Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory

The Internet is awash with sickening conspiracy theories involving a DNC staffer killed in a botched robbery that being peddled by Republicans trying desperately trying to distract from the Russia investigations. This sort of insanity is why I am convinced that this 4T is not going to end without massive domestic bloodshed, a substantial % of this country are brainwashed lunatics.

(05-21-2017, 06:35 PM)Odin Wrote: [ -> ]The Internet is awash with sickening conspiracy theories involving a DNC staffer killed in a botched robbery that being peddled by Republicans trying desperately trying to distract from the Russia investigations. This sort of insanity is why I am convinced that this 4T is not going to end without massive domestic bloodshed, a substantial % of this country are brainwashed lunatics.

Naturally you don't include yourself in this category.

You and Eric the Obtuse are quintessential examples brainwashed lunatics.  You remind me of religious zealots only in this case the state is your god.

(05-21-2017, 07:13 PM)Galen Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-21-2017, 06:35 PM)Odin Wrote: [ -> ]The Internet is awash with sickening conspiracy theories involving a DNC staffer killed in a botched robbery that being peddled by Republicans trying desperately trying to distract from the Russia investigations. This sort of insanity is why I am convinced that this 4T is not going to end without massive domestic bloodshed, a substantial % of this country are brainwashed lunatics.

Naturally you don't include yourself in this category.

You and Eric the Obtuse are quintessential examples brainwashed lunatics.  You remind me of religious zealots only in this case the state is your god.

Strictly speaking, I have seen no particular pattern of Eric's or Galen's thought patterns being influenced by the moon.

(05-21-2017, 06:35 PM)Odin Wrote: [ -> ]The Internet is awash with sickening conspiracy theories involving a DNC staffer killed in a botched robbery that being peddled by Republicans trying desperately trying to distract from the Russia investigations. This sort of insanity is why I am convinced that this 4T is not going to end without massive domestic bloodshed, a substantial % of this country are brainwashed lunatics.

I find it interesting that Kim Dotcom claims to know Seth Rich was in fact giving information to Wikileaks.  It is known that he was a Bernie supporter and if he found that Hillary was rigging the primary then he might have decided to sink her campaign as a consequence.  He certainly was in the right place to get the data.

I haven't yet made up my mind.  Time will tell, it always does.

Thanks for proving you are one of the lunatics, Galen.  

Anyone who takes this BS seriously belongs in the same category as the Sandy Hook Truthers, and most of them are probably the same people

(05-22-2017, 06:48 AM)Odin Wrote: [ -> ]Thanks for proving you are one of the lunatics, Galen.  

Anyone who takes this BS seriously belongs in the same category as the Sandy Hook Truthers, and most of them are probably the same people

The problem is that Wikileaks is offering $20,000 for information on his murder.  They have never done this before and the fact that they did is noteworthy.  When people or organizations do something out of character then it is time to take notice.  I haven't made my mind up but there are way too many anomalies here to ignore.

(05-22-2017, 02:24 PM)Galen Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-22-2017, 06:48 AM)Odin Wrote: [ -> ]Thanks for proving you are one of the lunatics, Galen.  

Anyone who takes this BS seriously belongs in the same category as the Sandy Hook Truthers, and most of them are probably the same people

The problem is that Wikileaks is offering $20,000 for information on his murder.  They have never done this before and the fact that they did is noteworthy.  When people or organizations do something out of character then it is time to take notice.  I haven't made my mind up but there are way too many anomalies here to ignore.

Wikileaks in a Russian propaganda front at this point, they are just baiting the crazies.

THE U.S. GOVERNMENT HAS BECOME THE ULTIMATE EXTENSION OF DONALD TRUMP’S FOR-PROFIT BRAND
Naomi Klein
June 12 2017, 1:16 p.m.
https://theintercept.com/2017/06/12/the-...fit-brand/



IN A LAWSUIT filed today, the attorneys general of the state of Maryland and the District of Columbia claim that by accepting millions of dollars and countless more perks from foreign governments, President Trump is at the center of an “unprecedented constitutional violation.” Whether it’s $270,000 in payments from a lobbying firm working for the Saudi government or praise from the Ambassador of Georgia (also a paying customer), Trump’s hotels and properties continue to rake it in from governments across the globe, from Turkey to Kuwait to India to Afghanistan to Qatar.

The attorneys general claim that “President Trump’s personal fortune is at stake,” whenever he makes a policy decision, whether it be about taxes, climate change, or foreign relations — a troubling notion, to say the least. According to the lawsuit, Trump’s continued entanglement in his business violates the constitutional emolument clause that, in theory, prevents the president from taking payments from foreign governments. The lawsuit is damning, saying, “never before has a President acted with such disregard for this constitutional prescription.”

