Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[palsch]

The rumours about what the administration wanted from Russia were cooperation against ISIS and isolating Iran.

The former Russia were basically begging for, seeing it as a way to legitimise their actions in Syria and the Assad regime. Joint operations would be a great boon to Russia, and it would be like giving someone a hundred dollars to eat a dish of their favourite food.

Iran was successfully isolated by sanctions under Obama which then brought them to the table, leading to the nuclear deal and unfreezing of relations. The new focus on them, rolling back any progress, seems to be a pathology of the Bannon/Flynn wing. It's not exactly clear that Russia are open to the idea at all.



Trump is looking for ways to make the trade deficit look bigger. Currently an item that is imported then re-exported would be at worst neutral on the trade deficit; the export cancels out the import, usually with some extra value added. Trump wants to only count them as imports, exploding the paper deficit. In particular it would appear to double it with Mexico and Canada, who often import goods via the US thanks to NAFTA. The idea that this is a harmful import deficit is absurd. Either you completely discount goods for re-export (measuring only imports for consumption and exports of domestic goods) or you count them coming and going. Another source that pulls the WSJ graphics and suggests this may be a trial balloon leak.

This is after a story about them demanding internal economic projections use growth estimates significantly higher than actual economists project.



Also some fallout from one of Thursday's stories; after their briefing with FBI Director Comey members of the Senate Intelligence Committee sent formal requests to various departments requesting that all material relating to the investigation into Russian interference in the elections be preserved. This should go without saying, but having Congressional heft behind the request could be significant in hearings down the line if there was any indication of a cover-up.

Exactly what prompted the letters is not clear.

In other Comey related news, Prebus says he received the same information as the committee and there was no collusion. Which would imply that the subjects of an investigation were briefed on the contents of the investigation. Lying or collusion?

[Silverthrone]

One of my favourite beer halls burned down that day. I can only assume that he meant that. (Well, it appears to have been an electrical fault, rather than kebab arson on haram property or anything particularly exciting). While I certainly do appreciate his concern, there are other venues available while they rebuild it. Still, they ought to put it up over the door, that the president of North America himself keeps them under his wings, as it were.

That said, it is quite typical of president Trump to have a relatively reasonable point to make (careless immigration leads to quite serious difficulties, Sweden being an example thereof), but fail to express it clearly enough. Instead, he made some vague bayings on the subject and then declined to clarify. While one cannot accuse the media of helping to clear it up, the truth of the matter is that president Trump was unclear, and carries most of the blame for being misunderstood.
Indeed, it has given the media and authorities of the kingdom concerned charte blance to ignore his point entirely, and claiming that he is lying again. So the great, big elephant with a sex offender's record gets to remain in the room for a bit longer.

[smjjames]

Huh? Trump doesn't have a sex offender's record. He's been accused of it, yes, but not convicted. Unless you're calling your king a sex offender, not sure here.

[misko27]

If any of you remember my recentish attempt to defend not impeaching Trump (which, if you don't recall, could be rather simply described with the phrase "Last Stand"), I've got something that might interest you folks: Congressional Democrats agree and are attempting to quiet talk of it.

Unrelated: how does one become a political consultant? Do you have to know somebody?

[MetalSlimeHunt]

How long until America's first gay president?

-160 Years

Unrelated: how does one become a political consultant? Do you have to know somebody?

Have knowledge you can be consulted on. Be hired to perform this service by a politician.

[Urist McClown]

To quote Trump as quoted by the article:

When you look at what’s happening in Germany, when you look at what’s happening last night in Sweden — Sweden!

That's all I could find as well. Nothing about a terror attack.

From what I understand, he apparently misspoke and was referring to a Tucker Carlson segment (interviewing Ami Horowitz, a documentarian) that had aired 'last night' describing how Malmo is now the rape capital of the West and lots of other depressing facts about modern YES Sweden. Sounds believable enough to me, but I can understand how the anti-Trump crowd may disagree.

