I’m only far right in California. In Utah I’m a dangerous moderate who supported Gerry Ford over Reagan, G.H.W. Bush over Reagan, and Bob Dole in 1996. Then Romney in 08 and 12, and Rubio in 2016. True conservatives will never forgive me for any of those.Originally Posted by Diehard Ute
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
Here's another montage of what streamed out at us all for over two years:
https://cdn.mrctv.org/videos/25728/25728-480p.mp4
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
This strikes me as a thoughtful analysis, by Paul Mirengoff, a well-known D.C. attorney at the Akin Gump firm before he retired 22-3 years ago:
WHY DID MUELLER PUNT ON OBSTRUCTION?
Andy McCarthy criticizes Robert Mueller’s for “abdicating” on the issue of obstruction of justice — that is, leaving it to Attorney General Barr to decide whether President Trump committed that criminal offense. I made the same point here.
McCarthy highlights the fact that Mueller knew Barr would find no obstruction of justice by Trump. Mueller knew this from Barr’s commentary on the issue as a private citizen.
Barr argued that the obstruction theory Mueller’s staff appeared to be pursuing is constitutionally infirm. He contended that an indictment of a president for obstruction could properly be based only on plainly corrupt acts like tampering with evidence and witnesses, not on constitutionally ordained exercises of presidential prerogative like firing an FBI director.
Because there was no evidence of such plainly corrupt action, Mueller must have assumed Barr would conclude Trump did not obstruct justice.
Barr did so conclude. However, he made it clear he was not basing this conclusion on constitutional consideration, but rather on the lack of sufficient evidence establishing the elements of obstruction, especially the element of intent.
Why did Mueller punt? In theory, there are at least four possibilities. First, he didn’t think it was his job to state a firm conclusion. Second, he concluded that there is no sound basis for recommending the prosecution of Trump, but didn’t want to say so. Third, he concluded that there is a sound basis for recommending the prosecution of Trump, but didn’t want to say so. Fourth, he couldn’t make up his mind.
Without knowing much about what’s in the report, weighing the plausibility of these theories requires a good deal of speculation. My speculation is below. For those who want the short version, I speculate that Mueller concluded there is no sound basis for prosecuting Trump, but didn’t want to say so, probably at least in part to satisfy his staff.
The first and fourth possibilities seem quite implausible. Nothing I know of about Mueller suggests that he’s too indecisive to make big calls even in cases he considers close (theory #4).
Nor could Mueller rationally have concluded that it wasn’t his job to make a recommendation (theory #1). As I pointed out here, the very point of having a special counsel is the view that judgments as to whether the president committed a crime should be made by someone independent of the president, rather than by a presidential appointee.
As to the third theory, it doesn’t seem likely that Mueller concluded there was a sound basis for prosecuting Trump, but didn’t want to say so. For one thing, if that’s what happened, word of it would likely come out, and Mueller would be disgraced in the eyes of the media and the left. For another, Mueller knew that leaving the decision to Barr would result in him finding no obstruction, meaning that the outcome Mueller viewed (in the theory #3 scenario) as incorrect would prevail.
Thus, I think the most likely explanation for Mueller’s punt is that he believed Trump didn’t commit the offense of obstruction, or that the evidence that Trump did wasn’t strong enough, but didn’t want to say so.
There are several reasons why Mueller might not want to give Trump a complete exoneration. These reasons are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they may be overlapping.
First, Mueller might believe that Trump, though not provably guilty of a crime, committed serious misconduct, and therefore didn’t deserve a full bill of good health. In this scenario, we can compare Mueller’s position to that of James Comey in the Clinton email investigation.
Comey apparently thought that Clinton engaged in serious misconduct. Thus, rather than give her a complete pass, he broke with Justice Department practice and criticized her at some length before concluding she did not commit a crime. Mueller similarly might not have wanted to give Trump a full pass for conduct that, in his view, approached (but did not reach) illegality.
Second, Mueller might simply deplore Trump too much to give him a full pass. He might have been strongly predisposed against Trump. Moreover, the president repeatedly called Mueller’s investigation a “witch hunt,” attacked Mueller’s team members as partisans, and refused to be deposed. I’m sure this did not sit well with the special counsel.