Trump, of course, still profits directly from his business dealings, since he has not divested from his business holdings in any way.

I’ve spent the last five months researching the Trump family’s global brand-based empire and the various ways that the president has turned the U.S. government into the ultimate extension of his for-profit brand, so far without any repercussion. So it’s good to see the law starting to catch up. But the lawsuit touches on a fraction of the ways in which Trump is actively profiting from the presidency. As I write in the introduction to “No Is Not Enough,” we are seeing this unprecedented level of self-dealing because Trump’s business model is itself relatively new, and certainly a first for a sitting president:

Trump was never the head of a traditional company but has, rather, long been the figurehead of an empire built around his personal brand — one that has, along with his daughter Ivanka’s brand, already benefited from its merger with the U.S. presidency in countless ways (membership rates at Mar-a-Lago have doubled; Ivanka’s product sales, we are told, are through the roof). The Trump family’s business model is part of a broader shift in corporate structure that has taken place within many brand-based multinationals, one with transformative impacts on culture and the job market.

What this model tells us is that the very idea that there could be – or should be – any distinction between the Trump brand and the Trump presidency is a concept the current occupant of the White House cannot begin to comprehend. The presidency is the crowning extension of the Trump brand.

We are in entirely uncharted territory, because let’s face it: human megabrands are a relatively new phenomenon. There’s no rulebook that foresaw any of this. People keep asking — is he going to divest? Is he going to sell his businesses? Is Ivanka going to? But it’s not at all clear what these questions even mean, because their primary businesses are their names. You can’t disentangle Trump the man from Trump the brand; those two entities merged long ago.

There’s a whole web of ways the Trumps can make money off their names and their official and unofficial roles in the White House. Patronage at Trump hotels and resorts by foreign governments and corporations is probably the least of it. Here’s an extract from another relevant chapter:

The conflicts tipped into self-parody on April 6, 2017, when, the Associated Press reported, “Ivanka Trump’s company won provisional approval from the Chinese government for three new trademarks, giving it monopoly rights to sell Ivanka brand jewelry, bags and spa services in the world’s second-largest economy.”

But that’s not the only thing that happened that day. “That night, the first daughter and her husband, Jared Kushner, sat next to the president of China and his wife for a steak and Dover sole dinner at Mar-a-Lago.” A political summit whose details had been arranged by none other than Jared Kushner. This goes well beyond nepotism; it’s the U.S. government as a for-profit family business.

FILE - In this Thursday, April 6, 2017, file photo, Ivanka Trump, second from right, the daughter and assistant to President Donald Trump, is seated with her husband White House senior adviser Jared Kushner, right, during a dinner with President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping, at Mar-a-Lago, in Palm Beach, Fla. China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Lu Kang on Wednesday defended the handling of the applications of the trademarks won by U.S. President Donald Trump’s daughter Ivanka and her company, saying that all such requests are handled fairly.



And a new twist since the book went to press. In China, three labor activists were detained by the government in May while investigating conditions at factories that make shoes for Ivanka Trump’s brand. This news came not long after the U.S.-based China Labor Watch alleged that some workers in factories that produced for Ivanka’s brand were paid what amounted to less than a dollar an hour, while being forced to work 12.5-hour days, six days a week. Despite mounting international condemnation, the activists have yet to be released. Could it be that the Chinese government decided to provide the ultimate service to the Trump family of brands: silencing whistleblowers who were exposing ugly corporate truths?

A New York Times reporter wrote earlier this month that, upon visiting Trump’s golf course in Bedminster, New Jersey, she was given a (now-discontinued) brochure dangling the possibility of a treat from Trump himself: “If he is on-site for your big day, he will likely stop in.” Despite protestations to the contrary, the idea that Trump-the-man is still deeply involved in Trump-the-business is very much a part of the whole offer of Trump-branded hotels and clubs. And nowhere more so than at Mar-a-Lago:

Mar-a-Lago has already increased its membership fees, to $200,000 from $100,000. And why not? Now, for your fee, you might find yourself witnessing a high-stakes conversation about national security over dinner. You might get to hobnob with a visiting head of state. You might even get to witness Trump announcing that he has just launched an air assault on a foreign country.

And, of course, you might even get to meet the president himself, and have the chance to quietly influence him. (No public records are kept of who comes and goes from the club, so who knows?) For decades, Trump has been selling the allure of proximity to wealth and power — it is the meaning of his brand. But now he’s able to offer, to his paying customers, the real deal.

Anything that increases Donald Trump’s visibility, and the perception of him as all-powerful, actively increases the value of the Trump brand, and therefore increases how much clients will pay to be associated with it — to slap it on their new condo development, say, or, on a smaller scale, to play on his golf courses or buy one of his ties.

