The fact one of these guys has a name very similar to Andrew Tate would be funny if it weren't so damn surreal.
US 2024 Presidential Election
- Thread starter gorfias
- Start date
Apparently Musk is not the admin of DOGE, but an employee of the White House
Good they cleared that up, because Musk's official title was a real problem
But if not Musk, what is? Is it Big Balls?
www.independent.co.uk
Truly excellent
www.telegraph.co.uk
Bit Carthaginian, innit?
Good they cleared that up, because Musk's official title was a real problem
But if not Musk, what is? Is it Big Balls?
White House scrambles to combat bird flu outbreaks
‘Why does it make any sense to have a big perimeter of dead chickens when it's the ducks and the geese that are spreading it?’ Kevin Hassett asks
www.independent.co.uk
Revealed: Trump’s confidential plan to put Ukraine in a stranglehold
Panic in Kyiv as US president demands higher share of GDP than Germany’s First World War reparations
I mean, that's a fascinating take on things, from both Jeffries and Klippenstein.
What people really need to be outraged about is not that the DoJ has placed a loaded prosecutorial gun against the head of the mayor of New York and threatened to fire it if he doesn't obey, it's that the DoJ put a loaded prosecutorial gun against Eric Adams' head and didn't just immediately pull the trigger, no discussion and no deals. He's corrupt. Taking him down is the DoJ's duty.
But this is Trump's America. The president is corrupt, the administration is corrupt, and it will selectively pursue corruption as it serves the political ends of the president and his administration. So the administration corruptly excuses the corruption of Eric Adams, and bare-facedly go together onto television to tell everyone how corrupt they all are. And what, the opposition party and lefty journalists are merely bothered that the federal government has leverage over the NY mayor?
I believe seven Federal prosecutors have now resigned, and one has openly invited the judge to refuse the case dismissal because it's corrupt. I'm glad someone stood up for ethics along the way, but unfortunately they're just going to be replaced by people with fewer scruples. That's how corruption works and spreads.
I'm not as certain this is the case. The "gifts" he was given was accommodations while traveling to Turkey. The crime he's accused of doing in return is bending the rules to accommodate a visiting head of state. That all sounds like international diplomacy to me.
There's also that Turkish residents in New York and people from Turkey conspired to launder campaign contributions to him, amounting to something like 0.5% of his fundraising, much of which was returned already, and in an amount that typically would result in a fine, not "taking him down".
Turkey Probe: Eric Adams Campaign Took Money from Leaders of Erdogan-Backed Foundation
The foundation, incorporated by Erdogan’s son, has spent tens of millions to erect a 21-story flagship building in Manhattan. As Brooklyn Borough President, Adams attended its groundbreaking — and met Erdogan himself.
www.thecity.nyc
Maybe there's more underneath this that we don't know about, but "you're not allowed to be mayor because they upgraded your flights" is pretty weak.
The alleged gifts total over $100,000, not only luxury accommodation but luxury travel, meals & campaign contributions, combined with falsifying a paper trail.
As well as doing other favours, like opening a skyscraper without the required fire inspection, & cutting ties with a community centre run by a group the Turkish government dislikes.
Do you think it's not meaningful that in Emil Bove's order to drop the indictment, he specifically says it has nothing to do with the quality of evidence?
While all that stuff is true, Jeffries also isn't just some random nobody (or even just a random Democrat). He's supposed to be the top dog Democrat with his leadership position. But he can't call out blatant naked corruption?
This is the kind of shit I mean when I say the parties are two sides of the same coin. They'll circle the wagons to protect themselves rather than do... anything about it. Talk is cheap so even if Jeffries can't take direct action, he can at least say something. Or if even that's too expensive, he could just shut the hell up but no, he has to go out and actively defend this corrupt dirt bag...
He's not an international diplomat, though, he's a city major. It's his job to make sure buildings in his city aren't going to burn down, not lovebomb foreigners.
I dare say he would have a chance, if for no other reason that all people able to afford expensive lawyers do. I also accept that this is probably quite small-scale compared to what many senior US politicians can and have got up to.
However, simply for a case to be brought, there's clearly something very credible in there. Secondly, the resignations of a significant number of his associates speaks volumes that there were potentially issues with his wider administration, even if not him personally, plus the ominous destruction of evidence charge somewhere in the mix. Finally, I note the conspicuous paucity of support that he has from his party colleagues city- and statewide.
