Yeah, Trump could take a dump on the whitehouse lawn in front of a group of school children and then get one of them to wipe his ass with the american flag while he hit on their teacher and republicans would still make excuses for him.
Like, the enduring legacy of the trump presidency is how the gop will void any pretense of ethical standards if it means they can squeeze a tiny bit more power out of the system.
That's exactly what happened with Nixon. That there wasn't, at least from this current perspective, any real punishment has given them a history to be emboldened by.
All opinions are my own and in no way reflect that of my employer.
The Secret Service isn't law enforcement and I think explicitly do not monitor protectee behavior.
Now if the Head of the FBI was sitting there, then I think you have yourself a question.
The Secret Service are absolutely law enforcement, presidential security is just one detail they perform. His bodyguards are all also legit federal law enforcement officers.
Edit: I don’t know if there’s any explicit policy not to monitor protectee behavior, including violent felonies. Just noting that the it is indeed a federal law enforcement agency, including duties outside protective detail. They’re federal cops, can arrest people, and as a general rule I would expect them to do so in the face of a murder.
If trump literally murdered someone on camera, he would be arrested. Someone would probably sue to have him released and it would make it to SCOTUS. Meanwhile, he would be impeached and removed from office, and after removal he would be indicted, tried and convicted.
SCOTUS would decide they didn't want top hear the case, but it wouldn't much matter, because Trump has already been sentenced for murder.
The reason that the State Department and other organs of nation building do not institute the American model of government when nation building abroad (since at least WWII) is that the Latin American nations that did follow our model had a strong tendency to fall into dictatorship. The ability of a strong executive to simply abolish the other arms of government is an essential flaw in our constitutional model.
So, we can feel safe saying that a hypothetical president who murdered an opponent on camera would be arrested and normality would ensue. The actual history of our governing model, however, suggests that said president would be just as likely to put on a military uniform, declare a state of emergency, and become President For Life.
The Secret Service isn't law enforcement and I think explicitly do not monitor protectee behavior.
Now if the Head of the FBI was sitting there, then I think you have yourself a question.
The Secret Service are absolutely law enforcement, presidential security is just one detail they perform. His bodyguards are all also legit federal law enforcement officers.
The Secret Service is the primary enforcement body for counterfeit currency. Presidential protection is a secondary duty added after their creation.
The Secret Service isn't law enforcement and I think explicitly do not monitor protectee behavior.
Now if the Head of the FBI was sitting there, then I think you have yourself a question.
The Secret Service are absolutely law enforcement, presidential security is just one detail they perform. His bodyguards are all also legit federal law enforcement officers.
The Secret Service is the primary enforcement body for counterfeit currency. Presidential protection is a secondary duty added after their creation.
What if Trump was involved in a counterfeiting scandal? What then?
The Secret Service isn't law enforcement and I think explicitly do not monitor protectee behavior.
Now if the Head of the FBI was sitting there, then I think you have yourself a question.
The Secret Service are absolutely law enforcement, presidential security is just one detail they perform. His bodyguards are all also legit federal law enforcement officers.
The Secret Service is the primary enforcement body for counterfeit currency. Presidential protection is a secondary duty added after their creation.
Yea, my brain kicked in when I was read mcdermott. I guess my statement is that the protection wing isn't looking for crimes to arrest folks for over their protection duties. They definitely aren't with their protectee, that'd actively undermine their ability to protect them.
Though I do expect there has been at least some discussion of what the fuck to do about witnessing that sort of thing. I'm curious if any of that was ever written down or if it was a strictly "only two people present" series of discussions.
Wait, whatever you did before you became President is off the table? Isn't everything they hated about Obama (other than ACA) from before he was President? Acorn, birth certificate?
Wait, whatever you did before you became President is off the table? Isn't everything they hated about Obama (other than ACA) from before he was President? Acorn, birth certificate?
IOKIYAR. Like the next time a dem is elected the GOP will immediately launch impeachment based on collusion with Russia.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Wait, whatever you did before you became President is off the table? Isn't everything they hated about Obama (other than ACA) from before he was President? Acorn, birth certificate?
IOKIYAR. Like the next time a dem is elected the GOP will immediately launch impeachment based on collusion with voters.
Wait, whatever you did before you became President is off the table? Isn't everything they hated about Obama (other than ACA) from before he was President? Acorn, birth certificate?
Wait, whatever you did before you became President is off the table? Isn't everything they hated about Obama (other than ACA) from before he was President? Acorn, birth certificate?
And if Hillary had won I'm sure we'd never hear another word about email servers or Benghazi.
