Published response to "reconfiguration of LDS politics"

[Scott Lloyd]

17 hours ago, Gray said:

And now Trump just fired the person leading the investigation into his collusion with Russia. But there's probably nothing to see here. 

It was past time that Comey be terminated. His behavior was erratic, too frequently inserting himself into political affairs where he had no business being. Some are saying Trump should have done this long ago, just after the inauguration. As it is he followed the recommendation of the attorney general and assistant attorney general, who have supervisory authority over the FBI director.

Did you notice that in his letter to Comey, Trump expressed appreciation to Comey for telling him "on three separate occasions" that he (Trump) was not under investigation? Do you still insist that this is a criminal investigation of Trump and not a counter-intelligence investigation?

And that investigation will go on. The presence of Comey is not essential to its continuation.

 

Edited May 10, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[Gray]

7 hours ago, The Nehor said:

It is like he is trying to reenact Watergate now. I like John Oliver's description of the whole thing when he called it "Stupid Watergate":

"And that is why this story is Stupid Watergate: It could very well take down the government, but nobody involved understands why or how to cover it up or what the government ****ing is or possibly how to breathe without getting regular reminders.”

It's like the Nixon presidency on fast forward. Except replace Nixon with a crazy incompetent narcissist  with early signs of dementia. 

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/09/politics/grand-jury-fbi-russia/index.html

Grand jury subpoenas issued in FBI's Russia investigation

[Gray]

4 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

It was past time that Coney be terminated. His behavior was erratic, too frequently inserting himself into political affairs where he had no business being. Some are saying Trump should have done this long ago, just after the inauguration. As it is he followed the recommendation of the attorney general and assistant attorney general, who have supervisory authority over the FBI director.

Did you notice that in his letter to Coney, Trump expressed appreciation to Coney for telling him that he (Trump) was not under investigation? Do you still insist that this is a criminal investigation of Trump and not a counter-intelligence investigation?

And that investigation will go on. The presence of Coney is not essential to its continuation.

 

Trump is under investigation, Comey basically confirmed that before he was fired. The fact that Trump brought that up in the letter shows how unhinged he is. Trump had been looking for an excuse to fire Comey for weeks.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/332651-sessions-was-told-to-find-reasons-to-fire-comey-reports

Grand jury subpoenas have been issued

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/09/politics/grand-jury-fbi-russia/index.html

 

Edited May 10, 2017 by Gray

[Scott Lloyd]

13 hours ago, The Nehor said:

It is like he is trying to reenact Watergate now. I like John Oliver's description of the whole thing when he called it "Stupid Watergate":

"And that is why this story is Stupid Watergate: It could very well take down the government, but nobody involved understands why or how to cover it up or what the government ****ing is or possibly how to breathe without getting regular reminders.”

On separate network news programs last night (Fox and PBS), two figures who were around during Watergate were interviewed: journalist Brit Hume, who covered the Watergate affair, and John Dean, counsel to Nixon who went to prison for his role in the coverup and who wrote a book about his experiences, an exposé called Blind Ambition (Martin Sheen played him in a movie based on the book). Both said the events of yesterday are nothing like Watergate.

Who is John Oliver?

Edited to add: Never mind. I see from a Google search that John Oliver is a comedian on HBO. Is that where you get all your information about current events?

Edited further to add: I found a transcript of the PBS interview with John Dean. The anchor is Judy Woodruff. Here's a selection from it pertaining to the comparison to Watergate and the "Saturday Night Massacre":
 

Quote

 

JUDY WOODRUFF: Exactly.

Now, John Dean — we’re on the phone with John Dean, who, of course, was the White House counsel to Richard Nixon.

There are going to be a number of comparisons drawn out of this, one of them, of course, the Saturday night — so-called “Saturday Night Massacre,” when President Nixon fired his attorney general and others because they wouldn’t carry out his wishes in the time of Watergate.

Any connection with that, or is this a completely different set of circumstances?

JOHN DEAN: I think this is different, Judy. I think it doesn’t have any of that kind of feel.

Archibald Cox was defying the president and taking his own course of action and taking a — making a decision that was very much placing Nixon in jeopardy. So, I don’t think we have any similarities here.

