President Donald Trump gave a startling interview this week in which he expressly stated his belief that “torture . . . works” and stated that he would order torture if his team asks for it to be used on detainees. It is a position opposed not only by the military and both Republican and Democratic members of Congress but, more importantly, United States and international law. In fairness to Trump, he added that his decision would be controlled by the law but also that he believed in the efficacy of torture: “I want to do everything within the bounds of what you’re allowed to do legally but do I feel it works? Absolutely I feel it works.” Under international law, it does not matter if torture is successful or useful. It remains a war crime. Indeed, it was the United States that played a key role in defining torture as a violation of international law. In other words, there is no legal basis for the use of torture or the commission of any war crime under domestic or international authority.
President Trump insisted that we have to “fight fire with fire.” Despite the widespread view that torture is not effective in producing reliable information (and the conclusions of intelligence reports that it did not produce significant intelligence), Trump said that he had “spoken with people at the highest level of intelligence and I asked them the question ‘Does it work? Does torture work?’ and the answer was ‘Yes, absolutely’.”
Fortunately, Defense Secretary James Mattis has clearly ruled out a return to a torture programs and various members of Congress, including Republicans, have warned Trump that they will not allow a return to the program launched by George W. Bush.
To Trump’s credit, he at least called waterboarding what it is: torture. Bush officials danced around the term torture despite long-standing rulings that it is a clear form of torture. Trump did not shy away from the turn but rather openly embraced it.
What is worrisome is that he did not even acknowledge that he would be ordering a war crime and subject the country and himself to potential international charges. Instead he defined our actions by the depravity of our enemies:
“When they’re shooting, when they’re chopping off the heads of our people and other people, when they’re chopping off the heads of people because they happen to be a Christian in the Middle East, when Isis is doing things that nobody has ever heard of since Medieval times, would I feel strongly about waterboarding?”
In the end however Trump affirmed that (while he believes torture works) he would yield to the law. That law is clear. Congress prohibited the use of torture, including waterboarding, and such tactics are not allowed under the military code.
If we ever resumed our “enhanced interrogation” program, Trump’s words could be used by an international tribunal. He is shown openly endorsing the use of “torture” — dispensing with the rhetorical evasions of the past Administration. Torture is expressly defined as a war crime under governing treaties and international law. By saying that he believes in effectiveness of torture and the willingness to order torture, Trump has created a record that could be used by other countries to establish knowledge and intent.
Finally, by expressly stating that torture is effective and permitted, Trump’s words could be used to legitimate the torture of American military personnel or civilians.
What do you think?
If any one is interested there was a remarkable movie that came out a few years ago with Sam Jackson called “Unthinkable”
It goes dark into torture for the worst case scenario of a nut job with an atomic bomb and he’s in custody.
The irony is the bad guys name was Steven Younger.
Stephen Younger just happens to be the former director of nuclear weapons at LOs Alamos. He became a pacifist and wrote a great book that I highly recommend called:”The Bomb”
24 Diet Cokes per day Keep the Sanity Away.
Torture does work, let’s cut the spin and horsesh!t on that. It should not be sanctioned but if there is a ticking time bomb scenario I am perfectly willing to play Sgt Schultz if it is used to save lives. The lie that it doesn’t work is spread by people who realize over 60% of Americans are fine w/ it being used. They hope their lie on it not working will bring down those numbers.
Torture does not work except for those fascists that get their rocks off seeing someone suffer.
How will you know if there’s a ticking time bomb? Only Spectre knows. I think you’ve been watching too many 007 movies.
Steve,
A year or two after 9-11, I was watching an exchange on C-Span.
There was a belief on the part of the FBI that a “suitcase nuke” was in the hands of terrorists in New York in Sept.-Oct. 2001.
Law enforcement flooded New York, and foretunately it turned out to be a false alarm.
One panelist said that Mayor Guiliani was not informed about the suspected existence of the nuke, and was irate when he learned of the threat only weeks later.
I don’t know if any “enhanced interrogation” was conducted in relation to the suspected nuke, but if there was ever a “ticking time bomb” event that would justify torture, that would be it.
And they come Dial a Yield! I like the neutron kind. No damage to structures only to life but radiation is gone in two days. That’s the ones Carter let the other side have for whatever reason. He wanted everyone to have an equal shot at Mutual Assured Destruction. He also freed up some other classified stuff. The Oklahoma City Bomb instructions are available on the internet to anyone in the world that wants them. And that’s just one or two page.
Michael,
There is reference in the Congressional Record of July 23, 2009 to the search teams sent to New York looking for the nuke.
A “dirty bomb” is probably a more obtainable WMD for terrorists, but I do remember one Al Queda expert saying that he believed Al Queda possessed a suitcase nuke in an interview right after the 9-11 attacks.
They were trying to buy one probably from Russia as back then the whole country was for sale. They may have suceeded. who knows? if anyone does know they aren’t talking. But it’s one of those – currently- unanswerable questions.
