Donald Trump and US politics

"

diablofdb wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Refugee successfully uses failure to assimilate as legal defense against New Hampshire domestic violence charges: http://www.unionleader.com/crime/manchester-domestic-violence-case-dropped-for-cultural-incompetence-20170709

it's similar to a rape case that happened in Germany where a 13 year old kid was molested but the case was dropped because the refugee did not understood the law and did not knew the laws of the country.


This is sickening

Just an example of the incompetence of our governments and the mass delusion westerners have in regard to "multiculturalism" and assimilation. When the state doesn't apply its very basic function of equality under law, then you don't really have a state.

But remember bois, diversity is our strength.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

diablofdb wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Refugee successfully uses failure to assimilate as legal defense against New Hampshire domestic violence charges: http://www.unionleader.com/crime/manchester-domestic-violence-case-dropped-for-cultural-incompetence-20170709

it's similar to a rape case that happened in Germany where a 13 year old kid was molested but the case was dropped because the refugee did not understood the law and did not knew the laws of the country.

This is sickening

In the neoprogressive utopia laws only apply to the Privileged.

Did people actually read? It is not "Cultural-incompetence", he is mentally ill.

"

deathflower wrote:

"

diablofdb wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Refugee successfully uses failure to assimilate as legal defense against New Hampshire domestic violence charges: http://www.unionleader.com/crime/manchester-domestic-violence-case-dropped-for-cultural-incompetence-20170709

it's similar to a rape case that happened in Germany where a 13 year old kid was molested but the case was dropped because the refugee did not understood the law and did not knew the laws of the country.

This is sickening

Did people actually read? It is not "Cultural-incompetence", he is mentally ill.

Not quite. The "cultural incomptency" defense is modeled on the mental incompetency defense, but differs in that, instead of having experts state that the defendant is mentally ill and cannot be cured within 12 months, that the defendant has failed to culturally assimilate and cannot be assimilated within 12 months. I guess you could look at it as claiming "failure to assimilate" as a qualifying mental illness all by itself.

Technically, I'm not sure I disagree — the beliefs of some of these cultures are insane. But if they are, why are we importing lunatics?

"

Raycheetah wrote:

Spoiler

"

Curiosor and Curiosor – Natalia Veselnitskaya Pictured With Obama Officals in DC on June 14th, 2016…

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/07/11/curiosor-and-curiosor-natalia-veselnitskaya-pictured-with-obama-officals-in-dc-on-june-14th-2016/

"

At the heart of the current media Russian narrative du jour is a story about Donald Trump Jr. meeting with a Russian attorney named Natalia Veselnitskaya. That meeting took place on June 9th 2016 in Trump Tower.

Now it is discovered via video and images, that only 5 days later, June 14th 2016, Ms. Veselnitskava was a guest of former Obama administration Russian Ambassador Michael McFaul in Washington DC for a House of Representatives hearing on U.S. Policy Toward Putin’s Russia.

Video et al at the link above.

Out before "Oh, right, Conservative Treehouse, LOL!" dismissal to justify ignoring the actual information. =9[.]9=

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/global-opinions/wp/2017/07/11/this-law-might-explain-why-a-russian-lawyer-wanted-to-meet-with-trump/?tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.1064032e1635

"

Nevertheless, a lot of very rich, very influential Russians remained angry. They deployed Veselnitskaya — she represented one of the companies accused of laundering the Magnitsky money in the United States — to lobby against the Magnitsky Act, to attack Browder personally, to even make a scandalous film about him and his crusade. Given how far they went and how much money they spent, it’s not at all hard to imagine that they would deploy her in a far more audacious project: an offer to help Donald Trump become president, and to ask him to lift sanctions in exchange.

She got hired by Russians that want sanctions imposed on Russia gone, and people are surprised that she found her way to be invited to a hearing that discuss those sanctions?

And the tone of this article implies that "Obama did something shady again!" *DUN DUN DUUUN!*

---------------

"

Manocean wrote:

Spoiler

I'm a bit skeptical that the President is done, but unless he pardons Jr I think his son (and maybe also the Secretary of Everything) might be ;D

---------------

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

diablofdb wrote:

meeting someone even for informations is never illegal. Hillary engaged some private detective and info agency to get some dirt on Trump for the election, and she got infos from people who were from other countries. That is not illegal is part of the game. So even if Trump Jr would have recieved info there that could have harmed Hillary, it would still be another nothing burger.

