Escape from Elba

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Poll

What do you expect on Wednesday?

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.
- 5 (45.5%)
A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.
- 5 (45.5%)
A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.
- 0 (0%)
More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.
- 0 (0%)
A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.
- 1 (9.1%)
More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.
- 0 (0%)
DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.
- 0 (0%)
Huge disruption to the day.
- 0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM


Pages: 1 ... 932 933 [934] 935 936 ... 4288

Author Topic: Trump Administration  (Read 2088286 times)

josh

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18995
    • View Profile
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #13995 on: May 20, 2019, 12:02:00 PM »

From a combat veteran on the topic of the proposed presidential pardons for convicted war criminals:

Quote
"Pardoning convicted war criminals is a slap in the face to everyone who fought honorably. To everyone who didn't commit war crimes. To everyone who chose the harder right over the easier wrong ... It sends the worst possible message from the very top to everyone still fighting - the Rules of Engagement are just annoying suggestions - do whatever you want and the CinC will pardon you because nothing matters anymore. These war crimes weren't close calls .... They weren't protecting their brothers in arms by making tough split second decisions to pull a trigger or to direct mortars/artillery/CAS onto questionable but necessary targets. This wasn't collateral damage. These dudes are just straight up murderers .... When this sort of flippancy comes from the very top, discipline crumbles .... President Trump is telling everyone in uniform to shoot now - get pardoned later."
Logged
The day Richard Nixon failed to answer that subpoena is the day he was subject to impeachment because he took the power from Congress over the impeachment process away from Congress, and he became the judge and jury." ~Lindsey Graham

josh

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18995
    • View Profile
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #13996 on: May 20, 2019, 12:15:19 PM »

Logged
The day Richard Nixon failed to answer that subpoena is the day he was subject to impeachment because he took the power from Congress over the impeachment process away from Congress, and he became the judge and jury." ~Lindsey Graham

NeedsAdjustments

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3276
    • View Profile
Logged
"When you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that's a pretty good job we've done."  -  The impeached "president" on Feb 27, 2020

NeedsAdjustments

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3276
    • View Profile
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #13998 on: May 20, 2019, 12:30:06 PM »

From a combat veteran on the topic of the proposed presidential pardons for convicted war criminals:

Quote
"Pardoning convicted war criminals is a slap in the face to everyone who fought honorably. To everyone who didn't commit war crimes. To everyone who chose the harder right over the easier wrong ... It sends the worst possible message from the very top to everyone still fighting - the Rules of Engagement are just annoying suggestions - do whatever you want and the CinC will pardon you because nothing matters anymore. These war crimes weren't close calls .... They weren't protecting their brothers in arms by making tough split second decisions to pull a trigger or to direct mortars/artillery/CAS onto questionable but necessary targets. This wasn't collateral damage. These dudes are just straight up murderers .... When this sort of flippancy comes from the very top, discipline crumbles .... President Trump is telling everyone in uniform to shoot now - get pardoned later."

Apparently one of the men being considered for a pardon had no less than 7 of his fellow Navy Seals testify to his crimes, saying they would mess with the sights on his gun so that he would miss, knowing that he would be targeting women and children.

If Trump is thinking that this pardon is going to ingratiate him with America's servicemen and women then that is an insult to America's servicemen and women.
Logged
"When you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that's a pretty good job we've done."  -  The impeached "president" on Feb 27, 2020

oilcan

  • Guest
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #13999 on: May 20, 2019, 12:34:35 PM »

Quote
Ian Samuel has pointed out the remarkable fact that, thanks to the way the Senate is structured, the senators who voted to confirm Brett Kavanaugh to the court received represent 38 million fewer people than the senators who voted against him.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/20/rich-white-men-rule-america-minority-rule

Yes, the court will occasionally manage to uphold democracy, but for the most part it has been packed with people who will interpret "democracy" as maintaining a structure of white male conservative hegemony.  As the quote points out, that structure is maintained by a Senate at demographic odds with the nation, whose majority represents a minority of the people.  God forbid we have the "tyranny of the majority" AKA POPULAR DEMOCRACY. 
Logged

oilcan

  • Guest
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #14000 on: May 20, 2019, 12:45:52 PM »

From a combat veteran on the topic of the proposed presidential pardons for convicted war criminals:

Quote
"Pardoning convicted war criminals is a slap in the face to everyone who fought honorably. To everyone who didn't commit war crimes. To everyone who chose the harder right over the easier wrong ... It sends the worst possible message from the very top to everyone still fighting - the Rules of Engagement are just annoying suggestions - do whatever you want and the CinC will pardon you because nothing matters anymore. These war crimes weren't close calls .... They weren't protecting their brothers in arms by making tough split second decisions to pull a trigger or to direct mortars/artillery/CAS onto questionable but necessary targets. This wasn't collateral damage. These dudes are just straight up murderers .... When this sort of flippancy comes from the very top, discipline crumbles .... President Trump is telling everyone in uniform to shoot now - get pardoned later."