I'm not particularly impressed with the media extrapolating 'Trump made up a terror attack' from that, though, if that is indeed all he said.

Swedish rape statistics have to be taken with a grain of salt. The Swedish legal definition of rape covers many things that elsewhere are considered sexual assault. So unless we are certain the statistic in question really compares apples to apples, all we can really conclude from this is that Malmö is the Swedish city with the most rapes (by the Swedish definition) reported.

I'd also argue that American reporting on refugees in Germany and Sweden tends to be one-sided and sensationalistic - yes, there were and are some considerable problems, but the overall situation is far from the bleak picture that is being painted.

[Frumple]

I may have misinterpreted Silverthrone, but I believe with that metaphor he was referring to the serious issues (not least of which is a huge spike in sexual assaults and rapes) in Sweden caused by immigrants and refugees.

Nah, pretty sure it was just somewhat hyperbolic reference to all the sex related shit in trump's history. Having a sex offender's record doesn't necessarily involve actual conviction. E: Or not. Eh.

Though speech wise... good gods. Actually skimmed over/read one or two of the recent speeches. Tighter grip nothing, the man's incoherent better than half the time at this point. Paragraphs worth of verbal diarrhea that are as nonsensical as they are empty of anything but the most shallow of platitudes. Guy either needs to hire better speech writers or just hire them at all.

[Silverthrone]

Huh? Trump doesn't have a sex offender's record. He's been accused of it, yes, but not convicted. Unless you're calling your king a sex offender, not sure here.

Oh, dear, now I was terribly unclear. I meant that this whole business with "Oh, whatever could he possibly mean? Is this those alternative facts of his? Oh, silly, silly Trump!" business means that a lot of media outlets do not need to acknowledge the elephant that is Malmö turning into a sex offender's paradise, along with other unfortunate facts and messy implications that many media outlets do not quite like to approach.

_{(The king is likely not a sex offender, although it is reasonable to assume that he would hardly be inexperienced. I am still waiting for some "Confessions of a former Madame" memoir to mention him at some point)}

While one cannot accuse the media of helping to clear it up, the truth of the matter is that president Trump was unclear, and carries most of the blame for being misunderstood.

Can't argue with that (though I still think it doesn't give the media license to invent things he 'said' out of whole cloth).

I do sometimes wish Trump held a bit of a tighter grip on himself as far as his speeches go. He's passionate, which isn't a flaw in itself, but as you say it sometimes detracts from his message.

Of course, it is quite right to also blame the media. It is not exactly unexpected, but it is terribly unprofessional of a journalist to assume that it was an outright fabrication. Even with so little to go on, and the president's refusal to spend half a minute to clarify, it is not exactly difficult to figure out what he likely meant.

I may have misinterpreted Silverthrone, but I believe with that metaphor he was referring to the serious issues (not least of which is a huge spike in sexual assaults and rapes) in Sweden caused by immigrants and refugees.

Precisely that, yes.

[MrRoboto75]

https://action.donaldjtrump.com/mainstream-media-accountability-survey

take this biased survey, then donate money to the president to silence the fake news once and for all

[smjjames]

Though speech wise... good gods. Actually skimmed over/read one or two of the recent speeches. Tighter grip nothing, the man's incoherent better than half the time at this point. Paragraphs worth of verbal diarrhea that are as nonsensical as they are empty if anything but the most shallow of platitudes. Guy either needs to hire better speech writers or just hire them at all.

And abandon the free-wheeling unrestrained speeches that propelled him to the Presidency? Pfft.

@silverthrone: If the Swedish embassy has to ask "what the heck are you going on about?", then he is definetly isn't clear. Sure, people can speculate, but only Trump knows what he means because he is so vague and the speculation could be wrong. Or maybe ask a Trump supporter, but you're likely to get many answers from there too.

[Silverthrone]

Though speech wise... good gods. Actually skimmed over/read one or two of the recent speeches. Tighter grip nothing, the man's incoherent better than half the time at this point. Paragraphs worth of verbal diarrhea that are as nonsensical as they are empty if anything but the most shallow of platitudes. Guy either needs to hire better speech writers or just hire them at all.