Correct. There's even a volunteer clause from the FEC which allows foreigners to volunteer for a political candidate as long as there's no compensation.

https://transition.fec.gov/pages/brochures/foreign.shtml#Volunteer

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/884840373843103744

Not only that. Kushner didn't disclose this meeting on his security clearance, which if I'm not wrong is a crime too (I think it's something similar to lying under oath).

Related:

---------------

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/884969207078768641

People are falling to understand what this all means.

What we know for certain is that Donald J. Trump Jr received an email saying that the Russian Government was willing to offer them information that was harmful to HRC. The fact that he and Jared Kushner(Now the current secretary of everything) went to that meeting knowing that the info came from the Russian government it's already a crime.

Now, if DJT Jr had a copy of that email that incriminates him, we can be sure that the sender (A Russian guy) must have one too.

So, when DJT Jr and Jared went to that meeting they already became susceptible to blackmail by the Russian government.

Mike Flynn was in a similar situation. Sally Yates called for his firing because she became aware that he had discussed sanction with Russia during the campaign(which made him susceptible to blackmail too), back then that didn't cast doubt on Trump(The President) as much, but now? Russians had the evidence that his son and son in law had committed a federal crime, I wouldn't say that is too far fetched to say that even Donald Trump himself could be blackmailed because of it.

-----------------

Now I ask a question: Is Trump being blackmailed?

He tried to lift sanctions on Russia:

"

He said State Department colleagues approached him, "concerned that the Trump administration, the incoming team was going to unilaterally rescind the sanctions on Russia, which had been placed there because of Russia's aggression on Ukraine. And it was further said by these people that there would be no action required from Russia."
Sauce: http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/former-diplomats-trump-team-sought-lift-sanctions-russia-n767406

He also want to give back the Russian Compounds that the Obama administration seized:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/report-trump-administration-moving-to-hand-back-shuttered-russia-compounds/

Now, about the Secretary of Everything, didn't he try to set up a secret back channel with Russia?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/may/27/trump-jared-kushner-secret-channel-russia

Related:
Before we could say that Russia helped Donald get elected on their own, and that Trump having policies that benefit Russia could be only a coincidence. But now, how can anyone be sure of that? You can believe, you can hope, but you can't be sure.

-----------------
Funny stuff ahead:
Bill Mitchel:
White house:
The Guy that arranged the meeting that Jr went: https://businessmonkeynews.com/pt/meet-the-unbelievable-man-who-set-up-trump-jr-s-meeting-with-russia-through-his-public-facebook-page/

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Not quite. The "cultural incomptency" defense is modeled on the mental incompetency defense, but differs in that, instead of having experts state that the defendant is mentally ill and cannot be cured within 12 months, that the defendant has failed to culturally assimilate and cannot be assimilated within 12 months. I guess you could look at it as claiming "failure to assimilate" as a qualifying mental illness all by itself.

Technically, I'm not sure I disagree — the beliefs of some of these cultures are insane. But if they are, why are we importing lunatics?

You pick 12 months as your defense. Not competent Not restorable Not dangerous. Did you not read that?

The Doctor give a date where he can't be cured. Not a date he can be cured. Do you even know when the defendant can be cured? It can be anywhere from 12 months to never. It is hasty generalization when you probably do not know either. It is probably closer to never. Unless I misunderstand what "Not restorable" mean.

"

diablofdb wrote:

"

鬼殺し wrote:

"

soneka101 wrote:

About the rest, I'm not really fighting here, just messing around, but I will do as you say and have my fun >:B

Anyway...this thread man. You're a fucking trooper.

Yadayadayada

Charan was rightfully commending Soneka for continuing to be one of a few voices against the many in this thread. It isn't easy being the voice of dissent, but it's important that those that dissent speak up, especially when they are the minority.

While we may disagree on the implication or analysis of various bits of information, it is still an honest exchange of opinion. Just because we may disagree on the reasoning, doesn't mean our opponent isn't giving us a well reasoned opinion.

If half of our elected leaders were as honest and forthright as Soneka, our country would be in much better shape. Disagreement has never really been the problem, the problem has been the lack of a constructive dialogue in which the people are respected and the merits and pitfalls of various approaches are weighed.

That said, our current POTUS is not a uniter. If the DNC wants a serious candidate for the next election, they need to find someone who can at least get people to sit down and discuss things like adults. In a nation of ~300 million people, someone has to be qualified to do that, I'd hope.