Meanwhile, the Trump Organization has worked relentlessly to expand its global reach. And why not? The brand is more visible now than ever before, and customers are willing to pay. As the lawsuit states, Trump’s “high office gives the Trump brand greater prominence and exposure.” And this is the heart of what we need to understand about how dangerous it is to have a president who is in the business of selling not any one particular product but his name:

Given that what the Trump sons — Eric and Donald Jr. — are selling is ephemeral (a name), a buyer could pay $6 million for it or could pay $60 million. Who’s to judge what constitutes a fair market-value price? More worryingly, who’s to say what services are being purchased when a private company pays millions to lease the Trump brand? Do they really think it’s that valuable to their condo tower, or do they think that by throwing in an extra $5 million, they might be looked on more favorably in other dealings that require a friendly relationship with the White House? It’s very difficult to see how any of this can be untangled. A brand is worth whatever buyers are willing to pay for it. That’s always been the appeal of building a business on this model — that something as ephemeral as a name could be vested with such real-world monetary value.

What’s extraordinary about Donald Trump’s presidency is that now we are all inside the Trump branded world, whether we want to be or not. We have all become extras in his for-profit reality TV show, which has expanded to swallow the most powerful government in the world.

The Trumps aren’t going to stop coming up with new ways to cash in on the presidency anytime soon. Since I finished writing “No Is Not Enough,” they’ve announced yet another creative new way to turn the White House into a for-profit family business, which I wrote about last week.

Enter American Idea, “a new midscale brand” hotel chain whose first properties will be in Mississippi, a red state where Trump won 18 percentage points more of the popular vote than Hillary Clinton. This is not just an attempt at crashing the Comfort Inn niche by wrapping it in stars and stripes. It’s also the most vivid window yet into the myriad ways the Trump family is transforming the presidency into a for-profit family business, annihilating the line between government and their web of brands.

It turns out that while the Trump kids were on the campaign trail last year, they weren’t just stumping for their father — they were conducting market research on ways to profit from Trump voters. The sons would return to Trump Tower and report on the quaint and old-timey tastes enjoyed in “real America,” as Eric Trump described it on “Good Morning America.”

As Donald Jr. put it, he realized “there’s something here, there’s a market here that we’ve been missing our entire lives by focusing only on the high end.” And there were more perks to tagging along on the campaign trail. They also met people who donated to the Trump campaign, and some of those very people are now the first partners for this new venture.

So let’s unpack that a bit. In Trump’s world, voters are future customers, campaign donors are future investors, and election results are a rich vein of consumer data.

The new lawsuit, though welcome, is only the first step of understanding the merger of the Trump Organization and the White House – with its almost infinite possibilities for corruption and influence peddling.

Naomi Klein’s new book, No Is Not Enough: Resisting Trump’s Shock Politics and Winning the World We Need, will published by Haymarket Books on June 13. http://www.noisnotenough.org

Top photo: Donald Trump and his family, from left, son Donald Trump Jr., son Eric Trump, wife Melania Trump, and daughters Tiffany Trump and Ivanka Trump cut the ribbon at the Trump International Hotel on Oct. 26, 2016, in Washington.

Not demonic? I beg to differ.


From the Sierra Club:


Horrible! The Trump administration just announced they're making new plans to expand drilling off America's coasts.

The announcement that this administration will develop a new Five Year Plan for offshore drilling, made today by Secretary Zinke, reopens plans to drill off our coasts, creating a potential for wide-scale disaster in our oceans. It also brazenly ignores permanent protections put in place for the Arctic and Atlantic Oceans, and hits reset on the plan the Obama administration completed only 6 months ago.

Disaster after disaster has shown that Big Oil and Gas cannot be trusted. Their track record includes the Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989, a failed attempt by Shell to drill in the Arctic Ocean, the Deepwater Horizon tragedy in the Gulf of Mexico, a major oil spill off the Santa Barbara coast, and the oil spill and leak of gas in Alaska's Cook Inlet. These tragedies can not be allowed to happen again.

Offshore oil spills happen frequently, devastating marine environments, commercial fishing industry, and tourism businesses. Even without spills, offshore oil causes pollution. The Department of the Interior should be protecting our coasts not handing them over so Big Oil can profit at the expense of coastal communities!

After more than 3.3 million public comments and 36 public meetings, the Obama administration's recent 5-year lease plan excluded drilling in the Pacific, the Arctic, and the Atlantic. We cannot go backwards now and allow Trump, Zinke and the rest of this dirty fuel-hungry administration to put our vulnerable coasts in jeopardy.

This planning process is an incredible waste of public resources and a deliberate attack on our oceans. Tell Zinke: The public has spoken, no more offshore drilling!

Reince Priebus admits Trump administration has looked into changing the First Amendment
May 1, 2017
http://theweek.com/speedreads/695695/rei...-amendment

White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus admitted during a Sunday morning interview with ABC's Jonathan Karl that the Trump administration has "looked at" a constitutional amendment to free speech protections.

