Treason Season??

[Black Aeronaut]

So, how do you define socialism?

sorry, something like this tends to require an actual keyboard and more time than i really have to answer, because it is a many nuanced thing

Yes, it is a very nuanced thing. And there are many different forms of socialism. We even have a few socialist mechanisms right in our very own Constitution.

And I would very dearly love to see the Nordic Model employed in the USA - a model that has thus far proven to be reliable and effective. What do you have to say about that?

[Inquisitive Raven]

Could you explain Awhat you mean by Nordic Model? Are you talking about something like the system that was developed in Germany under Otto von Bismarck? I certainly wouldn't object to that one.

[Labster]

So, how do you define socialism?

Also, last time I checked, the Nordic Model seems to work pretty damn well.

Check this out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_model

I challenge you to tell me just how that system is broken.

[Rajvik]

Neither a pure socialist, nor a pure capitalist system ever works.

I don't remember where i heard or read that but i do believe its true BA. Capitalism without regulation turns into Oligarchy and Socialism without free business dies the death of Stalinist communism that said, i do not think the Nordic model would fly in the United States for several reasons, but these two strike me as non-starters for pretty much everyone, especially the whole flat tax idea, (which i can stand behind) which has been shot to hell by both sides of the aisle.

Overall tax burdens (as a percentage of GDP) are high: Sweden (44.1%), Denmark (45.9%) and Finland (44.1%).[24] The Nordic countries have relatively flat tax rates, meaning that even those with medium and low incomes are taxed at relatively high levels

Sweden at 56.6% of GDP, Denmark at 51.7% and Finland at 48.6% reflect very high public spending.[22] One key reason for public spending is the large number of public employees. These employees work in various fields including education, healthcare, and for the government itself. They often have greater job security and make up around a third of the workforce (more than 38% in Denmark). Public spending in social transfers such as unemployment benefits and early-retirement programmes is high. In 2001, the wage-based unemployment benefits were around 90% of wage in Denmark and 80% in Sweden, compared to 75% in the Netherlands and 60% in Germany. The unemployed were also able to receive benefits several years before reductions, compared to quick benefit reduction in other countries.

First a flat tax, which has been a non-starter for both sides for years, (the liberals because it goes against their class warfare political model and the right because the big business guys know they aren't going to get any deductions while the little guy "knows" that regardless he's going to be footing the bill) and then with either that tax rate or as i figure it, the higher one that would be required to pay the national debt that has built up (note, not service the debt, pay it off in a reasonable amount of time) would put the US's tax rate with this model probably somewhere north of 50% which means that all those companies are going to leave for cheaper pastures.

Second, the population is already bitching because our government is spending 21% of our GDP where if we suddenly, (or even gradually) went to this model, we would be spending probably somewhere close to 95% GDP on our social programs.

Now, the question is, why do these countries feel they can get away with spending so much on their social programs? The answer is simple, they have had the US footing the bill for their defenses at least since the end of WWII,

Finally, look at the Criticism, it points out that the model is heavily dependent on redistribution, which fails in the face of the "lazy man" argument (re: Lazy man argument boils down to this: Why am I going to kill myself to do a good job, when this other guy is as useless as teats on a turtle and gets paid the same as me to do practically nothing. This last is especially true when said idiot gets the same or more due to connections and not hard work)

[Norgarth]

I'm Canadian, and to me it seems increasingly likely that the USA is doomed to either collapse into anarchy or erupt into civil war.

Moderates of either party are steadily decreasing in numbers (or seem to be at least), leading to increasing polarization and outlooks of "There's my side, or the Devil's side".

How is the country supposed to accomplish anything if the president seems more interested in tearing down whatever the opposing party has built (while blaming them for any and all problems) rather than try and actually fix/build anything? Not that whatever progress they make would survive the next change of power anyways.

[robkelk]

... (the liberals because it goes against their class warfare political model ...

I think you should stop paying attention to strawmen arguments and look at what liberals actually think of this matter.

[robkelk]

Michael Cohen says rigging polls 'was at the direction of' Trump

[Bob Schroeck]

Buzzfeed reports that Trump instructed Cohen to lie to Congress about the Trump Moscow condominium project. And:

“The special counsel’s office learned about Trump’s directive for Cohen to lie to Congress through...internal company emails, text messages, and a cache of other documents.”

This isn't just "he said-he said", this is from internal Trump documents.

As many others are now noting, suborning perjury is the textbook example of obstruction, and first article of impeachment against Richard Nixon was explicitly for instructing others to lie to Congress.

