Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 103: Going Through Testimony with a Fine-Tooth Comey

(+) Yeah! (+)

Yeap, the reason Comey "leaked" the memo through a proxy was stated in testimony - he didn't want to feed the reporters directly and have them hounding him for more
---

FFDragon posted...

I... think(?) McCain tried to attack his credibility.

But who knows what he was trying to do, really.

Yes, McCain was indeed trying to attack his credibility. And he succeeded, with flying colors!

Wait, you mean he was attacking his OWN credibility, right?
---

https://twitter.com/JasonKander/status/873017673642373120

hahahahaha holy shit
---

FFDragon posted...

https://twitter.com/JasonKander/status/873017673642373120

hahahahaha holy shit

Daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuum
---

FFDragon posted...

https://twitter.com/JasonKander/status/873017673642373120

hahahahaha holy shit

Damn, son. Well played.
---

Kander belongs on the national stage.
---

Things have slowed down way too much. I'm sure some legal prep stuff is happening behind the scenes but I'm ready for blood. Want stuff to be over one way or another!
---

FFDragon posted...

https://twitter.com/JasonKander/status/873017673642373120

hahahahaha holy shit

Shots have been fired like their names were Bill O'Reilly.
---

KamikazePotato posted...

Things have slowed down way too much. I'm sure some legal prep stuff is happening behind the scenes but I'm ready for blood. Want stuff to be over one way or another!

I want people to be ramping up opposition to AHCA

I'm extremely worried that Mitch is going to get it done while everyone is distracted, and then we'll be fucked.
---

KamikazePotato posted...

Things have slowed down way too much. I'm sure some legal prep stuff is happening behind the scenes but I'm ready for blood. Want stuff to be over one way or another!

And this is why politics is usually boring. It's slow.
---

So just to sum up the current Tory situation, after criticising a potential "coalition of chaos" and calling their opponents terrorist sympathisers, they have now been forced into a coalition of chaos (actually a minority government with an informal alliance) with a party that has known links to terrorism. This is not even getting into how anti-LGBT the DUP are, while many Tories including their Scottish leader are LGBT themselves.

They also destroyed their leader's reputation and made Corbyn the most popular he's ever been. What a show.
---

I feel their comments towards things like regulating the internet is what ultimately cost them a majority. There are things you don't discuss doing during an election campaign, regulating the internet has "brought down governments" or at the very least caused a u-turn in policy.

Honestly after Cameron stepped down there weren't many options to lead the party since many of them secretly opposed Brexit so a more right winged politician was selected. The thing about Brexit was that it wasn't voted entirely by right winged people, many centrists or left winged people felt it was the best option for the UK.
---

538's Trump approval rating aggregate has arrived at some nice clean numbers today - 38% approval, 56% disapproval.

Meanwhile, the Ulti Memorial Rasmussen Poll today has the Cheetoh in Chief at 46% approval (54% disapproval), with 29% strongly approve versus 45% strongly disapproving.

It's going to be interesting to see how the numbers move next week, when the Comey testimony has time to percolate through the system properly.
---

Why do I have the sudden feeling that if an impeachment of Trump ever happened, he'd fail to show up to court?

And I do mean sudden because nothing here or in Comey's testimony actually made me think that.
---

charmander6000 posted...

I feel their comments towards things like regulating the internet is what ultimately cost them a majority. There are things you don't discuss doing during an election campaign, regulating the internet has "brought down governments" or at the very least caused a u-turn in policy.

Honestly after Cameron stepped down there weren't many options to lead the party since many of them secretly opposed Brexit so a more right winged politician was selected. The thing about Brexit was that it wasn't voted entirely by right winged people, many centrists or left winged people felt it was the best option for the UK.

Nah that's not it. The internet stuff was bad for them but fairly minor, the focus was more on schools, the dementia tax, the NHS, human rights, fox hunting, and May's own awful performance. Of course it all added up to an awful manifesto and worse campaign.

Also most Tory MPs were openly remain, including Theresa May, who got the job because all the other big dogs fell in the post-brexit bloodbath. Theresa May herself is a centrist, although she threw in some more right leaning policies to try and grab the UKIP vote, which she failed to do.

And now with a minority government none of her awful stuff will pass, even with the DUP. She will struggle to pass a budget if she makes it that far. Our last minirity government only lasted 9 months. We'll see how this one goes.
---

I've been reading up about the UK election today. Can anyone fill me in on this Amber Rudd character?
---

She's one of May's biggest supporters and Home Secretary. May's old position. She is similar to May in policy I believe. Hates encryption and police spending. She was tipped to be a future candidate for Conservative leader after May. She got sent into the debate in May's place and got summarily ganged up on by the other 6 parties. Only two days after her father died no less. She took one for the team essentially.

Things got interesting when her safe Tory seat of Hastings looked like it might go Labour. She held it by only 350 votes. It being so close seems to have dashed her leadership hopes.

Anyway, the final result was announced and Labour got one last big win from the Tories - Kensington, one of the richest parts of the UK and a seat that has always been Tory until now.
---

FFDragon posted...

I like how everyone heard what they wanted to hear from Comey's testimony and we're right back where we started.

Well we've now got Trump saying he'll be glad to testify under oath, and both Congressional investigations demanding he turn over his "tapes," the combination of which could be fun.
---

How did the UK election happen exactly? I heard the Tories just...decided to have one because they felt like it? Is that sort of thing actually real?
---

They could have elections like every other month if they really wanted.
---

They wanted a stronger majority so they put forward a motion to dissolve parliament.

However it takes a 2/3 vote for it to happen so they needed other parties to agree. The other way would be to have a confidence vote which would trigger an election if a vote of no confidence passed.
---

I was thinking about this in relation to Trump. we would have had like 4 elections by now.
---

KamikazePotato posted...

