logo Sign In

Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo — Page 35

This topic has been locked by a moderator.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/19/us/politics/trump-russia-associates-investigation.html

Another quote from this same article. Nothing even solid to make this article necessary either.

It is not clear whether the intercepted communications had anything to do with Mr. Trump’s campaign, or Mr. Trump himself. It is also unclear whether the inquiry has anything to do with an investigation into the hacking of the Democratic National Committee’s computers and other attempts to disrupt the elections in November. The American government has concluded that the Russian government was responsible for a broad computer hacking campaign, including the operation against the D.N.C.

The counterintelligence investigation centers at least in part on the business dealings that some of the president-elect’s past and present advisers have had with Russia. Mr. Manafort has done business in Ukraine and Russia. Some of his contacts there were under surveillance by the National Security Agency for suspected links to Russia’s Federal Security Service, one of the officials said.

I have two words in response to this article … Uranium One.

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

They didn’t cooperate with him, but they didn’t walk out on him.

I am just talking about walking out on one speech. But no, I don’t think they should cooperate with him. I think they should fight him. I think they should filibuster like crazy. At least filibuster any attempt to repeal Obamacare. Also filibuster any attempt to confirm an Supreme Court nominee until Merrick Garland(Obama’s Supreme Court nominee) gets an up or down vote. Or perhaps filibuster any Trump nominee for a length of time equaling the time from date of the nomination of Merrick Garland to the end the Obama Presidency. Send a message.

Author
Time

Warbler said:

I don’t think they should cooperate with him. I think they should fight him. I think they should filibuster like crazy. At least filibuster any attempt to repeal Obamacare. Also filibuster any attempt to confirm an Supreme Court nominee until Merrick Garland(Obama’s Supreme Court nominee) gets an up or down vote. Or perhaps filibuster any Trump nominee for a length of time equaling the time from date of the nomination of Merrick Garland to the end the Obama Presidency. Send a message.

Absolutely.

Of course they’ll then just kill the filibuster so it won’t matter.

Author
Time

Warbler said:

moviefreakedmind said:

They didn’t cooperate with him, but they didn’t walk out on him.

I am just talking about walking out on one speech. But no, I don’t think they should cooperate with him. I think they should fight him. I think they should filibuster like crazy. At least filibuster any attempt to repeal Obamacare. Also filibuster any attempt to confirm an Supreme Court nominee until Merrick Garland(Obama’s Supreme Court nominee) gets an up or down vote. Or perhaps filibuster any Trump nominee for a length of time equaling the time from date of the nomination of Merrick Garland to the end the Obama Presidency. Send a message.

I still think that would embarrass them much more than it would help. The populace loved it so much when Republicans were impossible under Obama.

The Person in Question

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

I don’t think they should cooperate with him. I think they should fight him. I think they should filibuster like crazy. At least filibuster any attempt to repeal Obamacare. Also filibuster any attempt to confirm an Supreme Court nominee until Merrick Garland(Obama’s Supreme Court nominee) gets an up or down vote. Or perhaps filibuster any Trump nominee for a length of time equaling the time from date of the nomination of Merrick Garland to the end the Obama Presidency. Send a message.

Absolutely.

Of course they’ll then just kill the filibuster so it won’t matter.

I don’t think the Republicans have a filibuster-proof majority.

Author
Time

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

I don’t think they should cooperate with him. I think they should fight him. I think they should filibuster like crazy. At least filibuster any attempt to repeal Obamacare. Also filibuster any attempt to confirm an Supreme Court nominee until Merrick Garland(Obama’s Supreme Court nominee) gets an up or down vote. Or perhaps filibuster any Trump nominee for a length of time equaling the time from date of the nomination of Merrick Garland to the end the Obama Presidency. Send a message.

Absolutely.

Of course they’ll then just kill the filibuster so it won’t matter.

I don’t think the Republicans have a filibuster-proof majority.

That’s exactly why they will kill the filibuster.