"

soneka101 wrote:

What we know for certain is that Donald J. Trump Jr received an email saying that the Russian Government was willing to offer them information that was harmful to HRC. The fact that he and Jared Kushner(Now the current secretary of everything) went to that meeting knowing that the info came from the Russian government it's already a crime.

For something to be classified as a crime, you need to prove an intent and a criminal act. Even if you consider the emails a proof of intent, the criminal act isn't there. Nothing illegal happened.

Anon has been digging into the lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya. Natalia was pictured with officials of the Obama administration one week after the meeting with Don Jr... Natalia also somehow entered the US with an expired visa, her visa expired in January 2016. Natalia has a history of anti-Trump social media posts.

The meeting was also setup by people who forged the Pissgate dossier. And Fusion GPS guy Rob Goldstone explicitly said the info is coming from the Russian government. Either he's the dumbest co-conspirator ever or he did it on purpose to make a FISA warrant possible. Really gets you noggin joggin.

"

鬼殺し wrote:

"

DalaiLama wrote:

Charan was rightfully commending Soneka for continuing to be one of a few voices against the many in this thread. It isn't easy being the voice of dissent, but it's important that those that dissent speak up, especially when they are the minority.

While we may disagree on the implication or analysis of various bits of information, it is still an honest exchange of opinion. Just because we may disagree on the reasoning, doesn't mean our opponent isn't giving us a well reasoned opinion.

If half of our elected leaders were as honest and forthright as Soneka, our country would be in much better shape. Disagreement has never really been the problem, the problem has been the lack of a constructive dialogue in which the people are respected and the merits and pitfalls of various approaches are weighed.

That said, our current POTUS is not a uniter. If the DNC wants a serious candidate for the next election, they need to find someone who can at least get people to sit down and discuss things like adults. In a nation of ~300 million people, someone has to be qualified to do that, I'd hope.

Welcome back. You need not defend me to those I have chosen not to acknowledge, but my choice continues to be confirmed as the correct one by my occasional glimpses of their obstinate attitude and scornful approach towards the other. They do not seek bipartisan discussion or compromise. Or even progress. To them, argument is the end, not the means. I simply have no time for people like that.

And I agree with everything you've said. That you can still support Trump despite noting he's not a uniter is oddly admirable, or perhaps just speaks to your (and others'?) feeling that being a uniter is not an essential quality in a world leader. While a great many world leaders really aren't uniters either, I think most at least aspire for it. Trump does not. He is a conqueror and thus a divider. Great for business, not so great for world politics. Or politics in general, really.

On the other hand, maybe we're coming to the end of one, long-running style of politics and are being ushered into a new form of global co-existence, one that doesn't seek to unite or compromise, but instead emphasises difference to bolster morale within each nation. I've said this enough ways and then some: I don't think that's healthy, but who knows? Maybe it was always going to come to this.

Actually, I think saying Trump is not a uniter is oversimplifying things. He can rally very effectively, and rallying is a form of unification. But it tends to be a practice that unifies like-minded individuals towards a common cause, and that cause is often dynamic and short-term in nature. Rallying requires opposition, and as an ongoing process it demands a fresh supply of targets and blame-laying. It is a weak, fragile unification compared to the result of genuine diplomacy that overcomes differences and unites not just the choir but the entire congregation, so to speak. Rallying and demagogical behaviour was enough to get Trump over the line, and it's enough to keep him afloat for now, but I don't think he's doing very well at the job. He's nowhere top pick for the role of President of the United States, and there are many from any definable political camp in the US and around the world who feel that way; to me, that is the heart of the matter when discussing 'Donald Trump and US Politics'.

Wow... I can't believe you two actually believe that Trump runs the country. I think this is what upsets the traditional upper EDUCATED wealthy class. The disregard for knowing the history and dynamics of how the USA is actually controlled. You actually believe POTUS wakes up one day and says, "today I'm going to make a new resolution." LOL

It's also highly narcissistical some of your rhetoric... Bit worrisome. I wish there was a public podcast, so the three of us could speak. There's no editing when conversations are live. To be quite honest writers, many well known writers/authors are introverts.

Unification may be a worthwhile end goal, but it isn't always an immediate answer. For example, when solving a contagious plague, quarantine is the first step in a situation where unity is death.

