when he begged me for my endorsement for his Senate run (I gave it to him), and when he begged me to be Secretary of State (I didn’t give it to him). He is so bad for R’s!

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

Fucker Carlson seems to be leading the pivot on impeachment. As in, no longer deny the problem, but scold the degree of consequences.

He’s just pivoting too “it’s bad, but the Dems are overreacting”. It’s damage control so he can look like he’s being reasonable when he’s not

[Tami]

'It's totally appropriate': Pompeo jokes about political pressure at Greek press conference – video

--------------
Mike Pompeo says lawyers 'harassed' his team after he missed Ukraine subpoena deadline

[Tami]

Are you talking to me?’ Trump’s anger on impeachment erupts

[Theleviathan]

He’s just pivoting too “it’s bad, but the Dems are overreacting”. It’s damage control so he can look like he’s being reasonable when he’s not

Yup, that's what I said! And yes, it's totally self-serving but that's all Tucker has ever been about.

[Tami]

US Customs Officer Harasses Defense One Journalist at Dulles Airport

A U.S. passport screening official held a Defense One journalist’s passport until he received an affirmative answer to this repeated question: “You write propaganda, right?”

The incident took place about 4 p.m. on Thursday at Dulles International Airport. News Editor Ben Watson was returning from an assignment in Denmark when he entered permanent resident reentry aisle No. 17 at Dulles. After the Customs and Border Protection official asked the usual question about undeclared fruit or meat, the interaction took an unusual and unsettling turn.

Watson recalls the conversation:

CBP officer, holding Watson’s passport: “What do you do?”

Watson: “Journalism.”

CBP officer: “So you write propaganda, right?”

Watson: “No.”

CBP officer: “You’re a journalist?”

Watson: “Yes.”

CBP officer: “You write propaganda, right?”

Watson: “No. I am in journalism. Covering national security. And homeland security. And with many of the same skills I used in the U.S. Army as a public affairs officer. Some would argue that’s propaganda.”

CBP officer: “You’re a journalist?”

Watson: “Yes.”

CBP officer: “You write propaganda, right?”

Watson waited five seconds. Then: “For the purposes of expediting this conversation, yes.”

CBP officer, a fourth time: “You write propaganda, right?”

Watson, again: “For the purposes of expediting this conversation, yes.”

CBP officer: “Here you go.”

At that point, the CBP officer handed back the passport.