Progressives (Liberals)

The Sanders online army resembles President Trump’s most ardent supporters in more ways than either side might care to admit.

2 Replies

@hightor,

Had Sanders won in 2016, I'd have predicted 20 years of Democratic rule, just as I predicted 20 years of Republican rule due to Trump.

I'd not have made this prediction had any other Democratic or Republican candidate been elected president in 2016.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

they did however wage an eight year war against everything he tried to do, in spite of the fact that he was the people's choice. They never tried to work with him. And he was and is a moderate.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

That is incorrect. Boehner tried hard to work with Obama. But Obama gave in to leftist extremists and undermined the deal that he had reached with Boehner.

Moderate Republicans were also interested in passing immigration reform legislation, but Obama deliberately undermined them and did it all with executive orders (executive orders that Trump is repealing). I suspect that the Dreamers will come to wish that Obama had not sabotaged that effort to do it legislatively.

And of course, the biggest reason why Obama could never get anything done is because he squandered the entire first hundred days of his second term futilely attacking the indomitable might of the NRA.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

I was just reading back through this, and a couple other threads. You spend a godawful lot of time writing posts here, don’t you?

1 Reply

@snood,

No.

But I guess if you dislike reality, and you are not capable of challenging my posts with facts or logic, you have to come up with nonsense instead.

Although... I do admit that my posting here the past couple weeks has seriously cut into my World of Warcraft playtime. And that's a problem. I have only so much free time and WOW really should take precedence over a2k.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

Quote:
Three years of highly partisan and so far unproductive -and sometimes criminal -investigations . . .

There is no way you can substantiate a silly claim like that. But then, you have always been more concerned with polemic than with the truth.

Fraudulently obtained FISA warrants to monitor the communications of American citizens is a a serious crime. Moreover there is significant evidence (not yet criminally established) of illicit coordination between the CIA and the FBI in deceiving the FISA court. I believe that constitutes substantiation.

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

Fraudulently obtained FISA warrants to monitor the communications of American citizens is a a serious crime.

Really? Isn't that the task of the judge to prove such?
(Here, in Germany, errors in the application and/or issue of warrants lead to the annulment or non-execution of the warrant.)

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

The Judicial findings have already been made: Investigation has revealed and the FISA Judge has confirmed that the FISA applications involved fraud and knowing deception (deliberate and significant falsification of written material that would otherwise have led to a rejection of the application) of the court by responsible government officials. Punitive action has not yet occurred.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

Thanks.
Here, if "a serious crime" would be suspected, the judge would immediately ask the prosecution to act.

Actually, the prosecutions had to do so since we've got the rule of "compulsory prosecution".

Quote:

Code of Criminal Procedure
Section 152
[Indicting Authority; Principle of Mandatory Prosecution]

(2) Except as otherwise provided by law, the public prosecution office shall be obliged to take action in relation to all prosecutable criminal offences, provided there are sufficient factual indications.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

I suspect we have similar rules, but in the current, insanely polarized political environment we currently face, they have not yet been enforced. ( The qualifier in your quoted rule about "sufficient information" looks like an equivalently sufficient basis for delay to other things we have here as well. ) The deliberate fraud and deceptions in two FISA court applications have been identified by the Justice Department Inspector General, and recently confirmed by the Judges of the FISA courts. Criminal investigations are now underway in the Justice Department.

0 Replies

Bloomberg’s Super Tuesday Strategy Might Be Working
The question is whether it’ll hold up

1 Reply

@revelette3,

You should hope it will: Biden is toast and Bernie is unelectable.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

I look at the Bloomberg candidacy as "hedging our bets" candidate.

1 Reply

@revelette3,

Nice euphemism, though it appears to me to be more of a revised plan than a hedge. It remains to be seen whether the DNC can get away with rigging the rules sufficiently to bring Bloomberg onto the stage, while coaxing Biden to leave it -- all while successfully appeasing the enthusiastic and persistent Bernie supporters.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

The DNC never has nor ever will appease Bernie supporters. As for any rule changes, it depends on what an average of democrats thinks of it, not just Bernie supporters.

Regardless, Bloomberg seems to be doing alright without the DNC or being on the stage, which probably explains the DNC changing their rules.

I personally don't think they should have done it.

Biden is still very much relevant and is basically tied with Sanders in Iowa.

1 Reply

@revelette3,

Biden may well win the Primary (indeed it is my fondest hope), however that will not help the Democrats regain political power.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

It might not. Never would have thought he would have won the first time. Sometimes we in the US are our own worse enemies. Moreover, McConnell has assured republicans power by his appointment barely qualified conservative judges across the land regardless of which party is in control of Washington.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

Had Sanders won in 2016, I'd have predicted 20 years of Democratic rule, just as I predicted 20 years of Republican rule due to Trump.

Obviously a Sanders win in '16 would have been the result of a seismic shift in USAmerican sentiments regarding taxation, the role of government, and democratic socialism in general. But why make predictions about such unlikely events? Why make sweeping predictions at all?

1 Reply

@hightor,

Because I think there is a significant likelihood of the prediction coming true.

It's not like any harm comes from me making a prediction. I'll either be right or I'll be wrong.

Why do people try to see who can make the most accurate predictions of the results of those March basketball games?

1 Reply

Progressives (Liberals)

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know