All-purpose news and politics thread: Two Steps Beyond!

[Darkspellmaster]

Word on the street is Mueller is dropping the big indictments this week.

Guessing Jared.

Also in the news former CIA director is calling Trump a disgraced Demagogue. How long before he starts to target the CIA?

[Dalak]

Man, come on with that noise.

If you want to try to break an N.D.A. you were paid for with somebody like this, that is "Best Case Scenario" what will happen when the person who paid you decides to enforce it once you start looking like you are about to go blabbermouth. Trying to frame it as someone getting shafted is utter bunk.

"About to" isn't breaking anything, and you've harped on wording far too often for me not to point it out. Thus trying to sue her for 20 million is neither legal or proper. Maybe if she wasn't a porn star and was a whistle blower you'd have a different opinion.

[BeastieRunner]

Guessing Jared.

Also in the news former CIA director is calling Trump a disgraced Demagogue. How long before he starts to target the CIA?

Bannon is out of country. That's who it's gotta be. He knows he's cooked. He'd be safer than Jared and probably not trigger Trump into something insane.

Bilbo Biggot triggered the Manic Morning Meltdown and what looks like contingency plan A.

[Old Man Ollie 1962]

Word on the street is

Heh. You sound like Clemenza.

[numberthirty]

"About to" isn't breaking anything, and you've harped on wording far too often for me not to point it out. Thus trying to sue her for 20 million is neither legal or proper. Maybe if she wasn't a porn star and was a whistle blower you'd have a different opinion.

Let's go on ahead, and roll tape on that...

Post #88130 -

So...

I just watched Joy Reid and another woman discuss the whole Trump/Stormy angle.

It's odd how women who tend to be on the "Women Need To Have Their Own Agency" end of things go right to telling you exactly what sort of an actress a woman was and that another woman had just had her husband's child when that actress might have slept with a married man.

Let alone that they made sure to throw out "Prostitute" only to correct having done so at the end of the piece.

So, yeah. Kind of a funny route to women actually being able to have legitimate self-determination.

Post #88142 -

"Funny Route" as in...

- Why is the particular type of film this woman was in even central enough to the issue that it requires being mentioned?
- Is it because the folks mentioning it want to focus on that a judgment they don't want a woman having an abortion to have to discuss is just fine to discuss if a woman might be sleeping with a married man or making a living in a certain way?
- If it is fine, how is that putting women in a better position to have a blanket "Say Of Their Own"?

Never mind that tossing in "Prostitution" happened and why it might have been thrown into the mix.

[numberthirty]

"About to" isn't breaking anything, and you've harped on wording far too often for me not to point it out. Thus trying to sue her for 20 million is neither legal or proper. Maybe if she wasn't a porn star and was a whistle blower you'd have a different opinion.

Unless you have an actual copy of her N.D.A. that clearly points out what does not constitute a violation, I'd say you are in "Guess" territory.

At best.

[Tazirai]

Yep, some of the oldest congressional members weren't spring chickens when they got elected.

Dianne Feinstein became a Senator at 59, twenty two years after her first election to political office (when she joined the San Francisco Board of Supervisors.)

Bernie Sanders (who weirdly enough does not appear to be explicitly mentioned as someone too old to run for office by the guy making that argument, even though he'll be in his mid 80s at the end of the Senate team he is seeking, and seems to be positioning himself for a Presidential bid at 79) became a Senator at 65.

Donald Trump was elected to his first political office at 70.

One of the Democrats' biggest recruiting gets of the midterms is the former Tennessee Governor running for Senate in his mid-70s.

There are problems with older officials, in that they will be more likely to have serious health issues. There are advantages as well. They can have significant institutional knowledge, as well as a deeper understanding of history due to their involvement in earlier debates which are often relevant in the current day. And there are ways individual elder statesmen can have an impact, Ted Kennedy's endorsement of Obama in the 2008 primary was seen as meaningful due to his storied history. John McCain's views against torture or reckless health care reform get more attention than the typical Senator willing to vote against the party at times.

It does seem to be a bit of a myth that Congress has too many old-timers.

There are three Senators who have been in the office since the 70s. Two will be out by this time next year, leaving one.

77 current senators were elected since 2000.

22 have been elected/ appointed since the 2014 elections. By this time next year, that number will increase to at least 26, with the resignation of Cochran and open elections in Arizona, Tennessee, and Utah.

People also think Biden is okay to run but Bernie isn't but fail to mention they are near the same age.

[Malvolio]

And I'm sure everyone will remain perfectly calm should Trump and the GOP not just decide to suspend elections. Which is the reason they probably are doing nothing about potential Russian meddling going into 2018, because they'd like that to be the excuse to just call them off entirely.

Short version, Republicans have painted themselves into a corner, and they have less than eight months to reverse course. If they keep trying to defend the indefensible (Trump), they're going to get obliterated at the polls. Hell, for sticking with him for this long and dug in as hard as folks like Devin Nunes have, it might already be too late.

I thought Paul's post was a reference to voter suppression. I think we have to guard against that in a lot of states, especially those with Republican governors and/or secretaries of state.