Karl sought to clarify President Trump's tweet that "the failing New York Times has disgraced the media world. Gotten me wrong for two solid years. Change the libel laws?" "That would require, as I understand it, a constitutional amendment," Karl said. "Is he really going to pursue that? Is that something he wants to pursue?"

"I think it's something we've looked at," Priebus replied in the affirmative. "How that gets executed, or whether that goes anywhere, is a different story."

As Talking Points Memo notes, it was not a slip of the tongue — Priebus repeats that "this is something that is being looked at" later in the interview as well.

"The changes President Trump wants are blocked by decades of jurisprudence which is little contested, unlike other hot button points of constitutional law," writes TPM's Josh Marshall. "If you want what Trump wants, you have to amend the Constitution — and not the Constitution in general but the First Amendment specifically. Amending the First Amendment to allow the head of state to sue people who say things he doesn't like amounts to abolishing it."

Watch the clip below. Jeva Lange

Recently, I've been throwing a tantrum against humor.  I still think a repeated bombardment directed at red (or blue) people in general is a bad idea.  Making fun of Trump?  Arguably, a much less bad idea.

The Republicans are correct, though, that precedents involving the First Amendment, Free Speech and libel are extremely well set in law.  Once one becomes a celebrity, especially a celebrity politician, libel protection become nil to nonexistent.  You can dump on politicians as much as one likes.  That isn't apt to change without the constitutional amendment process.

And that is so with very good reason.  The notion of a government board that judges whether any can speak against the government is chilling.

But I've also got a sense that freight trains are being driven through the eye of a needle.  Hillary's e-mails and Trump's Russia connection might be examples.  A little evidence of something not that absurd can be blown crazy out of proportion by today's media and hostile political forces.

I can go into wishful thinking mode, and wish for a society that cared more for providing benefit to the people rather than stoking scandal.  I'd like to think there ought to be a right to hope, even if the above sort of hope is hopeless.  It's not like scandal about politicians is new.  Did you hear it rumored that Thomas Jefferson had a child with one of his slaves?  Is there no limit as to how far people will go?

But censoring criticism of the government is not the way to go.

The Feds Just Expanded Civil Asset Forfeiture 'Laws' Nationwide
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-19...nationwide

....As Reuters reports, the U.S. Justice Department announced on Wednesday that the federal government will reinstate a program that helps local and state law enforcement seize cash and other assets they suspect have been earned from crimes.

Local police will now be able to seize cash, often from those suspected of drug crimes, even in states that do not condone the policy.

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein told reporters that most seizures were warranted because the "vast majority" of people who have property taken by police do not contest it in court.

"This is going to enable us to work with local police and our prosecutors to ensure that when assets are lawfully seized they are not returned to criminals," said Rosenstein at a media briefing at the Justice Department.

The Obama administration had rolled back the policy in 2015, saying it incentivized police to take money from people who had committed crimes.

Since former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder weighed in on the issue in 2015, Justice Department agencies like the Drug Enforcement Administration has been barred from rewarding local police for taking possessions from people they stop.

Now, the federal government will again be able to return up to 80 percent of the assets seized to local law enforcement.

Rosenstein said the 2015 policy had a chilling effect on seizures by local law enforcement.

Many states have civil asset forfeiture laws that allow the state government to redistribute money seized for programs like education. But the federal program returns cash directly to the police department that took the asset, allowing them to buy new equipment or as drug sniffing dogs.

The Justice Department under President Donald Trump has made efforts to improve relationships with local and state law enforcement, which they viewed as damaged under the Obama administration. Rosenstein said that the president had heard from police who were concerned about the 2015 policy, but the administration was not acting to score political points with police unions that supported Trump's campaign.

"This is not an effort to appease any particular constituency. It is an effort to empower law enforcement," Rosenstein said. The Police State's tentacles just reached a little further into your 'pocketbook' as what has become known as “policing for profit,” goes nationwide.. by federal law!

(07-21-2017, 02:20 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]The Feds Just Expanded Civil Asset Forfeiture 'Laws' Nationwide
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-19...nationwide

....As Reuters reports, the U.S. Justice Department announced on Wednesday that the federal government will reinstate a program that helps local and state law enforcement seize cash and other assets they suspect have been earned from crimes.

Local police will now be able to seize cash, often from those suspected of drug crimes, even in states that do not condone the policy.

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein told reporters that most seizures were warranted because the "vast majority" of people who have property taken by police do not contest it in court.

"This is going to enable us to work with local police and our prosecutors to ensure that when assets are lawfully seized they are not returned to criminals," said Rosenstein at a media briefing at the Justice Department.

