[AMV] Amerikaanse politiek #548 - Florence is coming

quote:

Op vrijdag 14 september 2018 20:55 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Rectificatie:
[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 september 2018 01:30 schreef Nintex het volgende:

[..]

Tja, Fake News verspreiden is de MSM goed in. De damage is done mensen hebben de originele headline gezien, maar de rectificatie zal niet zoveel aandacht krijgen.

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 september 2018 01:31 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Maar jij denkt dat jouw media nauwkeuriger zijn en ook goed corrigeren als ze fout zitten?

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 september 2018 01:40 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Dat is wel een heel erg retorische vraag.

quote:

Op vrijdag 14 september 2018 23:41 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Hm mja, ik kan slechts weergeven hoe ik er over denk ... bij deze:

[..]

Manaforts advocaten hebben er op aangestuurd om bepaalde kwesties te scheiden. Hierdoor zijn er 2 rechtszaken gekomen. Eentje in Washington DC en eentje in Virginia.

De zaak in Virginia leide tot 8 keer schuldig en 10 keer een hung jury (11 juryleden stemden voor elke aanklacht schuldig en 1 onschuldig). Hierover zou nog een besluit moeten komen of de resterende 10 aanklachten vervolgd gaan worden. Ik weet niet of dit onderdeel is van de plea deal die gesloten is.

De zaak in Washington DC zou vandaag eindelijk beginnen, maar zoals gezegd heeft hij Manafort schuld bekend en samenwerking toegezegd in ruil voor ernstige strafvermindering. Dit proces is hiermee uitgesteld totdat hij ofwel geleverd heeft ofwel dat het duidelijk is dat hij niet gaat leveren.

Bij de aanklachten zijn Trump en de Trump campagne niet direct betrokken. Desalnietemin was hij wel Trumps campagnemanager en had hij er mogelijk verstandig aan gedaan om te zorgen dat Trump niet won gezien de extra exposure die zijn winst genereerde.

[..]

Hij heeft 100% zeker een deal gesloten. Zie bijvoorbeeld:
- dit nytimes artikel: https://www.nytimes.com/2(...)afort-plea-deal.html
- de plea deal zelf: https://int.nyt.com/data/(...)2/optimized/full.pdf

[..]

Ja, snap ik. Maddow vind ik ook vaak nuttig hiervoor. Geschreven heeft vox.com vaak goede en accurate explainers. Maar ja, dat duurt altijd natuurlijk eventjes.Misschien dat dit wat voor je is? https://www.vox.com/2018/(...)mueller-trump-russia

quote:

Wealthiest Republican supporter in Ohio quits party

The wealthiest supporter of the GOP in Ohio said Thursday that he is no longer a member of the Republican Party.

“I just decided I’m no longer a Republican,” L Brands CEO Leslie Wexner said during a panel discussion at a leadership summit, according to The Columbus Dispatch.

Wexner, who said he’s been a Republican since college, added that he is now an independent, before saying that he “won’t support this nonsense in the Republican Party” anymore.

“I haven’t run an ad in the newspaper that said, ‘I quit,’” he said.

The Columbus Dispatch noted that Wexner said he’s instead been writing notes to friends who are lawmakers and telling them that he’s no longer a member of the GOP.

The development came just a day after former President Obama slammed GOP lawmakers during a rally in Ohio for Democratic gubernatorial candidate Richard Cordray.

“What you’re seeing is Republicans in Congress who are bending over backwards to try to shield and deflect oversight of this behavior and accountability and consequences," Obama said.

“This is serious. You know it is. And frankly even some of the Republicans know it is. They will say it, they just don’t do anything about it. … [They say,] 'we’ll put up with crazy' in exchange for tax reform and deregulation.”

Wexner called Obama’s visit to Ohio this week a “great moment for the community,” according to the Dispatch.

“I was struck by the genuineness of the man; his candor, humility and empathy for others,” Wexner said.

The newspaper noted that the comments stand in stark contrast to what the GOP supporter has said about President Trump.

The billionaire CEO reportedly said in a speech last year that he was “ashamed” by Trump’s response to the white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Va., that erupted in violence and led to the death of a 32-year-old woman.

The Ohio businessman has donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to Republican candidates and groups over the years, including giving $250,000 to a super PAC backing Sen. Rob Portman's (R) reelection campaign in 2016 and nearly $70,000 to GOP committees and candidates in Ohio and other states, the Dispatch noted.

Wexner isn't the only person to renounce their GOP affiliation this year. In August, Michael London, a former member of the Trumbull Town Council in Connecticut, announced he was leaving the party because it was "no longer the party that I believed in all these years."