It’s a good argument, but I disagree, and it only adds to the fervor for torture under less threatening circumstances. The remedy is found after focusing in on why anyone would want to bring a suitcase nuke into the country. Don’t you think? It’s more about why we’re destroying the rest of the world for a buck and an unsustainable standard of living while being selectively ignorant as to why anyone would want to hurt us in retaliation. If they use religion as a magnetizing battle cry, I can see why. We do the same thing. Onward Christian soldier.
And now let us pray.
Steve “56”…
Smartphone may act up again…
I agree that trying to understand the motivation of
those who would set off a nuke in New
York, just as understanding the motivations of those who would fly airplanes into the WTC should be explored.
Just as the understanding the motivations of the Japanese when they attacked Pearl Harbor was
/ is worthwhile.
I feel strongly that “understanding” has its limits, and pondering an enemies’ motivations as the the sole or primary response to an attack is probably unwise.
Many have noted the similarity between 9/11 and and a similar attack in a book of Tom Clancy’s. What was the main difference? Motivation and desired end result.
Instead of hitting two basically meaningless buildings which did nothing to really hurt the US they could have attacked a much more meaningful target namely the State of the Union Address in the Representatives Wing of the Capitol Building. That also had great symbolism but for some reason they were fixated on the Trade Towers. With four aircraft they could hardly have missed.
Figure that out you will figure out the answer to your question.
It is I suppose a cultural difference that is completely out of synch with the rest of humanity.
Terrorism itself has long ago codified and published a working manual of how to carry out that type of revolution. See Carlos Marighella Mini Manual for the Urban Guerrilla or google up Cycle or Circle of Repression as used by the rebels in Brazil and then the Tupamaros in Uruguay in the 60’s.
So codified that one can easily spot the flaw which is a government taking the role of the rebel terrorists and then add comments from the Clinton White House and this last one “Never let a good crisis go to waste.’ Or think about the cycle of economic repression kicked off by the ethanol scam and housinb bubble scam put in place BY government.
These at least had an understandable motive and goal.
Do those two things exist with Jihadi’s or is it just kill, kill, kill for funz and grinz?
Michael…
– The plane that the passengers downed in PA. may have been heading for the Capital Building.
I was happy to see Alexander Van der Bellen, the independent and former leader of the Green Party, elected president of Austria. 54 percent of the voters in Austria have their heads on straight, while we get a fascist, racist, misogynist, homophobic, Judeo-Christian billionaire with the sensibilities of a robber baron who was substantially outspent by his closest corrupted Establishment competitor.
http://tass.com/world/925899
What a grand two-party system we have, backed 100% by the bourgeois coalition of the content and otherwise known as a bunch of sheep.
Good on Austria for rejecting the fascist trend. They have been there done that.
We had no choice.
Bull Shit. You had a choice of Trump, Clinton, Johnson, Klein, any write in you wanted and a way to vote None Of The Above. If you thought they were evil you had a choice and a commitment to yourself having confessed publically to knowin evil to NOT support it. If you thought I have a choice of right, wrong and compromise you had three choices. Two wrong and one right. Nuremberg Defense doesn’t work.
Trump, Clinton, Johnson, Klein, any write in you wanted and a way to vote None Of The Above.
That spells, N-O C-H-O-I-C-E
Jill Stein was a choice, and a great one. She’s the only one of the four who hasn’t quit practicing what she preached. For instance, where was any of the other three during the March for Women in DC this week?
I am speaking about choices for President. Not choices to express our opinion.
As opinion, yes Stein was a great choice. As choice for President, there was never any question that she even might be elected.
Brooklin Bridge – Jill Stein was my least acceptable candidate and that was even after Hillary. I saw her interviewed and she made a terrible impression on me. This may be why she has done so poorly getting votes every time.
Fair enough Paul. But she was never a choice for President. You need not have concerned yourself.
Brooklin Bridge – if Jill Stein’s purpose is NOT to get elected, then why is she wasting space on my ballot? Why is she requiring 3 states to recount their ballots?
Exactly, Paul. There are sheep everywhere and no sheepdogs.
Paul,
I looked at her platform and it was a laundry list of progressive goals. More big government programs to fulfill her utilitarian agenda. The difference between her and Clinton is she lacked the corporate support.
Olly – Jill Stein lacked ANY support.
Paul Schulte…..
The “One-Percenters” supported Jill Stein
May she had no financial support, but 1.2 million of us voted for her.
and did not vote for in fact voted against Clinton and the secular progressives. For that THANK YOU for helping us restore our Constitutional Government. Thanks for serving your country and the Constitution and the principles of representative democracy that it rests upon. Thanks for being cognizant conscious members of the ultimate source of power – the voting self governing voting citizens. Having established that he rest we can sort out later is the difference between conservation, being good stewards of the land, and caring about the environment all that different? .
Steve Groen – considering the number of eligible voters 1.2 million is statistically insignificant.
