The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
[Missouri] Politics- The Eric Greitens post-resignation After Party
Foefaller
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
This is the state of Missouri:
The Show-Me State, Birthplace of Walt Disney, George Washington Carver, and Harry Truman. One of former slave states that didn't succeed during the American Civil War (though I still got the "State's Rights" BS in school) and home to the best barbecue in the world (and I'll cut anyone who disagrees)
This is it's former governor Eric Greitens:
Mr. Greitens is currently indicted for Felony Invasion of Privacy for taking nude photos of his hairdresser-turned-mistress that he sexually abused and Felony Computer Tampering for taking the donor list from the charity he started (but is no longer a part of) without the charity's permission to gather campaign donations.
If the picture above looks a lot like a mugshot, that's because it is.
The trial for the invasion of privacy case starts May 14th and a special session to consider impeachment will start on May 18th.
The possibility of impeachment for Greitens is pretty intriguing. Missouri's State Assembly has Republican supermajorities in both the House and the Senate, but had absolutely no problems getting the 3/4ths necessary to start a special session, the first time in Missouri's history that one was called by the Assembly (in fact, some of the people who didn't sign were D's protesting that they should be doing the impeachment vote now, not waiting until after the regular session ends.) A lot of this likely has to do with two reasons: First, Greitens has had an antagonistic relationship with the state assembly pretty much from day 1, calling them "career politicians" (despite the fact it's not in session all year) making hypocritical demands to clean up avenues of corruption as he runs a first-for-the-state Dark money PAC, and other things that would be all too familiar to anyone who follows Trump's relationship with Congress.
Second is that it's midterm year, and Greitens does not have nearly the sway on Missouri voters that Trump does. There has already been evidence that Greiten's scandals are having a negative effect on downticket races, most notably for US Senator, where the latest polls Have Claire McCaskill ahead of the most likely GoP nominee, State Attorney General Josh Hawley. If Greitens refuses to resign and has to be dragged out the governor's mansion kicking and screaming (and its looking very likely that's what it will take to get him out before his term officially ends) McCaskill will likely once again be re-elected because of the State GoP shooting themselves in the foot, and this time she didn't need to do any reverse psychology* to make it happen.
Another fact about Missourit impeachment; when the House votes to impeach, it isn't like on the federal level where the Senate acts as basically the jury, instead, the Senate picks the seven judges who will hear the case, with a vote of 5-2 for to remove from office.
...and the judges that will get the task will mostly likely be appointed appellate judges (if not just use the Missouri Supreme Court) and not elected circuit judges. Fun fact: the method that Missouri uses to appoint appellate judges, assisted appointment merit selection, is called the Missouri Plan because we were the first to do it.
Anyway, all the golden rules of political threads apply:
Only post stuff related to Greitens or Missouri Politics
Don't post random tweets of people without saying why they're important and commenting on what they said.
No nihilistic doom and gloom if the darkest timeline occurs.
Don't be silly Geese.
and so on.
If you want to follow this sort of stuff on your own, I recommend the Kansas City Star, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch and St Louis Public Radio. There is also KCUR, Kansas City's NPR station, but honestly they're usually just re-posting SLPR's articles, their local focus (and arguably the Star's as well) is much more on Kansas politics.
The Show-Me State, Birthplace of Walt Disney, George Washington Carver, and Harry Truman. One of former slave states that didn't succeed during the American Civil War (though I still got the "State's Rights" BS in school) and home to the best barbecue in the world (and I'll cut anyone who disagrees)
This is it's former governor Eric Greitens:
Mr. Greitens is currently indicted for Felony Invasion of Privacy for taking nude photos of his hairdresser-turned-mistress that he sexually abused and Felony Computer Tampering for taking the donor list from the charity he started (but is no longer a part of) without the charity's permission to gather campaign donations.
If the picture above looks a lot like a mugshot, that's because it is.
The trial for the invasion of privacy case starts May 14th and a special session to consider impeachment will start on May 18th.
