Politics politics

Trump's authoritarian streak

Trump's authoritarian streak
Trump's authoritarian streak

Trump is a cancer on American democracy, and we must cut him out in order to survive.

But within Western constraints, Trump has displayed plenty of examples of imperious behavior that raise concerns that his presidency represents a challenge to constitutional norms and civic institutions.

In many ways, Trump is a politician with counter-liberal instincts operating within a liberal society, who uses the rhetorical techniques of authoritarian regimes.

But it is often difficult to tell when he is serious about a strongman power move or is trolling critics and playing up his reality show bombast.

It's a feature not a streak.

Streak? Trump is every bit as bad as Stalin, Mao, Hitler, and now that he is intentionally killing people in Puerto Rico add Pol Pot.

Pelosi: Passing a 'No-First-Use' Law on Nuclear Weapons Is 'Urgent'

Pelosi: Passing a 'No-First-Use' Law on Nuclear Weapons Is 'Urgent'

First strike should be treated completely different from Retaliatory strikes but have not been treated as such.

The entire system is built to deter a first strike by another (USSR at the time). The only way a first strike would be successful with a major nuclear opponent, would be if you can take out their nukes before they can launch. If they can a) detect our launch and b) launch theirs before ours hit, then we would be destroyed also. Thus making it a no win situation. This is the entire basis for have the ability to do a "quick launch" with a limited (single) responsible authority. (As someone pointed out, even this, in today's world, should require 2 in agreement at least as it is possible with todays technology to set up a system to have this done in minutes).

FIRST STRIKE authority SHOULD be very different. There is no nuclear deterrance in having the ability to do a first strike. Under the constitution this is declaration of war and SHOULD be left to congress. No single man should have this authority.

Unfortunately MANY,defend the authority to do the second (First strike) because they don't understand the difference.

In fact, Most studies, say having First strike authority actually increases the chance of a nuclear war by encouraging an opponent to launch a "pre-emptive" strike because they think you are about to launch. If they know you can't (unless they do), they are less likely to launch, knowing you will respond. It effectively eliminates cat and mouse, and second guessing.

TL;DR: First strike nuclear launch authority should be different than retaliatory strike authority. First strike authority is not a deterrent and only makes the risk of Edit: "Nuclear" war higher, not lower.

Very well said. Invariably you'll hear a retort similar to "but - Truman exercised first strike authority to end WW2!" which ONLY makes sense when you consider the fact that we were the ONLY nation in the world with a nuclear strike capability and no other nation was even within a year of successfully testing one. I promise you that the calculations would have been very different had any other nation on earth been nuclear capable, enemy or not.

Edit; grammar

Plus we didn't fully understand the long-term havoc we were wreaking. Now, we do, and it's unconscionable (except as a retaliatory strike).

Truman didn’t use a “nuclear weapon” as we understand the concept today, because the concept didn’t exist until the weapon was understood.

It was two big bombs dropped (as bluffs, we didn’t have another, and wouldn’t for some time), on a “military target” as they were defined in the fucked up logic of WWII.

House Ethics Watchdog: ‘Substantial Reason To Believe’ Collins Broke Law

House Ethics Watchdog: ‘Substantial Reason To Believe’ Collins Broke Law

The very same Collins who had written into the ACA which failed to exempt all counties in NY State from paying Medicade taxes and placing the burden on NYC residents. He is now also willing to fold on the tax bill, to let NY State residents either deduct their mortgage or federal taxes. Not both like it is now. Fuck this guy.

A congressional ethics watchdog released a report Thursday that found Rep. Chris Collins (R-NY) may have broken ethics rules and federal law with actions he took as a board member of the biotech firm Innate Immunotherapeutics.

The independent Office for Congressional Ethics (OCE), which may investigate allegations against lawmakers and refer its findings to the House Ethics Committee, found there is “substantial reason to believe” Collins shared nonpublic information about the purchase of Innate stock with investors and that he took official actions to help Innate: two National Institutes of Health employees told OCE that Collins asked an NIH employee to help Innate with a clinical trial.

The party of "Family Values!"

He shared insider tips with Tom Price too if I'm not mistaken.

Title is confusing... I thought it was Susan Collins at first. I never heard of Chris Collins.

Kevin de León, California Senate leader, intends to challenge Sen. Dianne Feinstein

Kevin de León, California Senate leader, intends to challenge Sen. Dianne Feinstein
Kevin de León, California Senate leader, intends to challenge Sen. Dianne Feinstein

Pretty big deal. In California, the State Senate Leader probably has a higher profile than an ordinary congressman

Feinstein was recently quoted as saying that "she hopes Trump will improve," in the face of overwhelming evidence he is a Russian asset. It's time for her to retire.

You're trolling or being obtuse, but to spell this out for others: when a hostile nation installs a puppet in your executive branch, you don't "hope" they "improve," you take steps to remove them from power. Please see how Adam Schiff has behaved and acted, and compare that to what Feinstein has said and done.

Please get rid of Feinstein. We need strong, effective leaders to challenge Trump. This is not the time to have senior citizens in positions of power.

Congress OKs expanded protections for federal whistleblowers

Congress OKs expanded protections for federal whistleblowers

That’s good, right? Surely there’s no way this is a bad thing.

Manning served EIGHT YEARS for that stunt, and if that's what you call treason, then Trump is guilty of super mega deluxe treason.

