192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
hightor
 
  3  
Fri 12 May, 2017 04:32 am
@farmerman,
How much of the difference between C3 and C4 plantlife is caused by, or dependent upon, photoperiod? Given ideal temperature, could tropical grasses thrive under the 16-17 hours of mid-summer daylight in the higher latitudes of the temperate zones?
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  2  
Fri 12 May, 2017 06:00 am
@layman,
More chicken little deniers. Although I note that your Spencer dude says: "The only part that is relatively settled is that adding CO2 to the atmosphere has probably contributed to recent warming."
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  5  
Fri 12 May, 2017 06:26 am
Michael Gerson
Quote:
It is amazing what our democracy has, so far, allowed Trump to get away with, giving only a grimace, a laugh or a shrug. But this tolerance is about to be tested.

If Trump selects a political crony — of the Rudy Giuliani or Chris Christie variety ­— to head the FBI, the integrity of federal law enforcement and the rule of law will be under direct assault. Such a nomination, again, would not be illegal. But such a bold, banana-republic-style power play by the president — which could be interpreted only as an attempt to quash the Russian-influence investigation — would be properly viewed as a constitutional crisis. And the historical spotlight would burn hot on Republican legislators.
WP
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  3  
Fri 12 May, 2017 06:32 am
@farmerman,
Plants won't evolve fast enough to respond to global warming in real time. They will respond though, by growing faster through a direct cause-to-effect relationship: more CO2, more photosynthesis.

The main difference between what's happening now and what happened before in prehistoric times is the speed of the change. We are forcing a massive change in global climate at record speed. I know it looks slow from our perspective but our climate will be wholy different 1 or 2000 years from now, and by geologic standards, this is a blip in time.
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  5  
Fri 12 May, 2017 06:33 am
@MontereyJack,
I believe you may be right about Trump's dementia, or something is off with him. He is now openly admitting he was thinking of Russia at the time he decided to fire Comey.

Quote:
Recounting his decision to dismiss Comey, Trump told NBC News, “In fact, when I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said, ‘You know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made up story, it’s an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that they should have won.’”

Trump’s account flatly contradicts the White House’s initial account of how the president arrived at his decision, undercutting public denials by his aides that the move was influenced in any way by his growing fury with the ongoing Russia probe.


WP

Also, Sessions may be in trouble with his involvement in the Comey firing since he recused himself due to his own connection to Russian contacts.

Excerpts
Quote:

Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself from the Russia investigation. “During the course of the last several weeks, I have met with the relevant senior career Department officials to discuss whether I should recuse myself from any matters arising from the campaigns for president of the United States,” he said in his written recusal released on March 2. “Having concluded those meetings today, I have decided to recuse myself from any existing or future investigations of any matters related in any way to the campaigns for President of the United States.”

Any existing or future investigations. Related in any way.

Sessions consulted with the president and coordinated the firing of James Comey. Recall that Comey had testified on March 20 that he was heading the Russia investigation:

I’ve been authorized by the Department of Justice to confirm that the FBI, as part of our counterintelligence mission, is investigating the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election. That includes investigating the nature of any links between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian government, and whether there was any coordination between the campaign and Russia’s efforts. As with any counterintelligence investigation, this will also include an assessment of whether any crimes were committed. Because it is an open, ongoing investigation, and is classified, I cannot say more about what we are doing and whose conduct we are examining.

Quote:

The problem for Sessions (as it is for Trump) is legal as well. This returns to whether firing Comey constituted obstruction of justice. Lawfare blog supplies us with the persuasive analysis:

Under 18 U.S.C. § 1505, a felony offense is committed by anyone who “corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication influences, obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation in being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress.”

An accompanying code section, 18 U.S.C. § 1515(b), defines “corruptly” as “acting with an improper purpose, personally or by influencing another, including making a false or misleading statement, or withholding, concealing, altering, or destroying a document or other information” (emphasis added). This is where obstruction of justice intersects with the false statements law. If you knowingly and willfully make a false statement of material fact in a federal government proceeding, you’ve potentially violated § 1001, and when you add an objective to influence, obstruct, or impede an investigation, you’ve now possibly violated § 1505 as well. Perjury can intersect with obstruction of justice in the same way.

Under the statute, a “proceeding” can be an investigation. Section 1503 criminalizes the same conduct in judicial proceedings. So obstruction during an investigation might violate § 1505, while if that same investigation leads to a criminal prosecution, obstruction during the prosecution itself would violate § 1503. The individual also has to know that a proceeding is happening in order to violate the statute, and must have the intent to obstruct—that is, act with the purpose of obstructing, even if they don’t succeed.