Paul that’s true BUT Hillary got in the popular vote 48.2 percent I’ve not found what getting the Green vote would have done to change that. Nor the Libertarian vote. I believe Greens were about one percent and Libertarians about five percent. So even those wouldn’t have given Clinton the required majority even IF it mattered which it didn’t. But it did help along with the other uinexpected bits and pieces in kicking out the extreme left and gettng us back to a Constitutional Government and a third big help for that was the RINO faction of the left which drove away from the Republicans huge numbers of members although they still voted against Clinton preferring Trump to the alternative. What worked was the synergistic effect on the entire registered portion of the available voting pool and it’s effect on geting some of those to register. A lot of little and mostly ignored in the ipast segments became the new majority and best of al lthe dark side still hasn’t figured that out.. including the pollsteres and the former mainstream nedia. They ARE NOT maintstream any more.
Michael: “[G]etting us back to a [c]onstitutional government”? How so?
Trump has said he’ll follow Mattis’ advice regarding torture, for example, when it’s clearly against the law. Are you of the belief that somehow things will change from a usurping Executive and a Congress with its hands tied behind its back?
Paul, considering the number of people who were tricked into not voting their conscience on the notion of “no choice” but to vote for Clinton or Trump (in other words, that’s just the way it is; otherwise, we’re doomed), I think 1.2M Green votes is significant.
I think there was also a difference of corrupt vs. honorable.
Olly: So you voted for Trump, who will add layer upon layer of government in your life, while, just like he said he would do, at the same time reducing taxes on the wealthy at YOUR expense. You watch how much trickles down to you.
i already watched it trickle – away – during the last eight years of heavy debt load and borrowing and inflation and devaluation and the direct attack of the left on the retirement funds of the retired and elderly. Obamanomics is an Obomination and that goes double for Obamadon’care.
“who will add layer upon layer of government in your life, while, just like he said he would do, at the same time reducing taxes on the wealthy at YOUR expense. ”
Citation please. When did he say that?
Why is he getting rid of Obamacare? Because it progressively taxes the wealthiest taxpayers including one self-serving orangutan and would then proportionately overburden the working class. Why has he said he would reduce the corporate tax, the estate tax, and the highest brackets of the income tax? A no brainer, Michael.
Just as a guess i would say because Obamacare screwed up and made valueless my combination guanteed for for life after 24 years in the real combat arms medical coverage as part of the retirement package, It’s been a paid for expense since day one, they reneged on GI Bill for college and the same on the housing loand scam promise. Now I get hit for mandatory Medicare and none of it including VA is worth a thin dime to me because I can buy it out of pocket cheaper south of the borderl
All Obamacare was is stealing from those who produced or produce to pander for votes from moochers most of the time. Oh yes and I did a second entire career actually working as civilian employee in the transportatin and construction industries. Of course his phony job figures play into it as did his tax increases, as did every other looney tunes move he made so screw Obama and the secular progressives and that incudes his right wing of the left RINO buddies as well.
The Constitution was worth fighting for but that’s it.
Ditto. I ran the numbers. the projected tax bracket will come damn close to replacing the 30% loss of buying power the fricking rake off artis of the secular progressive left out right stole from the retired and elderly. Source. The outcome of Turbo Tax dot com. Damn i wish that would start this year…!!!! PS I am a hair under the meidan average income for the USA and moved to Mexico to be able to afford to ‘live.’ Now I am back to middle middle class thanks to the exchange rates. My thank you to Mexico is spending most of my retirement income down here and sponsoring three students in college prep and one in a University pre-med program. i am not altruistic and despise the ‘give back crap’ garbage. Anytning I do contribute is my choice and not with a gun at my head.
Got it Steve. No citation, simply more fake news.
Here’s Richard Wolff on the subject of his tax relief for the rich. You may not like RT, but Wolff’s a straight shooter.
To vote for Jill Stein for president would have required one to vote his or her conscience rather than for a corrupted politician or businessman. Don’t you think?
I did vote for her. If I remember, I had to write her in. I was hesitating however between her and the moon. Back and forth, back and forth. Thought I would need a glass of water. Which choice was more realistic? Finally I decided on Jill, but it was by a crescent sliver.
Look, All I’m saying, is that I would like a system where the cards are not stacked against thrid party candidates. Jill Stein should have been allowed in the debates. Bernie shouldn’t have had to run as a Democrat. All of that is reducing our effective choices to mere mini protests in a sort of kind a private booth.
Understood and true.
While you were economically saying all that needed to be said, I was continuing my rant. 🙂 Ignore.
And I still don’t call it choice of president. More like choice of wishful thinking.
That’s ALL I was saying up top by, “We had no choice”
Anyone who believes voters had a choice between anyone other than Hillary and Trump for president is dreaming.
And speaking of all that, it was fine by me to vote for Jill just to try and give her the 5%? boost she needed to get on the debate circuit next time round. But I had no illusion my vote could result in the next President of the United States being Jill Stein. That was never a choice given me. Not even a slim one.
Would having the League of Women Voters in charge of the debates again open up the playing field, do you think?
No. The LWVs are a coalition of contented Democrats. Federal elections need to be controlled by the federal government, not the parties or an NGO.
Prairie Rose, it might. It would almost certainly be better than those gastly TV thugs. Right now, both parties are corrupt because the system they operate in is corrupt. They are wholly owned by transnational corporations and banks and investment firms. Until that changes, our electoral system is probably going to remain a well orchestrated farce.