So, at my work, we have giant flatscreen tvs that show call flow and information about the company on the bottom half of the screen, and then interesting facts and bits of the news on the top half, usually in short, bite sized sentences. Today, the way that algorithm pulling from Reuters noted it was "Trump Claims Hush Money paid to mistresses are not campaign contributions." Which was the best summation of the bullshit I had seen from a news source.
So, at my work, we have giant flatscreen tvs that show call flow and information about the company on the bottom half of the screen, and then interesting facts and bits of the news on the top half, usually in short, bite sized sentences. Today, the way that algorithm pulling from Reuters noted it was "Trump Claims Hush Money paid to mistresses are not campaign contributions." Which was the best summation of the bullshit I had seen from a news source.
Yes, that's the headlines we wanna see. The sleaze is just assume and the story is some arcane bullshit. The thing that sticks in the mind is "Trump pays hush money to mistress".
I won’t clog the thread but the reactions of everyone trying to download it while PACER was stalling was just priceless.
Also spare a thought for Rachel Maddow, who pretty much ended up trying to download the damn thing and then read it while she was live on air.
Meanwhile, as part of Flynn’s don’t-lock-me-up chant, his lawyers say that he has spent 62 hours assisting investigators and has turned over thousands of records from both of his companies, as well as electronic devices.
I won’t clog the thread but the reactions of everyone trying to download it while PACER was stalling was just priceless.
Also spare a thought for Rachel Maddow, who pretty much ended up trying to download the damn thing and then read it while she was live on air.
Meanwhile, as part of Flynn’s don’t-lock-me-up chant, his lawyers say that he has spent 62 hours assisting investigators and has turned over thousands of records from both of his companies, as well as electronic devices.
Brad is with USA Today.
"I did what I was legally obligated to do after I did a bunch of illegal shit. So, we cool?"
At least for me, if Flynn was instrumental in making the case against the Trumps, he probably deserves a lot of leniency.
Edit. I just remembered he tried to arrange an illegal kidnapping of a political dissident for Turkey. For that part, he deserves the book thrown at him.
At least for me, if Flynn was instrumental in making the case against the Trumps, he probably deserves a lot of leniency.
Edit. I just remembered he tried to arrange an illegal kidnapping of a political dissident for Turkey. For that part, he deserves the book thrown at him.
I dunno if deserves is the word I would use, but I would agree that it is useful to signal that the people who flipped early (like Flynn and Papaddopoulos) and were cooperative get lesser sentences while those who don't flip and/or kind of flip but play games (like Manafort and Stone) will end up with the book thrown at them to encourage those on the edge to come out with hopes of lesser sentences.
What Flynn deserves is to set in prison for a long time to pay for his crimes against society.
I won’t clog the thread but the reactions of everyone trying to download it while PACER was stalling was just priceless.
Also spare a thought for Rachel Maddow, who pretty much ended up trying to download the damn thing and then read it while she was live on air.
Meanwhile, as part of Flynn’s don’t-lock-me-up chant, his lawyers say that he has spent 62 hours assisting investigators and has turned over thousands of records from both of his companies, as well as electronic devices.
Brad is with USA Today.
"I did what I was legally obligated to do after I did a bunch of illegal shit. So, we cool?"
He was not legally obligated to cooperate. He was only obligated to cooperate on the understanding that he might be given a lower sentencing recommendation by the prosecution.
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Why do papers like the Washington Examiner exist?
Today they’re running an op/ed that opines this week’s filings related to Cohen and Trump are “unimportant” because Daniels and MacDougal are floozies and “Trump would have won regardless,” blah blah blah sore loser libs.
The GOP, if they’re to continue existing in any substantial capacity, is going to have to take a real look at this pervasive crisis of moral bankruptcy within their ranks.
Not to play devils advocate here, but what exactly is the charge here? That these payments are considered campaign contributions and therefore illegal?
Posts
It would never get approved but just seeing the dates would be hilarious/depressing.
That's exactly what happened with Nixon. That there wasn't, at least from this current perspective, any real punishment has given them a history to be emboldened by.
The Secret Service are absolutely law enforcement, presidential security is just one detail they perform. His bodyguards are all also legit federal law enforcement officers.
Edit: I don’t know if there’s any explicit policy not to monitor protectee behavior, including violent felonies. Just noting that the it is indeed a federal law enforcement agency, including duties outside protective detail. They’re federal cops, can arrest people, and as a general rule I would expect them to do so in the face of a murder.