Apparently one of the men being considered for a pardon had no less than 7 of his fellow Navy Seals testify to his crimes, saying they would mess with the sights on his gun so that he would miss, knowing that he would be targeting women and children.

If Trump is thinking that this pardon is going to ingratiate him with America's servicemen and women then that is an insult to America's servicemen and women.

Is it enough of an insult, one wonders, as one always does at each fresh Trumpian transgression, to sway anyone who votes?

Today's lead editorial in the NYT weighs in on the whole pardoning madness:

Quote
The full pardons of Conrad Black, a wealthy friend of Mr. Trump’s who has written charitably about him, and Patrick Nolan, a former Republican Assembly leader from California who has criticized aspects of the Russia investigation, are the latest examples in what seems to be a new trend in presidential clemency: mercy for lawbreakers in the mold of disgraced politicians, media personalities and political allies who have flattered, defended or curried favor with the president.

Then came news that the president may mark this Memorial Day with pardons for outlaws in a category all their own — war criminals. The Times reported on Saturday that Mr. Trump has asked the Justice Department’s pardon unit to begin processing paperwork for what could be serial pardons for service members accused or convicted of war crimes. This month, Mr. Trump already pardoned Michael Behenna, a former Army lieutenant who was court-martialed and convicted of killing a detained Iraqi man whom he was interrogating. The American Civil Liberties Union said the pardon represented “a presidential endorsement of murder.”

This may leave you asking: What have these people done to merit a presidential pardon?

Really good question.  Rightwingers of Elba?  Thoughts? 
Logged

whiskeypriest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1364
  • What does it matter? All is grace.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #14001 on: May 20, 2019, 01:15:23 PM »

From a combat veteran on the topic of the proposed presidential pardons for convicted war criminals:

Quote
"Pardoning convicted war criminals is a slap in the face to everyone who fought honorably. To everyone who didn't commit war crimes. To everyone who chose the harder right over the easier wrong ... It sends the worst possible message from the very top to everyone still fighting - the Rules of Engagement are just annoying suggestions - do whatever you want and the CinC will pardon you because nothing matters anymore. These war crimes weren't close calls .... They weren't protecting their brothers in arms by making tough split second decisions to pull a trigger or to direct mortars/artillery/CAS onto questionable but necessary targets. This wasn't collateral damage. These dudes are just straight up murderers .... When this sort of flippancy comes from the very top, discipline crumbles .... President Trump is telling everyone in uniform to shoot now - get pardoned later."

Apparently one of the men being considered for a pardon had no less than 7 of his fellow Navy Seals testify to his crimes, saying they would mess with the sights on his gun so that he would miss, knowing that he would be targeting women and children.

If Trump is thinking that this pardon is going to ingratiate him with America's servicemen and women then that is an insult to America's servicemen and women.

Is it enough of an insult, one wonders, as one always does at each fresh Trumpian transgression, to sway anyone who votes?

Today's lead editorial in the NYT weighs in on the whole pardoning madness:

Quote
The full pardons of Conrad Black, a wealthy friend of Mr. Trump’s who has written charitably about him, and Patrick Nolan, a former Republican Assembly leader from California who has criticized aspects of the Russia investigation, are the latest examples in what seems to be a new trend in presidential clemency: mercy for lawbreakers in the mold of disgraced politicians, media personalities and political allies who have flattered, defended or curried favor with the president.

Then came news that the president may mark this Memorial Day with pardons for outlaws in a category all their own — war criminals. The Times reported on Saturday that Mr. Trump has asked the Justice Department’s pardon unit to begin processing paperwork for what could be serial pardons for service members accused or convicted of war crimes. This month, Mr. Trump already pardoned Michael Behenna, a former Army lieutenant who was court-martialed and convicted of killing a detained Iraqi man whom he was interrogating. The American Civil Liberties Union said the pardon represented “a presidential endorsement of murder.”