That’s negative thinking. You had a choice for president, but too many thought like you did and ended up voting for a corrupted politician instead of Stein because they believe couldn’t be elected. And that’s the reason she wasn’t. Piss-poor rationale.
Steve,
“Federal elections need to be controlled by the federal government”
Wouldn’t there be a conflict of interest–to get the person most suited to perpetuating the government’s versus the citizenries’ interests? The federal government is detached from the desires of regular people; the “winner” would be a pro-war corporatist. It would be more streamlined to rig, too, I would think.
Exactly the opposite. The start oint is the self governing citizen who in a group of the whole are the ultimate source of power. Not kings, emperors or dictators or any form of government. The second step is applying thie principles of representative democracy using a direct vote, without hindrance or interference by those same people in electing their local and city and county and State leadership Even beyond that to District Representatives to the federal Government.
The change originally came with the formerly sovereign State Governments at the State formerly nation state level choosing Senators. That was changed which effectively did away with checks and balances. on the Federal Government as did it’s companion income tax amendment which gave them control fo the individual citizens.
But the second level is called Constitutional Republic which uses selected delegates to the Senate and Representative assemblies now chosen by the same ultimate source of power the citizens themselves.
To balance large states against small states the electorla College was selected after much discussion although it too is made up of delegates selected by the same ultimate source of power the self governing citizens
The caveat is IF the citizens do their job and remember the government is nothing more than their employees.
IF the citizens can keep it they have a grass roots representative democracy as a foundation for a Constitutional Republic which in turn is under the Constituion which is the social contract that guarantees certain rights and liberties and restricts the government to certain limited and state purposes.
Unless of course the citizens get lazy and decide to ignore the whole thing in which case the next applicable phrase is No Dictator ever took power it was handed to him by the citizens….willingly.
The choice is yours and always has been. Be a free and independent citizen or be a servant of the government or a something….
Your choice. Your responsibility. We have gone through three revolutions and this time a counter revolution. Might try living up to your responsibilities and your right to do so this time. if you haven’t already I may be preaching to the choir.
It’s not about Trump or Clinton, left or right, liberal or conservative. It’s about rights if you want them and the responsibility to keep and maintain them.
This is your third chance
But there is a final defense and a final backstop. Read the oath of office taken by the military. Read it carefully. It contains a right and a duty and a mission and they are the only ones who can decide when or where to carry out that duty. That is their responsibility.
I won’t guarantee the outcome. But I will be on their side.
No just your garden variety left wing secular fascist stooge mentality nothing more exciting than that but it served it’s purpose. Personally I believe which is not the same as can prove the whole thing was orchestrated by the ‘DNC along with the Burn Bernie effort and probably or possiby came from Wasserman-Schultz.
Now where she was getting her orders is easier the best ;’guess’ would be straight from the George’s Lykoff and Soros and she might very well have acted as the bag lady and control agent from that direction the same as Huma did from the Foundation – Middle East – Iran – Oligarchs connection which only leaves who in the establishment aristocracy was the third part of what now is looking like a cabal. All of which makes a lot more sense just be subjective conjecture than the fairy tails from the Loser Faction and the Soon To Be Ousted white Identify faction of the Secular Regressives and their tabloid blogs.
When it comes to inventive creativity an objectivivist with a vocabulary and great idea wins every time.
For the record All of the above is made up of whole cloth in imitation of a progressive turned regressive Der Spinne Doktor Watch for it in a theater near you starring Madonna, Looney Clooney and what’s his face Heidi’s Pimp – unless it’s in England or Oz. There watch for it in a theatre near you but mind getting kicked in the trunk. Ten to one no one figures out that pun.
Did I tie that back with Stein? No. There’s no froth on warm beer. It’s been kept int he flat too long.
Indeed, you might be one of the few who could get a sail boat to move by merely talking to it.
“There’s no froth on warm beer.” Shakespeare?
I’m speaking about the choices we were provided by the system. That was binary. Predetermined. Not one choice more.
That’s negative thinking. You had a choice for president, but too many thought like you did and ended up voting for a corrupted politician instead of Stein because they believe couldn’t be elected. And that’s the reason she wasn’t. Piss-poor rationale. -Steve Groen
Huh? Were you addressing me? You were perhaps suggesting that the two parties are not corrupt? That they are not utterly tied to the same corporate interests? That observing such out loud is negative thought? That there was a realistic chance Stein could be elected if we all just thought positive thoughts? That due to this, I, like many, ended up voting for a corrupted politician instead of Stein after I just finished saying I DID vote for her?
Trying to walk through a wall by simply projecting positive thoughts about a door being there isn’t positive thinking. It’s nonsense wrapped up in this case in a pretentious hollow civics lesson.
You have some other bee in your bonnet. Good luck with it..
Prairie Rose: “’Federal elections need to be controlled by the federal government.’ Wouldn’t there be a conflict of interest–to get the person most suited to perpetuating the government’s versus the citizenries’ interests? The federal government is detached from the desires of regular people; the “winner” would be a pro-war corporatist. It would be more streamlined to rig, too, I would think.”