The question for Sessions — and for the president — is whether there was intent to obstruct justice. (“As applied to the President and his staff, the first two elements appear to be a slam dunk. First, courts have given “proceeding” a broad definition. … Second, Comey himself had recently confirmed that the investigation was ongoing—in extremely public and publicized congressional hearings.”) That leaves the matter of intent.

While ordinarily one might find this hard to prove, here we have overwhelming evidence that the reason for the firing was not his handling of the Hillary Clinton email matter. Saying it was not about Russia constitutes a lie, part of an effort to interfere with the investigation. Firing the lead investigator to slow the investigation appears to be designed “to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding.”


WP
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  2  
Fri 12 May, 2017 06:33 am
@layman,
More chicken little deniers. Although I note that your Spencer dude says: "The only part that is relatively settled is that adding CO2 to the atmosphere has probably contributed to recent warming."

Not ****, Sherlock... And you can cross out "relatively" and "probably".
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  5  
Fri 12 May, 2017 06:45 am
In an interview with the Economist, Trump claims he invented the phrase "prime the pump"...
Quote:
ECONOMIST: Beyond that, it’s okay if the tax plan increases the deficit?

TRUMP: It is okay, because it won’t increase it for long. You may have two years where you’ll … you understand the expression “prime the pump”?

ECONOMIST: Yes.

TRUMP: We have to prime the pump.

ECONOMIST: It’s very Keynesian.

TRUMP: We’re the highest-taxed nation in the world. Have you heard that expression before, for this particular type of an event?

ECONOMIST: Priming the pump?


TRUMP: Yeah, have you heard it?

ECONOMIST: Yes.

TRUMP: Have you heard that expression used before? Because I haven’t heard it. I mean, I just … I came up with it a couple of days ago and I thought it was good. It’s what you have to do.
WP
If that isn't pathological enough, Trump himself (as the WP piece notes) has used that phrase himself multiple times earlier.

There's no connection between truth and what comes out of Trump's mouth. About anything. How about Russia or the FBI and other investigations and the firing of Comey? There he can be trusted to be honest least of all.

Yet the tribal identity and allegiance of almost all GOP politicos and supporters is such that all of this is ignored, excused and defended. And the US as a functioning democracy is in jeopardy because of this.
blatham
 
  6  
Fri 12 May, 2017 06:56 am
Quote:
As the controversy surrounding Donald Trump's firing of FBI Director James Comey intensifies, one of the key questions is whether the president obstructed justice by firing the person overseeing the investigation into the Russia scandal. Trump's allies have gone to great lengths this week to argue that the firing and the investigation have nothing to do with one anoth

The president, however, has now admitted that those defenses are wrong. In an interview with NBC News' Lester Holt yesterday, Trump admitted he was motivated by concerns about the Russia scandal when he decided to oust Comey from his FBI post.
Quote:
"[W]hen I decided to just do it [fire Comey], I said to myself, I said you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made up story."

About the same time as the interview, Trump's spokesperson also told reporters that by firing Comey, the White House has "taken steps" to end the investigation into the Russia scandal.

Democrats don't need to make the case that Trump obstructed justice; Trump and his team are doing it for them.
Benen
revelette1
 
  4  
Fri 12 May, 2017 07:02 am
@blatham,
Not only that, but his entire argument is flat wrong, we are not highest taxed country in the world.

Quote:
Data from 2014, the most recent year available, shows that the United States wasn’t the most highly taxed by the typical metrics and actually places near the bottom or around the middle of the pack.


PF

As it said on the down the article, even if you are talking about corporate tax, we are not at the highest because of deductions and exclusions.
blatham
 
  4  
Fri 12 May, 2017 07:10 am
@revelette1,
I'll grant that on this claim, he may not be knowingly lying. He may well be simply repeating a falsehood he got from elsewhere and is far, far too uneducated and unprincipled to know or care regarding the accuracy or truth of what he's saying.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  -4  
Fri 12 May, 2017 07:25 am
@blatham,
Why do you insist on posting material from hacks?

This is what was actually said:
Quote:
“We want this to come to its conclusion, we want it to come to its conclusion with integrity,” said deputy press secretary Sarah Sanders, referring to the FBI’s probe into Moscow’s interference in last year’s election. “And we think that we’ve actually, by removing Director Comey, taken steps to make that happen.”