This could be huge. Trump likely can't veto it (passed in the house by 420-0!!! I don't have senate numbers but I assume it meets the 2/3rds requirement to override a presidential veto). That means that - while this is couched as a VA whistleblower law - whistleblowers in other areas of the government could legally be protected from, say, retaliation within the executive branch. It could - theoretically - allow more people to blow the whistle on trump / russia / collusion and give them legal cover for doing so.

Which means this also provides an "out" to the GOP congress. They can claim "we needed the whistleblowers to know how bad it was" and pretend that they've really not been covering for trump this whole time.

Maybe Trump will think they are leakers and veto it! lol

Unhinged GOP congressman accuses media of making up the devastation of Puerto Rico

Unhinged GOP congressman accuses media of making up the devastation of Puerto Rico
Unhinged GOP congressman accuses media of making up the devastation of Puerto Rico

Wow.

Headline is actually accurate. That guy lost his marbles.

CUOMO: You have less than half the country [sic] that has what you need to sustain life, without fresh water, power, food, place to live.

PERRY: Mr. Cuomo, you’re simply just making this stuff up. You’re making it up.

CUOMO: How am I making it up? What am I making up?

PERRY: If half the country [sic] didn’t have food or water, those people would be dying. And they’re not.

If you read English, that's exactly what Perry said.

Called Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA) a dick earlier.

I was wrong.

Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA) is an unhinged asshole.

I am not usually a fan of shareblue, but there is nothing wrong with this article. They are simply showing a crazy event that had happened, and the transcript of the convo. If they could stick to identifying these "minor" outrages that are just too small for a major network to pick up on - they would earn a lot more respect. More of this, and less of the hyper-left spin on content covered elsewhere.

Edit: A word, a sentence

Ryan blasts states that send billions to federal government

Ryan blasts states that send billions to federal government

“States that got their act together are paying for states that didn’t,”

Right, California and New York take care of Kansas and Georgia.

The top House Republican on Thursday blasted high-tax states that deliver billions to the federal government as he faced a backlash from rank-and-file GOP lawmakers over a sweeping tax-cut proposal.

Ryan who gets his insights on economics from Ayn Rand novels, is now blaming the provider states for supporting America.

Yo, Massachusetts resident here. If you don't want our money I think we'd be happy to hold on to it. I'm sure Kansas and Mississippi will do just fine by themselves.

In fact, California, New York and New Jersey send many billions more in taxes to Washington than they get back in federal spending, new data show. Divided by total state residents, New York gets back 81 cents for every $1 it pays in, New Jersey receives 74 cents and California 96 cents, according to an analysis released last month by the Rockefeller Institute of Government.

Don't confuse this turd with the facts

Marc Anthony: Trump 'tone-deaf, idiotic, callous and disrespectful' on Puerto Rico

Marc Anthony: Trump 'tone-deaf, idiotic, callous and disrespectful' on Puerto Rico
Marc Anthony: Trump 'tone-deaf, idiotic, callous and disrespectful' on Puerto Rico

He just summed up Donald J. Trump nicely I think.

Super callous fragile racist sexist nazi potus

He’s not wrong.

No, no link to support this. I misread and made a mistake. I retract my previous statement, sorry about that! :)

Pawar drops out of Illinois governor's race

Pawar drops out of Illinois governor's race
Pawar drops out of Illinois governor's race

It’s the latest reminder of the breakneck spending pace in the 2018 governor’s contest, an election that could cost more than a quarter-billion dollars when all the primary and general election spending is counted.

“We raised $828k from 2,526 donors; that is amazing. But as you know, the race for Illinois governor will set a record as the costliest race in American history,” Pawar said in a statement ending his campaign Thursday. “For democracy’s sake, I hope we see this as a troubling trend.”

Sarah Brune, executive director of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform, said the most troubling aspect of the surge of self-funded, big money campaigns for marquee offices is that the spending tends to impact lower-level offices including mayoral contests and state legislative races. Those who aren't personally wealthy or lack a mega-donor feel they can't compete at any level.

“It’s not just that running for governor is inaccessible, the bigger problem is the trickle down effect —- people feel they can’t run for local offices,” Brune said.

In the Democratic gubernatorial primary, billionaire J.B. Pritzker has so far dominated party and union endorsements and has for months flooded the airwaves with ads.

Part of his appeal to Democrats is his personal fortune — Pritzker’s a candidate who can go toe-to-toe with incumbent GOP Gov. Bruce Rauner. Rauner, a multi-millionaire with some $70 million sitting in his campaign account, has the support of Ken Griffin, one of the wealthiest individuals in the world.

That's honestly disgusting. Candidates whose quality is determined by how big their checkbook is, not how good their skills or ideas are. This is how democracy dies.

This is such a shame. I hate that money causes candidates to drop out of races before anyone is even paying attention. They should at least be able to fail on their merits.

Dang, I really liked Pawar. He was focused on universal childcare and funding public schools.

I had no idea who this man was and I live right next door in Missouri where I see a ton of Illinois Governor ads.

House approves $36.5 billion disaster bill, passes 353-69

House approves $36.5 billion disaster bill, passes 353-69
House approves $36.5 billion disaster bill, passes 353-69

All of the opposed are Republicans.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2017/roll566.xml

Anyone got a list of the 69 who voted against?

How in the fuck does someone from Alabama, Louisiana, S. Carolina vote against some shit like this? Assholes your state will be next in line for a hurricane and I bet you'll be bitching and moaning the money ahd help isn't coming quick enough.

I can see the western/midwest states somewhat, but it's not like they don't get disasters either.

Bet they all voted for 600-700 trillion for defense, though.

Try one of these subthreads