jack_package_200
Banned
It would not surprise me if Jimmy and the Secular Talk guy are on the russian payroll.
Both have called the Russia investigation a distraction and both love love love to shit on the dems including Obama and Hilary
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
- Thread starter aspiegamer
- Start date
- Status
It would not surprise me if Jimmy and the Secular Talk guy are on the russian payroll.
Both have called the Russia investigation a distraction and both love love love to shit on the dems including Obama and Hilary
Thaedolus
Member
He doesn't work at the White House.
Sounds like Wray was part of some kind of nominations/recess package
What? You're scared that she's running for president or you're scared that she's not voting for another Trump shill?
What? You're scared that she's running for president or you're scared that she's not voting for another Trump shill?
Her political instincts are terrifyingly good. It's why I swapped over to just embracing it. If we lost in part due to having a candidate who wasn't very good at this stuff, why not go full-throttle the other way?
edit: The abstentions.
Al or Joe for VP.
Not everyone is bought off by fucking Russia geeeeeez.
But yes, there's a faction on the left that spends an inordinate time shitting on liberals, not sure what you would expect from the YT.
Mighty Chin
Banned
That WSJ interview was embarrassing.
Interesting that Burr abstained.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
There's a 30% chance Bernie, Kamala, and other Dems who want to be president just voted for a guy who will go to prison for obstruction of justice.
Just terrible political instincts.
Just terrible political instincts.
Prof. Bathtub
Member
How many appointees have actually been dedicated public servants with no hidden baggage/loyalty guarantees. Saying "if a Dem did all this, there would be zero approvals" is old hat, but it really is true how they're expected to give the benefit of the doubt every time, and are sad examples of partisanship if they don't.
ShadowSwordmaster
Banned
Sorry, my mistake.
Dubbedinenglish
Banned
jack_package_200
Banned
aspiegamer
Member
Very surprised it wasn't more of a split vote. Going against -all- Trump nominees feels like it should be a given for any Democrat with higher ambitions at this point. It's easy to later admit "hey, the guy ended up being okay" but very hard to explain "wow, despite plenty of evidence to the contrary I'm shocked he ended up being a Trump puppet!"
Basically a string of Iraq war votes from here on.
Basically a string of Iraq war votes from here on.
Prof. Bathtub
Member
If Mueller came out tomorrow saying "yeah, they're all guilty of every accusation and more" and the GOP & Fox response was "yeah, ok, but it was worth it", Dems would still face a tsk tsking from the news if there was blanket noncooperation.
Autodidact
Banned
Blonde white woman from New York could smack of Hillary.
But Gilly not Hilly's political instincts could very likely overcome those comparisons.
Israel, although she backed down from her original stance on the BDS boycott, and I'm not sure anyone gives a shit to be honest.
I mean, she also worked at DPW, but this will only affect a small subset on the left.
jack_package_200
Banned
She also has not had a several decade long smear campaign against her.
I think the truth is most people either support Israel or they don't care. Its not a disqualifying position in this country.
I don't like it but that's just the way it is.
aspiegamer
Member
Like, that's actually a pretty good statement and something that would be wholly appropriate to say under any other circumstances, but I don't know why you take a chance on something like this when there's absolutely no need to go out on a limb. It wasn't even a close vote, either, so saying it was 100% symbolic or a protest vote is still safe.
You're not wrong, but this really reeeeeeeeeeeally sounds like a new Iraq war vote situation again where it cost Hillary the nomination in 2008. Not this one specific vote necessarily, but voting on absolutely any and all persons nominated by Trump in general.
Fenderputty
Banned
Kamala:
I keep telling ya, she looks the part but she's not ready for primetime.
I've read this twice now and am struggling to find where her statement sucks and why she's not ready.
Like are we all advocating protest votes for the sake of protest votes regardless of what it is we're protesting?
VendettaRed07
Member
People will just transfer all of Hillary's smears onto her just because of the superficial stuff
She's smart but it's going to be very hard for her
He legit doesn't want the job.