That's just the same thing 3 times.
Immaterial to my point. You can have incredibly strong evidence of minor misdemeanors.
The gifts were before he was mayor.
Which brings us to why it's being dropped. The perception here is that the mayor picked a fight with the Biden administration over immigration in late 2022, the investigations started in early 2023, and both his comments and the investigations became public later that year. Trump sees him as an ally against Democratic immigration policy. So when the suggestion is that he's been gone after because he picked fights with the prior administration, it is not contradictory to see allies of that administration failing to support him. Why would his party be expected to support him when he's attacked them? A New York official taking his side is either killing their career or moving somewhere else very soon.
The same thing as what? Those are political favours, clearly unrelated to standard diplomatic courtesy or reception.
OK, let me rephrase.
Do you think it's a good precedent for cases to be dropped explicitly because the defendant would be helpful to the President's agenda, with all considerations of criminal justice rendered irrelevant?
Do I think there are occasions where it is better for society to set aside strict pursuance of legal justice? Yes, yes I do. If the President's agenda is sufficiently good and the crimes of a nature to be reasonably forgiven, I do think that is a fine precedent. And if they were to find evidence that the investigation was actually started as retaliation, I think that ending the investigation is not only good, but arguably necessary.
Let's put ourselves in another's shoes for a moment. Imagine yourself the mayor of New York. A foreign nation has built a consulate in your city, and the president of that nation is visiting and planning an event there. The construction timeline is behind schedule (they always are), and it won't be done through to fire inspection in time for the event. Do you, as mayor, feel it appropriate to tell another nation that they aren't allowed to use their own building because it hasn't been fully inspected yet? Do you think the people you were elected to represent want you to hector visiting dignitaries with fire codes? Is the decision to allow an exception in that situation really so unreasonable as to require corruption to make sense of it?
But who decides when a president's agenda is ''sufficiently good'? or which crimes are of a nature that can be reasonably forgiven? Because that seem the exact sort of question that have wildly different answers depending on who you ask.
I have a feeling that if a Democratic president pressured to get investigations dropped that no Republican would argue that his agenda was ''sufficiently good enough'' to condone this because they are his political opponents. For a concrete example, had Biden necked the court sessions of Hunter they'd have seethed in rage rather than downplay it on account of Biden's agenda being ''sufficiently good'' . And likewise not a soul not already hoodwinked by Trump is likely to argue his presidential agenda is ''sufficiently good''.
This lines of thinking would lead to justice not being dispensed on the facts of law, but on how much one likes or dislikes the reigning president.
So long as this went uniformly in the direction of clemency, I would not necessarily oppose it. I do not want people prosecuting their enemies, and I do not mind a certain amount of latitude in forgiving friends, particularly if it's being used to counteract the former.
I don't think Republicans seethed at Biden's pardon of Hunter. It was not only predictable, but relatable, and obviously allowable. If there is seething over the event by Republicans, it isn't at Hunter getting away with crimes, but rather at the people who still pretended he didn't. Just don't lie to me about it.
Oh and Trump just signed an executive order pretty much literally claiming "I am the law". Super not what a dictator would do. Wonder how SCOTUS will bend themselves backward to justify this.
Don't worry, he's making sure to cover his ass by replacing anyone who might oppose him. He's instructed the DoJ to terminate ALL Biden-era US Attorneys that aren't already gone.
Hey second amendment lovers, this would be a situation where you could actually put it to use.
It's not just about hoarding those puppies, you know.
It's not just about hoarding those puppies, you know.
Cool. And since both of these aspects are just determined by the President's lackeys, we have a standard that can totally exempt those in the President's favour from legal consequence.
Just use another damn building. Skipping legal safety requirements is not a requirement for diplomacy.
Now pretend it was a Democrat loyalist letting a lefty European politician hold an event in a not quite finished building.
Did the Dem loyalist also get $100,000 from them? Threaten to fire the official if he didn't sign the building off? Falsify his paper trail?
If so, straight to jail, do not pass Go, do not collect $100,000.
Literally couldn't give a shit. Corruption is a non-partisan issue.
Burn all the corrupt fuckers down, and the higher their status, the more important and satisfying it is to take them down. The accountability part of transparency and accountability really matters.