The Obama administration had rolled back the policy in 2015, saying it incentivized police to take money from people who had committed crimes.

Since former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder weighed in on the issue in 2015, Justice Department agencies like the Drug Enforcement Administration has been barred from rewarding local police for taking possessions from people they stop.

Now, the federal government will again be able to return up to 80 percent of the assets seized to local law enforcement.

Rosenstein said the 2015 policy had a chilling effect on seizures by local law enforcement.

Many states have civil asset forfeiture laws that allow the state government to redistribute money seized for programs like education. But the federal program returns cash directly to the police department that took the asset, allowing them to buy new equipment or as drug sniffing dogs.

The Justice Department under President Donald Trump has made efforts to improve relationships with local and state law enforcement, which they viewed as damaged under the Obama administration. Rosenstein said that the president had heard from police who were concerned about the 2015 policy, but the administration was not acting to score political points with police unions that supported Trump's campaign.

"This is not an effort to appease any particular constituency. It is an effort to empower law enforcement," Rosenstein said. The Police State's tentacles just reached a little further into your 'pocketbook' as what has become known as “policing for profit,” goes nationwide.. by federal law!

Yes, civil asset forfeiture is disgusting.   If there's someone who needs a nice case of cancer, its Sessions.  Anyone who's pro civil  asset forfeiture is a fascist.   It's like this,
he's  way past his expiration date [in more ways than 1. ]    Oh, and

It's the 1950's calling. They want Sessions back.

(07-20-2017, 12:43 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ]#Impeach!

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-l...story.html

'Trump’s buyer’s remorse about Sessions wasn’t the only evidence in the interview of the president’s eccentric views about the rule of law. He suggested at one point that the FBI director reports directly to the president. (In fact, that official is part of the Justice Department chain of command, though as a member of the executive branch he is ultimately accountable to the president and, obviously, can be fired by the president.)'

==========================

Here I try to break this down a bit.

Trump is half Kraut, and I have long wondered if his ancestors in the US were Hitler lovers during the past 4T. I also wonder how bought into English legal concepts he and his ancestors are / were.

Beyond that I am more and more convinced that Trump, if not a Duginist / Eurasianist himself, is certainly a puppet of such Anti Western Fiends. That alignment puts him in conflict with normal, traditional Anglo-American culture.

So to all you Borders, Language and Culture people, it really sucks that we have people who subscribe to thoroughly alien cultural concepts in the WH.

Uh, good borders make for good neighbors.   Global warming's gonna do a number on the US's carrying capacity, which means we can't fucking take care of the rest of the world. Charity begins at home.  Why can't some progressives see how messed up they are on stuff?  Look at Houston.  It's a sanctuary city, but oh, the hypocrisy.  Houston should put illegal aliens in jail and offer sanctuary to homeless folks.  They're 180 degrees off.  What a cabal of morons, those city officials.   Fuck you Houston. I hope the ACLU cleans y'all clocks.  The US, the land of fucked up priorities. US out of the Mideast. Let Russia have the place.  I don't care about the Mideast.  Let it just go up in flames. I also have no pity for employers who are now short of workers  Hey employers, raise wages and do stuff to make the work environment better.  You'll then get your employees.  If y'all want to rely on illegal labor and it's shut down, too bad. Just go out of business. I don't care and I won't miss y'all.   So , yeah, even a blind squirrel finds nuts at times. Trump's wall and shutting off illegal labor are good things™.  Oh, and aren't English legal concepts part of "culture"?

Asset forfeiture is appropriate for

1. objects apparently used in the commission of a crime. So one busts a pimp with some runaway girls having been turned into prostitutes... and he is apparently transporting his 'wares' in a late-model "Pimpmobile". The vehicle could reasonably be seized but stored for a return to the accused in the event of a non-conviction. The video equipment in use by a creator, distributor, or user of child porn could be seized and put under custody for return in the event of a non-conviction. This would be true whether it is camera equipment or studio props in use in making the stuff, a supplier's vehicle used in transporting it, or a porn user's television and playback gear -- maybe the sofa on which he sits to watch it.

2. Perishables to be sold on the fair market or supplied to the general public for purposes of welfare. Proceeds must be held in trust for return to someone not convicted.

3. Overt contraband, like counterfeit coins and goods, illegal drugs, illegal weapons, child porn, material in violation of the Endangered Species Act, or devices used in illicit gambling. Most of this can be destroyed because there could be no lawful owner.

4. Revenue in whole or part used in the commission of a crime or proceeds of a crime. Again, the funds should not be disbursed or goodies sold until a conviction is made. Property should be kept in escrow.