EDIT: Or maybe not. According to the Washington Examiner:

UPDATE: The reporters didn't see the documents, we should note. They spoke to sources who say the documents exist. Also, one of the Buzzfeed reporters, Jason Leopold, has copped to inventing sources in the past. The other reporter, Anthony Cormier, says they have sources beyond the two who were willing to talk "on the record."

We'll have to wait and see if this is the real deal, or another false trail.

[Bob Schroeck]

From Wired:

Trump Must Be a Russian Agent; the Alternative Is Too Awful

[hazard]

If Trump really is a Russian agent, and there's little reason to doubt that he's been compromised somehow and to some extent, that's the highest placed Russian agent I've ever heard of.

The guy who would otherwise be the highest is some West German cabinet member whom was the second in command after the Chancellor IIRC.

[Bob Schroeck]

Follow up on the Buzzfeed stuff. Most news outlets are taking it very seriously. Even the Washington Examiner article I quoted was taking it seriously, while pointing out that it needed verification.

[robkelk]

CBC Analysis: Giuliani changes his public position twice in the two days

Giuliani went from his position last July on FOX News that "there was no collusion with the Russians whatsoever on behalf of the Trump campaign" (not his words, but when said to him he said "Correct") to his position Wednesday on CNN that "I never said there was no collusion between the campaign or between people in the campaign" (his words - he didn't say it, but he agreed in public when somebody else said it) to his position Thursday on Twitter that "I can only speak of what I know, and that is that I have no knowledge that anyone on the campaign illegally colluded with Russia" (his words).

The sharp reversal is "very grave," said Harry Litman, a former U.S. attorney and deputy assistant attorney general.

"But it also means this whole trash-talking of the last year and a half of the Mueller probe as a 'witch hunt' has to completely fold up shop now," he said.

"Because from this basic concession, there's certainly no 'witch hunt' now. How can you not seriously go after what you concede is a collusion between the highest members of the campaign - maybe just not the candidate - and a hostile foreign nation?"

In other words, rather than try to dismiss Mueller's probe, Giuliani only served to validate it.

From the order of events presented in the article, Litman's statement appears to have been made before Giuliani's tweet.

Giuliani may be expecting a cascade of damaging new evidence in the coming weeks that might point to collusion.

He has established a pattern of moving the goal posts at interesting times.

Last May, he appeared to surprise Fox News presenter Sean Hannity when he suddenly revealed that Trump had repaid his fixer Michael Cohen the $130,000 that Cohen had paid in hush money to Stormy Daniels, the pornographic actress who alleges she had an affair with Trump.

Trump had previously claimed he had no idea Cohen made the payment.

Under Canadian law, that can be considered to be bribery - just ask Mike Duffy. (Wikipedia link) Funny how that happened under a conservative government ... there must be something to the idea that the USA keeps getting what Canada had a half-decade or more earlier. (Maybe your next President will legalize cannabis use?)

Giuliani might have good reason to try to change the collusion narrative, given what's expected to come. He has reportedly said he expects Mueller's findings to be "horrific" for Trump.

Cohen has since flipped on the president, pleading guilty last year to lying to Congress, as well as to committing campaign finance violations and financial crimes. He began co-operating with Mueller's team and is due next month to testify before Congress.

Trump's ex-campaign manager Paul Manafort, who pleaded guilty in September on financial charges, is alleged to have shared 2016 polling data with Konstantin Kilimnik, who has ties with Russian intelligence.

And Mueller's team this week filed nearly 200 pages of new material on Manafort.

I'd say all we need now is missing 18-and-a-half minutes of tape, but I've been told that there's a report that Trump took his translator's notes away from him... so it looking to me a lot like 1972-4 all over again. (Wikipedia link)

[Labster]

Mueller's office issued a rare public statement that the Buzzfeed report got some of the details in its story wrong. What details? That's an exercise left to the reader.
It could be like Woodward and Bernstein in Watergate, who messed up one story by misattributing their sources. It could be that all of the supposed evidence doesn't really exist, and it's only Cohen's claim -- a claim from a known liar. Or maybe Trump didn't do it.

The net effect of which is that we're back where we were on Monday this week, almost. Yesterday, the pitchforks were out, and today they go back in the barn, but we're still a little angry, and a lot frustrated.

It's frustrating how little we know. With Nixon, Congress could pretty much reveal evidence as they found it. Here, it's a national security investigation, and lives are on the line. Gotta protect "sources and methods" of our spies.