This may leave you asking: What have these people done to merit a presidential pardon?

Really good question.  Rightwingers of Elba?  Thoughts?
Had their cases argued forcefully on Fox and Friends.
Logged
I like to think you killed a man. It's the Romantic in me.

kiidcarter8

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12267
    • View Profile
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #14002 on: May 20, 2019, 01:28:48 PM »

That it COULD occur under newly proposed legislation is the point you are missing

We had this discussion already, where that assertion (that a woman about to give birth to a viable child can have it aborted) was fact checked and found false.  I not only didn't miss that point but was one of the Elbans who engaged with it.  Try to keep up.

And, if you recall, I acknowledged that, on a personal level, I would support a woman deciding that she could not, in good conscience, abort a third trimester baby because I recognize that it could be sentient, aware of suffering, and viable outside the womb.   I only support third trimester abortion where the fetus is not viable and abortion would forestall suffering.  IOW, acts of mercy.

Good for you

But I wasnt really speaking to just you
Logged

kiidcarter8

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12267
    • View Profile
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #14003 on: May 20, 2019, 01:31:07 PM »

....and again - key wording is COULD occur.  Law would allow it.

Why pass something like that?
Logged

Yankguy1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4981
    • View Profile
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #14004 on: May 20, 2019, 01:32:54 PM »

....and again - key wording is COULD occur.  Law would allow it.

Why pass something like that?
Perhaps for the same reason that a law which would force a raped 11-year old to give birth is passed. 
Logged
"What a beautiful buzz, what a beautiful buzz."

kiidcarter8

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12267
    • View Profile
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #14005 on: May 20, 2019, 01:54:52 PM »

https://www.americamagazine.org/rha2019?page=1


Pro-choice advocates point out that one reason for that is that the very small fraction of abortions that are conducted at 21 weeks or later (a little more than 1 percent) are almost always in response to some medical issue. Those issues could include acute risks to the life of the mother or conditions that make the child unable to survive to birth—but they also include situations where the child would face a terminal condition, significant suffering or a severe disability after birth, and where abortion is chosen to “spare” the child such pain. However, some providers have acknowledged that they are willing to perform late-term abortions even absent medical necessity, though it is impossible to estimate how many late-term abortions fall under that description.


----




Does the R.H.A. define “human person” to exclude unborn children?


This is complicated. In addition to the provisions explicitly allowing abortion discussed above, the R.H.A. also modifies sections of the New York state penal code to eliminate references to abortion. Prior to these changes, the definition of homicide included causing the death of a person (defined as “a human being who has been born and is alive”) or of an unborn child if the woman has been pregnant for more than 24 weeks.


After the removal of abortion from the penal code, the existing definition of person as “a human being who has been born and is alive” remains—but because there is no longer any reference whatsoever to unborn children as possible victims of homicide, the law now effectively excludes them from the definition of “human person.”

Pro-life advocates have also pointed out that this change in the penal code means that domestic violence resulting in the loss of a pregnancy can no longer be prosecuted as severely as it has been. (It can of course still be prosecuted in the same way as any other assault against someone who is not pregnant.)

--------

Does the R.H.A. remove protections for an infant born alive during an abortion?



Yes. The R.H.A. repeals section 4164 of New York’s public health law. That section had provided that abortions after the 12th week of pregnancy had to be performed in a hospital, and that for abortions after 20 weeks a separate physician had to be on hand to provide medical care for any infant born alive during the procedure—which is a possibility, even if an unlikely one.

The now-repealed section also specified that a child born alive during an abortion procedure immediately enjoyed the protection of New York’s laws, and it required medical records to be kept of the efforts to care for the infant. Without section 4164, the public health law is now silent on the status of an infant born alive during an abortion.


------


The R.H.A. sets out the law’s purpose to secure for every pregnant woman a “fundamental right to choose to carry the pregnancy to term, to give birth to a child, or to have an abortion.” The law also says that the state shall not “discriminate, deny or interfere” with these rights in any other regulations.


YEP - she can decide to snuff out the baby's life right up until delivery

Ridiculous


Mayor Pete and the others should be quite proud of what they defend to get votes.