Autodidact
Banned
Can anyone explain why Mia Love has seemingly underperformed in every election she's ever contested? She represents an R+13 district but has never garnered more than 54% of the vote. Does that district have some ancestral Democratic leanings courtesy of Jim Matheson?
Or is it racism, which no one should endure regardless of party affiliation?
Because it's a completely meaningless vote for Kamala, and she still did the wrong thing. And her explanation of "Well, he said he'd be a good boy!" is weak, unconvincing shit.
Why not? Dems should not be endorsing Republican FBI directors. It's bad politics AND policy
Why not? Dems should not be endorsing Republican FBI directors. It's bad politics AND policy
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
It's actually sexism, not racism from what I can tell.
Utah is far more driven by hatred of women than nonwhites.
..damn, that's actually pretty fucking smart. They get AF One early and way cheaper.
Uh...the logical conclusion of your last statement would mean that any President whose party did not control the Senate could not get any cabinet members into government. I think I'll pass on that.
Fenderputty
Banned
You're going to have to do better than shout lame platitudes. So far your advocating for protest votes simply to protest. Comey and Mueller are both republicans so I would disagree that simply putting one in charge at the FBI is bad policy, which is all that should matter politically, even if it doesn't.
While she was safe, maybe she felt a "no" vote wasn't needed. Ideally all politicians voted this way.
This too. The results of more purity test bullshit.
Prof. Bathtub
Member
Whoops, didn't mean to sound like I was excusing the votes due to media pressure. Most of these D senators seem to be too trusting and generally ignore what extremes the other party would go to in a inverse of these (legitimately serious) circumstances.
Trump fired Comey. This is not some hypothetical generic GOP presidency where we're playing politics over the FBI nomination.
If you think the base doesn't want this, fine. I think all evidence points to the contrary.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
I'm sorry, but anyone who doesn't understand how stupid it is to confirm Wray is too stupid to be president.
We need two facts here.
1. Trump fired his FBI Director for being unwilling to obstruct justice.
2. Trump nominated Wray for FBI director after saying this.
The dots are impossibly easy to connect here. Kamala and the rest voted for a guy who will possibly be an accessory to a criminal conspiracy.
We need two facts here.
1. Trump fired his FBI Director for being unwilling to obstruct justice.
2. Trump nominated Wray for FBI director after saying this.
The dots are impossibly easy to connect here. Kamala and the rest voted for a guy who will possibly be an accessory to a criminal conspiracy.
aspiegamer
Member
Yup. Not to try to beat the dead horse, but this exact sort of situation was litigated in the 2008 primaries. In a race so close, one of the few actual talking points against Clinton was her Iraq War vote. Her justification sounded extremely similar to that statement, even! "I trust these guys, so it'll be fine," essentially, which looks dumb as hell if it goes wrong later on. I didn't even hold the vote against her but I cannot deny the feelings others had.
Not saying that's a particularly productive tactic, but, well, yes? If you're pandering to Democratic primary voters, why not? Worked for Republicans for 8 years. Think of it as basic cost-benefit for future POTUS candidates-- There's a 0% chance of it bothering anyone and 0 possible votes lost in any primary for going against (or abstaining). If you end up being wrong, it's an instant non-starter for some of the left base.
whyamihere
Banned
lol Gillibrand.
T H I R S T Y
(This was the right move tho)
I think your spoiler is right.
I mean black people weren't even allowed to be Mormons until how long ago?
Problem is, you can't blast Trump for ignoring norms and destabilizing the country politically, and then start doing the same thing and saying "well he started it!" as your reasoning. You can't run on being the adults in the room if your plan is to mimic Trump and the GOP.