Trump does not unite. He schisms. But that's what the US needed. In the Republican Party, evangelocons and neocons got rekt — to quote Scott Adams, "Trump hollowed out the GOP and he's wearing it as a skin." Good — they are beyond saving and must be allowed to die (I said as much in my first Trump post in OT). In the Democratic Party, the growing rift between a mostly liberal base and a leadership class of neoprogressives has left the opposition desperate and inoherent. Again, good — it might eventually lead to a purge of the Dems' more dangerous elements and a return to sanity. In the media, he's been the focus of a new war between corporatist legacy media and new, more independent Internet-based media — between fake news and real journalism.

Trump's rise has caused irreparable damage to how American politics has conducted. Like chemotherapy. And not a moment too soon.

"

Xavderion wrote:

For something to be classified as a crime, you need to prove an intent and a criminal act. Even if you consider the emails a proof of intent, the criminal act isn't there. Nothing illegal happened.

"

Spoiler

The first: "A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make a contribution or a donation of money or other thing of value, or expressly or impliedly promise to make a contribution or a donation, in connection with any Federal, State, or local election."

The email exchange showed the information was promised from a foreign national — in this case the Russian government — and would be presented by a Kremlin-connected Russian lawyer. The line "other thing of value," experts said, covers opposition research or damaging information on another candidate.

Brendan Fischer, Federal Election Commission reform program director at the Campaign Legal Center, told Business Insider that the FEC has in past opinions interpreted the definition of "other thing of value" to include non-monetary contributions in relation to the foreign national ban.

"So getting opposition research or dirt on Hillary Clinton, or however they tried to portray it, would constitute a contribution both on the definition of a contribution and on the foreign national contribution ban," he said. "And then solicitation: Did Trump Jr. solicit the contribution? I think there the answer is also yes."

That leads to the second key passage, which reads: "No person shall knowingly solicit, accept, or receive from a foreign national any contribution or donation prohibited by" the law.

Regardless of whether Trump Jr. received any information, which he insists he did not, the solicitation of the meeting violates this statute, Ryan said.

"Whether or not he actually received that information does not matter in the eyes of the law," Ryan said. "Trump’s solicitation of the information is what constitutes the violation."

Sauce: http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-jr-emails-illegal-campaign-2017-7

When he said "Yes I want" and went to the meeting he was already done. The law says he can't solicit or accept anything of value from foreign officials, so the argument that he didn't receive the info ignores that asking for it (by going to the meeting) was also criminal.

Also, here is the timeline of that month:

You guys say it's a nothing burger, but a guy on reddit just called it a "Jr. Whopper"...

"

Xavderion wrote:

Spoiler

Anon has been digging into the lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya. Natalia was pictured with officials of the Obama administration one week after the meeting with Don Jr... Natalia also somehow entered the US with an expired visa, her visa expired in January 2016. Natalia has a history of anti-Trump social media posts.

That doesn't clear Trump Jr of anything '~'

"

Xavderion wrote:

Spoiler

The meeting was also setup by people who forged the Pissgate dossier. And Fusion GPS guy Rob Goldstone explicitly said the info is coming from the Russian government. Either he's the dumbest co-conspirator ever or he did it on purpose to make a FISA warrant possible. Really gets you noggin joggin.

Like I said before on my last post, the sender of the email could use it to blackmail Trump Jr. The way the email is, it's clear evidence of a crime, but if it was done with codenames and shit how could they use it as blackmail material? Taking into consideration that Natalia is trying to ease sanctions on Russia this way is seems like a more effective approach.

"

DalaiLama wrote:

Spoiler

Charan was rightfully commending Soneka for continuing to be one of a few voices against the many in this thread. It isn't easy being the voice of dissent, but it's important that those that dissent speak up, especially when they are the minority.

While we may disagree on the implication or analysis of various bits of information, it is still an honest exchange of opinion. Just because we may disagree on the reasoning, doesn't mean our opponent isn't giving us a well reasoned opinion.

If half of our elected leaders were as honest and forthright as Soneka, our country would be in much better shape. Disagreement has never really been the problem, the problem has been the lack of a constructive dialogue in which the people are respected and the merits and pitfalls of various approaches are weighed.

That said, our current POTUS is not a uniter. If the DNC wants a serious candidate for the next election, they need to find someone who can at least get people to sit down and discuss things like adults. In a nation of ~300 million people, someone has to be qualified to do that, I'd hope.

I have mixed feelings about you man.

At first I thought you were fooling around, picking the other side of the discussion on some subjects just to annoy people. But if it's true that you are here to discuss stuff in earnest, and just share opinions, then I have to say that I feel bad for misjudging you.

-------------

Look at this dude:


That must have been a shitty day >.<