The reason that the State Department and other organs of nation building do not institute the American model of government when nation building abroad (since at least WWII) is that the Latin American nations that did follow our model had a strong tendency to fall into dictatorship. The ability of a strong executive to simply abolish the other arms of government is an essential flaw in our constitutional model.
So, we can feel safe saying that a hypothetical president who murdered an opponent on camera would be arrested and normality would ensue. The actual history of our governing model, however, suggests that said president would be just as likely to put on a military uniform, declare a state of emergency, and become President For Life.
The Secret Service is the primary enforcement body for counterfeit currency. Presidential protection is a secondary duty added after their creation.
What if Trump was involved in a counterfeiting scandal? What then?
Yea, my brain kicked in when I was read mcdermott. I guess my statement is that the protection wing isn't looking for crimes to arrest folks for over their protection duties. They definitely aren't with their protectee, that'd actively undermine their ability to protect them.
Though I do expect there has been at least some discussion of what the fuck to do about witnessing that sort of thing. I'm curious if any of that was ever written down or if it was a strictly "only two people present" series of discussions.
IOKIYAR. Like the next time a dem is elected the GOP will immediately launch impeachment based on collusion with Russia.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Projection to cover the screen.
He was black before he was President, yes
And if Hillary had won I'm sure we'd never hear another word about email servers or Benghazi.
Reuters reporter:
What? Isn't that contradictory?
He's rambling, looking for excuses.
So, at my work, we have giant flatscreen tvs that show call flow and information about the company on the bottom half of the screen, and then interesting facts and bits of the news on the top half, usually in short, bite sized sentences. Today, the way that algorithm pulling from Reuters noted it was "Trump Claims Hush Money paid to mistresses are not campaign contributions." Which was the best summation of the bullshit I had seen from a news source.
Yes, that's the headlines we wanna see. The sleaze is just assume and the story is some arcane bullshit. The thing that sticks in the mind is "Trump pays hush money to mistress".
So expect new exciting details to pour over! Soon. Hopefully.
Natasha is a staff writer with The Atlantic and NBC News contributor.
*edit* Replacing Natasha’s deleted tweet. Pretty sure that she and a bunch of others are worn out from frantically hitting refresh.
She deleted the first one because having finally managed to get the damn memo she accidentally said that it was from Cohen’s lawyers, not Flynn’s.
We know her pain
Also spare a thought for Rachel Maddow, who pretty much ended up trying to download the damn thing and then read it while she was live on air.
Meanwhile, as part of Flynn’s don’t-lock-me-up chant, his lawyers say that he has spent 62 hours assisting investigators and has turned over thousands of records from both of his companies, as well as electronic devices.
Brad is with USA Today.
"I did what I was legally obligated to do after I did a bunch of illegal shit. So, we cool?"
FFXIV - Milliardo Beoulve/Sargatanas
Edit. I just remembered he tried to arrange an illegal kidnapping of a political dissident for Turkey. For that part, he deserves the book thrown at him.
Yeah. Sometimes, you gotta let Henry Hill retire to the suburbs.
I dunno if deserves is the word I would use, but I would agree that it is useful to signal that the people who flipped early (like Flynn and Papaddopoulos) and were cooperative get lesser sentences while those who don't flip and/or kind of flip but play games (like Manafort and Stone) will end up with the book thrown at them to encourage those on the edge to come out with hopes of lesser sentences.
What Flynn deserves is to set in prison for a long time to pay for his crimes against society.
Number one, it wasn't a campaign contribution.
If it were, it's only civil.
And even if it's only civil, there was no violation based on what we did.
It was awesome.
It's depressing how much Trump is just a symptom and not a cause of this political climate
He's the direct result of whatabout and both sides -ism.
Come Overwatch with meeeee
He was not legally obligated to cooperate. He was only obligated to cooperate on the understanding that he might be given a lower sentencing recommendation by the prosecution.
Today they’re running an op/ed that opines this week’s filings related to Cohen and Trump are “unimportant” because Daniels and MacDougal are floozies and “Trump would have won regardless,” blah blah blah sore loser libs.
The GOP, if they’re to continue existing in any substantial capacity, is going to have to take a real look at this pervasive crisis of moral bankruptcy within their ranks.
They won’t, but hey ho.
Which is an improvement over the past, when they operated them to get all that plus war with Spain.
More seriously, take a look at how the British tabloids have shaped the Brexit debate. That sort of power is nice to have.
Edit: Amusing point:
Not to play devils advocate here, but what exactly is the charge here? That these payments are considered campaign contributions and therefore illegal?