« Last Edit: May 20, 2019, 01:57:53 PM by kiidcarter8 »
Logged

REDSTATEWARD

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5939
    • View Profile
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #14006 on: May 20, 2019, 02:07:55 PM »

Quote
Ian Samuel has pointed out the remarkable fact that, thanks to the way the Senate is structured, the senators who voted to confirm Brett Kavanaugh to the court received represent 38 million fewer people than the senators who voted against him.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/20/rich-white-men-rule-america-minority-rule

Yes, the court will occasionally manage to uphold democracy, but for the most part it has been packed with people who will interpret "democracy" as maintaining a structure of white male conservative hegemony.  As the quote points out, that structure is maintained by a Senate at demographic odds with the nation, whose majority represents a minority of the people.  God forbid we have the "tyranny of the majority" AKA POPULAR DEMOCRACY.
The Senate was not constructed demographically.
Logged

LarryBnDC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11424
    • View Profile
    • The Shinbone Star
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #14007 on: May 20, 2019, 02:13:13 PM »

https://www.americamagazine.org/rha2019?page=1


Pro-choice advocates point out that one reason for that is that the very small fraction of abortions that are conducted at 21 weeks or later (a little more than 1 percent) are almost always in response to some medical issue. Those issues could include acute risks to the life of the mother or conditions that make the child unable to survive to birth—but they also include situations where the child would face a terminal condition, significant suffering or a severe disability after birth, and where abortion is chosen to “spare” the child such pain. However, some providers have acknowledged that they are willing to perform late-term abortions even absent medical necessity, though it is impossible to estimate how many late-term abortions fall under that description.


----




Does the R.H.A. define “human person” to exclude unborn children?


This is complicated. In addition to the provisions explicitly allowing abortion discussed above, the R.H.A. also modifies sections of the New York state penal code to eliminate references to abortion. Prior to these changes, the definition of homicide included causing the death of a person (defined as “a human being who has been born and is alive”) or of an unborn child if the woman has been pregnant for more than 24 weeks.


After the removal of abortion from the penal code, the existing definition of person as “a human being who has been born and is alive” remains—but because there is no longer any reference whatsoever to unborn children as possible victims of homicide, the law now effectively excludes them from the definition of “human person.”

Pro-life advocates have also pointed out that this change in the penal code means that domestic violence resulting in the loss of a pregnancy can no longer be prosecuted as severely as it has been. (It can of course still be prosecuted in the same way as any other assault against someone who is not pregnant.)

--------

Does the R.H.A. remove protections for an infant born alive during an abortion?



Yes. The R.H.A. repeals section 4164 of New York’s public health law. That section had provided that abortions after the 12th week of pregnancy had to be performed in a hospital, and that for abortions after 20 weeks a separate physician had to be on hand to provide medical care for any infant born alive during the procedure—which is a possibility, even if an unlikely one.

The now-repealed section also specified that a child born alive during an abortion procedure immediately enjoyed the protection of New York’s laws, and it required medical records to be kept of the efforts to care for the infant. Without section 4164, the public health law is now silent on the status of an infant born alive during an abortion.


------


The R.H.A. sets out the law’s purpose to secure for every pregnant woman a “fundamental right to choose to carry the pregnancy to term, to give birth to a child, or to have an abortion.” The law also says that the state shall not “discriminate, deny or interfere” with these rights in any other regulations.


YEP - she can decide to snuff out the baby's life right up until delivery

Ridiculous


Mayor Pete and the others should be quite proud of what they defend to get votes.

George Zimmerman murdered a child who was minding his own business, in other words an innocent life.

Just shut the fuck up about your “pro-life” bullshit.

There are babies in cages on the Southern border for no good goddamn reason.

Just shut the fuck up about your “pro-life” bullshit.

The states pushing these anti “personal responsibility” laws for women in the name of preserving life also lead the nation in state sanctioned murder or capital punishment aka death penalty.

Just shut the fuck up about your “pro-life” bullshit.

Black boys being boys can be murdered by the police who are sworn to protect and serve but claim an 11 year old boy with a BB gun made them “fear for their own life.”

Just shut the fuck up about your “pro-life” bullshit.

Fuck you and every other “pro birth and fuck everything and anyone else” defender of white patriarchy.