I think both private and public administration of elections have their downsides, but look what happens when the parties control their nomination process and the shenanigans at the state and local levels and at the polling stations which are swept under the rug the next day. At least with public employees being involved, and enough vetted ombudsmen, there’s more of an ability to discipline malfeasance.
Further, the federal government has a theoretical due process requirement which the People can and will enforce in court – the League of Women Voters and other NGOs don’t.
Like Hillary Clinton refusing to disclose the transcripts of her Wall Street speeches and Donald Trump refusing to divulge his tax returns, the LWV has no such obligation.
In any case, the Electoral College is counterproductive to democracy unless you’re Alexander Hamilton or one of the plutocrats who Hamilton intended control our government.
Steve G.,
I have been thinking about your reply all day. I still have many half-formed questions rolling around in my head that will require research on my part (e.g., Hamilton vs. Madison and Jefferson’s views on the EC). I suspect you are right about Hamilton and plutocrats (I am reading The Art of Power right now about Jefferson and he despised Hamilton and his monetary plans), though I know little about Hamilton.
My suggestion of the LWV was to organize the debates instead of the parties and the networks colluding to keep other parties out.
Regarding “there’s more of an ability to discipline malfeasance” if the federal government controls federal elections, that seems to be putting far too much faith in an already too powerful federal government. Would it be an Executive branch organization that controls it? That would concentrate its power even more. Even if the Legislative Branch controlled it, they are not going to want a disrupter (like Stein, Sanders, Trump, etc to upend the status quo). So far I do not see the federal government being disciplined at all. Yes, the SC did swat down some of President Obama’s actions, but Clinton got off, Clapper and Brennan were not even challenged for their lies, the Patriot stands, as does surveillance powers. People can at least walk away from the DNC if they learn they are crooks.
I am not convinced doing away with the EC is a good idea. I do NOT want NY or CA determining the Executive Branch all the time. That said, if good arguments or suggestions can be laid out to modify what we have, I will consider them. I know Madison made suggestions, but I have not had a chance to read what they are. Your thoughts?
Prarie Rose: I apologize for not getting to this thoughtful post until now.
“I am not convinced doing away with the EC is a good idea. I do NOT want NY or CA determining the Executive Branch all the time.”
This is a very good point. I think this could be remedied by simply removing human delegates (who currently have the right to vote against the popular outcome in any jurisdiction) from the equation and simply adding the number of delegated votes to the winner’s column in each state.
Delegates have the potential ability to vote against the popular vote, which isn’t a democracy of the People but of the delegates. Don’t you think?
Steve Groen – everything you need to know about the EC is in the Federalist Papers.
Paul, I’m not a Hamilton fan. He was an elitist and not inclined to democracy. Perhaps if I were born Blue Boy I’d have favored his position, but I’m a homeboy.
Who do you like in today’s game?
Steve – I like Tom Brady, but I may be one of the few. 🙂 I want to see Goodell hand him the trophy. And then I want to see Brady beat Goodell over the head with it. However, that is just me.
Substitute Denver and Oakland the first time Denver went to the Super Bowl and it would be Denver getting beat over the head. That game ushered in the TV Judge as Oakland really won the playoff game and Denver looked like the worst most amateurish team possible in the Super Bowl.
Right now I can’t remember who won just that one particular part. but readding the comment on Brady etc. it came right into my mind.
Denver and Seattle for various reasons have always been the teams to hold in contempt while Cowboys when Ditka was playing defense and got kicked out of every game for injuring and opposing player out of the game became my favorite.
When he became coach at Chicago i transferred allegiance to the Bears even though I consider Chicago and New York to be the left and right armpits of the nation with Washington the anal orifice. So it was Bears not the city that counted.
NY Giants I refer to as the Jersey Giants as they practice and play in Jersey not in New York.
and don’t get me started on stadium naming rights. It’s Candlestick Park period and will always be Candlestick Park.
How many reading this even know what I’m talking about.
What privately owned island hosted NFL foootball games between what teams?
Go Razorbacks
Isn’t life full of wonderful memories?
Well, I was referring to you, but I forgot about your earlier post about “choice.” My apologies. 🙂
What Michael wrote. The choice was there and there’s no excuse for not voting one’s conscience unless you’re promoting the fascist game.
An essentially meaningless definition of choice, or more accurately, like Obamacare, the kind of choice that is provided to obviate by high sounding gloss any need to offer real choice for yet another cycle.
Steve,
I think there was an opening in 2016 for an effective 3rd party candidate to get a meaningful percentage of the vote.
With the objective of building a base, long term, for future elections.
I pointed out several months ago that Jill Stein could not get elected to either the state legislature or Lt. Governor in Massechusetts, an alt.left state.
That did not bode well for much of a showing on the national level.
Gary Johnson didn’t seem to run a very effective campaign, but I think he got 3-3 1/2% to Stein’s nearly one percent.
I’ve actually voted for 3rd party candidates a few times, starting with the Bull Moose Party.