This what your dumb-**** hack wrote:
Quote:
Trump's spokesperson also told reporters that by firing Comey, the White House has "taken steps" to end the investigation into the Russia scandal.


You post so much fake news that you make other conspiracy posters look good by comparison.
McGentrix
 
  -4  
Fri 12 May, 2017 07:33 am
@revelette1,
revelette1 wrote:

Not only that, but his entire argument is flat wrong, we are not highest taxed country in the world.

Quote:
Data from 2014, the most recent year available, shows that the United States wasn’t the most highly taxed by the typical metrics and actually places near the bottom or around the middle of the pack.


PF

As it said on the down the article, even if you are talking about corporate tax, we are not at the highest because of deductions and exclusions.


Where do you come up with this crap? Nothing you've written has anything to do with what Trump has said.

How about we look at the actual facts? Wouldn't that be strange for you guys?

Corporate Income Tax Rates around the World, 2016

Quote:
It is well known that the United States has the highest corporate income tax rate among the 35 industrialized nations of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).[1] However, it is less well known how the United States stacks up against countries throughout the entire world. Expanding the sample of countries and tax jurisdictions to 188, the U.S.’s corporate tax rate of almost 39 percent is the third highest in the world, lower only than the United Arab Emirates’ rate of 55 percent and Puerto Rico’s rate of 39 percent. The U.S. tax rate is 16.4 percentage points higher than the worldwide average of 22.5 percent and a little more than 9 percentage points higher than the worldwide GDP-weighted average of 29.5 percent. Over the past ten years, the average worldwide tax rate has been declining, pushing the United States farther from the norm.


I don't understand why you feel you need to stretch soooo far to try to prove something that is so easily disproven.
izzythepush
 
  4  
Fri 12 May, 2017 07:36 am
Quote:
US President Donald Trump has warned fired former FBI chief James Comey against leaking material to the media.

In a tweet on Friday he said Mr Comey had "better hope that there are no 'tapes' of our conversations".

Mr Comey, who had been leading an inquiry into alleged Russian meddling in the US election, was fired by the president on Tuesday.

Mr Trump has since insisted he was told by Mr Comey that he was not under investigation.
Mr Trump said he had been told twice by Mr Comey over dinner and once over the phone that he was not a target of the inquiry.

The president said: "I said: 'If it's possible, would you let me know: am I under investigation?' He said: 'You are not under investigation.'"

The FBI investigation is looking into possible collusion between Trump election campaign officials and Moscow.
Mr Trump said this week he alone was responsible for the decision to sack Mr Comey, calling him a "showboat" and "grandstander".

Mr Trump has dismissed the FBI investigation as a "charade" and has said Democrats are using "fake news" about collusion with the Russians as an excuse for losing the election.

In another tweet on Friday, Mr Trump said: "When [former Director of National Intelligence] James Clapper himself, and virtually everyone else with knowledge of the witch hunt, says there is no collusion, when does it end?"
However, Mr Comey's successor, acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe, said on Thursday that it remained "a highly significant investigation".

In testimony to the Senate Intelligence Committee, he also cast doubt on White House claims that Mr Comey had lost the confidence of his staff.

"I can confidently tell you that the vast majority of employees enjoyed a deep and positive connection to Director Comey," Mr McCabe said.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39899542
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  6  
Fri 12 May, 2017 07:39 am
@McGentrix,
Quote:
we want it to come to its conclusion with integrity,

Good point, McG. "Integrity" is the hallmark of Trump, his spokespersons and this administration. You can see that clearly in the "prime the pump" metaphor created by the supergenius at the helm. You can see it in the changing and contradictory explanations from the WH re why Comey was fired. You can see it really everywhere over the last two years with all the pussy grabbing and everything.

Your continuing use of "fake news" is brain dead. But that's the function of the term.
layman
 
  -4  
Fri 12 May, 2017 07:40 am
@McGentrix,
Trump himself on the topic;

Quote:
"I want to find out if there was a problem in the election having to do with Russia. As far as I'm concerned, I want that thing to be absolutely done properly," Trump said. "Maybe I'll expand that, you know, lengthen the time (of the Russia probe) because it should be over with, in my opinion, should have been over with a long time ago. 'Cause all it is, is an excuse but I said to myself, I might even lengthen out the investigation, but I have to do the right thing for the American people."

Trump added of the investigation, "I want that to be so strong and so good. And I want it to happen."