5. Stolen goods that are otherwise licit -- to be returned to lawful owners or insurance companies for which a claim is made.

prower2b Wrote:Asset forfeiture is appropriate for

1. objects apparently used in the commission of a crime. So one busts a pimp with some runaway girls having been turned into prostitutes... and he is apparently transporting his 'wares' in a late-model "Pimpmobile". The vehicle could reasonably be seized but stored for a return to the accused in the event of a non-conviction. The video equipment in use by a creator, distributor, or user of child porn  could be seized and put under custody for return in the event of a non-conviction. This would be true whether it is camera equipment or studio props in use in making the stuff, a supplier's vehicle used in transporting it, or a porn user's television and playback gear -- maybe the sofa on which he sits to watch it.   

The above is not civil asset forfeiture.  That's something like held in safe keeping. You're implying the accused gets his/her stuff back.  "The vehicle could reasonably be seized but stored for a return to the accused in the event of a non-conviction." is not civil asset forfeiture.  Civil asset forfeiture can rob you of your stuff even without a conviction. That's why it's so evil. Any statute that has that  term needs to be ripped up and burned.   I also don't like the word , "apparently" in any law/statute either.  It's a nebulous subjective word what means like "seems like" , "could be", "more likely is/is not".  The word, "appear" also has this problem.  Example:

She appears to be pregnant.  <- This sentence is messed up.  She is pregnant, or she is not.  That's also why any used of those words in laws/statutes like the US legal code defines
terrorism as such.

So... the US has been ruled by clowns. Laws/statutes should be, IMHO, clearly stated.  Never mind all of the cruft there is.   The Republicans have a good narrative I'm going to steal.   "Repeal and replace" is actually a good idea in many cases.  Stuff like repeal/replace Obamacare with Medicare for all, repeal/replace Medicare payroll tax due to issues with that tax base with a WTO compliant VAT tax.  Taxes go up, private insurance and their "networks" go away, tax code is a real good thing to repeal/replace.  Add VAT tax here, add X/Y tax here.  X/Y tax is just a progressive income tax that starts at whatever to compensate for regressive VAT tax.  X/Y tax = you make X income from all sources no matter where income originated and pay Y tax. Just repeal laws that forbid competition like you can't get your prescriptions in Canada/Europe/Mexico/ and wherever the FDA approves which drugs from which country are safe.

Quote:2. Perishables to be sold on the fair market or supplied to the general public for purposes of welfare. Proceeds must be held in trust for return to someone not convicted.

Like the above you're not describing civil asset forfeiture.

Quote:3. Overt contraband, like counterfeit coins and goods, illegal drugs, illegal weapons, child porn, material in violation of the Endangered Species Act, or devices used in illicit gambling. Most of this can be destroyed because there could be no lawful owner.

Close.  I'd legalize all gambling though.  I don't think we agree of course on "illegal drugs".  Weed and peyote should just be legalized. shrooms and LSD should just be scheduled prescriptions. LSD has some promise, so it should be legal under medical supervision.

Quote:4. Revenue in whole or part used in the commission of a crime or proceeds of a crime.  Again, the funds should not be disbursed or goodies sold until a conviction is made. Property should be kept in escrow.

That , like the above does not happen with civil asset forfeiture.  Modern day highway robber governments use it to feather their nests.  The laws/statutes should have what you mentioned below as the first option. You'd get something like the assets being held pending trial shall be used for restitution upon conviction ... or... the assets being held pending trial shall be released to the state of X general fund or federal treasury as the case may be.  The  condition of fund/property  being released to a non law enforcement entity shuts down the incentive for local governments to do aforementioned feather nesting.  As for the several states, they'd by default have to release their civil asset takings to again, a third party. I'd add the phrase below to keep congress from screwing stuff up.

Congress is forbidden from using funds obtained from civil asset forfeiture from anything else except to refund it to offset deficits.  After all, like I was saying, we're dealing with clowns.  I do think these changes should be popular enough such that if nagging congress members now and following through on just a "replace" is a nice starting point for this narrative. So you see, Republicans can be useful in rare cases.  Repeal/replace all the way baby.

Quote:5. Stolen goods that are otherwise licit -- to be returned to lawful owners or insurance companies for which a claim is made.

That's really a good idea for real.  The above is called restitution, FWIW.

(07-21-2017, 04:22 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-20-2017, 12:43 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ]#Impeach!

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-l...story.html

'Trump’s buyer’s remorse about Sessions wasn’t the only evidence in the interview of the president’s eccentric views about the rule of law. He suggested at one point that the FBI director reports directly to the president. (In fact, that official is part of the Justice Department chain of command, though as a member of the executive branch he is ultimately accountable to the president and, obviously, can be fired by the president.)'

==========================

Here I try to break this down a bit.

Trump is half Kraut, and I have long wondered if his ancestors in the US were Hitler lovers during the past 4T. I also wonder how bought into English legal concepts he and his ancestors are / were.