 

Here's the link: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/comey-firing-appears-center-handling-clinton-email-case/

Edited May 10, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

40 minutes ago, Gray said:

Trump is under investigation, Comey basically confirmed that before he was fired. The fact that Trump brought that up in the letter shows how unhinged he is. Trump had been looking for an excuse to fire Comey for weeks.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/332651-sessions-was-told-to-find-reasons-to-fire-comey-reports

Grand jury subpoenas have been issued

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/09/politics/grand-jury-fbi-russia/index.html

 

From your link:

Quote

The firing occurred weeks after Comey confirmed that the FBI is investigating whether Trump associates colluded with Russia in its efforts to meddle in the 2016 election. 

This does not say "Trump is under investigation."

It is consistent with what I have pointed out: That this is not a criminal investigation with an accused suspect. It is a counter-intelligence investigation.

Did you ever bother to read my link to the National Review piece? Evidently not, because you haven't addressed the content. ll you did was make an ad hominem jab about my "right wing" source. It's going to be hard to have a coherent discussion with you until you educate yourself on the difference between a criminal investigation and a counter-intelligence investigation.

 

Edited May 10, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[thesometimesaint]

46 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

It was past time that Coney be terminated. His behavior was erratic, too frequently inserting himself into political affairs where he had no business being. Some are saying Trump should have done this long ago, just after the inauguration. As it is he followed the recommendation of the attorney general and assistant attorney general, who have supervisory authority over the FBI director.

Did you notice that in his letter to Coney, Trump expressed appreciation to Coney for telling him that he (Trump) was not under investigation? Do you still insist that this is a criminal investigation of Trump and not a counter-intelligence investigation?

And that investigation will go on. The presence of Coney is not essential to its continuation.

 

Some small problems. The Attorney General had removed himself for the investigation of Clinton and the Trump/Russian investigations. The IG for the DOJ is still in the investigation of Comey's errors in judgment concerning the Clinton E-Mails and hasn't yet finished its report. Trump lied. There has been an ongoing investigation of his ties to Russia since last July, with no conclusion in sight. Trump and Sessions were just looking for any excuse to fire both Comey and Sally Yates.for their testimony about the FBI Counter-Intelligence probe of Trump and his associates.With the FBI effectively out of the picture now if Paul Ryan and/or Mitch McConnell don't want an investigation there won't be one. Paul Ryan is bad at his job being a check and balance to the President,  and McConnell's wife works for Trump.

It is not a crime for a Russian to be a Russian spy, We just kick them out of our country. It is a crime for an American to become one. You can go to jail for a long time if proven.

Edited May 10, 2017 by thesometimesaint

[Gray]

25 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

From your link:

This does not say "Trump is under investigation."

It is consistent with what I have pointed out: That this is not a criminal investigation with an accused suspect. It is a counter-intelligence investigation.

Did you ever bother to read my link to the National Review piece? Evidently not, because you haven't addressed the content. ll you did was make an ad hominem jab about my "right wing" source. It's going to be hard to have a coherent discussion with you until you educate yourself on the difference between a criminal investigation and a counter-intelligence investigation.

 

Much of the details are classified Scott. But it's clear where this is headed. 

[Gray]

19 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

There's two questions. Whether there is a group such as I described and whether it's fair to call them the alt-left. The former seems undeniable so I take it you aren't disputing that there are organized groups like antifa engaged in these actions. So I assume your problem is with the label "alt left." Is that right?

I didn't know that about Richard Spencer. That's interesting.

You can call them whatever you like I guess, but the "alt-left" doesn't really exist. There are plenty of extremist left wing groups, but I don't know that there is a clear analog to the alt right. 

[Gray]

21 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Being "critical of non-whilte groups" does not make one a white supremacist. Surely you must recognize this.

To give an example, I can find the "Black LIves Matter" movement contemptible (in fact, I do), but that doesn't make me a white supremacist. My basis for holding them in contempt is not race, but their ideology and behavior.

The sheriff of Milwaukee County in Wisconsin, Don Clark, is black, and he is even more contemptuous of them than I am. Does that make him a "white supremacist"?

Determining credibility is a legitimate part of a debate, whether it be on a message board or not. It has nothing to do with being a teenager.

In courtroom trials, jurors are instructed to weigh the credibility of witnesses. It is very much adult behavior.

Making too frequent accusations such as "white supremacy" that lack substance does impact one's credibility. I am entitled to point that out.

Coulter makes sly references to white supremacist manifestos and thinks that immigration of non-white people amounts to "white genocide." 

[clarkgoble]

14 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

I cannot find a single instance of any pundit on the right condemning the GamerGate threats.

I don't think most people, including pundits, know much about GamerGate. The Federalist and a few other podcasts mentioned it and condemned it. But honestly I just never heard much about it period. I'll be the first to admit I don't know much about it and honestly don't care much. What little I do know makes me think I'd not want to be involved with anyone on either side of it.

