USA Politics (redux)

[Todd]

Like everyone else, I'll just assume your assertion has no support.

Right on.

His actions are by his own definition criminal theft.

I see.

[71 dB]

Diana Feinstein's short term memory is deteorating. Diana Feinstein's short term memory is deteorating.

[Todd]

In leaked recording, Biden says GOP used 'defund the police' to 'beat the living hell' out of Democrats

Defund the police.  Progressives should redouble their efforts for 2022.

[Karl Henning]

J. Rubin: "The Republican Party, ironically the party that used to defend objective reality and scorn victim-mongering, now thrives as an institution in which people, as Trump said at a recent rally, think "we're all victims" and accept Trump's alternative reality. Maybe one day an American Lech Walesa will arrive in the Trump heartland and revive the spirit of democracy. Until then, the GOP remains the "2 + 2 = 5" party."

[flyingdutchman]

Trump, the Neo-fascist: https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-just-broke-last-level-085740834.html

[MusicTurner]

Trump, the Neo-fascist: https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-just-broke-last-level-085740834.html

Quote from the article:
" If a Trump came along in Denmark, say, would Denmark elect him? I doubt it. Ditto most European countries."

  It's been talked about here, but the answer is an absolute "No!", at least within a foreseeable horizon, say of 10 years. But the same applies to Biden.
Besides their politics, their rhetorical style wouldn't gain success (Trump would be considered extremist; Biden just without much substance; of course Biden would qualify better, if we'd somehow experienced Trump at first). There's been - and still are - fringe politicians and parties, but generally there's a moderating (or destroying) effect if they go into parliament, where government is only possible via compromises. Often with 5 different parties or more participating, and one single party never getting more than 30-35 % of the total votes, in the last four decades, and many smaller parties getting 3 - 10 % of them, including representation in parliament. This also functions as a system, that lets sudden opinions in society get their steam out, via new parties.

Let me add, that we've a somewhat #45-comparable figure, Glistrup, in the 70s. He didn't get much political influence. His eccentricities and crimes became too much, and when his party split up, the moderate fraction (which expelled him) gained more importance; it's now receding however, with new parties popping up.

[T. D.]

This is an interesting op-ed if not paywalled:

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-12-11/texas-election-suit-shows-trump-s-grip-on-republican-party

With each passing day, President Donald Trump's losses continue to mount in court challenges to the election results — as of this writing, by one count, the campaign is 1-53. So it's tempting to dismiss and mock the ongoing "clown show." That would be a major error.

Not only do the president's words and actions increase the potential for violence, but they are already doing actual harm to American democracy. And since Trump is a 74-year-old man who is not going to change, it's up to elected Republicans to put a stop to this madness, as at least one Republican (Senator Mitt Romney) has had the courage to call it.

Instead, they are encouraging it. A wildcat lawsuit filed by the Texas attorney general against the voting procedures in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin (all of them, not coincidentally, won by Joe Biden) was joined by 23 other Republican states and 106 members of the House. That the case is absurd and hypocritical in no way makes it less dangerous. The Republican attorneys general of these states are doing this to placate one man — and the disturbing hold he has on the party's base.


The Founders warned about this moment. In Federalist Papers No. 10, James Madison wrote of the threat of "faction," which he defines as "a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community."

Madison believed that a constitutional republic would serve as a bulwark against faction: "The influence of factious leaders may kindle a flame within their particular States, but will be unable to spread a general conflagration through the other States."

Hold my ale, says Trump's faction.

[Karl Henning]

This is an interesting op-ed if not paywalled:

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-12-11/texas-election-suit-shows-trump-s-grip-on-republican-party

With each passing day, President Donald Trump's losses continue to mount in court challenges to the election results — as of this writing, by one count, the campaign is 1-53. So it's tempting to dismiss and mock the ongoing "clown show." That would be a major error.

Not only do the president's words and actions increase the potential for violence, but they are already doing actual harm to American democracy. And since Trump is a 74-year-old man who is not going to change, it's up to elected Republicans to put a stop to this madness, as at least one Republican (Senator Mitt Romney) has had the courage to call it.

Instead, they are encouraging it. A wildcat lawsuit filed by the Texas attorney general against the voting procedures in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin (all of them, not coincidentally, won by Joe Biden) was joined by 23 other Republican states and 106 members of the House. That the case is absurd and hypocritical in no way makes it less dangerous. The Republican attorneys general of these states are doing this to placate one man — and the disturbing hold he has on the party's base.