Beyond that I am more and more convinced that Trump, if not a Duginist / Eurasianist himself, is certainly a puppet of such Anti Western Fiends. That alignment puts him in conflict with normal, traditional Anglo-American culture.

So to all you Borders, Language and Culture people, it really sucks that we have people who subscribe to thoroughly alien cultural concepts in the WH.

Uh, good borders make for good neighbors.   Global warming's gonna do a number on the US's carrying capacity, which means we can't fucking take care of the rest of the world. Charity begins at home.  Why can't some progressives see how messed up they are on stuff?  Look at Houston.  It's a sanctuary city, but oh, the hypocrisy.  Houston should put illegal aliens in jail and offer sanctuary to homeless folks.  They're 180 degrees off.  What a cabal of morons, those city officials.   Fuck you Houston. I hope the ACLU cleans y'all clocks.  The US, the land of fucked up priorities. US out of the Mideast. Let Russia have the place.  I don't care about the Mideast.  Let it just go up in flames. I also have no pity for employers who are now short of workers  Hey employers, raise wages and do stuff to make the work environment better.  You'll then get your employees.  If y'all want to rely on illegal labor and it's shut down, too bad. Just go out of business. I don't care and I won't miss y'all.   So , yeah, even a blind squirrel finds nuts at times. Trump's wall and shutting off illegal labor are good things™.  Oh, and aren't English legal concepts part of "culture"?

Get out of the mideast. Maybe good advice. But what occurs to me in reply to your statement is, well, flames have a tendency to spread. Sometimes fast.

Sanctuary cities are necessary as a response to illegal picking up of immigrants without cause and sending them back. The USA is a land of immigrants. Hypocrisy is blaming immigrants for our troubles. No, it's true our priorities are screwed, but that doesn't mean progressives are necessarily wrong about immigrants. The extreme Republicans and the Trump/Sessions xenophobic base have stopped bipartisan reforms for years supported by Republican and Democratic presidents alike which could have straightened out the mess. They are the ones worthy of the most concerted and loud attacks against them.

(07-21-2017, 11:43 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-21-2017, 04:22 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-20-2017, 12:43 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ]#Impeach!

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-l...story.html

'Trump’s buyer’s remorse about Sessions wasn’t the only evidence in the interview of the president’s eccentric views about the rule of law. He suggested at one point that the FBI director reports directly to the president. (In fact, that official is part of the Justice Department chain of command, though as a member of the executive branch he is ultimately accountable to the president and, obviously, can be fired by the president.)'

==========================

Here I try to break this down a bit.

Trump is half Kraut, and I have long wondered if his ancestors in the US were Hitler lovers during the past 4T. I also wonder how bought into English legal concepts he and his ancestors are / were.

Beyond that I am more and more convinced that Trump, if not a Duginist / Eurasianist himself, is certainly a puppet of such Anti Western Fiends. That alignment puts him in conflict with normal, traditional Anglo-American culture.

So to all you Borders, Language and Culture people, it really sucks that we have people who subscribe to thoroughly alien cultural concepts in the WH.

Uh, good borders make for good neighbors.   Global warming's gonna do a number on the US's carrying capacity, which means we can't fucking take care of the rest of the world. Charity begins at home.  Why can't some progressives see how messed up they are on stuff?  Look at Houston.  It's a sanctuary city, but oh, the hypocrisy.  Houston should put illegal aliens in jail and offer sanctuary to homeless folks.  They're 180 degrees off.  What a cabal of morons, those city officials.   Fuck you Houston. I hope the ACLU cleans y'all clocks.  The US, the land of fucked up priorities. US out of the Mideast. Let Russia have the place.  I don't care about the Mideast.  Let it just go up in flames. I also have no pity for employers who are now short of workers  Hey employers, raise wages and do stuff to make the work environment better.  You'll then get your employees.  If y'all want to rely on illegal labor and it's shut down, too bad. Just go out of business. I don't care and I won't miss y'all.   So , yeah, even a blind squirrel finds nuts at times. Trump's wall and shutting off illegal labor are good things™.  Oh, and aren't English legal concepts part of "culture"?

Get out of the mideast. Maybe good advice. But what occurs to me in reply to your statement is, well, flames have a tendency to spread. Sometimes fast.

Sanctuary cities are necessary as a response to illegal picking up of immigrants without cause and sending them back. The USA is a land of immigrants. Hypocrisy is blaming immigrants for our troubles. No, it's true our priorities are screwed, but that doesn't mean progressives are necessarily wrong about immigrants. The extreme Republicans and the Trump/Sessions xenophobic base have stopped bipartisan reforms for years supported by Republican and Democratic presidents alike which could have straightened out the mess. They are the ones worthy of the most concerted and loud attacks against them.

