Page 129 of 135 FirstFirst ... 120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135 LastLast
Results 1,921 to 1,935 of 2015

Thread: 2018 American Political Scene

  1. #1921
    Senior Contributor antimony's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Feb 08
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    4,166
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Listened to your VP recently ?



    A senior intelligence official tells Pence that what Russia is doing in the US or to the US pales in comparison to what China is doing.

    That's all i need to know, this speech vindicates what my guys tells me about this administration and what it means for India

    This is a speech with a pointed statement of intent at China, all Trump, delivered by his deputy but is no less dilute. Foreign observers won't ignore it
    I do not listen to doormats. I do listen to the whatever is going on in the Mueller Investigation, especially in context to Trump's behavior around Putin.

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Who are you referring to here ?
    Imran Khan, who else. All the fire and brimstone from Washington, policy wise, did not stop GHQ from installing their puppet.

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Why should i pay close to twice you do for the same product that is made in the US ?
    Huh? Tariffs raise your price. If India lowers tariffs then the Indian consumer benefits.

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    I think they are doing just that. Abe showed everyone the way. See, shouldn't the Chinese also be doing that. That isn't cleaar to me. How long this kerfuffle between China & the US will last ?

    I've always thought Trump was angling for a deal with China and once he got it that everything would be completely ok. This plan doesn't benefit India. Otoh if there is a long term shift in thinking, one which reconfigures business as a result then it would be different.
    China has been fairly controlled in what they say about Trump. However, he ran on a platform blaming China so he will hardly pull back. Notice his current policy has invited retaliatory measures harming his own constituents (soybean farmers).
    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

  2. #1922
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    10,914
    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    I do not listen to doormats. I do listen to the whatever is going on in the Mueller Investigation, especially in context to Trump's behavior around Putin.
    You asked to substantiate how Trumps's actions were adversely affecting China & Pakistan. I've provided them. Mueller has nothing to do with this.

    Imran Khan, who else. All the fire and brimstone from Washington, policy wise, did not stop GHQ from installing their puppet.
    Indian analysts don't care about Imran. He's been panned before getting into office and now two months later people are extrapolating what to expect for the rest of his term. Not a whole lot. Nawaz was a PA appointee too, took him ten years to pushback.

    Huh? Tariffs raise your price. If India lowers tariffs then the Indian consumer benefits.
    Indian tariffs on American goods raise my price. Trump is pushing for India to lower those tariffs.

    China has been fairly controlled in what they say about Trump. However, he ran on a platform blaming China so he will hardly pull back. Notice his current policy has invited retaliatory measures harming his own constituents (soybean farmers).
    So this is the thing. He has tried to implement everything he said when running. Checks and balances means some of those things cannot be implemented. But his intent is clear. The rhetoric wasn't empty talk. Congress isn't going to hold his hand wrt to Pakistan & China.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 29 Nov 18, at 12:13.

  3. #1923
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    10,914
    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    Any man that is Trumpkin's deputy is dishonourable.
    We are only talking about the Vice president here : )

  4. #1924
    Senior Contributor antimony's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Feb 08
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    4,166
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    You asked to substantiate how Trumps's actions were adversely affecting China & Pakistan. I've provided them. Mueller has nothing to do with this.
    No, I asked how they were strategically affected. Not a whole lot. The point about the Mueller investigations is that TRump woll not do anything to Russia, which is the point of the investigation

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Indian analysts don't care about Imran. He's been panned before getting into office and now two months later people are extrapolating what to expect for the rest of his term. Not a whole lot. Nawaz was a PA appointee too, took him ten years to pushback.
    It means that Kashmir is not going to quiet down anytime soon, regardless of the fire and brimstone from Washington.