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zaterdag 15-09-2018 om 05:08:11 When President Obama said that he has been to “57 States,” very little mention in Fake News Media. Can you imagine if I said that...story of the year! @IngrahamAngle reageer retweet

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 september 2018 08:42 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Trouwens.... Nu Manafort al zijn bezit heeft opgegeven is het dan zo dat Mueller nu de beschikking heeft over zijn appartement in Trump Tower?

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 september 2018 08:59 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

De VS krijgt idd dat apartment. Weet niet wanneer het overgedragen wordt. Misschien kunnen ze er een stukje van de secret service huisvesten ipv wat ze nu huren in Trump Tower?

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 september 2018 06:23 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

Maddow

Robert Mueller Secures Full Cooperation, Guilty Plea From Paul Manafort | Rachel Maddow | MSNBC

twitter:

MaddowBlog twitterde op zaterdag 15-09-2018 om 03:27:03 Manafort guilty of an illegal, foreign-funded smear campaign against Hillary Clinton for not being sufficiently pro-Russia? Hmmm.... https://t.co/aRwanCO0bS reageer retweet

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 september 2018 08:42 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Trouwens.... Nu Manafort al zijn bezit heeft opgegeven is het dan zo dat Mueller nu de beschikking heeft over zijn appartement in Trump Tower?

twitter:

kenvogel twitterde op zaterdag 15-09-2018 om 04:40:46 NEW: People who worked with MANAFORT in Ukraine think his real value to MUELLER may be flipping on the oligarchs, the pols they funded & the Western firms/operatives who assisted them, including ones he recruited, like TONY PODESTA, MERCURY & @SKADDENARPS. https://t.co/eubx2gJzfq reageer retweet

twitter:

kenvogel twitterde op zaterdag 15-09-2018 om 04:42:28 Allies of PODESTA & MERCURY are seething at MANAFORT right now. They blame him for misleading them into FARA violations back in 2012, & now they're concerned that he's going to help MUELLER frame them for work he orchestrated. https://t.co/eubx2gJzfq reageer retweet

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 september 2018 13:03 schreef Nintex het volgende:

twitter:

kenvogel twitterde op zaterdag 15-09-2018 om 04:40:46 NEW: People who worked with MANAFORT in Ukraine think his real value to MUELLER may be flipping on the oligarchs, the pols they funded & the Western firms/operatives who assisted them, including ones he recruited, like TONY PODESTA, MERCURY & @SKADDENARPS. https://t.co/eubx2gJzfq reageer retweet

twitter:

kenvogel twitterde op zaterdag 15-09-2018 om 04:42:28 Allies of PODESTA & MERCURY are seething at MANAFORT right now. They blame him for misleading them into FARA violations back in 2012, & now they're concerned that he's going to help MUELLER frame them for work he orchestrated. https://t.co/eubx2gJzfq reageer retweet

Kijk eens aan.

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 september 2018 13:10 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Oligarchen zou ik kunnen geloven. Slechts wat lobbyisten als Podesta oid, daarvan lijkt het me sterk dat het hoog genoeg de boom in gaat om een grote deal over te kunnen sluiten.

Het zou ook verklaren dat hij expliciet aangaf dat zijn familie veilig moest zijn.

Hoe dan ook heeft hij aangegeven met willekeurig wat hem gevraagd wordt mee te werken, dus we gaan zien wie er allemaal onder de bus gegooid worden.

quote:

Trump cannot use a pardon to stop Manafort’s cooperation (WaPo)

By Paul Rosenzweig and Justin Florence

Paul Rosenzweig is a senior fellow at the R Street Institute, a policy research organization and a former Whitewater prosecutor under Kenneth W. Starr. Justin Florence is the legal director of Protect Democracy and a former White House associate counsel in the Obama administration.

With a plea deal announced Friday in the second trial of former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort, the possibility that President Trump will issue a pardon to prevent Manafort's future cooperation with special counsel Robert S. Mueller III warrants fresh attention.

Trump's supportive tweet about Manafort after his conviction in August on eight felony fraud counts, praising him for not cooperating with prosecutors, was widely interpreted as a hint of future presidential leniency. Trump has insisted on his "absolute" power to pardon even himself, and his lawyers in a secret January memo to Mueller asserted the president's complete control over federal investigations as the nation's chief law enforcement officer.

Trump and his team have tried to lay the groundwork for pardons to protect him from criminal charges. But can he use the pardon power in that way? Not in our reading of the law. A self-pardon, or a pardon that is self-protective and serves the same purpose as a self-pardon, would be an abuse of power that violates the Constitution and, as such, could warrant impeachment.

If the president can use the pardon power to protect himself from prosecution, it would effectively transform him into an authoritarian ruler, incapable of being limited by law or any other branches of government. In constitutional terms, using the pardon power in this way would appear to violate Article II, which requires the president to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." To honor his oath of office, in other words, the president must act faithfully to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution" to the best of his ability.