The possibility of impeachment for Greitens is pretty intriguing. Missouri's State Assembly has Republican supermajorities in both the House and the Senate, but had absolutely no problems getting the 3/4ths necessary to start a special session, the first time in Missouri's history that one was called by the Assembly (in fact, some of the people who didn't sign were D's protesting that they should be doing the impeachment vote now, not waiting until after the regular session ends.) A lot of this likely has to do with two reasons: First, Greitens has had an antagonistic relationship with the state assembly pretty much from day 1, calling them "career politicians" (despite the fact it's not in session all year) making hypocritical demands to clean up avenues of corruption as he runs a first-for-the-state Dark money PAC, and other things that would be all too familiar to anyone who follows Trump's relationship with Congress.
Second is that it's midterm year, and Greitens does not have nearly the sway on Missouri voters that Trump does. There has already been evidence that Greiten's scandals are having a negative effect on downticket races, most notably for US Senator, where the latest polls Have Claire McCaskill ahead of the most likely GoP nominee, State Attorney General Josh Hawley. If Greitens refuses to resign and has to be dragged out the governor's mansion kicking and screaming (and its looking very likely that's what it will take to get him out before his term officially ends) McCaskill will likely once again be re-elected because of the State GoP shooting themselves in the foot, and this time she didn't need to do any reverse psychology* to make it happen.
Another fact about Missourit impeachment; when the House votes to impeach, it isn't like on the federal level where the Senate acts as basically the jury, instead, the Senate picks the seven judges who will hear the case, with a vote of 5-2 for to remove from office.
Missouri Constitution wrote:Power of impeachment--trial of impeachments.
Section 2. The house of representatives shall have the sole power of impeachment. All impeachments shall be tried before the supreme court, except that the governor or a member of the supreme court shall be tried by a special commission of seven eminent jurists to be elected by the senate. The supreme court or special commission shall take an oath to try impartially the person impeached, and no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of five-sevenths of the court or special commission.
...and the judges that will get the task will mostly likely be appointed appellate judges (if not just use the Missouri Supreme Court) and not elected circuit judges. Fun fact: the method that Missouri uses to appoint appellate judges, assisted appointment merit selection, is called the Missouri Plan because we were the first to do it.
Anyway, all the golden rules of political threads apply:
Only post stuff related to Greitens or Missouri Politics
Don't post random tweets of people without saying why they're important and commenting on what they said.
No nihilistic doom and gloom if the darkest timeline occurs.
Don't be silly Geese.
and so on.
If you want to follow this sort of stuff on your own, I recommend the Kansas City Star, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch and St Louis Public Radio. There is also KCUR, Kansas City's NPR station, but honestly they're usually just re-posting SLPR's articles, their local focus (and arguably the Star's as well) is much more on Kansas politics.
Foefaller on
0
Posts
That was aired before the primaries, when Todd Akin was in third to the more moderate candidates. She made sure that would be the candidate she faced because she knew she had her best shot at him.
Underestimate Claire McCaskill at your own peril.
If you need to remember an ad with a gun in it from the 2016 election season in MO, remember this one:
~ Buckaroo Banzai
Will Schmitt is a reporter for the Springfield News-Leader.
So, here's the background - the MO GOP is worried that the above ballot initiatives will help drive Democratic voters to the polls in November, so they were planning to move the initiatives to the primary. However, doing this requires the governor to sign off, and now that the MO GOP has (rightfully) decided to hang him out to dry, Greitens isn't in the mood to do his party any favors - like moving these initiatives.
Jason Kander chan
I'm sure he'll be back again. Are there any MO spots coming vacant soon he could go for...hmmmm
In short, while everyone is focused on the affair/sex abuse part of all this, the Computer Tampering is actually the one most likely to stick; The prosecution does not have the photo, and the defense is going to be able to question the lawyer of the woman's husband, who was given money sometime after leaking the story against the woman's wishes. On the other hand, there is already a record of Greitens lying about how he got the donor list from the charity (The Mission Continues) when he signed a document saying he got it as an in-kind donation... only the specific person he said he got it from, Danny Love, does not work at the charity, and The Mission Continues has stated that they never gave the list to Danny.
On the Legislature side, this has pretty much killed anything other than the budget getting through this session, because everyone, on both sides, just knows Greitens will try to get no votes for impeachment in exchange for signing it, and they don't want to give him the opportunity. Silver lining is that it has stopped some stupid bills from getting anywhere, but it also means you can still legally shoot your gun in the air for celebration in municipal boundaries in Missouri for another year.
Steam Profile | Signature art by Alexandra 'Lexxy' Douglass
Sadly, it's pretty much unconstitutional to not do so, given the "right to confront one's accusers".