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Indian tariffs on American goods raise my price. Trump is pushing for India to lower those tariffs.
    That is exactly my point. While you are happy that Trump is punishing the Chinese, India may not be far behind. There is a saying in Bengali that aptly describes this attitude (ghute pore gobor haase - the cowdung laughs at the plight of the upla cake)

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    So this is the thing. He has tried to implement everything he said when running. Checks and balances means some of those things cannot be implemented. But his intent is clear. The rhetoric wasn't empty talk. Congress isn't going to hold his hand wrt to Pakistan & China.
    My point is, none of that benefits India. The fact that my quarellsome neighbor cannot eat does not benefit me if that does not stop him quarelling. Meanwhile the real world implications of the economic measures are far severe
    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

  5. #1925
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    10,914
    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    No, I asked how they were strategically affected. Not a whole lot.
    Well, it isn't aiding their agendas, this policy is complicating it.

    It means that Kashmir is not going to quiet down anytime soon, regardless of the fire and brimstone from Washington.
    Kashmir is an Indian problem. Nation building is a long struggle. Unlike in the 90s the Americans aren't interfering in the process.

    That is exactly my point. While you are happy that Trump is punishing the Chinese, India may not be far behind. There is a saying in Bengali that aptly describes this attitude (ghute pore gobor haase - the cowdung laughs at the plight of the upla cake)
    Lower tariffs on american goods benefits Indian consumers. In the 90s calls from India to the US cost ten times more than the other way around. Then in '99 India joined the ITU and that cash cow went away.

    My point is, none of that benefits India. The fact that my quarellsome neighbor cannot eat does not benefit me if that does not stop him quarelling. Meanwhile the real world implications of the economic measures are far severe
    If they can't eat they have bigger problems, if their narratives are ignored then what else have they left. How severe these economic implications you speak of depends on Trumps willingness to stay the course. Are companies going to move out of China right away, no, as its not clear how long this policy will endure. Is it just a ploy, that isn't clear to me, do i support it for reasons mentioned earlier, yes.

    India's trade surplus with the US is $23 biliion, its nearing 500 with China. I'm not so worried and neither should you be.

  6. #1926
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    5,611
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    We are only talking about the Vice president here : )
    When a dog bites you it is the owners fault. Not so with people.

  7. #1927
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    15,003
    Quote Originally Posted by GVChamp View Post
    "Libertarian" in the US typically involves Constitutional textualism, rather than iron-clad strict constructionism. Zraver definitely strikes me as that variety, though I'm not sure how apparent that is to non right-wingers.
    Bit of both. I think government should leave people alone and that in most cases the market will provide the answer. I am not one of those taxation is thefties, taxes for public goods outlined in the Constitution like roads and courts don't bug me. I've stated before that spending on SNAP while onerous at least keeps the poor too not hungry to tear it all down around us.


    The intention is not to keep the Constitution as written in 1783, since we have an amendment mechanism. The intention is to interpret the Constitution as it was written by the people who wrote it. In the case of women voting, women have the right to vote since that is in the 19th Amendment. If there were no 19th Amendment, and the Supreme Court decided that women have the right to vote because it is Current Year, that'd be bad law. It doesn't matter that we have "evolved as a society" or whatever, the states would have the right to restrict suffrage based on sex.
    Pretty much with some caveats. I would argue the 14th underpins the 19th and had it been read properly we would not have needed the 19th. Ditto black voting, gay marriage... I am definitely old school common law in that anything not expressly forbidden is permitted.

    For instance, the guy fined for refusing the bake the gay wedding cake is a violation of libertarian principles, but it isn't necessarily a violation of legal principles, because the relevant laws are Colorado laws. Conservatives interested in protecting this have to pass Religious Freedom Acts or whatever they are called, because there is no legal principle that automatically gives you the right to refuse service.[/QUOTE]

    1st Amendment issue, free exercise clause. Sole proprietorship should be able to reflect the mores of the owner absence any type of local monopoly power or generally recognized public service provider like a doctor.

    I definitely break with many Libertarians on immigration. I think we should only import those we need. Importing unskilled labor only undermines the value of the one thing the poor have of value their labor. This is bad for social cohesion.