How did the UK election happen exactly? I heard the Tories just...decided to have one because they felt like it? Is that sort of thing actually real?

They wanted to increase their majority. It backfired horribly.
---

transcience posted...

I was thinking about this in relation to Trump. we would have had like 4 elections by now.

Presidents are a bit different, it would be more like if Paul Ryan decided to call an election for congress
---

charmander6000 posted...

transcience posted...

I was thinking about this in relation to Trump. we would have had like 4 elections by now.

Presidents are a bit different, it would be more like if Paul Ryan decided to call an election for congress

I could go for that, honestly.
---

KamikazePotato posted...

How did the UK election happen exactly? I heard the Tories just...decided to have one because they felt like it? Is that sort of thing actually real?

Its called a snap election which they can call when some kind of major event like brexit happens or if the government simply becomes untenable - they also have regularly scheduled elections like ours.
---

SupremeZero posted...

KamikazePotato posted...

How did the UK election happen exactly? I heard the Tories just...decided to have one because they felt like it? Is that sort of thing actually real?

They wanted to increase their majority. It backfired horribly.

I got the intent, just not the 'how'. Being able to call for an election whenever you want seems absurd and easily abusable.
---

Relatedly, can somebody more familiar with UK Politics explain the mechanics of a No Confidence vote to me? I did a quick search and could only find that the current government has to resign/dissolve if it passes, but I couldn't find anything on the mechanics of the vote itself. Is it simple majority, supermajority, or what? What makes it different from the 2/3 vote that was actually used, aside from the political statement involved?
---

KamikazePotato posted...

SupremeZero posted...

KamikazePotato posted...

How did the UK election happen exactly? I heard the Tories just...decided to have one because they felt like it? Is that sort of thing actually real?

They wanted to increase their majority. It backfired horribly.

I got the intent, just not the 'how'. Being able to call for an election whenever you want seems absurd and easily abusable.

You need a 2/3rds majority in the house of commons or a vote of no confidence to call a general election. Otherwise they are every five years.

Of course, until 2011 the Prime Minister could just call an election whenever.
---

Reg posted...

Relatedly, can somebody more familiar with UK Politics explain the mechanics of a No Confidence vote to me? I did a quick search and could only find that the current government has to resign/dissolve if it passes, but I couldn't find anything on the mechanics of the vote itself. Is it simple majority, supermajority, or what? What makes it different from the 2/3 vote that was actually used, aside from the political statement involved?

The no confidence vote only requires a majority. The 2/3 vote was placed to avoid people abusing their power to call elections at any time.

Of course the party could have gone with a no confidence motion, but the optics look poor because it would suggest in-fighting among the party.
---

charmander6000 posted...

Of course the party could have gone with a no confidence motion, but the optics look poor because it would suggest in-fighting among the party.

Yeah, I figured optics was the reason they didn't go that route, but I was curious as to whether it was an option if you got somebody who didn't give a shit about that involved.
---

One good thing about being able to call for a snap election at any time, keeps Russia from having time to organize their meddling operation.
---

To learn more about votes of no confidence, just watch The Phantom Menace.
---

That's considered torture in civilized countries.
---

MrGreenonion posted...

One good thing about being able to call for a snap election at any time, keeps Russia from having time to organize their meddling operation.

Apparently a Tory MP was overheard saying "And we can't even blame Russia!"
---

LapisLazuli posted...

To learn more about votes of no confidence, just watch The Phantom Menace.

When I was a kid I just thought that was part of the bullshit plot that made up the rest of the movie!

"Blockading an entire planet with one ship? Voting out the chief executive just because you want to? Midichlorians? Get real, George!"
---

IIRC, majority parties in other countries have triggered early elections through votes of no confidence in themselves. The optics are poor, like Mitch McConnell filibustering himself.
---

In Canada we don't need a 2/3 vote or a vote of no confidence to dissolve government, the prime minister can go to the Governor General and ask for a new election. Traditionally this is done when the governing party elects a new leader though technically it can be done for any reason.
---

https://twitter.com/NBCNightlyNews/status/873271359480246272

Question: Were visa waivers discussed?

Pres. Trump: "We didn't discuss it."

Romanian Pres. Iohannis: "Yes ... I mentioned this issue."

I love how the camera zooms right up Trump's face as the Romanian pres continues talking
---

that zoom is begging for the CYE theme
---

If it was in Congress' power to call early general elections, Obama would have been voted out as soon as Republicans gained both houses in 2014.
---

what in the world is with Trump's denials where he follows it up with "I did not do that but even if I did do that, everybody's saying that would be a fine thing to do!"
---

GuessMyUserName posted...

what in the world is with Trump's denials where he follows it up with "I did not do that but even if I did do that, everybody's saying that would be a fine thing to do!"

Well he's not entirely wrong - Trump can do literally anything and his devoted worshipers would say it's a fine thing to do.

As for why he phrases it like that, he probably believes he's being clever.
---

trump taking cues from OJ
---

It allows him to pump up his lies-per-sentence stats.
---

https://twitter.com/lloydblankfein/status/873288013224267776
---

I love notgreatbob.gif
---

Republicans are going to be bled dry with ads like this through 2020 if they're stupid enough to pass Trumpcare in the Senate:

https://twitter.com/Mikel_Jollett/status/873194058427977728
---

I realized that the Tories probably held on to power due to LFF between Labour and the SNP in Scotland. They gained 12 seats in Scotland, without which they wouldn't have enough even with the DUP alliance.
---

Yeah the downside to FPTP is that it favours a two party system, which in turn leads to lower vote turnout.

Though to be fair some of those seats won by the Conservatives would have still gone Conservative even if you add the Labour and SNP votes (which is already an unfair thing to do). Some people didn't want a second Scotland referendum.
---