I think John Anderson got c.6-7 % in 1980, Perot git c.18% in 1992, and George Wallace ( who actually carried several states and got Electoral votes) in 1968.
So I think there was opportunity in 2016 for a strong third party ticket….I think the problem obstacles they faced were largely due to weak candidates, in addition to the funding ahirtfalls and ” they can’t win so I won’t vote for them” mentality.
Not sure what layers of new governmental control you anticipate in a Trump administration.
At this point, I don’t see anything on the horizon that rivals the impact of Obamacare when it comes to adding layers of government control.
“funding SHORTFALLS”
It’s useful to think of them as message candidates Klein especially. But they did stick it out and helped to keep Clinton from getting a popular majority though it didn’t mean anything in the real election. Kleini sort of went off the deep end at the end.
As for the Libertarians they were offered a number of opportunities to make their main goal as a debating party and turned them down. they came up with a relatively sensible platform but their candidates, as your said destroyed it. and they ended up being message candidates for pot and little else. Damn shame as you said they could have played coalition politics and ended up with perhaps 20% and a control of the outcome.
They are a failed outgrowth of the objectivist movemenjt who decided to get subjective but they did have some major brains and one is the former CEO of BB&T who went on to work at the CATO Institute another of their successes. But they are not poltically astute and became a place for those who wanted to preserve their version of ethics and morality by voting but not participating.
Still they stayed in the seven to ten percent range until the last minute when a great many voted AGAINST Hillary Clinton.
Now I mentioned Coalition Poltics and this is something Trump can and is using. Notice he maintained ties with all the factions includig the major one those who previously had no representation.
So first he has to honor his campaign promises and second walk a very thin balancig act in some areas. Mexico is a good example. The deal is already made it’s now a matter of saving face foe Pena who faces a horrible choice if his main opponent gets elected. Mostly it’s all about riots etc but it’s also about ending up win win win. Payment for the wall which is mostly about a section in southern Arizona that Obama turned into a free way for the cartels. One of the suggestions was Mexico pays. That’s true.
So you bring up the 25% tariff law which means the whole world pays it or you just sort of mention it. In fact they already pay tariffs and those existing tariffs are enough to pay for the project. which of course are enough to put a lot of our people to work. Add 5,000 border patrol and 10,000 Immigration and put the miltary back on that job a large part of the problem is solved. Pena saves face, Trump keeps his promise and keeps his supporters which are not insignificant nor badly splintered as our the left.
Remember start hard and ease off is more productive than thed other direction. So what did crimnal aliens mean. We thought it mean undocumented. Turns out it means people who committed a crime and then were found out to be also undocumented. So the sancutary snow flakes get all carried away and then wham. Money will be cut and it WILL. But the worst blow is this. Hey snowflake HOW COME you want to give a break to a criminal and we know that because they were arrested for commiting a crime and then found to be without papers BUT if you arrest a US Citizen wham go to jail and no sancturary for you. Make some governors, mayors and police chiefs look mighty stupid when the dollars dry up.
They do get paid for the jail space by the way but it seems Obama’s people sort of delayed that and delayed checking on the claims for asylum etc etc etc. Tha’s why the extra bodies in ICE And BP.
There’s more but that’s the basics and hey didn’t these snowflake media dummies figure out what tweets are for. Blank blank almighty he’s been leading these SFB’s around by the nose with tweets for months and they still fall for it.
Anyway in the end you’ll see a lot more Mexican workers and hopefull with affordable Mexican passports and on the Bracereo or Green Card programs but the emphasis is on deporting criminals those that threaten us.
Added thought. We help Mexico if we deport them since a huge amount are not Mexican but from other countries like El Sal or even Cuba. Mexico runs a very active blockade at their southern border already but that effort will lessen their costs. .
tnash: “So I think there was opportunity in 2016 for a strong third party ticket….I think the problem obstacles they faced were largely due to weak candidates, in addition to the funding ahirtfalls and ” they can’t win so I won’t vote for them” mentality. . . .Not sure what layers of new governmental control you anticipate in a Trump administration. At this point, I don’t see anything on the horizon that rivals the impact of Obamacare when it comes to adding layers of government control.”
I don’t think Stein was a weak candidate. She’s smart, and she can learn, just as Trump will have to do. The difference is she’s got a moral compass. I’d put her up against Trump or Clinton in a debate any day. There’s a reason the two major parties refuse to engage in third-party debates.
As for more bureaucracy, as a primary example, let’s see what Congress replaces Obamacare with. I have a friend who said he was ecstatic that Trump was elected, but he’s worried because he was eligible for Obamacare and had lots of overdue health concerns tended to over the last year as a result. That included having one of his toes removed for diabetes and the followup care, which he wouldn’t have been able to get under CalWorks (AFDC). Not that I like Obamacare – it is insurance-controlled medical care where the physician is reduced to a cog on the sprocket. I have my doubt as to whether anything will change considering disappearing eligibility will be the Democratic Party’s ticket to win both houses in two years.
In terms Housing, Education, and the Interior, I think we’re going to see a regressive re-write of regulations, if not federal statutes.