In my view, though, it is unfair to assume that Mueller acted out of personal animus towards Trump. His reputation for integrity cuts against that assumption.
But what about Mueller’s staff of partisans? Given the highly partisan backgrounds of some staff members, I think it’s fair to assume that they didn’t invest more than a year-and-a-half of their life to issue a report that fully exonerated Trump.
Mueller must have been under considerable internal pressure not to issue such a report. This may have caused him to stop short of issuing such a report.
If so, Mueller not only failed to do his job, he failed to do it for a very bad reason. At the same time, given what I suspect to be the high degree of partisanship within Mueller’s team, perhaps we should consider ourselves lucky that Mueller at least exonerated Trump of collusion — the main issue he was tasked with considering and the main issue in the public’s mind.
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
This satire is priceless.
https://babylonbee.com/news/touching...aign=mattwalsh
TrumpYellsAtMcCainGrave.png
Very interesting things underway in Venezuela. The US wants Maduro out, declaring Juan Guaido the recognized leader, and things looked bleak for Maduro, as protests and crushing economic sanctions from the US made Maduro's reign on power tenuous.
Russia and China had other things in mind, though as Russia is steadily reinforcing the Venezuelan military with new military hardware, Russian troops, training and bilateral military exercises. China sent 65 tons of medical supplies & arranged for Venezuelan oil to be refined in India, and one of Russia's energy giants has also stepped up to help stabilize Venezuela's state run oil company.
John Bolton has revived the Monroe Doctrine as justification for US excluding these interloping powers from the New World.
Kind of intriguing. Will the US military intervene? Will Trump see things a different way after meeting with Putin?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/as-maduro-confronts-a-crisis-russias-footprint-in-venezuela-grows/2019/03/29/fcf93cec-50b3-11e9-bdb7-44f948cc0605_story.html?
I really think Brennan was wrong to do what he did.
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
I’m sure that’s true in many cases, but I think it would be dangerous to take adverse action of any kind based on what must be considered suspicion, not knowledge.
Last edited by LA Ute; 03-30-2019 at 10:13 AM.
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
There is no doubt — none — that Guaidó is the constitutional leader of Venezuela now. It will be interesting to see what everyone does about that. It’s sad to see Russia acting like Soviets Lite.
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
Countries seeking financial support historically had two choices, the US and Russia. They now have 3. The US sanctions gave Venezuela no other option but to seek assistance elsewhere.
Bolton reviving the Monroe Doctrine is curious. It must be in a strictly military sense.
Costa Rica renounced diplomatic relations with Taiwan, and in response China built them a really nice soccer stadium (among other things). My son came back from S. America recently, connected in Panama, and flew Air China from Panama to Houston. Those are two small examples I'm familiar with personally, and I've read about extensive Chinese economic activity throughout Latin America, including stimulating the soy bean market in Brazil, as the Chinese quickly moved to diversify their exposure to single-sourcing soybeans from the US, from the tariff wars.
Putin clearly wants to exercise neo-Soviet military power, but China's soft power approach is extensive and will probably pay dividends over a long period of time.
This would have previously been just a good article for News of the Weird: The Mayor of Grantsville is in some hot water for allegedly tying up women employees with plastic ties, which he claims is just an extension of his exuberent personality, no harm intended. Several women didn't appreciate the antics and quit their jobs.
https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics...e-mayor-brent/
I have a soft spot for Grantsville. It's the gateway to some really good hiking in the Stansbury Mountains, it's the home of the Donner-Reed Party museum of stuff they found on the Salt Flats, and it had (still has?) a scuba training place that has real sharks in salt water.
Ordinarily, I would think this wayward Mayor would resign and that would be the end of it. In the current national/political climate, I really hope this doesn't turn ugly, with the women getting some #MeToo backlash, death threats from around the country, etc. We haven't seen that kind of nasty vigilantism in Utah. Hopefully we won't.
Where I disagree with you is your use of the term “Venezuela“ as if Maduro, the one who went to the Russians, is actually the country’s legitimate president. He’s not. Guiadó is. Maduro is trying to become a dictator. I think Obama would have imposed sanctions on him.
Last edited by LA Ute; 03-30-2019 at 01:14 PM.