I did see Ben Shapiro tying the alt-right to gamergate.

Quote

Many of the most public members of the alt-right are leftovers from Gamergate, the scandal that rocked the gaming community in which leftist reviewers saw fit to stifle and savage any video game (or science fiction and fantasy book) that didn’t hew to radical leftist tropes. As a way of trolling such leftists, many anti-SJW bloggers began using deliberately offensive language, then celebrating themselves for violating taboo. This has carried over to support for Donald Trump – many of these same people think that Trump’s unfortunate habit of saying terrible things is just high politics’ version of their own trolling, that he’s standing up to the regime of political correctness. He isn’t. He’s just a jerk. And so are they, for following along. The conflation between tweeting hook-nosed Jew cartoons at Jews and fighting against the scourge of political correctness, which prevents honest discussions of serious issues, actually damages the cause of political incorrectness.

Certainly many on the right attacked Milo long before alt-right was big in the news. I'm not sure the right has to condemn every detail of harassment by name. The right certainly has condemned twitter mobs and the like.

Edited May 10, 2017 by clarkgoble

[clarkgoble]

7 minutes ago, Gray said:

You can call them whatever you like I guess, but the "alt-left" doesn't really exist. There are plenty of extremist left wing groups, but I don't know that there is a clear analog to the alt right. 

I guess what I'm saying is I just can't figure out what you mean when you say the alt-left doesn't exist. If you mean it's not an exact parallel to the alt-right I'd agree. But I don't think many are making that claim. Rather they're using the term to refer to people on the left who violate norms of decency and use force, threats and intimidation to push their views.

[clarkgoble]

9 minutes ago, Gray said:

Coulter makes sly references to white supremacist manifestos and thinks that immigration of non-white people amounts to "white genocide." 

Well I admit I don't read Coulter and find her distasteful so I'll bow to your knowledge if she's doing that. I've just never heard many calling her a white supremacists - just a jerk who actively trolls as part of her business plan.

Edited May 10, 2017 by clarkgoble

[Gray]

36 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

I guess what I'm saying is I just can't figure out what you mean when you say the alt-left doesn't exist. If you mean it's not an exact parallel to the alt-right I'd agree. But I don't think many are making that claim. Rather they're using the term to refer to people on the left who violate norms of decency and use force, threats and intimidation to push their views.

Well there have always been extremists on both the left and right side. The alt right is a rising, somewhat cohesive movement. It's not just a catch all for any right wing extremist. But you seem to be using alt-left as more of a catch all term. 

Edited May 10, 2017 by Gray

[clarkgoble]

5 minutes ago, Gray said:

Well there have always been extremists on both the left and right side. The alt right is a rising, somewhat cohesive movement. It's not just a catch all for any right wing extremist. But you seem to be using alt-left as more of a catch all term. 

I don't think so. Again, just going by reading twitter via the hashtags proponents of these anti-speech protests there seems to be a very cohesive movement with a lot of agreement. I don't mean it as a catch-all term, although honestly I think sometimes the phrase alt right is used as a catch all term too. Indeed I've often complained that the way the media has treated the alt right the past year is helping to create and expand the movement.

[clarkgoble]

9 hours ago, The Nehor said:

It is like he is trying to reenact Watergate now. I like John Oliver's description of the whole thing when he called it "Stupid Watergate":

He's being very stupid, but I think the differences from Watergate are important to keep in mind. I've no idea what, if any, involvement with Russia he has. Certainly various people during the campaign did have ties. My assumption is that Trump just is so uncurious and narcissistic that he didn't care or look too deeply. That is we should apply Hanlon's Razor and never attribute to malice that which can adequately be explained by stupidity.

However I clearly don't know. Yesterday's actions make me think that perhaps there's more there than I thought. I think comparisons to Watergate are more than a little overstated right now. I think they're more projecting hopes by the left and never Trumpers more than strong parallels. Don't get me wrong. I'd definitely rather have Pence as President than Trump. I just think people are speaking more out of their projections at this stage. 

[thesometimesaint]

Pence is Trump without the insanity, Pence's story about Flynn just doesn't hold water.

[Rajah Manchou]

44 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

I don't think most people, including pundits, know much about GamerGate. The Federalist and a few other podcasts mentioned it and condemned it. But honestly I just never heard much about it period. I'll be the first to admit I don't know much about it and honestly don't care much. 