Trump’s already called for an aggressive upgrade of the most expensive military in the world, and the middle class will have to pay for it. For a nation that by and large hates socialist programs as much as it does the devil, now’s the time to make a career of the military. With BAH and a retirement package including free university level schooling plus continued BAH while a full-time studen, being a socialist protector of an imperial government ain’t a bad way to go for most free-market capitalists without other leads. Then again, most veterans that I see discover the real war only after they leave military service.
I would say it just the opposite. We are now seeing less regressivism and more progress. You measure by the yardstick of Marx and Engels we choose to use self government of and by the citizens.
In any case and I remind you that your Fourth Branch of Government system and Obama left us with everything your rail against in place and intact. You can’t have it both ways. As you are about to find out with the nuclear option.
Why do you think so many banded together to kick you out of power at so many levels? Like MSNBC if that is a true report, you are outta here and take your fascist crap with you.
This is not fun and games fireside chat time. This is a full blown counter revolution and it’s still in progress. Deguello!
Michael: I went off the Obama wagon in February 2015, after several years of absolute disappointment in his foreign policy, stringent lack of transparency, and domestic spying. He was part of the problem that Trump will continue. NONE OF THAT WILL CHANGE. It’s a plutocracy with 50% of the US living at or below the poverty line.
What’s to like about that? It’s certainly not progressive and it is regressive in terms of civil rights here and abroad.
Steve 56,
– How do you account for the fact that Jill Stein has been routed in her runs for the Massechusets State Legislature and Lt. Governor?
It goes back ( at least partially) to what I said here several months ago…..that if she’s unable to get any traction in a state like Massechusets, how can she expect to have a meaningful following in a national race?
How do I feel about her losses in Massachusetts? Do I have to go through a list of popular politicians who endured loss before being elected?
She was honest, intelligent, and had a message about humanity. That’s good enough for me in a world of corrupted politician and a snake-oil-selling bozo who takes advantage of students in his private university. What’s more, Dubya and this bozo have proven you don’t need brains to be president. And frankly, her Green New Deal would serve better and more of America than this plutocracy does.
Weak answer and the red herring rotted before it crossed the page. Now I know Carville really IS on vacation.
Steve…- I can’t think of any examples where a politician entered a presidential election after getting routed in lower- level state races.
Governor Moonbeam of California might fit that description but he had to wait for a new generatin of snowflakes. Not the one that lost to an immigrant but the one that inherited the Governship from his Daddee.
But I might be wrong it’s the only thing in memory that might fit the requirement. Short list huh?
Whoops I found the list I found the list It’s long……
Glen H. Taylor, a Democrat known as “The Singing Cowboy,” ran for Congress in Idaho seven times (1938, 1940, 1942, 1944, 1950, 1954 and 1956). His 1944 Senate run was his only successful campaign. Taylor was also the Progressive Party vice presidential nominee in 1948.
Look in wikpedia under the heading perennial candidates.
tass was the sister publication to pravda. If that’s your source you might as well of used Reason or Guardian or NYT or WaPo.
Do you dispute that Van der Bellen was elected with 54% of the vote? Right now, I trust more in foreign journalism than our own.
Which news service do you trust?
Ect chewally old man I rather like the BBC and Reuters don’t you know… rather favor Birminginham United though. (What is a Van Der Vellen and why do I care.) Let’s see…How the hell did an Austrian end up in this mess? Is he the bag lady to NATO? Did he get elected with 54% of the vote? Nice. Congratulations. I sent an email. I get it …..he had eleven point eight more than Clinton and in Austria the popular vote counts bu the is anti populist and GOT IT The Green Alternative Party and former Social Democrat. took a while but Reuters came through! He’s going to be Kleins campagin manager in 2020? So back to real football. What do you think of the Ghana Egypt Pan African match up this next go round?
I do listen to the BBC, more because they seem to know how to speak English better than we do, and the interviews are usually discerning.
You have two terrorists in custody and you want to know where they planted the bomb at O’hare. You take both in chains up in a plane and fly over South Chicago. You ask the first guy where he bomb is. He refuses to yak. You throw him out the plane with no chute. Then you turn to the other guy. “We don’t use no torture round here Joe Bob. Where are the bombs planted?” If he hesitates then throw him out. Video tape it. Show it to the world.
We don’t need no friggin terrorists.
They just need some thought control.
All in all, its just a …
Glitch in the road.
Trump Report
Trump is an immoral, evil man. Reports are;
1.) he is a puppet of the satanic, terrorist state Israel
2.) believes in torture
3.) has given money to illegal Israeli settlements in Palestine
4.) supports Israel in their murdering Palestinians and stealing their land for 70 years
5.) has chosen Supreme War Criminals for his cabinet
6.) will not admit the U.S. / Israeli invasions are Wars of Aggression
7.) wants to steal Iraqi oil
8.) will not tell the Truth that Israel did 9/11
9.) believes in murder by drone strikes
10.) does not keep God’s Commandment, “Thou shalt not kill.”
11.) does not tell the Truth that Israeli settlements in Palestine are illegal under international law
Technically, there is no such thing as international law.