[robkelk]

Not quite back to last weekend - Giuliani's flip-flopping gives a reason (not an excuse) to continue the investigation. It's now in Trump's best interests to be either cleared or indicted. (Whether he realizes that is another matter altogether, of course.)

[robkelk]

...
Andrew McCabe was fired today as Assistant FBI Director, because apparently he was too hard on Hillary during the election :'(.  Two days before his retirement date on Sunday.  I'm sure there was no political motive for this.  Nothing to do with him working on the investigation of Trump.
...

That was extremely petty of Trump ... and it removed any externally-imposed reason that McCabe might have had to not testify against Trump.

Lost his job? Already happened.
Lost his pension? Already happened.
Been fucked over by the person who would have preferred he not say anything? Already happened.

What's left to hold over him?

Apparently, nothing.

To make up for the lost pension, he's written a book. And he refuses to say whether Trump is or is not a Russian asset

From the interview:

McCabe also claims that Trump told him, "I heard you were part of the resistance" that didn't approve of Comey's leadership and his treatment of the Clinton email case.

"I realized that he was offering me the opportunity to adopt his narrative," he said of the president's comments.

"I see it now as my own loyalty test - Would I go along with the facts and the circumstances that he was trying to engineer or was I on the other side?"

He added: "It was, of course, contrary to the truth and it was not something that I could do."

Two days later, top FBI officials launched investigations into the president.

McCabe claims the underlying reasons he set the investigations into motion immediately after being asked to serve as acting director was because Trump had made it clear he "might not be in the job long."

[SilverFang01]

Today Cohen testified before the House Oversight Comittee and it was quite interesting.

Chairman Cummins made it clear that he intends to excercise meaningful oversight over the presidency. And it was clear that the GOP representatives were angry that they could not get away with petty procedural maneuvering games anymore, flare ups of Clinton Derangement Syndrome (someday a cure will be found), some self-owns, etc. It is clear that the GOP representatives present have never been part of a minority and didn’t know how to handle it.

What do you guys think?

[robkelk]

So... Today, someone who was trusted enough by the current leader of the country to be put into a position of great responsibility - a position no longer filled by that person - was on the Hill, in front of a House committee, giving testimony that could cost said leader the next election (keep in mind that none of the testimony has been proven in court). Everyone on the House committee treated her with respect.

But enough about Canadian politics.

So... Today, someone who was trusted enough by the current leader of the country to be put into a position of great responsibility - a position no longer filled by that person - was on the Hill, in front of a House committee, giving testimony that could cost said leader the next election (keep in mind that none of the testimony has been proven in court). At least one member of the House committee decided that an ad hominen attack was appropriate.

I trust that the way I phrased that tells what I think about the matter south of the border.

Oh, yes: If Cohen really is a "pathological liar", what does that say about the person who used to be his employer?

[robkelk]

Michael Cohen sues Trump Organization, claiming nearly $2M in unpaid fees

Cohen said the organization has refused to pay any of his legal fees or costs since May 2018, and owed him almost $2 million as of Jan. 25.

Cohen told Congress last week that Trump was a racist, a liar and a con man.

So... Cohen is complaining that somebody who he himself claims is "a con man" hasn't paid him?

[hazard]

I think Cohen is expecting he won't get his money back.

But this is still going to be really annoying to Trump, who now has to pay a lawyer to argue for him about this matter.

[classicdrogn]

Plus, this puts him in the proactive, attacking position, and as we all know the side that's attacking is always correct (when it comes to politics and scandals in the public eye) even more so because it also frames him as the victim in the very same stroke, and obviously only a bad person would pick on someone who was already a victim.

[Labster]

Well, it's finally over. Mueller is done, so it's all over but the shouting. Gonna be a lot of shouting, though.

[Dartz]

Somehow I doubt it'll have the conclusion anybody wants.

[Rajvik]

I'm going to point something out here, Mueller's report is supposed to lay out the evidence, (or lack there of) of the accused crime, it is not his job to say guilty or not. I'm sure both sides will have plenty to shout over

[Black Aeronaut]

Very true. Just because there were no further indictments does not mean that there isn't something damning in his report.

Sit back and relax, folks. This is gonna take a while.

[robkelk]

Us old fogeys have at least vague memories of how long it took to go from "somebody broke into an office at Watergate" to Nixon resigning before he could be impeached. Unlike Watergate, this case has national security undertones... so I'm expecting it'll take even longer.