Asked by Holt if by firing Comey he was trying to send a "lay off" message to his successor, Trump said, "I'm not."

"If Russia did anything, I want to know that," he said.

Trump said he never tried to pressure Comey into dropping the FBI probe of the Trump campaign and insisted, "I want to find out if there was a problem in the election having to do with Russia. I just want somebody that's competent," Trump responded. "I am a big fan of the FBI, I love the FBI."


http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-reveals-he-asked-comey-whether-he-was-under-investigation-n757821
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  5  
Fri 12 May, 2017 07:41 am
@McGentrix,
Perhaps you didn't read the whole article from politifact? In any event, it has charts and breaks down how the deductions and exclusions means corporations in practice pay less tax. It is not rocket science.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  5  
Fri 12 May, 2017 07:46 am
@blatham,
The BBC is repeating what you've posted.

Quote:
on Thursday afternoon, the president took a wrecking ball to the White House's days of work.

"I was going to fire Comey," Mr Trump said in an interview with NBC News. "Regardless of the recommendation I was going to fire Comey."

If that weren't enough, the president went on to say that the Russia investigation was on his mind when he made the final call to sack the director.

"When I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story," he said.

Oftentimes it seems like the president and his press office are operating from different playbooks.

The president says or tweets what he chooses, and his staff scrambles to explain the context or douse the flames of controversy.
It happened when the president boasted about the size of his inauguration crowd, alleged that there were millions of illegal votes in the presidential election and accused Barack Obama of "wiretapping" him, among many other instances.

On Thursday afternoon it was time to bring out the brooms once again.
"I hadn't had a chance to have the conversation directly with the president," Ms Huckabee Sanders said during the daily White House press conference when asked how Mr Trump's remarks conflicted with her earlier statements. "I went off of the information I had."

Oftentimes, it seems, the shelf life of that information is very short.
When asked why he fired Mr Comey, the president didn't talk about policies or performances, he framed his response in terms of character.

"Look, he's a showboat; he's a grandstander," Mr Trump said. "The FBI has been in turmoil. You know that, I know that. Everybody knows that. You take a look at the FBI a year ago, it was in virtual turmoil - less than a year ago. It hasn't recovered from that."

According to press reports, the president was particularly angered when Mr Comey told a Senate committee last week that he was "mildly nauseated" by the thought that his interventions might have influenced the presidential election.
Given how sensitive the president is to questions of the legitimacy of his electoral victory, the line surely did not go over well.

Back in January, just two days after his inauguration, Mr Trump met face-to-face with Mr Comey and said that the FBI director had become "more famous than me".

It seemed a strange line at the time, given that fame, for the president, is a commodity to be closely guarded.

That remark now makes more sense - viewed not as a joking aside, but as the president's evaluation of a potential adversary.

The "grandstander" was seeking fame at the president's expense. He had to go.
It was a bit of a non sequitur in his letter informing Mr Comey that he had been fired.

The president, in the second paragraph, said that he appreciated being informed by the director "on three separate occasions" that he was not the subject of an FBI investigation.

In his NBC interview, Mr Trump elaborated on those occasions.

Two, the president said, came during phone calls - one he initiated and one initiated by the director.

The third was over a dinner, previously unreported, during which Mr Comey asked Mr Trump to keep him on as director.

"I said: 'If it's possible, would you let me know if I'm under investigation'," the president said. "He said: 'You are not under investigation.'"

According to justice department guidelines, FBI officials are not supposed to comment on the status of ongoing investigations - a position that acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe emphasised during congressional testimony on Thursday.

Ms Huckabee Sanders was asked during the White House press conference on Thursday whether the president's question about an ongoing investigation with the FBI director in a dinner during which his tenure was also discussed was potentially troublesome.

"I don't see that as a conflict of interest," Ms Huckabee Sanders said.

In the end, however, it's largely a question of semantics.

Mr Trump may not be under investigation, but - according to Mr Comey in congressional testimony in March - his presidential campaign is and some of his associates are.

When it comes to law enforcement actions, that may be close enough.

And, for Mr Trump, too close for comfort.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39891797
0 Replies
 
Below viewing threshold (view)
Walter Hinteler
 
  6  
Fri 12 May, 2017 08:23 am
Quote:
http://i.imgur.com/TwVUAS1.jpg

I'm excited about the Trump tapes.
Perhaps, there will be a REMIX of other wiretapped persons, committees etc ?
0 Replies
 
Below viewing threshold (view)
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.52 seconds on 09/28/2024 at 05:29:04