Israel should have a trial in the International Criminal Court. Israel to the Hague.
The Hague
161206-ongwen-ot-02.jpg
Israel should have a trial in the International Criminal Court. Israel to the Hague.
The Hague
http://www.buenavistamall.com/161206-ongwen-ot-02.jpg
“Israel’s Settlements Have No Legal Validity, Constitute Flagrant Violation of International Law, Security Council Reaffirms”
https://www.un.org/press/en/2016/sc12657.doc.htm
Technically, there is such a thing as criminal law for those nations which have the balls to ratify it by treaty. We don’t because we’re a bully.
The left is not only mindless but sexistr, racist and bigoted as well . Patriot? To whom? Certainly not to the Consitution of the United States therefore it must be to …mmmmm national socialism, international socialism, or secular regressivism just to make a SWAG or three. If it’s to the Patriot Act I know for sure I’m on the right track. Seign me no Heils I don’t serve The Party.
Now wait for the typical response.
Torture has to be met with torture.
Unfortunately there is no legal system
in our civil society which allows for such practice.
However beheadings must be confronted with appropriate
Actions.
An eye for an eye.
Like Jesus said.
Now, what to do with enemies invading countries on false pretences….
If only we had a legal system in our civil society…. Well, one that actually does anything.
Jesus never said Eye for an Eye.. false doctrine.
The question is what will this torture that is DDT produce? America has not been tortured like this for some time. Usually good comes out. So, there is a purpose to this liar, cheat, slanderer, bigot, racist, cretin, buffoon, carnival barker…..
“So, there is a purpose to this liar, cheat, slanderer, bigot, racist, cretin, buffoon, carnival barker…..”
You didn’t finish your thought Issac. Here, allow me to assist:
“…now enough about me…”
You are welcome.
Assac, you know what’s real torture, your rants always the same thing. Your from or are a BC resident tell us all about East Hastings, the taxes, the drugs, the homeless, the runaways and tell us all about your PM JDT or would that be JDDT?
One thing I really like is President Trump really gets under the skin of all you hate filled liberal weenies. Remember how you told us all how Hilly was a shoe in for president and how Trump could never get those electoral votes? LMAO.
“I want to do everything within the bounds of what you’re allowed to do legally but do I feel it works? Absolutely I feel it works.”
Who would prefer a President that would lie to your face? Seriously, this President has said what he believes and then said the most important thing we demand of the President, he would subordinate his opinions to the rule of law. Haven’t we had enough of Presidents that you KNEW were lying? Haven’t we had enough of Presidents acting above the law?
I view his comments as absolutely refreshing; truthful AND a warning to our enemies. Don’t f*ck with us. Don’t do things that would warrant a response by this President because he will use EVERY legal measure to address them AND will be supportive of “other” measures should he be asked to approve them.
America first? Damn right!
The use of torture is probably not an effective way to get information. But to remove the threat of torture would not be wise if information obtained would prevent a major terrorist act on American soil. In a perfect world, torture would never be used or necessary. But we are not in a perfect world, and we deceive ourselves if we think that not using all means necessary to obtain information that would prevent loss of innocent American lives should not be used.
Maybe if Trump does order torture. some of his generals will quit. Pompeo is questionable on torture.
“various members of Congress, including Republicans, have warned Trump that they will not allow a return to the program launched by George W. Bush.”
Good.
If he does order a return to using torture, that should be grounds for impeachment. Hopefully Congress will keep a watchful eye.
You think torture doesn’t still happen on home soil?
Think again.
Watch Torture: America’s Brutal Prisons.
https://freedocumentaries.org/documentary/torture-america-s-brutal-prisons
Not sure I get your point. Murder is illegal and happens pretty frequently
,especially in Chicago. . Should we drop the laws prohibiting murder?
Your jerk neighbor kid kidnaps your child and sticks them in a well somewhere. You are a fool if you believe that you would not throw that kid against the walls to find out where your kid is.
Governments aren’t parents with kidnapped children.
So we can hand captured isis to the parents of our military and let them do as they please?
Trump said torture works a year ago. Nothing new here…….
If Trump would say he would absolutely prohibit torture, I would not believe him. And whenever any other president of my lifetime said it, I would not have believed them either. But now – especially in the age of terrorism – I would n’t believe ANY CIA director who said it will never be used. I cannot conceive that Donald Trump would ever be stymied by international law when it came to saving American lives.
The only essential question is how critical is the information we need to get. If it is judged as critical to save American lives – say, if we have someone in custody who we KNOW had contact with someone who had mentioned a future terrorist event – I think that NO technique would be forbidden.
1. Torture only works sometimes….
You can torture Trump into admitting his wall is utterly useless and stupid
You can’t torture Trump into giving all his belongings to the poor.
Some causes are greater than people’s own lives, some people are just bat shit crazy/programmed/experienced.
Hope General Mathis is up to reigning in this draft dodging mad man wanna bee emperor Trump.
I hope one day you will quit parroting the daily definition of your masters.
Just use the more “sophisticated” forms of torture used by Israel:
https://www.rt.com/news/374923-israel-torture-methods-interrogation/