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

I don’t think they should cooperate with him. I think they should fight him. I think they should filibuster like crazy. At least filibuster any attempt to repeal Obamacare. Also filibuster any attempt to confirm an Supreme Court nominee until Merrick Garland(Obama’s Supreme Court nominee) gets an up or down vote. Or perhaps filibuster any Trump nominee for a length of time equaling the time from date of the nomination of Merrick Garland to the end the Obama Presidency. Send a message.

Absolutely.

Of course they’ll then just kill the filibuster so it won’t matter.

I don’t think the Republicans have a filibuster-proof majority.

That’s exactly why they will kill the filibuster.

???

Author
Time
 (Edited)

The filibuster is a Senate rule that can be removed by simple majority vote. If that is done, all legislation would only require a similar majority vote instead of 60 votes.

IIRC the Dems already got rid of the filibuster for cabinet nominations a few years back when they got frustrated with Repuplicans filibustering all of Obama’s choices.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Well, if they do that, then I suggest the Dens walk out of Congress and refuse to return. I mean without the filibuster, what is there for the Dems to do. They should also complain about extreme hypocrisy. Because the GOP has used the filibuster to try to block anything they could under Obama and the Dems never attempted to change the Senate rules. Dems should make it clear to the GOP that if they remove the filibuster, it is all out, no holds barred, war between the two.

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

Warbler said:

moviefreakedmind said:

They didn’t cooperate with him, but they didn’t walk out on him.

I am just talking about walking out on one speech. But no, I don’t think they should cooperate with him. I think they should fight him. I think they should filibuster like crazy. At least filibuster any attempt to repeal Obamacare. Also filibuster any attempt to confirm an Supreme Court nominee until Merrick Garland(Obama’s Supreme Court nominee) gets an up or down vote. Or perhaps filibuster any Trump nominee for a length of time equaling the time from date of the nomination of Merrick Garland to the end the Obama Presidency. Send a message.

I still think that would embarrass them much more than it would help. The populace loved it so much when Republicans were impossible under Obama.

It got them Congress and the White House, didn’t it?

Author
Time

So here we are, 27 or so hours into the Presidency and so far:

Day One:
Remove references to health care from the White House website.
Remove references to civil rights from the White House website.
Remove references to climate change from government websites.
Remove references to LGBT rights from the White House website.
Begin the repeal process for the ACA.
Deny entry to foreign nationals who disagree with the Trump administration.

Day Two:
Censor Government agencies for reporting protester vs. inauguration turnout facts.

I’m not impressed so far.

Keep Circulating the Tapes.

END OF LINE

(It hasn’t happened yet)

Author
Time

It’s official: DJT is already a terrible president.

Author
Time

It needs to be all out war(to be clear, I mean the figuratively, not literally) on this guy.

Author
Time

To Duracell,

I’m wondering if a title change might be in order for your thread here. What good is a politics thread if most every conversation only starts or ends with President Trump bashing?

There will be little if any reasonable discourse now that he has been Inaugurated. Just a thought anyways.

Author
Time

I don’t think thread title changes are possible anymore since teh update.

Author
Time

Jetrell Fo said:

To Duracell,

I’m wondering if a title change might be in order for your thread here. What good is a politics thread if most every conversation only starts or ends with President Trump bashing?

There will be little if any reasonable discourse now that he has been Inaugurated. Just a thought anyways.

What are you suggesting? He change the title to the “bash Trump” thread? You don’t even think we should try reasonable discourse? I don’t get it.

Author
Time

DominicCobb said:

Jetrell Fo said:

To Duracell,

I’m wondering if a title change might be in order for your thread here. What good is a politics thread if most every conversation only starts or ends with President Trump bashing?

There will be little if any reasonable discourse now that he has been Inaugurated. Just a thought anyways.

What are you suggesting? He change the title to the “bash Trump” thread? You don’t even think we should try reasonable discourse? I don’t get it.

I don’t see reasonable discourse being had, just Trump bashing, hence the suggestion.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Someone could make a new thread if it’s really necessary.