[Dalak]

Unless you have an actual copy of her N.D.A. that clearly points out what does not constitute a violation, I'd say you are in "Guess" territory.

At best.

We're both there, but your guess was that she broke her NDA without blabbing. I still think your opinion would be different if she was a whistle blower, which was the bigger point IMO. If she was about to squeal on Big Pharma, the Gov't, someone from Wall Street, or any of your chosen issues you'd be clamoring in her favor. Not against Trump here though.

[numberthirty]

We're both there, but your guess was that she broke her NDA without blabbing. I still think your opinion would be different if she was a whistle blower, which was the bigger point IMO. If she was about to squeal on Big Pharma, the Gov't, someone from Wall Street, or any of your chosen issues you'd be clamoring in her favor. Not against Trump here though.

That is because it would be the "Apple" to the "Orange" we are talking about here.

If one of the women Weinstein had sign an N.D.A. decided to break it, it would be completely different than what is going on here.

There is obviously the component of that Daniels stands to make a good bit of money off of being able to break the N.D.A. she was compensated to sign. Ignoring that incredibly likely motivation to try to lump her into the group you mentioned makes absolutely zero sense. No one in those situations would be in a similar position to profit by breaking them or whistle blowing.

Which isn't to say I even have much of a problem with the possibility that she offered to return her initial compensation to be released from the N.D.A. If both parties could agree to that being a reasonable scenario. If not, you don't just get to potentially violate it without consequence. Like or dislike Trump is a non-issue when it comes to that.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

People also think Biden is okay to run but Bernie isn't but fail to mention they are near the same age.

Not me. I don't want Sanders OR Biden to run. The Dems need fresh blood to run for president, not those fossils. If that's ageism, hey, I'm fine with that.

**********

Trump’s Personal Lawyer Is Now Calling For End To Russia Probe

He called for “an end to alleged Russia Collusion investigation.” Sorry, homeslice, there's nothing "alleged" about what happened in 2016. Meanwhile....

**********

Andrew McCabe Gave Memos On Trump Conversations To Robert Mueller

Former FBI Director James Comey wrote similar memos on his interactions with Trump. You can hear Dolt45 and his henchmen going "GULP!" from miles away! Meanwhile....

**********

Democrats Flood Andrew McCabe With Federal Job Offers To Save His Pension

The former FBI deputy director was fired two days before he was set to retire with his pension. That's plenty cool!

**********

James Comey Fires Back At Trump, Vowing To Reveal Who’s ‘Honorable’ — And Who Isn’t

Former FBI director is about to bare his history with the president in a new book. Yo, Jimbo! What took so long?

**********

Retired 4-Star Army General Calls Trump A ‘Serious Threat To National Security’

The president is “refusing to protect the U.S. from Russian attacks.” Well, of course he's refusing! Trump didn't want to anger his BFF, Bad Vlad.

[PaulBullion]

Not me. I don't want Sanders OR Biden to run. The Dems need fresh blood to run for president, not those fossils. If that's ageism, hey, I'm fine with that.

Yeah, I can't think of a single instance where I would have seen an pro-Biden Democrat argue against Sanders based on age. They're more likely to point out that Sanders is not a Democrat, too divisive and has too much baggage.

[PaulBullion]

Democrats Flood Andrew McCabe With Federal Job Offers To Save His Pension

The former FBI deputy director was fired two days before he was set to retire with his pension. That's plenty cool!
.

While that is definitely nice to see, I'm wondering if it could have any effect on McCabe's unlawful termination suit? Seeing as there would be less damage done to him by the termination and he'd still be working for the government?

[numberthirty]

We're both there, but your guess was that she broke her NDA without blabbing.

As for this, it's not entirely a "Guess"(unless the Times is just printing outright lies now)...

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/07/u...els-trump.html

Ms. Clifford’s nondisclosure contract, made public through her lawsuit, calls for disagreements to be settled through confidential, binding arbitration. The lawsuit was filed a week after Mr. Cohen initiated arbitration proceedings, but the court papers did not say what was at issue or refer to the restraining order.

The contract gives Mr. Trump the right to seek financial penalties of more than $1 million in arbitration should Ms. Clifford break or threaten to break her agreement to stay silent. It also gives him the right to obtain an injunction barring her from speaking while disputes are considered in arbitration or open court. Those terms prompted Ms. Clifford to change her plans about going public, according to two people familiar with the situation who were not authorized to speak about it.

While I know that they are asserting that it not what they are doing because they believe the contract to have previously invalidated, that doesn't really change that it is probably what they are doing if the agreement is still valid. It's also not so much "Breaking" as a "Penalty" that happens for not abiding by that part of it.

[PaulBullion]

As for this, it's not entirely a "Guess"(unless the Times is just printing outright lies now)...

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/07/u...els-trump.html



While I know that they are asserting that it not what they are doing because they believe the contract to have previously invalidated, that doesn't really change that it is probably what they are doing if the agreement is still valid. It's also not so much "Breaking" as a "Penalty" that happens for not abiding by that part of it.

Can't you see that Stormy's lawyers were daring Trump's to sue, and they got what they wanted?

It's all about discovery.