President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

Correct. But giving false or misleading information in an effort to obstruct an investigation is.

Not saying it's a slam dunk. But it's also not just "lying to the media" as you so desperately want the narrative to be.

David Sklansky, a professor of criminal law at Stanford Law School, said that if Trump, as reported by the Post, helped craft a misleading public statement about the meeting, he may have bolstered a potential obstruction of justice case against himself.

Trump dictated misleading statement on son's meeting with Russian: Washington Post

 

The "blind spot" belongs to those white Americans who happily retweet and like Twitter rants and promote "passing the mic" while themselves not giving up not a single place in line. The white Americans who are happy to embrace diversity, but not to the extent that their kid isn't, yannow, going to the college of their choice.

In other words, Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Just be clear on what some of the rhetoric is. If you're white, you're, at the very least, implicitly complicit, to an extent that only non-white Americans can comprehend in you. If you support mandatory minimums, you're complicit. Three strikes? Complict. More funding for cops? Complicit. If you're not in support of reparations, you're complicit. Why Hilary Clinton Doesn't Deserve the Black Vote may have cost Hilary Clinton young black voters in key states and, by extension, the election. When she's below the approval line for a crime bill signed 23 years ago by her husband, you can begin to appreciate the depth of the critique.

And I appreciate it. I do. Does it cost the Democratic Party elections? Yes. Does the Democratic Party care? Not really. Does this then mean a segment of our population would rather churn out strong rhetoric liked on Twitter instead of winning elections and making gains in places that aren't liberal university campuses? More or less.

 

I can't stand Bill Clinton, but the crime bill crap was one of the biggest hatchet jobs of the election. All it proved was that a lot of voters are fucking stupid.

 

The author of The New Jim Crow is far from dumb.

 

Oh yeah, this.

 

Probably more than you think.

 

I didn't say she was dumb. I'm saying she's been far less than objective in service of selling a book, especially with respect to the crime bill.

 

I don't disagree, but I'm not sure law professors are objective, or expected to be so.

 

LOL. What "digital campaign issues"?

They spent way less than the Clinton campaign, but they spent it way more efficiently.

That's not criminal.

 

The five former presidents form the One America Appeal for hurricane relief. Guess who was quite pointedly not invited?

Former US Presidents launch 'One America Appeal' to assist hurricane victims

And then, of course, felt entitled to invite himself in?

 

Are voters stupid? Yes, or economically could care less, thus wilfully ignorant.

IMHO this started with the "Contract with America" in the '80s where the GOP sold the bill of goods that "we protect your family values" and in return we get the tax breaks and save millions (you get $50/yr.)