blatham
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Apr, 2019 05:50 pm
@revelette1,
yep
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  3  
Reply Fri 19 Apr, 2019 05:52 pm
I don't want to see Democrats impeach Trump.

I think it's bad strategy and there's an election soon that will take care of him (hopefully).

BUT, if that's the route they go....I'll be sitting here smiling at the **** show.
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Apr, 2019 06:04 pm
Quote:
“While we have more detail from [Thursday]’s report than before, Congress must continue its investigation into Trump’s conduct and any foreign attempts to influence our election,” Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) said in a statement.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/4/19/18484998/mueller-2020-democrats-congress-trump-investigations

So that's right in line with Lash's thoughts as expressed earlier.
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Apr, 2019 06:10 pm
@blatham,
Try hard to understand. I don’t agree with every word that comes out of Bernie’s mouth.

But I did spend three hours with him today.😏
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  3  
Reply Fri 19 Apr, 2019 06:15 pm
@maporsche,
Although, I've heard that the Democrats may need to open an impeachment investigation in order to receive an unredacted version of the Mueller report.

If that's true, then I'll support the impeachment investigation. I think Congress NEEDS to see the full report.

If the stuff that's redacted doesn't rise to anything more than what we already know, I would not support a VOTE on impeachment.

I'm fine with what the public has seen thus far being all we get.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Fri 19 Apr, 2019 07:43 pm
@maporsche,
Congress doesn't have any right to see the full report. An impeachment investigation will not change this.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Fri 19 Apr, 2019 07:44 pm
@Lash,
Lash wrote:
Hear me now, believe me later: this will be the new normal for ALL seated presidents if the Dems do this. You will grow to rue the day you did this. All of us will. Every US president will be embattled and weakened.

Why wait for a Democrat to be elected president again? That'll be 18 years from now.

Sic the FBI and IRS on the Democrats TODAY.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Apr, 2019 08:09 pm
Danny Glover shuffled out on the stage like he was trying to walk in flip flops a couple of sizes too big —with this big welcoming smile on his face. He has a sheen of silver hair on his head, but I immediately thought of him as a younger man, in the thick of the civil rights movement. When I’d see him interviewed in the 70s, he seemed so pissed. At me, I felt. Race seemed to make him angry, and me, definitely not his kind of person.

I was so glad to see him today. I saw him so differently. His words are a little slurry now. Time has made a new change since the last time I saw him. What a titan he’s always been.

Bernie said earlier in the day at a previous meeting that Cornel was now situated at Harvard and flew to to town as a favor. There was a strong feeling that these men were close friends (I guess saying how they loved each other may have given that impression), but much more than that, people in these venues could tell that these friendships grew around a greater purpose. They were at their business, their passion to make the world fair.

Cornel and Nina were by far the more animated of the primary speakers today and yesterday. I adore Cornel West, as did the crowd. I’m not sure if this is paternalistic or not, but I couldn’t help but notice few pairs of young black men in the two smaller venues — because these guys are the demographic I least expect to see cooped up in a building waiting an hour and a half to see an old white guy talk about politics. Bernie’s friends weren’t widely advertised and even if they had been, twenty-something black guys... Two of these guys were sitting in front of me, and as Cornel and then Bernie started articulating Bernie’s goals re police reform and institutional racism, the one who’d obviously convinced the other to come was saying, “See! See, I told you.” A LOT of the audience was so thirsty to hear what Bernie is about.

I had a great time meeting and goofing with these people, yelling agreement, high-fiving strangers.

Bernie got 7 endorsements from lawmakers in SC. I met some dynamic lawmakers, working hard to lift people out of poverty. I’ll be working with them as I can, and they’ll be taking my ideas about Title 1 schools to the statehouse.

There’s a lot of work to do, but we’re up for the task.

It’s heartening to know there are people out in the world, honestly trying to make life fair for other people. I’m happy to know some of them.





0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  3  
Reply Sat 20 Apr, 2019 12:43 am
2020 campaign trail runs through churches in South Carolina.


Published April 19, 2019
Quote:
NORTH CHARLESTON, S.C. — By now, most Democratic presidential candidates have polished their stump speeches. But when they're in South Carolina, they may need to add in a sermon.

In a large and diverse primary field, White House hopefuls are angling to develop relationships with black churches. That's because success in South Carolina, home to the nation's first Southern presidential primary, could come down to connecting with politically influential churchgoing African Americans.

"Candidates recognize that black churches are the places to be seen and heard," said Bobby Donaldson, a professor of civil rights history at the University of South Carolina. "If you're trying to find a captive and captivating audience, then the black church is the perfect place to get your message across."