Also, Comey might be the main reason that Trump gets impeached, so I'd say that republican worked out. Sec Gates probably saved the US hundreds of billions of dollars (and potentially trillions) moving forward by getting rid of cost+ military programs. That's another republican that worked out. I think people forget that the Republican party is divided even more ideologically than the Democratic party currently (crazy OT topics about pro-life Dem nominees notwithstanding)
EDIT:
Trump also fired Flynn (SecDef?), fired Reince (CoS) and Spicer (Press Sec), is about to fire Sessions (AG), and has Tillerson (SoS) on the verge of resigning out of frustration. Throw in Mooch and whoever the hell else I'm forgetting about.
I don't think this is an FBI issue. I think this might be a Trump issue.
Flynn, Spicer and Reince are not Senate confirmed positions. They're completely irrelevant.
I think you're missing the point; it's not about Republican or Democrat. This is about a position that should never have been vacant in the first place (!!!)
If Trump can fire Comey and get his preferred replacement no questions asked, then you've completely destroyed any pretense the FBI has of being independent, and the 10 year sentence is a complete sham. This is not a normal nomination! This is not business as usual!
And that's before you even get into the fact that he's almost certainly going to be asked to obstruct justice by the President.
I think you're missing the point; it's not about Republican or Democrat. This is about a position that should never have been vacant in the first place (!!!)
If Trump can fire Comey and get his preferred replacement no questions asked, then you've completely destroyed any pretense the FBI has of being independent, and the 10 year sentence is a complete sham. This is not a normal nomination! This is not business as usual!
And that's before you even get into the fact that he's almost certainly going to be asked to obstruct justice by the President.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Even a brain surgeon could see that Trump nominated Wray to obstruct justice.
Box of Kittens
Banned
Eh, I don't think the argument is "they started it" as much as "Trump fired the FBI director to obstruct the FBI's investigation of him."
I'm pretty happy to set a precedent of not confirming FBI picks from presidents who are obstructing justice.
I'm pretty happy to set a precedent of not confirming FBI picks from presidents who are obstructing justice.
Fenderputty
Banned
"possibly" is an odd (even though correct) word choice to use considering you're being so matter of fact with your comments.
I'm not sure where you're going with this. Is putting a republican in charge of the FBI bad policy? If it is, why is a republican being fired by a republican? It could be bad politics, but I quite frankly think the purity bullshit is a dangerous path that I want nothing to do with.
Has it? It got them elected. They haven't had one piece of conservative legislation to speak of and it's directly related to the fringes gaining control due to purity bullshit.
Imagine a public option on the precipice of passing but we're one vote short because a public option isn't liberal enough and the vote requires single payer.
whyamihere
Banned
Hot take: Wyden would have a larger national profile/ambitions if he didn't have a lisp 
Yep. I don't trust this motherfucker at all. http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/01/politics/christopher-wray-fbi-director/index.html
Lindsey Graham had to ask him almost 3 times if he thought Mueller was on a witch hunt, and when he finally said no it was like it pained him to say it. And then he said he "doesn't know the law" regarding whether Trump can fire Mueller.
Prof. Bathtub
Member
Hence the circumstances would be legitimately serious if a democrat did it, not like "a democrat DARED to nominate a supreme court justice in an election year!"
jack_package_200
Banned
Hot take: Wyden would have a larger national profile/ambitions if he didn't have a lisp
I actually think he has some (probably not a lot) crossover support in some Red States. A friend of mine who lives in Tennessee told me the people there really like Wyden do to his stances on privacy.
Couple of ideas:
1. Mueller doesn't appear like he'll take shit from anyone. I think if he starts finding roadblocks laid by Wray, we'll find out.
2. Many in Congress have said that another major firing would cross a line. Even if that was just more hot air, the public and media uproar will be huge.
Fenderputty
Banned
Trump clearly thought he had Rosenstein bought too. How'd that work out for him?
Dubbedinenglish
Banned
That was before Sessions recused, would've been Trump's criteria if were after.
Are you anti-Mueller too? Why get an independent counsel to do what a Republican lackey can do instead?
I don't understand your position here.
- Status