And abandon the free-wheeling unrestrained speeches that propelled him to the Presidency? Pfft.

@silverthrone: If the Swedish embassy has to ask "what the heck are you going on about?", then he is definetly isn't clear. Sure, people can speculate, but only Trump knows what he means because he is so vague and the speculation could be wrong. Or maybe ask a Trump supporter, but you're likely to get many answers from there too.

Well, yes. He is not being clear, and I think that is quite arrogant and careless of him. It is not worthy of a president. Nonetheless, I do believe that this is a case of a lot of clever people playing dumber than they are. The embassy, however, were quite right to ask. "We do not know what is being alluded towards, and that is why we have posed the question" was the statement, I believe. It is quite easy to guess what the president did mean, but until he deigns to explain, it is impossible to know. That is, know precisely what he meant and have it confirmed by himself or his staff.

I doubt it will go anywhere, but I am quite happy with the fact that they ask. If nothing else, it should be standard procedure when a head of state effectively talks shit and declines to clarify.

[MorleyDev]

Sweden also has a lot more support for people to come forward, so it's estimated that more rapes that occur get reported compared to other countries. So between a wider legal definition of rape (sweden actually use a decent definition, many countries still require a) penetration and b) the penetrator to be male. Which is stupidly fucking narrow), and a greater likelihood of a rape being reported compared to other companies, comparing statistics across countries is really fucking tricky.

Wikipedia even has a page on the subject: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_Sweden

For example, Sweden reformed its sex crime legislation and made the legal definition of rape much wider in 2005, which largely explains a significant increase in the number of reported rapes in the ten-year period of 2004-2013. The Swedish police also record each instance of sexual violence in every case separately, leading to an inflated number of cases compared to other countries. Additionally, the Swedish police have improved the handling of rape cases, in an effort to increase the number of crimes reported. Raised awareness and a shifting attitude of sexual crimes in Sweden, which has been ranked as the number one country in gender equality, may also explain the relatively high rates of reported rape.

[Neonivek]

Sweden also has a lot more support for people to come forward, so it's estimated that more rapes that occur get reported compared to other countries. So between a wider legal definition of rape, and a greater likelihood of a rape being reported compared to other companies, comparing statistics across countries is really fucking tricky.

(Wikipedia even has a page on the subject: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_Sweden)

I am reminded when Canada had the statistic that we punished our children more then any other country in the world... Like... 3x more.

But when we actually looked at the statistic more closely we found out... No, it really wasn't the case.

It was more that we marked down every time a child was charged, we marked repeat offenses as separate children, and it didn't matter what punishment they received even if it was no punishment at all (or at least an implied punishment by the parents).

[smjjames]

I doubt it will go anywhere, but I am quite happy with the fact that they ask. If nothing else, it should be standard procedure when a head of state effectively talks shit and declines to clarify.

Yeah, I don't see it going anywhere as it's just the diplomatic version of asking "What the heck are you talking about?"

Oh and just in: The deputy press sec. said that Trump was referring to rising crime, which pretty much matches the speculation.

[Silverthrone]

It is, of course, part of it. Statistics alone does not count for as much as they are often presented as. More vaguework from politicians and media alike certainly does not help.

_{Now, 'Rape in Sweden' sounds rather like a dreadfully misguided idea for a tourist catalogue, somehow.}

I doubt it will go anywhere, but I am quite happy with the fact that they ask. If nothing else, it should be standard procedure when a head of state effectively talks shit and declines to clarify.

Yeah, I don't see it going anywhere as it's just the diplomatic version of asking "What the heck are you talking about?"

Oh and just in: The deputy press sec. said that Trump was referring to rising crime, which pretty much matches the speculation.

Better late than never, I suppose. I do hope it sets a precedent to demand clarification from diplomatic channels, if that is indeed what it takes to make the president's staff clarify his more confused ravings.