Some 2020 candidates are already working to build their relationships with this community. Sen. Kamala Harris of California will attend an Easter service on Sunday in Columbia at a church whose pastor is a lawmaker who recently endorsed her campaign. She swung through a fellowship hall in North Charleston earlier this year and visited churches last fall to rally voters ahead of the midterms.

Sens. Cory Booker of New Jersey and Bernie Sanders of Vermont attended a Martin Luther King Jr. Day event at a historic black church in Columbia, and both have held campaign events in fellowship halls at black churches around the state. In the past week, Sanders held a town hall in a black church in Spartanburg with members of the state's Legislative Black Caucus.

Former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julián Castro, former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper and former Texas congressman Beto O'Rourke have also visited black churches. And in one of her visits to three Charleston-area black congregations in February, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York gave a sermon of sorts, summoning a fiery cadence that spurred shouts of "Amen!" from the crowd of several hundred.

"I love the fact that your Bibles are under your seat," she told congregants at Mount Moriah Missionary Baptist. "When you go on a plane and they say your life preserver is under your seat — OUR life preservers are under our seat!"

Gillibrand said she felt she had been well received, but some observers say such moments can be awkward.

"It seems very, for lack of a better term, inauthentic," said Jalen Elrod, a black voter and first vice chairman of the Greenville County Democratic Party. "She'd be better served if she came and said, 'Here's what I'm about. Here's what I'm trying to support.'"

Still, the visits allow candidates to introduce themselves to voters. They can also potentially elevate their standing with voters if they secure an official endorsement from church leaders.

That may be part of Harris' calculus, with her announcement last month of an endorsement from Darrell Jackson. The longtime state senator is also pastor of Bible Way Church of Atlas Road, a Columbia congregation that's seen as among the most influential in the black community. That's where she'll attend Easter services on Sunday.

But Antjuan Seawright, a South Carolina political consultant and fifth-generation member of the African Methodist Episcopal church, notes that an endorsement from a pastor is no guarantee of securing his parishioners' support.

"Just because the pastor endorses doesn't mean the congregation follows," Seawright said. "The sheep don't always follow the shepherd because people have evolved, and they've become more independent in their thought."

While the pathway through the black church is a tricky one to navigate, it's hard to avoid. Jaime Harrison, who chaired the state party in the 2016 presidential cycle and is mulling a challenge to U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, said that as candidates get past their introductory visits to South Carolina, voters will be watching their moves carefully.

"You expect people to come and visit your church or come to the local NAACP and be the keynote speaker," said Harrison, also associate chairman of the Democratic National Committee.

Regardless of their approach, Seawright urged white candidates to strive to make authentic connections and develop policy proposals that back up whatever overtures they're making as they visit the state's parishioners.

"People want authenticity, people want genuineness, and they want honesty," Seawright said.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/2020-campaign-trail-runs-through-churches-in-south-carolina/ar-BBW7wAp?ocid=UE13DHP
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 20 Apr, 2019 11:26 am
@blatham,
If you wish to believe that Nadler is free of partisan influence, be my guest.

After the release of the Starr report Dems were at once distancing themselves from their creepy leader and working their hardest to keep him in power.

This is the way of DC.

I find it incredible that someone of your obvious intelligence actually buys into a Manichean view of US politics: Republicans Evil; Democrats Virtuous. It's why I am always led to the belief that you are a propaganda merchant. I can't imagine why you bother, but you obviously do.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 20 Apr, 2019 11:40 am
The Report exonerates Trump from criminal charges. I don't know how anyone can see it differently.

He was not indicted. Period, end of sentence

Mueller like his good buddy Comey seems to think he should play some larger role than the one assigned to him.

With this report, he has overstepped his prosecutorial role. Charge or don't charge and spare us your opinions.

Imagine, if you will, that you were alleged to have committed some serious crime and upon investigation, your local DA announced that there was "insufficient evidence" to charge you but that you were not "exonerated" Just about everyone in your community would think "He's guilty as hell but just too clever to be caught." That is not how it's supposed to work and if you think it is ok because the particular target is someone you don't like (Clinton or Trump) you are helping to undermine our justice system.

What can be done to the rich and powerful can very certainly done to the rest of us.

Trump should go to the American people and "confess" that under duress he made a good many mistakes; that he realizes he should not have and assure us he will not do so again.

He should not be primping about total vindication, and yet this is what our current political environment demands. No public official will admit to error unless they are two steps away from the chopping block because they know it will be used against them.

Good faith does not exist in DC

BTW: I really, really hope the Dems move to impeach him.

hightor
 
  2  
Reply Sat 20 Apr, 2019 01:44 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
He was not indicted.

He might have fully exonerated himself if he'd agreed to be questioned. Maybe that's why the report ends somewhat inconclusively.

