mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest
Roger Stone got arrested. Options
Andrew Schultz
Posted: Friday, January 25, 2019 9:42:59 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/7/2015
Posts: 433
Neurons: 5,646,394
Location: Chicago, Illinois, United States
Roger Stone is a bad, bad person. A cartoonishly bad person. And has been for a while. He got himself suspended from Twitter, mainly for harassing people wo brought his possible role in 2016 dirty tricks to light, but that was legal if reprehensible.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/25/politics/roger-stone-arrested/index.html?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twCNN&utm_content=2019-01-25T11:28:15

The indictment is here:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/25/politics/read-roger-stone-indictment-fbi/index.html

The big thing? Someone more senior directed him to do certain things. There aren't a lot of possibilities.
TL Hobs
Posted: Friday, January 25, 2019 11:12:03 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/16/2009
Posts: 1,399
Neurons: 6,101
Location: Kenai, Alaska, United States

MAGA: Morons Are Governing America

NKM
Posted: Friday, January 25, 2019 12:37:16 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 2/14/2015
Posts: 5,266
Neurons: 315,308
Location: Corinth, New York, United States
I've long been registered as a Republican, though I haven't always voted that way. I didn't vote for Trump, for fear of what might happen should he be elected.

Unfortunately, he was elected, and his effects on our country have proven even worse than I had feared.

Romany
Posted: Saturday, January 26, 2019 2:15:46 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/14/2009
Posts: 17,740
Neurons: 57,489
Location: Brighton, England, United Kingdom

It's a hard way to learn - but perhaps one of the good things that comes out of this whole shemozzle is that people will start to understand the power - and the privilege - of voting?

We know that only 58% of eligible voters turned out in the 2016 elections - meaning that almost half of the country didn't.

So because of the poor turnout, a minority group ended up representing a quarter of the votes turned in - while still being a fringe minority in the population as a whole. And they won. Had the voter turnout been larger the minority group wouldn't have had as much of an impact as it did.

(Yeah, well, I know that's pure speculation. But it's food for thought for people who think "What difference will it make if I vote or not?")
NKM
Posted: Saturday, January 26, 2019 11:00:02 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 2/14/2015
Posts: 5,266
Neurons: 315,308
Location: Corinth, New York, United States
Actually (or at least so I've read) more people voted for Clinton than for Trump; it's our quirky "Electoral College" method of weighted State-by-State voting that made him the winner of the election.

Blaidd-Drwg
Posted: Sunday, January 27, 2019 3:18:55 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/2/2015
Posts: 2,211
Neurons: 487,305
Location: Cambridge, Minnesota, United States
NKM, you are correct. Almost 1.5 million more votes for Clinton, but she lost the electoral vote.

The low voter turnout is disgusting at best, but much of the reason for it is the millions of people who have been removed from the voting rosters in unethical and in many cases illegal purges. Political groups in the US have systematically removed millions of people from voting rosters (so they cannot legally vote). It is no surprise that the vast majority of those removed were registered Democrats or were thought to likely vote for a Democrat.
Andrew Schultz
Posted: Tuesday, January 29, 2019 1:18:45 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/7/2015
Posts: 433
Neurons: 5,646,394
Location: Chicago, Illinois, United States
NKM wrote:
Actually (or at least so I've read) more people voted for Clinton than for Trump; it's our quirky "Electoral College" method of weighted State-by-State voting that made him the winner of the election.



Yes. I think the point remains, though: voting can help lessen the likelihood of these irregularities and odd chances as well. There's a separate debate about how the Electoral College leaves us vulnerable to the sort of electoral manipulation it seems the Russians had a hand in (e.g. focusing on Wisconsin/Pennsylvania/Michigan) but I also think it's good that voters have a chance to change things locally or vote for their representative.

It's easy to feel helpless enough to not even vote. In non-swing states, this is especially tough. But I also think we have a choice once we realize voting does so much: give up, or say, we'd like to do more than just vote.
Ursus Minor
Posted: Tuesday, January 29, 2019 7:53:02 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/13/2016
Posts: 674
Neurons: 2,863
Location: Inozemtsevo, Stavropol'skiy, Russia
[quote=Andrew Schultz]it seems the Russians had a hand in [quote]


Speaking about Russian meddling in 2016 election...

John Bolton with a note about 5000 troops to be sent to Columbia in his pad.
The picture was taken after the press conference about sanctions for Venezuela on January 28.


"/>
Andrew Schultz
Posted: Wednesday, January 30, 2019 2:40:15 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/7/2015
Posts: 433
Neurons: 5,646,394
Location: Chicago, Illinois, United States
Confused about the point you're trying to make here. If it's that the Russian election interference had potentially even worse consequences than we feared, then I agree wholeheartedly!

It did, however, lead to an amusing tweet by Ted Lieu, who is smart and clever and funny. https://twitter.com/RepTedLieu/status/1090379963885338624

P.S. whatever the point you're trying to make, inflicting that large a picture of John Bolton on us is rough stuff, man. Rough stuff!
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.