« Last Edit: May 20, 2019, 02:23:20 PM by LarryBnDC »
Logged

LarryBnDC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11424
    • View Profile
    • The Shinbone Star
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #14008 on: May 20, 2019, 02:21:58 PM »

Quote
Ian Samuel has pointed out the remarkable fact that, thanks to the way the Senate is structured, the senators who voted to confirm Brett Kavanaugh to the court received represent 38 million fewer people than the senators who voted against him.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/20/rich-white-men-rule-america-minority-rule

Yes, the court will occasionally manage to uphold democracy, but for the most part it has been packed with people who will interpret "democracy" as maintaining a structure of white male conservative hegemony.  As the quote points out, that structure is maintained by a Senate at demographic odds with the nation, whose majority represents a minority of the people.  God forbid we have the "tyranny of the majority" AKA POPULAR DEMOCRACY.
The Senate was not constructed demographically.

So What?

It wasn’t constructed as an elected office, either. First hundred years or so the Senate was selected by the state legislatures. People wanted to directly elect their Senators and it took an amendment to change the process but that provision also included a “race rider” saying the Feds couldn’t intervene in racist discrimination.

So if there was a provision in the amendment allowing states to bar blacks from voting isn't that a demographic consideration and if the construction of the Senate was previously redesigned why not fix it now and make it more representative of the nation?
Logged

kiidcarter8

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12267
    • View Profile
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #14009 on: May 20, 2019, 02:32:58 PM »

https://www.americamagazine.org/rha2019?page=1


Pro-choice advocates point out that one reason for that is that the very small fraction of abortions that are conducted at 21 weeks or later (a little more than 1 percent) are almost always in response to some medical issue. Those issues could include acute risks to the life of the mother or conditions that make the child unable to survive to birth—but they also include situations where the child would face a terminal condition, significant suffering or a severe disability after birth, and where abortion is chosen to “spare” the child such pain. However, some providers have acknowledged that they are willing to perform late-term abortions even absent medical necessity, though it is impossible to estimate how many late-term abortions fall under that description.


----




Does the R.H.A. define “human person” to exclude unborn children?


This is complicated. In addition to the provisions explicitly allowing abortion discussed above, the R.H.A. also modifies sections of the New York state penal code to eliminate references to abortion. Prior to these changes, the definition of homicide included causing the death of a person (defined as “a human being who has been born and is alive”) or of an unborn child if the woman has been pregnant for more than 24 weeks.


After the removal of abortion from the penal code, the existing definition of person as “a human being who has been born and is alive” remains—but because there is no longer any reference whatsoever to unborn children as possible victims of homicide, the law now effectively excludes them from the definition of “human person.”

Pro-life advocates have also pointed out that this change in the penal code means that domestic violence resulting in the loss of a pregnancy can no longer be prosecuted as severely as it has been. (It can of course still be prosecuted in the same way as any other assault against someone who is not pregnant.)

--------

Does the R.H.A. remove protections for an infant born alive during an abortion?



Yes. The R.H.A. repeals section 4164 of New York’s public health law. That section had provided that abortions after the 12th week of pregnancy had to be performed in a hospital, and that for abortions after 20 weeks a separate physician had to be on hand to provide medical care for any infant born alive during the procedure—which is a possibility, even if an unlikely one.

The now-repealed section also specified that a child born alive during an abortion procedure immediately enjoyed the protection of New York’s laws, and it required medical records to be kept of the efforts to care for the infant. Without section 4164, the public health law is now silent on the status of an infant born alive during an abortion.


------


The R.H.A. sets out the law’s purpose to secure for every pregnant woman a “fundamental right to choose to carry the pregnancy to term, to give birth to a child, or to have an abortion.” The law also says that the state shall not “discriminate, deny or interfere” with these rights in any other regulations.


YEP - she can decide to snuff out the baby's life right up until delivery

Ridiculous


Mayor Pete and the others should be quite proud of what they defend to get votes.

George Zimmerman murdered a child who was minding his own business, in other words an innocent life.

Just shut the fuck up about your “pro-life” bullshit.

There are babies in cages on the Southern border for no good goddamn reason.

Just shut the fuck up about your “pro-life” bullshit.

The states pushing these anti “personal responsibility” laws for women in the name of preserving life also lead the nation in state sanctioned murder or capital punishment aka death penalty.

Just shut the fuck up about your “pro-life” bullshit.

Black boys being boys can be murdered by the police who are sworn to protect and serve but claim an 11 year old boy with a BB gun made them “fear for their own life.”

Just shut the fuck up about your “pro-life” bullshit.

Fuck you and every other “pro birth and fuck everything and anyone else” defender of white patriarchy.

Thanks for bringing up Trayvon.  It was your campaign to destroy Zimmerman that got your cousin killed.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 932 933 [934] 935 936 ... 4288