A president's first obligation is to the Constitution and its faithful enforcement — not to himself. He may not act, or fail to act, for corrupt or self-interested reasons. And he must enforce the laws Congress has enacted, not subvert those laws to his own interests or those of his cronies.

The president's powers — even seemingly unfettered ones, such as the power of the pardon — must be exercised within the parameters of other legal requirements derived from the Constitution or enacted by statute. To see this most clearly, consider a diverse group of people: the class of people who violated the Selective Service laws during the Vietnam War by burning their draft cards, fleeing to Canada, or through other, nonviolent acts of protest. President Jimmy Carter used the pardon power to grant clemency to everyone who had broken these laws in protesting the war — a merciful gesture by Carter, whatever your view on the merits of the conflict.

But what if, say, Carter had granted the same clemency but limited it to Caucasians and excluded all people of color. Or if he afforded clemency only to Catholics, but not to Protestants, Jews or Muslims. Americans would surely say that the pardon power could not be used in that way — and that using a lawful power to violate another law (in this case, the right to equal protection) would render the pardon itself illegitimate and unlawful.

The principle would also apply to self-protective pardons; the power itself cannot reasonably be read to allow its use to further violations of other laws — in Trump's case, that might mean laws against corruption, obstruction and conspiracy.

The Office of Legal Counsel, which sits in the Justice Department and provides the president with opinions on executive actions, has the view that the president cannot self-pardon. As part of the executive branch, the OLC is very much in favor of executive power.

But on the issue of self-pardons, the OLC has been more restrained. In a 1974 opinion, written four days before President Richard M. Nixon resigned, the head of OLC wrote that the president cannot pardon himself, under "the fundamental rule that no one may be a judge in his own case." That is a rare example of the executive branch articulating a limit on its own power, and it shows why a president's use of the pardon power for others to obstruct an investigation and to immunize himself from liability would be legally suspect.

The OLC's opinions are binding only for subordinates in the executive branch. A president is free to ignore them, as some presidents have. But if the president were to issue a self-protective pardon, as in the case of Manafort, that would be a novel, untested act that would run counter to the precept that in our country, nobody is above the law.

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 september 2018 11:17 schreef clumsy_clown het volgende:

[..]

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 13-09-2018 om 14:37:27 3000 people did not die in the two hurricanes that hit Puerto Rico. When I left the Island, AFTER the storm had hit, they had anywhere from 6 to 18 deaths. As time went by it did not go up by much. Then, a long time later, they started to report really large numbers, like 3000... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 13-09-2018 om 14:49:12 .....This was done by the Democrats in order to make me look as bad as possible when I was successfully raising Billions of Dollars to help rebuild Puerto Rico. If a person died for any reason, like old age, just add them onto the list. Bad politics. I love Puerto Rico! reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zaterdag 15-09-2018 om 04:05:02 “When Trump visited the island territory last October, OFFICIALS told him in a briefing 16 PEOPLE had died from Maria.” The Washington Post. This was long AFTER the hurricane took place. Over many months it went to 64 PEOPLE. Then, like magic, “3000 PEOPLE KILLED.” They hired.... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zaterdag 15-09-2018 om 04:23:26 ....GWU Research to tell them how many people had died in Puerto Rico (how would they not know this?). This method was never done with previous hurricanes because other jurisdictions know how many people were killed. FIFTY TIMES LAST ORIGINAL NUMBER - NO WAY! reageer retweet

Wanneer de man waar je het, puur om te trollen, voor op neemt de dood van duizenden mensen misbruikt, is het dan nog lollig?

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 september 2018 13:29 schreef Bernhard.von.Galen het volgende:

[..]

Die tweets zijn echt walgelijk inderdaad. Nintex wat vind jij van deze tweets?

quote:

Op zaterdag 15 september 2018 13:36 schreef Nintex het volgende:

[..]

De boosheid van Trump snap ik wel als ze inderdaad gezegd hebben dat er maar 16 doden waren gevallen. Daarnaast faalde de lokale overheid en Puerto Rico natuurlijk gigantisch. FEMA heeft alles geleverd wat ze moesten leveren, maar het bleef daar staan in de havens en opslag plaatsen.

Ongeacht wat Trump er van vind moet dit natuurlijk uitgezocht gaan worden, maar dat zal in het huidige Amerika wel niet gebeuren.

Wat je ziet is dat Trump meer de 'baas' van het bedrijf Amerika is dan een politicus of bureaucraat. Dat wil zeggen dat hij iemand een vriendje met weinig tot geen kennis van zaken aanwijst die het probleem moet oplossen op basis van zijn aanwijzingen, maar dat hij verder niet heel diep de detail induikt. In de politiek werkt dat toch heel anders.