The Founders warned about this moment. In Federalist Papers No. 10, James Madison wrote of the threat of "faction," which he defines as "a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community."

Madison believed that a constitutional republic would serve as a bulwark against faction: "The influence of factious leaders may kindle a flame within their particular States, but will be unable to spread a general conflagration through the other States."

Hold my ale, says Trump's faction.

Not in his worst nightmares did Jas Madison see 49% of the US electorate lapping up laughable disinformation, let alone contemptible putzes who watch the shit-show for "amusement."

[T. D.]

From the "A fool and his money..." department:

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/11/trump-official-mick-mulvaneys-hedge-fund-seeking-at-least-1-million-from-investors.html

[Karl Henning]

From the "A fool and his money..." department:

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/11/trump-official-mick-mulvaneys-hedge-fund-seeking-at-least-1-million-from-investors.html

His competency as a scammer has never been in question.

[T. D.]

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/11/supreme-court-rejects-texas-lawsuit-challenging-bidens-election-wins-in-4-key-states.html

[drogulus]

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/11/supreme-court-rejects-texas-lawsuit-challenging-bidens-election-wins-in-4-key-states.html

     Someone should buy Bart a beer or 12.

[Karl Henning]

Guess it won't be necessary for Ted Cruz to "argue" before the SCOTUS, after all.

[T. D.]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-11/trump-campaign-to-run-ads-promoting-effort-to-overturn-election

President Donald Trump's campaign plans to buy ads on unspecified cable television networks to promote his effort to overturn the election he lost, highlighting claims that have been refuted by elections officials and dismissed by judges across the country.

One commercial claims that mail-in ballots were "a recipe for fraud" and urges viewers to "contact your legislators today." Trump has sought to persuade Republican state lawmakers in several battleground states to override voters and award him their states' Electoral College votes.

The campaign did not say in a release how much it would spend on the ads or which networks would run them. Trump and the Republican Party have raised about $208 million since the election. The campaign didn't immediately respond to a request for comment on Friday evening.

[JBS]

Guess it won't be necessary for Ted Cruz to "argue" before the SCOTUS, after all.

His offer was actually on the case SCOTUS refused to hear earlier in the week.

[Todd]

From the "A fool and his money..." department:

Incorrect.  The article indicates that the fund will focus on the financial sector, and pretty much no one on earth has a better understanding of the changes to oversight and enforcement rules at the CFPB than the estimable Mr Mulvaney.  Dems will try to reinvigorate the agency, and it is doubtful that one should be invested in the fund for a decade, but the next 6, 12, or 18 months could prove to be quite lucrative.  The thing is, those able to invest will know precisely what they are getting into.  If I had sufficient investment capital and was accredited, I'd put money in for the short term.  (I know, I know, all other posters on GMG are accredited investors.)

[JBS]

Lawsplainer

The Texas case SCOTUS refused to hear might cause a bit of confusion.

States suing each other--original jurisdiction--is a case only SCOTUS can hear, and the Court has limited it as much as possible to cases which can't be decided any other way (such as a state official being sued). The Court has a rule in place that the Court must give permission (leave of the Court) to start a case in original jurisdiction. Justices Alito and Thomas have stated in prior cases they believe the Court has to accept such cases no matter what the merits are.

This afternoon's SCOTUS order said leave of the Court was not granted to file because there was no issue on which the Court could rule. Alito and Thomas inserted a sentence to say they would have followed their previous opinion by accepting the case and then dismissing it.  No Justice, including Alito, Thomas, and the three Justices appointed by Trump, publicly dissented from the result itself (throwing the case out on its merits), so Trump apparently had all 9 Justices vote against him, including the three he appointed.

[Karl Henning]

His offer was actually on the case SCOTUS refused to hear earlier in the week.

Thanks!

[Herman]

maybe Cruz should read some 'Green Eggs and Spam' again...

[drogulus]

     An accredited investor is assumed to be swift enough to take risks ordinary investors should not take. They are often rich enough to be dumb with their money and pay more for the privilege of lower returns and high fees. In truth if you are that sophisticated you don't do this.

The thing is, those able to invest will know precisely what they are getting into.

     Mulvaney knows. It's not personal, it's business.