Quote:
Just about everyone in your community would think "He's guilty as hell but just too clever to be caught."

If you're not suspected of murder I doubt people would even care that much. Some Mafia dons were found not guilty because the juries found the RICO statutes too complicated to establish a chain of incriminating evidence. As I recall, some of them were pretty smug about it. And "good government" types were warning that these overly-complex laws would undermine our justice system.

I'd really like to know if there have been other cases where prosecutors have stated that a suspect is not exonerated but won't face indictment either.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Reply Sat 20 Apr, 2019 02:13 pm
@hightor,
How about molesting a child?
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Apr, 2019 03:34 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
If you wish to believe that Nadler is free of partisan influence, be my guest.
I didn't make that claim. Rather I linked a fact check piece that demonstrates the Trump quote was false.
Quote:
This is the way of DC.
A worthless generalization. There's one fellow in jail for possession of weed and another person in jail for child molestation. Both criminals in our system but the differences can't rationally be glossed over.
Quote:
I find it incredible that someone of your obvious intelligence actually buys into a Manichean view of US politics: Republicans Evil; Democrats Virtuous.
Also a claim I've never made. There was a prior point in time where Republicans were morally superior to Dems on the issue of race. Right now, the moral standing of the two parties is not equal and Republicans are off the rails and in the toilet. These are generalities so not applicable on the individual level but can be, and are, applicable on the broader level.
hightor
 
  3  
Reply Sat 20 Apr, 2019 03:37 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
I think you know what I'm getting at — complex white collar prosecutions as opposed to depraved crimes against individuals committed by individuals. I used murder as an example and didn't list every heinous act imaginable. And in the real world, prosecutors would be reticent to allow someone freedom if there was a likelihood that the released person would be prey to vigilante justice. Bank fraud, not so much.
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Apr, 2019 04:13 pm
Lots of people are still going through the Mueller report and will be for a while. And that's the redacted version. And of course there are the other investigations that Mueller had to turn over to other judicial bodies. And then there is Congress's responsibility as well. And god knows what a release of Trump's tax returns might show. Trump might avoid impeachment but I'm doubting that more and more.

I only have guesses on how this will play in terms of the election but I do not any longer think avoiding impeachment is prudent for the maintenance of American democracy. It is certainly not morally acceptable. Congress has a role here and avoiding it sets a very dangerous precedent. I also no longer believe that it is probable that sympathy for Trump will accrue as it did for Clinton because of the significant differences in behaviors of the principals in the two cases. The GOP base will mostly remain loyal, I expect, given their epistemological isolation in rightwing media land but polling seems to suggest that educated white GOP voters are now falling away from Trump, which one might expect.
blatham
 
  2  
Reply Sat 20 Apr, 2019 04:39 pm
For those who like to read very smart people...
Quote:
It’s Going To Be a Culture War’: Journalists Discuss Fake News Ahead of the 2020 Election

During the 2016 presidential election, fake news spread far and wide through social media, and has continued to do so since then. Journalists and academics discussed the rise of fake news in an event at the Arthur L. Carter Journalism Institute on Wednesday.

The New York Times columnist Michelle Goldberg, historian and journalist Rick Perlstein and NYU Associate Journalism Professor Jay Rosen spoke at the event. The Nation columnist Kai Wright moderated the event.

Rosen discussed Facebook’s initiative in December 2016 to outsource fact-checking to third-party organizations to monitor its news content. According to Rosen, Facebook consulted him on the idea. Rosen warned them of the backlash it could face from right-wing media because the fact-checkers being used — Snopes, ABC News and FactCheck.org — are considered to be left-leaning. Facebook then told Rosen that the outlets chosen were not out of political bias.

“It doesn’t matter if you’re trying to be political, these actors are going to denounce you,” Rosen said. “Claiming to be victims of media bias is how they do politics. It doesn’t matter.”

Shortly after Facebook’s announcement, right-wing outlets like Breitbart denounced Facebook and claimed the company had political motivations.

LINK
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 20 Apr, 2019 04:58 pm
@blatham,
Quote:
Also a claim I've never made.


Perhaps not so explicitly but everyone here knows that is exactly what you contend.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 20 Apr, 2019 05:00 pm
@hightor,
It doesn't matter what the crime is. The prosecutor's role is to prosecute, not to moralize. If he or she can't do the former they should never attempt the latter. They are not government superheroes.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Apr, 2019 05:12 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
What I contend is what I wrote is my contention.
 

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 0.17 seconds on 04/20/2024 at 01:48:37