1. We more or less agree wrt Mideast, I think...

2.  Hmmmm..... Life lessons from poker needed here. - When playing a hand always consider that how you play this hand affects the other players. IOW, how you play this hand affects the future. So, it appears Eric and Rags are sitting at the virtual table.  So Eric mentions " bipartisan reforms for years supported by Republican and Democratic presidents alike which could have straightened out the mess..."  I think you want Path to Citizenship along with perhaps more folks on the waiting list coming in.  So now:

1. Are you OK with just letting the whole world in, with no checks whatsoever?  If so, have you considered some possible consequences.  If we let too many folks in, then wages would crash and we'd for sure become a 3rd world shithole and in the end nobody benefits. Have you considered that uncontrolled borders also let folks who have wormies and other pathogens to cross. Remember that prior immigrants to the US, you know those you speak of in the 20th century got health screenings?  Why should we risk public health to make some dumb ideological point? Now, the Trump side's objectives are also not grounded in reality.  First, you can't of course keep everyone out, nor discount that there are a batch of immigrants that do indeed do shitty jobs citizens won't do.  So have a plan, man. To play the cards right for the long term in this case requires in step by step manner.

1. Get control of the borders. We don't want a mess after we do:

2. Implement path to citizenship.  Spend the money, set up the processing centers, get the medical resources set up, then get the word out that citizenship sign up is available.  This is when you stop deporting except right at the border.

3. Have the new citizens take a seminar on employee/rights rights. They shall like everyone else and H-2 holders [should be] paid the minimum wage laws and offered the customary OSHA  protections. 

4. End this stupid war on drugs because it causes a lot of the push of folks to our border.  Mexico for example is a narco state because the US is too dumb to see its own part in the mess.  Also no more messing around in Latin America's internal affairs anymore by the US.


You see Eric, one has to do a deep data dive to get rational policies that emphasize logic over irrational emotionalism.
Laws/statutes made based on emotion are doomed to fail or disaster because any semblance to reality is utterly lacking.  Peace out.

Rags.


Wow, what an emoticon.  Neon is cool.

(07-22-2017, 12:14 AM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-21-2017, 11:43 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Get out of the mideast. Maybe good advice. But what occurs to me in reply to your statement is, well, flames have a tendency to spread. Sometimes fast.

Sanctuary cities are necessary as a response to illegal picking up of immigrants without cause and sending them back. The USA is a land of immigrants. Hypocrisy is blaming immigrants for our troubles. No, it's true our priorities are screwed, but that doesn't mean progressives are necessarily wrong about immigrants. The extreme Republicans and the Trump/Sessions xenophobic base have stopped bipartisan reforms for years supported by Republican and Democratic presidents alike which could have straightened out the mess. They are the ones worthy of the most concerted and loud attacks against them.

1. We more or less agree wrt Mideast, I think...

2.  Hmmmm..... Life lessons from poker needed here. - When playing a hand always consider that how you play this hand affects the other players. IOW, how you play this hand affects the future. So, it appears Eric and Rags are sitting at the virtual table.  So Eric mentions " bipartisan reforms for years supported by Republican and Democratic presidents alike which could have straightened out the mess..."  I think you want Path to Citizenship along with perhaps more folks on the waiting list coming in.  So now:

1. Are you OK with just letting the whole world in, with no checks whatsoever?  If so, have you considered some possible consequences.  If we let too many folks in, then wages would crash and we'd for sure become a 3rd world shithole and in the end nobody benefits. Have you considered that uncontrolled borders also let folks who have wormies and other pathogens to cross. Remember that prior immigrants to the US, you know those you speak of in the 20th century got health screenings?  Why should we risk public health to make some dumb ideological point? Now, the Trump side's objectives are also not grounded in reality.  First, you can't of course keep everyone out, nor discount that there are a batch of immigrants that do indeed do shitty jobs citizens won't do.  So have a plan, man. To play the cards right for the long term in this case requires in step by step manner.

I think the plans that were proposed in congress were fine. That's not letting too many folks in; it was a balanced plan.

Quote:1. Get control of the borders. We don't want a mess after we do:

2. Implement path to citizenship.  Spend the money, set up the processing centers, get the medical resources set up, then get the word out that citizenship sign up is available.  This is when you stop deporting except right at the border.

3. Have the new citizens take a seminar on employee/rights rights. They shall like everyone else and H-2 holders [should be] paid the minimum wage laws and offered the customary OSHA  protections. 

4. End this stupid war on drugs because it causes a lot of the push of folks to our border.  Mexico for example is a narco state because the US is too dumb to see its own part in the mess.  Also no more messing around in Latin America's internal affairs anymore by the US.

I think the plans were reasonable and made immigrants go through these hoops. Maybe they could be tweaked, I dunno. But the plans were not implemented because of the right-wing extremists who control our congress.