It'd be easy to call that a lazy dodge, but I can relate. I also honestly don't care much about the crazies that prevented Shapiro from speaking at DePaul or the nut that sent the anonymous email that shut down the parade in Seattle. I don't agree with fear and bullying as a political tool, but these are all nutters and I'm not going to worry too much about it.

I think the answer is that sometimes we care and other times we don't, and those swings are almost always dictated by our political ideology.

[clarkgoble]

2 minutes ago, Rajah Manchou said:

It'd be easy to call that a lazy dodge, but I can relate. I also honestly don't care much about the crazies that prevented Shapiro from speaking at DePaul or the nut that sent the anonymous email that shut down the parade in Seattle. I don't agree with fear and bullying as a political tool, but these are all nutters and I'm not going to worry too much about it.

And to be clear, the reason I worry about these protests and threats of violence on campus is because of how I value the role of an university. To me universities are under threat from both sides. I think they are vitally important for the progress of society.

While I condemn any attempt to silence public speech especially that of journalists, clearly that goes on so often I pick and choose what I focus on. To me the alt right and what I am calling the alt left are threats to society. To the degree both arise out of gamergate (if at all) then gamergate is included in my criticisms. I just don't think I need to know the details of gamergate to make these broader criticisms about the nature of contemporary political speech.

 

[clarkgoble]

10 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said:

Pence is Trump without the insanity, Pence's story about Flynn just doesn't hold water.

That's not a small matter. I don't deny for a second Pence is trying to spin heavily issues due to his place in the administration. And don't get me wrong, even as a conservative Pence is far from my ideal choice as President. But he'd be so much better than Trump it's hard to exaggerate.

[thesometimesaint]

For me it's a Sophie's Choice.

[Robert F. Smith]

On 5/7/2017 at 11:04 PM, halconero said:

And look where that 250 year experiment got you!

You do have a point.  After all, Canada is quite a civilized place, and without revolting against King and country.   On the other hand, the American Revolution made it clear to Britannia that some new policies needed to be adopted.  Canada is the direct beneficiary.  No surprise that many refugees are leaving the USA for Canada -- where they are more likely to be welcomed.

[Robert F. Smith]

On 5/7/2017 at 11:04 PM, Scott Lloyd said:

You're drifting into hysterics again, Bob. You need to calm down.

Tell that to James Comey.

[Scott Lloyd]

5 hours ago, thesometimesaint said:

Some small problems. The Attorney General had removed himself for the investigation of Clinton and the Trump/Russian investigations. The IG for the DOJ is still in the investigation of Comey's errors in judgment concerning the Clinton E-Mails and hasn't yet finished its report. Trump lied. There has been an ongoing investigation of his ties to Russia since last July, with no conclusion in sight. Trump and Sessions were just looking for any excuse to fire both Comey and Sally Yates.for their testimony about the FBI Counter-Intelligence probe of Trump and his associates.With the FBI effectively out of the picture now if Paul Ryan and/or Mitch McConnell don't want an investigation there won't be one. Paul Ryan is bad at his job being a check and balance to the President,  and McConnell's wife works for Trump.

It is not a crime for a Russian to be a Russian spy, We just kick them out of our country. It is a crime for an American to become one. You can go to jail for a long time if proven.

CFR that the FBI is out of the picture. Again, Comey's presence is not essential to a continued FBI probe. In fact, a replacement might be beneficial, as Comey was such a loose cannon.

ETA: Here's a reaction from one member of Congress with regard to whether the investigation will continue:
 

Quote

 

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine)

“The Justice Department was really understaffed for a long time, it took a while for the attorney general to be confirmed and his deputy was just confirmed I believe a week or so ago, and it’s the deputy who is a career prosecutor who had been designated to do the analysis so the FBI director’s actions and came up with the recommendation.

“The president did not fire the entire FBI. He fired the director of the FBI. And any suggestion that this is somehow going to stop the FBI’s investigation of the attempts by the Russians to influence the elections last fall is really patently absurd. This is just one person, it’s the director, the investigation is going forward both at the FBI and in the Senate Intel Committee in a bipartisan way. SO I don’t think there’s any link at all.”

 

 

Edited May 10, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

52 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Tell that to James Comey.

You really think his ouster was unjustified?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/09/why-comey-was-fired-doj-rips-handling-clinton-case-in-ouster.html

[Scott Lloyd]

4 hours ago, Gray said:

Coulter makes sly references to white supremacist manifestos and thinks that immigration of non-white people amounts to "white genocide." 

Documentation with context, please.