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
I think that's right, any US president would be trying to force Maduro out:
- some perhaps because of the humanitarian crisis and Maduro's horrible reign as leader
- others only because Maduro is aligned militarily with Cuba, Russia, etc.
In a way, the situation there now is like Putin paraphrasing FDR's statement about Somoza in Nicaragua (back in the day) about Maduro: "He may be a son of bitch, but he's *our* son of a bitch".
The wildcard in all this is whether Putin can persuade Trump to undercut John Bolton, and let the Russians & Chinese "stabilize" the situation with Maduro left in power.
China is doing the same thing in Kenya and other African countries. In Kenya, the Chinese are "loaning" money, equipment and manpower for improving roads and infrastructure throughout the country.
I'm not sure it needed to be revived. John Kerry said in 2013 (I think) that "the era of the Monroe Doctrine is over," but I don't think one U.S. Secretary of State can put an end to 200 years of diplomatic history.
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
I was talking with a coworker from mainland. They mentioned there are *lots* of Chinese workers in Africa, and increasingly, Latin America. "It is just like America did before."
Building infrastructure is important, unquestionably. But it's the Next-Gen wireless networking technology that's even more crucial. Huawei is buying marketshare, even in Europe. In Pence's speech in the Security Forum in Europe recently - where he got the silent treatment when mentioning greetings from President Trump - he specifically said "it will be hard to defend the West if they get their technology from the East".
Several European nations already use Huawei wireless technology and are satisfied. It's a particularly bad time to have rocky relations with our historic allies.
NBC Poll - "Most Americans don't think Trump is in the clear on Russia, yet" https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/mee...e-mode-n989061
It's one poll, the split basically reflects the divide on Trump in general, maybe this reflects the deep cynicism people have in general.
But one part of the poll sticks out - 31% of those polled say they're not sure if Trump has been cleared, yet: 45% of this group are independents, 27% are Democrats, but curiously, 25% are Republicans.
This last group is a fascinating demographic to consider. Do they think it's because Adam Schiff & Jerry Nadler are going to keep the issue going? Are they not entirely comfortable with Trump's odd deference to Putin, or overt attempts to curry loyalty, or aren't sure Mueller got to the bottom of things because Trump struggles to tell the truth about just about every topic?
I admit I thought Mueller would find fairly strong evidence of collusion/conspiracy, based on a wide variety of evidence, and Trump's tendency to act like a mob boss. But there was some doubt, notably from Cohen, who said he didn't see direct evidence of collusion, but thought there could be, or Brennan specifically saying while he was in office he didn't see direct evidence in the Intel, but saw very concerning "parallelism" in events that suggested there could be some.
Hopefully Trump will now support efforts to improve election security and better protect the nation from the cyber threat from the outside. I think Trump might keep stoking doubts about his innocence vis-ŕ-vis Russia alive by continuing the weird "free speech" attacks on Twitter and Facebook, helping the Breitbart/InfoWars/Jerry Corsi conspiracy sector, and Trump over-selling the summary of the Mueller report to include a complete exoneration on obstruction of justice.
Here’s another poll that I am sure the Democrats are going to pay attention to, if they are smart:
It’s not surprising at all that many people still doubt Trump. He doesn’t act like he cares whether people believe him or not. For example, all of those puzzling friendly statements about Putin. Did they indicate he has some affinity for the guy? Or were they simply his ham-handed efforts to exercise diplomacy? I’m not sure will ever know.
I do think that most fair-minded people listen to political hitmen like John Brennan saying that the president is a Russian asset and has committed treason, rolled their eyes at least a bit and took the whole thing with a healthy dose of skepticism. We could’ve use more skepticism about all that during the last two years.
Last edited by LA Ute; 03-31-2019 at 01:21 PM.
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
So what do people think about Trump planning to nominate two people with strong political views to the Federal Reserve, one of who's mail claim is former CEO of Godfather Pizza (no need to discuss numerous allegations of sexual misconduct). My very conservative father would have been aghast at the prospect.
I saw that he was going to nominate Herman Cain. I'm not a fan. Wasn't it the Domino's guy who had the sexual misconduct issues?
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
Maybe both did, but the article I read referred to them.