    Oh you can tell that TBM is not from Arkansas, we have a vibrant Libertarian movement that manages to place candidates on most state wide office ballots. We rarely break 5% but we are here.

  8. #1928
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    5,611
    So I have a question...Hmm bit complicated but as I understand it Trumpkins first delivers written replies to Mueller, then Cohen is called into a Court to plead guilty about lying as to Trumpkin (and his family's) continued business interests in Muscovy well into the time that Trumpkin was a Presidential candidate. Now if Trumpkin has said in his sworn answers to Mueller his old story "Nothing to do with Moscow" etc which Cohen has then disproved (with email evidence etc) then obviously Trumpkin is perjured but what next?

    Seems at least possible to me that Mueller has pulled a move - if so would charges follow? Can you prosecute a President?

  9. #1929
    Senior Contributor antimony's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Feb 08
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    4,166
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Well, it isn't aiding their agendas, this policy is complicating it.


    Kashmir is an Indian problem. Nation building is a long struggle. Unlike in the 90s the Americans aren't interfering in the process.


    Lower tariffs on american goods benefits Indian consumers. In the 90s calls from India to the US cost ten times more than the other way around. Then in '99 India joined the ITU and that cash cow went away.


    If they can't eat they have bigger problems, if their narratives are ignored then what else have they left. How severe these economic implications you speak of depends on Trumps willingness to stay the course. Are companies going to move out of China right away, no, as its not clear how long this policy will endure. Is it just a ploy, that isn't clear to me, do i support it for reasons mentioned earlier, yes.

    India's trade surplus with the US is $23 biliion, its nearing 500 with China. I'm not so worried and neither should you be.
    Any thing that is not specicially aimed at China/ Pakistan but incidentally damages them (like the Tariffs policy) is nothing to goad at because it can hit India too. Your point about lower prices aside, India WILL be hurt if it becomes a target for Trump.

    Indian's trade with the Us includes 28 bill of services exports, a lot of which is already at risk. IT services comapnies have been hurt by the visa regime already.

    While your experts gloat about the damage done to China and Pakistan due to Trump's stupid policies, I will worry more about the actual harm done both to the US and Indian economic interest by those same policies.
    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

  10. #1930
    Senior Contributor Bigfella's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jan 07
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,658
    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    So I have a question...Hmm bit complicated but as I understand it Trumpkins first delivers written replies to Mueller, then Cohen is called into a Court to plead guilty about lying as to Trumpkin (and his family's) continued business interests in Muscovy well into the time that Trumpkin was a Presidential candidate. Now if Trumpkin has said in his sworn answers to Mueller his old story "Nothing to do with Moscow" etc which Cohen has then disproved (with email evidence etc) then obviously Trumpkin is perjured but what next?

    Seems at least possible to me that Mueller has pulled a move - if so would charges follow? Can you prosecute a President?
    I'm pretty sure 'executive privilege' stops Presidents from being prosecuted, sued & otherwise harassed by the law. Not an unvarnished good, but it does make sense (and is quite common around the world). Presidents have to be impeached or removed by other constitutional means (I think Article 25?). Of course, Trump can be prosecuted after his Presidency ends if the statute of limitations hasn't ended or the incoming President doesn't pardon him. There is some discussion about whether or not a President can pardon him/herself. It seems unlikely, but there isn't a legal precedent.


    Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

  11. #1931
    Senior Contributor GVChamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 06
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,634
    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    So I have a question...Hmm bit complicated but as I understand it Trumpkins first delivers written replies to Mueller, then Cohen is called into a Court to plead guilty about lying as to Trumpkin (and his family's) continued business interests in Muscovy well into the time that Trumpkin was a Presidential candidate. Now if Trumpkin has said in his sworn answers to Mueller his old story "Nothing to do with Moscow" etc which Cohen has then disproved (with email evidence etc) then obviously Trumpkin is perjured but what next?