Doesn't meant she needs to be publicly identified, surely.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
You have to tell the defendent, and they have to be able to look into her, so... yeah it pretty much does.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
Nah we could do it differently but publicly smearing sexual assault victims is how we do these days.
I'm just finding it hard to figure out how they can conduct their investigation without finding out who she is. I'll take your word for there being procedures.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
There's a difference between the necessary law enforcement and judicial officials knowing, and having it out there for everyone to know.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
I mean the defense gets to investigate, that's the hard one.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
Not really? This isn't uncharted legal territory, trials have occurred before where witnesses and/or victims were kept anonymous, despite testifying and being cross-examined.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Discovery means information that is shared between the parties and the court. Not everything in discovery needs to go into the public record part of the file (in fact most of it doesn't). The defense would get all the information about the victim's identity they need to investigate in discovery. It doesn't need to be made public for all to see.
Right, but the defense is neither law enforcement or judicial officials (unless you're being technical with lawyers as officers of the court, but that wasn't how I read it)
I assume the defense is going to end up knowing their identity as an inevitability, and isn't allowed to make it public or something?
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
I'm not sure where the disconnect is here. Why does that mean that the victim's name should be public?
It doesn't. There's a difference between the defense knowing and the public knowing, which isn't allowed in the dichotomy I replied to?
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Yeah, I'm clearly not communicating something well here, so I'll just leave it be.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
The problem is that the damage would already be done. We're already seeing this strategy in use elsewhere.
I've had a problem with military fetishism for a long time now and this is just a part of it. Unless you are speaking specifically about something you did that was part of your MOS/CMF for information purposes or about military policy your veteran status means absolutely nothing. I dislike that fellow veterans are using their status to attempt to present themselves as an authority on policy when that policy is about curtailing the civil liberty of civilians. I don't imagine the response here would be so positive if he was talking about, for example, further limits on 4th amendment protections because he experienced health and welfare inspections without warrant ergo it shouldn't be a big deal for the police to randomly search a private residence for contraband without a warrant.
Trials have been conducted where the defendant was not allowed to know the identity of someone giving testimony. You simply do not have the defendant present during the testimony. (You also have the gallery cleared.) It's not rocket science!
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
It's also constitutionally questionable. The courts have struggled with what "the right to face one's accusers" entails.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
pleasepaypreacher.net
A common Republican talking point is that Democrats hate guns, or fear them, or want to get rid of them all. Kander even says in the ad that his opponent was attacking him on the issue.
His experience and expertise contradict the common narrative. He's clearly quite adept with it, he explains that he has used it in service, and that he feels that reasonable regulation of them is sensible.
I don't think that's all that difficult a message to take at face value. We've had countless debates and arguments on these very forums (and I know for a fact you've been present in some of them) where the more common liberal/democratic/etc forumer is called out for lacking knowledge or expertise. Now having expertise on the subject is somehow pandering inappropriately? So Democratic candidates should just shut up and take it if challenged on the topic?
C'mon man, I think you're stretching, and I also think you know it.
You're not wrong about there being issues with US politics and voters fetishizing the military, but that's a much bigger issue that no single candidate is going to solve, and it's definitely not going to happen if Democrats are eternally conceding the debate and narrative around guns in America.
If it wasn't appropriate for this to be discussed, maybe his opponent shouldn't have picked that fight.
The ad was also a jab at his opponent Roy Blunt, who had never served. Which might fall into the "fetishizing the military" category, but could also speak to his expertise when it comes to veterans affairs and firearms over his competition.
edit: To be clear, I don't care if he refutes his political opponent or if he claims to have expertise on the topic. My problem is his use of his veteran status as an attempt to end the argument. If he has some special expertise or knowledge on policy then demonstrate it. And a cringey video where he puts together a field stripped AR, which I could teach literally anyone with hands to do in five minutes, is not a demonstration of expertise.
Anyway, bringing it back to the thread topic: Fun fact about the Judge for the Greitens case; He's the one who struck down the same-sex marriage ban in Missouri.
Also, it looks like jury selection is going to push back the actual trial to start on Tuesday or Wednesday. While is the potential juror bleed hasn't been Pharmabro bad, They've only gone through just over half of the potential jurors in the time they expected to do all of them.