Aside from Herman Cain as a new catalyst for the #MeToo movement, his ideas on economics are extremely malformed. Anyone remember his "3 nines" plan for the economy? Stephen Moore said "I have a lot of homework to do" to come up to speed on issues the Fed deliberates on. These two would be Trump loyalists first & foremost, having sage economic minds isn't really part of the calculus.
It's a pretty transparent move to support Trump's pressure to lower rates and breathe more life into a record long expansion, basically a 2nd shot of starter fluid to follow the 2017 tax cuts, whose stimulative effect has petered out, with the economy settling back toward a more long term sustainable 2% growth rate... but now with sustained $1.x Trillion deficits.
Bob Kerrey: How did Department of Justice get the Trump-Russia investigation so wrong?
https://www.omaha.com/opinion/midlan...dc5375bf4.htmlDelusions fascinate me in part because I have so many of my own. Most often delusions are harmless. Sometimes they are not.
At the moment my fellow Democrats are suffering from two that are harmful. The first is that Americans long for a president who will ask us to pay more for the pleasure of increasing the role of the federal government in our lives. That this is a delusion can be seen in the promises made by six successful Democratic candidates in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan: three governors and three senators. Not one of them supported the Green New Deal, a tax on wealth or “Medicare for all.”
The second Democratic delusion is that Americans were robbed of the truth when Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller and Attorney General William Barr concluded that President Trump did not collude with Russia in 2016. All evidence indicates that the full report will not change the conclusion that Donald J. Trump did not collude with Vladimir Putin to secure his victory in 2016.
Rather than investigating the president further, Congress needs to investigate how the Department of Justice got this one so wrong. If the president of the United States is vulnerable to prosecutorial abuse, then God help all the rest of us. Members of Congress cannot do this themselves. We do not trust them enough with such a vital mission.
Congress should create a nonpartisan commission to find out what went wrong and to tell us what needs to be done to make certain it never happens again.
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
Kirstjen Nielson out of DHS.
Apparently she missed her "kids in cages" quota last quarter.
Lefty pundit makes an admission:
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
Without anything to support it, I suspect that a majority of people expected something more from the tax cuts. The big question will not be whether the 99% got a reduction, but whether Trump and Congressional Republicans oversold it, and if the 99% think the big winners are the 1%.Lefty pundit makes an admission:
To be fair, I think most people don't look at the +/- and only look as to whether or not they got a refund or had to pay less in April.Lefty pundit makes an admission:
They may have received a tax cut, but the reduced witholding probably changed their EOY tax bill. I know a lot of people got burned by this.
Lefty pundit makes an admission:
The final question is: did you pay less tax b/c of the cut? To make the tax cut more popular immediately, the administration changed withholding so that people would get a bigger bounce in their paychecks each pay period. They sold that as part of the cut, when it wasn't. I suspect that for most people, the tax cut is more or less a wash. We personally saw no benefit. I suspect you did not either esp. in California. So there was a huge tax cut that skyrocketed the deficit and benefited corporations and the very wealthy. Was it worth it? Personally I don't think so. It could have been structured to give greater relief to the middle class, who need it more.
The tax bill didn't help me at all. I think removing the state and local tax deduction was a punitive measure, taken against high-tax blue states. I also think the Democrats have lied brazenly and repeatedly about the tax bill, just as Matthew Iglesias admitted. Just for fun I Googled "2017 tax bill nonpartisan analysis," and found this as the first result, from the Tax Policy Center (a creature of The Urban Institute and Brookings, not reassuringly nonpartisan in my mind):
https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/feat...s-and-jobs-act
It does look like most people got a tax cut. So, FWIW.
Maybe I am becoming a grumpy old guy but these days I am viewing both parties with a jaundiced eye. Both of them spin and lie disingenuously and incessantly (my bias is that the Dems/left are more shameless at that), and we have a boor in the White House.
grumpy-old-man-2.jpg
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
I would really love to know what is behind Trump's issues with immigration. Is it purely political? Did/does he simply view immigration as a means of securing the election/re-election by scapegoating Muslims and Mexicans. Is it racism? His rhetoric has the sound of racism. I just don't get it. He rails against immigrants and at the same time doubles the number of H1-B visas from 30,000 to about 60,000.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote