Republicans control the House and the Senate, and will soon have a majority in the Supreme Court. I would hope that Republicans would oppose someone who makes a mockery of Republican principles. But hope is the denial of reality.
Edit: Republican Senate leadership: https://twitter.com/Max_Fisher/statu...00906195091456
Last edited by Loki; 12-10-2016 at 01:47 AM.
Hope is the denial of reality
So now the plot thickens; CIA confirms Russia's role in actions intended to get Trump elected. Will Trump indeed be the next President of the United States?
Congratulations America
As Fuzzy's repeatedly explained well the job of the Republicans is to work with and adjust through cooperation their President. It is the job of the Democrats to provide opposition.Originally Posted by Loki
It's the job of both parties to protect America's security and institutions.
Meanwhile, 55% of GOP voters claim the whole thing is a Clinton conspiracy: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/n...209-story.html Time to change the party name to Alex Jones Inc.
Last edited by Loki; 12-10-2016 at 03:16 PM.
Hope is the denial of reality
Well, if anyone the CIA would know how to spot influencing elections, they've done it often enough themselves.
Keep on keepin' the beat alive!
No, that's not what I said. It's not their job to work with and adjust through cooperation the President. But they can't do their job well if they don't. That's not as much an issue for the Democrats because a major function of the opposition in contemporary Washington is to be partisan and fight the other party's agenda.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
The CIA could only dream of having the Kremlin's rate of success in this area.
Hope is the denial of reality
That's what they want you to think
Keep on keepin' the beat alive!
So the new secretary of state is the American with the closest connections to Putin (also no diplomatic experience), and his chief deputy will be John Bolton.
And here's GOP free-marketers trying to justify their about-turn on every issue they've ever cared about: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/1...timulus-232387
Last edited by Loki; 12-10-2016 at 11:27 PM.
Hope is the denial of reality
Seems like a really weird choice. Then again, we all seem to have not lost our tendency to pre-judge results before we see results.
It's like acting surprised that a circus ride will cause dizziness, even though that's why you bought the ticket in the first place.
I'm just glad that American democracy is being used as the latest battle ground for the old FBI-CIA feud.
Have fun out there guys.
The light that once I thought compassion still casting shadows in your action
The words you shared were cold transactions that bring me to curse what you've done
When you're up there absorbed in greatness with such success you've grown complacent
I hope you scorch your many faces when you fly too close to the sun
Point taken. Though that feels a bit like splitting hairs, if something is a necessary condition of doing their job well then that is essentially part of their job. Or it should be.
Protecting the security and sovereignty of their country is also part of their job. A reasonable person might even expect that to take precedence over passing a tax cut.
Hope is the denial of reality
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/top-10-signs-that-a-us-president-is-a-russian-spy-2016-12-13?siteid=YAHOOBOpinion: Top 10 signs that a U.S. president is a Russian agent
Published: Dec 14, 2016 10:21 a.m. ET
By
BRETT
ARENDS
COLUMNIST
It sounds like the stuff of conspiracy theorists and the tinfoil brigade.
It’s even straight out of Cold War fiction.
But in the shadowy world of espionage, accusations and counter-accusations, how can the ordinary citizen tell if the next U.S. president is actually an agent of the Kremlin?
Good news: We’ve got your back.
Here are 10 “telltale signs” that a U.S. president might be a Russian spy, and how we might be able to swear in a “Comrade-in-Chief” next month.
1. U.S. intelligence concludes that the Kremlin helped put him in power.
That’s usually a pretty strong giveaway right there. The CIA has never before accused the Kremlin of interfering in a U.S. election. They’re probably not 0-for-1.
Mind you, when Russian hackers pointedly attacked and embarrassed Donald Trump’s opponent, but left him completely alone, you have to ask: Did we really need a report by the CIA?
2. The new president sides with the Kremlin against the CIA.
Trump’s dismissive response to this news includes three classic spin techniques: shooting the messenger, by attacking the CIA; misdirection, by raising doubts about the CIA’s competence, namely the claim that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction when it didn’t; and begging the question, by implying we should now “move on.”
Neither is a serious argument. Indeed, if the CIA’s report is accurate, why on Earth would we “move on”?
Imagine Ronald Reagan or Dwight Eisenhower reacting this way to a CIA statement about Kremlin activities in the U.S.
Go on — try.
3. He receives vast sums of money from mysterious Russians.
This even includes an astonishing $95 million that Trump personally received from a Russian billionaire during the 2008 collapse.
In Vladimir Putin’s kleptostate, there is no fine line between the state and the private sector, the president and the oligarchs.
As Trump’s son Eric confessed:: “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets. … We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia.”
4. His election suddenly makes a lot of people rich … in Moscow.
You think Wall Street has done well since Trump’s election victory?
The S&P 500 stock index SPX, -0.18% of the U.S. is up about 5% since Nov. 8.
Moscow’s RTS index: 20%.
Yes, really — from 973 to 1,148. Let the vodka flow! It’s not just about the oil rally, either. The RTS’s increase is more than twice that of global energy stocks.
Putin and his pals were nursing painful losses for several years. But no longer — Moscow stocks are back to their highest levels since the Ukrainian crisis.
5. He wants to end Russia’s global isolation.
Vladimir Putin’s sinister state has been subject to global sanctions since 2014, and for good reason. He’s destabilized Ukraine and annexed Crimea. The British government concluded he had “probably” assassinated a critic in London. He helped arm the people who blew up Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, killing 298 people.
Trump’s response? He praises Putin’s leadership, wants to “get along” with Russia, and hints strongly at ending those sanctions — something he can do by executive order.
6. He surrounds himself with known Russian agents and sympathizers.
Those include Carter Page and the menacing Paul Manafort. You’d imagine that a Kremlin agent in the White House would appoint a close friend of Russia — indeed, someone who actually won the Russian Order of Friendship award.
No wonder one of Putin’s advisers is praising Trump’s “fantastic” team.
7. He repeatedly refuses to criticize the Kremlin.
It’s been Sherlock Holmes’s dog that didn’t bark.
Time and again, during the election campaign and since, Trump has had every opportunity and incentive to criticize Vladimir Putin. He was repeatedly criticized on the campaign trail for being too soft on Putin, or too friendly toward him, or even in Putin’s pocket.
And each time, Trump failed. He just couldn’t criticize Putin. Not even for allegedly murdering journalists.
Sometimes silence speaks louder than words.
8. He immediately drives a wedge between the U.S. and Russia’s chief Asian rival, China.
What could make the Kremlin happier than a public feud between Washington and Beijing — for example, over Taiwan?
A full trade war between the two, including tariffs — that’s what!
In retrospect, doesn’t it seem odd that so much of Trump’s campaign has been devoted to attacking China and demonizing the Chinese (oh, and the Japanese) before the eyes of the American public?
Any conflict or tension between the U.S. and China, the world’s two biggest economic powers, is great news for Russia. It weakens China, hurts international unity against Russia and reduces America’s strategic options. Brilliant!
9. He also undermines NATO.
Trump’s comments undermining NATO, and particularly its commitment to the Baltic states, has long been the stuff of fantasy to Putin’s Kremlin.
The Russians have hated the North Atlantic Treaty Organization since Harry Truman set it up in 1949 to stop the Soviet Union’s expansion of its European sphere of influence. They’re especially furious about the Western alliance’s expansion into Eastern Europe after the collapse of the Berlin Wall.
Many in Russia consider the Baltic states to be traditional subjects of the “Russian empire.”
It tells you a lot that the Lithuanian government recently started handing out instructions to its citizens on how to cope if Russian tanks roll back in.
10. Oh, yeah — and he once marketed his own brand of vodka.
Not beer. Not bourbon. Not even gin.
Vodka.
Really, in retrospect, how hard was this?
The Rules
Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)
It's even more 'disruptive' that a certain percentage of voters didn't fall under a single criteria, because they voted for Obama at least once, maybe even twice, but then voted for Trump. That kind of thing drives political party pundits, and behavioral 'scientists' nuts.
That sort of thing is extremely healthy and good news. It shows that people are complicated beings with their own desires, impulses and decision making processes.
Not a series of check boxes. Everyone is complex not a single "criteria".
The family business is taking minority-managing positions in real estate ventures, with some geographic concentration in NYC. That Russian oligarchs comprise often invest in these kinds of projects is deeply unsurprising.As Trump’s son Eric confessed:: “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets. … We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia.”
Not to worry, we have this to look forward to:
December 19, 2016
The Electors meet in their state and vote for President and Vice President on separate ballots. The electors record their votes on six “Certificates of Vote,” which are paired with the six remaining Certificates of Ascertainment.
The electors sign, seal, and certify six sets of electoral votes. A set of electoral votes consists of one Certificate of Ascertainment and one Certificate of Vote. These are distributed immediately as follows:
one set to the President of the Senate (the Vice President) for the official count of the electoral votes in January;
two packages to the Secretary of State in the state where the electors met—one is an archival set that becomes part of the public record of the Secretary of State's office and the other is a reserve set that is subject to the call of the President of the Senate to replace missing or incomplete electoral votes;
two packages to the Archivist—one is an archival set that becomes part of the permanent collection at the National Archives and Records Administration and the other is a reserve set that is subject to the call of the President of the Senate to replace missing or incomplete electoral votes; and
one set to the presiding judge in the district where the Electors met—this is also a reserve set that is subject to the call of the President of the Senate to replace missing or incomplete electoral votes.
December 28, 2016
Electoral votes (the Certificates of Vote) must be received by the President of the Senate and the Archivist no later than nine days after the meeting of the electors. States face no legal penalty for failure to comply.
If votes are lost or delayed, the Archivist may take extraordinary measures to retrieve duplicate originals.
On or Before January 3, 2017
The Archivist and/or representatives from the Office of the Federal Register meet with the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House in late December or early January. This is, in part, a ceremonial occasion. Informal meetings may take place earlier.
January 6, 2017
The Congress meets in joint session to count the electoral votes. Congress may pass a law to change this date.
The Vice President, as President of the Senate, presides over the count and announces the results of the Electoral College vote. The President of the Senate then declares which persons, if any, have been elected President and Vice President of the United States.
If a State submits conflicting sets of electoral votes to Congress, the two Houses acting concurrently may accept or reject the votes. If they do not concur, the votes of the electors certified by the Governor of the State on the Certificate of Ascertainment would be counted in Congress.
If no Presidential candidate wins 270 or more electoral votes, a majority, the 12th Amendment to the Constitution provides for the House of Representatives to decide the Presidential election. If necessary the House would elect the President by majority vote, choosing from the three candidates who received the greatest number of electoral votes. The vote would be taken by state, with each state having one vote.
If no Vice Presidential candidate wins 270 or more electoral votes, a majority, the 12th Amendment provides for the Senate to elect the Vice President. If necessary, the Senate would elect the Vice President by majority vote, choosing from the two candidates who received the greatest number of electoral votes. The vote would be taken by state, with each Senator having one vote.
If any objections to the Electoral College vote are made, they must be submitted in writing and be signed by at least one member of the House and one Senator. If objections are presented, the House and Senate withdraw to their respective chambers to consider their merits under procedures set out in federal law.
January 20, 2017 at Noon—Inauguration Day
The President-elect takes the Oath of Office and becomes the President of the United States.
General Authority
The Archivist of the United States, as the head of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), is responsible for carrying out ministerial duties on behalf of the States and the Congress under 3 U.S.C. sections 6, 11, 12, and 13.
NARA is primarily responsible for coordinating the various stages of the electoral process by helping the States prepare and submit certificates that establish the appointment of electors and validate the electoral votes of each State.
The Archivist delegates operational duties to the Director of the Federal Register. The Federal Register Legal Staff ensures that electoral documents are transmitted to Congress, made available to the public, and preserved as part of our nation's history.
The Office of the Federal Register Legal Staff reviews the electoral certificates for the required signatures, seals and other matters of form, as specified in federal law.
Only the Congress and the courts have the authority to rule on substantive legal issues.
Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?
https://twitter.com/monkeycageblog/s...40342407446528
This is the world we live in.
Hope is the denial of reality
This a great response on that link.
https://twitter.com/thriftymaven/sta...78417292431361
Yay for another false equivalence. Democrats don't think it makes a person president; they think it should.
Hope is the denial of reality
It was more the image I thought was entertaining.
That 48% of Republicans are aware that their winning candidate lost the popular vote is surprising given how little attention most people pay to politics. I'd have thought more than 52% would think the President Elect had won the popular vote.
This issue has been in the news non-stop since the election.
Hope is the denial of reality
Yeah and that makes 100% of the population suddenly interested in the minutiae of politics how?
The word minutia must have a totally different definition in Britain. Because here it doesn't mean "a highly salient topic".
Hope is the denial of reality
Salient to a politics geek like you. Not salient to 48% of Republicans apparently.
Or they're paying attention...but to Trump and Breitbart.
Hope is the denial of reality
In the real world the proportion of the electorate paying attention to Breitbart is closer to 1% than 48%
That's because the remainder are paying attention to Facebook, specifically Facebook posts inspired by Breitbart
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote