HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Girard442 » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next »

Girard442

Profile Information

Member since: Tue Dec 6, 2016, 10:49 AM
Number of posts: 3,367

Journal Archives

A reminder: laws don't enforce themselves.

There's black letter law that says that Treasury must turn over anyone's federal tax returns when requested by a congressional comittee but if no one exacts an actual penalty for not doing it...

If Barr ordered Mueller to end his investigation, wouldn't that have to be in Mueller's report?

I suppose it's possible the report went all mealy-mouthed and passive voiced: "a decision was made to end the investigation", but I don't think it did.

Could somebody explain something re: Trump's "oranges" appearance?

In this Vox article:

During an Oval Office event with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg on Tuesday afternoon, President Donald Trump either lied or got confused about where his father was born, admitted that closing the border with Mexico will be economically harmful to the US (but threatened to do it anyway), pushed a baseless conspiracy theory, and repeatedly struggled to say the word “origins.”


https://www.vox.com/2019/4/2/18292571/trump-nato-secretary-white-house-oranges

It ends with the sentence:

Reporters were then ushered out of the room.


Is this the normal protocol when the POTUS makes a press appearance with a guest? Or, am I just being weird when I picture staff shoving the press out before they can see any more of Donnie having one of his "spells"?

When Mueller is called before Congress...

...is there any reason he wouldn't be allowed to testify that Barr directed him to end the investigation, if he did?

Why Ken Starr got it right and Mueller got it wrong.

Mind you, Starr will go down in history as a pervy Inspector Javert. Still...

Imagine you're an investigator in a local DA's office and you're looking into a local landlord who may be guilty of illegally converting single-family homes into multifamily rentals. So you're looking into local landlord dude and you run across extensive evidence that he is running a really big human trafficking operation. So, what do you do? Report back to your boss and say, "Y'know, I looked into the zoning thing and I really didn't find anything that looked actionable", while keeping the trafficking thing under your hat because you weren't tasked for it.

Hell no, you don't. You get that info out to somebody who can do something about it, whoever that might be. You're law enforcement, not a bean counter. It's your job to uphold the damn law. After investigating Trump for two years Mueller knows exactly who he is, with that knowledge backed up by reams of concrete evidence. If he can't find some way to get info out about actionable things Trump has done, it's because he has chosen not to.

Really, really makes me wonder.

Are Trump supporters in an altered mental state?

No, this is not snark. I'm thinking in terms of Jonestown or Nazi Germany. It seems that that level of fanatical devotion and complete suspension of critical thinking involves more than just being hoodwinked or having one's prejudices catered to. I wonder if it's possible for some people to blip into a nonthinking state of total loyalty -- or if it's possible to imagine heading off such a transformation.

So, at this point, Mueller either knows with certainty that Trump is conspiring with Putin...

...or he doesn't.

If he doesn't, after all this investigating, then there's no legally actionable case against Trump.

If he does, what's his next move?

Does the past physically exist?

I mean, we remember a past. We can use forensic science to construct a description of what happened in the past. But what happens when our analysis, no matter how fine-grained and thorough, can only point to a number of possible pasts that could have led to this present? Is one of those pasts the "real" one and the others fake? Or are they all equally valid?

"Praising With Faint Damns"

A column written a long time ago by (I think) Meg Greenfield about how someone who should have condemned something with the strongest possible language instead issued a mild and lackadaisical criticism. This is what Trump does with the Reichwingers and White Nationalists.

Nobody is fooled. They get the message loud and clear.

Why politicians of all stripes must speak out against Trump's statements about violence.

People tend to forget that there are only a few people prominent in politics who get the same level of protection that the POTUS gets. I'd guess the vast majority live in the same basic situation the rest of us shlubs do. If Trump successfully ignites political violence, he's thrown all those people under the bus. So, Senator/Representative/judge/staffer/media figure -- how comfortable are you with the knowledge that Trump is painting a target on you, your spouse, your children, your friends, and your extended family?
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next »