    Seems at least possible to me that Mueller has pulled a move - if so would charges follow? Can you prosecute a President?
    The Executive Branch has usually claimed a sitting President cannot be indicted on criminal charges. Trump will likely be impeached, but it'd have to be really bad for a conviction in the Senate. But it's definitely possible depending on what Mueller knows, and he almost certainly knows something deeply incriminating about Trump specifically (something almost certainly prosecutable)
    "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

  12. #1932
    Global Moderator
    Military Professional
    Defense Professional
    Albany Rifles's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Apr 07
    Location
    Prince George, VA
    Posts
    9,021
    Quote Originally Posted by Bigfella View Post
    I'm pretty sure 'executive privilege' stops Presidents from being prosecuted, sued & otherwise harassed by the law. Not an unvarnished good, but it does make sense (and is quite common around the world). Presidents have to be impeached or removed by other constitutional means (I think Article 25?). Of course, Trump can be prosecuted after his Presidency ends if the statute of limitations hasn't ended or the incoming President doesn't pardon him. There is some discussion about whether or not a President can pardon him/herself. It seems unlikely, but there isn't a legal precedent.
    What Pete said.

    Additionally, if it happened in NY State, the State AG of NY can bring charges as NY has some tough laws on anything dealing with fraud, money laundering, etc., because of Wall Street.
    “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
    Mark Twain

  13. #1933
    Global Moderator
    Military Professional
    Defense Professional
    Albany Rifles's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Apr 07
    Location
    Prince George, VA
    Posts
    9,021
    Quote Originally Posted by GVChamp View Post
    The Executive Branch has usually claimed a sitting President cannot be indicted on criminal charges. Trump will likely be impeached, but it'd have to be really bad for a conviction in the Senate. But it's definitely possible depending on what Mueller knows, and he almost certainly knows something deeply incriminating about Trump specifically (something almost certainly prosecutable)
    Not sure about the impeachment. From a purely political point of view it is not in the Democratic Party's best interests to impeach the president. The majority of the country is not calling for that I believe. Better to run against a severely damaged Trump for the presidency in 2020. Also, Pence is a fairly successful politician and right now he is fairly neutered.

    What the majority of the country is looking for is legitimate oversight and movement forward on several fronts. An infrastructure bill makes sense for both the House Dems & the White House. It puts people to work on long term jobs and returns tax dollars to the coffers from payroll taxes. And God knows we need it.
    “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
    Mark Twain

  14. #1934
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    14,199
    AR,

    Not sure about the impeachment. From a purely political point of view it is not in the Democratic Party's best interests to impeach the president. The majority of the country is not calling for that I believe. Better to run against a severely damaged Trump for the presidency in 2020. Also, Pence is a fairly successful politician and right now he is fairly neutered.
    yeah, impeachment is much more a political calculation than it is a legal judgment.

    of course, even if the majority of the country DID call for impeachment, that -still- wouldn't matter...it would only matter once the majority of -Republicans- started calling for impeachment that Trump would start sweating.

    having said that, if 20 Senate Republicans suddenly indicated that Trump deserved to get impeached, Democrats would almost certainly jump through any hoop necessary to impeach and convict the President, whatever that might spell for 2020.

    can't really see the infrastructure bill get off the ground. Senate Republicans have already poo-poo'd it and Trump won't lean on them too hard. what he certainly WILL lean on them on is holding the line whenever the House investigations get off the ground and whenever Mueller finishes up.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  15. #1935
    Senior Contributor GVChamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 06
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,634
    Impeachment only takes a simple majority vote in the House. Depending on how severe the crime is, I could totally see the Senate voting for conviction, regardless of partisan lean. It just depends on how serious the crime is. Mueller has not issued a report yet.
    "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. 2017 American Political Scene
    By YellowFever in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 2571
    Last Post: 29 Dec 17,, 21:34
  2. Lotsa great American political news out there today...
    By Bluesman in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 27 Aug 10,, 20:00
  3. American political duplication between Riyadh and Israel
    By ahmed in forum International Politics
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 29 Apr 07,, 22:06

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •