Political Roundtable Part XVII

[closg00]

One of SD20's favorite posters Sebastian Gorka has a arrest warrant in Hungary.

Share to Facebook
Share to Twitter
Share to Google+

Former Trump adviser Gorka wanted for arrest in Hungary: report
© Greg Nash

President Trump's former adviser, Sebastian Gorka, has an active warrant for his arrest in Hungary, according to new reports.

The warrant, which is over a “firearm or ammunition abuse” issue, has been in place since September 2016, covering the entirety of Gorka’s White House stint, according to BuzzFeed, citing reporting by Hungarian media outlet 444.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/369548-sebastian-gorka-has-an-active-warrant-for-his-arrest-in-hungary

I thought James Woods was his go-to guy.

[nate33]

Crickets from the media on this, actual, violation of the Logan Act:

KERRY TO ABBAS CONFIDANTE: 'STAY STRONG AND DO NOT GIVE IN TO TRUMP'
BY BEN CASPIT/MAARIV JANUARY 24, 2018

While the White House has confirmed that since the Jerusalem Declaration there has been a complete disconnect between the Palestinian Authority and the Trump administration, it turns out that the previous administration has maintained contact with PA officials.

Maariv reported that former US secretary of state John Kerry met in London with a close associate of PA President Mahmoud Abbas, Hussein Agha, for a long and open conversation about a variety of topics. Agha apparently reported details of the conversation to senior PA officials in Ramallah. A senior PA official confirmed to Maariv that the meeting took place.

Agha is one of Abbas’s closest associates and one of the veteran peacemakers with Israel.

He conducted the “London Track,” secret negotiations held from 2010 to 2013 between the emissaries of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, attorney Yitzhak Molcho and Brig.-Gen. Mike Herzog, under the supervision and presence of Dennis Ross. Agha also authored with Yossi Beilin the Beilin-Abbas agreement in the 1990s. He is considered a staunch supporter of the peace process, very close to Abbas, and maintains an extensive network of contacts, including Israelis.

During the conversation, according to the report, Kerry asked Agha to convey a message to Abbas and ask him to “hold on and be strong.” Tell him, he told Agha, “that he should stay strong in his spirit and play for time, that he will not break and will not yield to President [Donald] Trump’s demands.”

According to Kerry, Trump will not remain in office for a long time. It was reported that Kerry said that within a year there was a good chance that Trump would not be in the White House.

http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Kerry-to-Abbas-confidante-Stay-strong-and-do-not-give-in-to-Trump-539643

[dckingsfan]

You can't honestly think that what you posted and what gtn130 are in someway equivalent. If we can't at the very least establish a baseline that the Republican party engages in dog whistle racism (as pointed out by Republicans) and it also implements policies that target minorities (as pointed out by court cases) then we'll never actually get to the root of why the government is broken.

Did you NOT look at what he posted... It shows that the Rs are ALL KKK. It shows that the independents are going along with it - it isn't true, it is irrational and it is tribal. If you start at that point then there will NEVER be a middle. Fortunately there seems to be some level heads in the R and D caucuses that are leading the way (common sense coalition).

The baseline should be that we never vote for racists, sexual harassers, embezzlers, etc.

Add to that we need good pols that bring along the right policies. The Ds have not done a good job governing either... if we are good with where they are currently at - our standards are pretty damn low.

[Wizardspride]

Crickets from the media on this, actual, violation of the Logan Act:

KERRY TO ABBAS CONFIDANTE: 'STAY STRONG AND DO NOT GIVE IN TO TRUMP'
BY BEN CASPIT/MAARIV JANUARY 24, 2018

While the White House has confirmed that since the Jerusalem Declaration there has been a complete disconnect between the Palestinian Authority and the Trump administration, it turns out that the previous administration has maintained contact with PA officials.

Maariv reported that former US secretary of state John Kerry met in London with a close associate of PA President Mahmoud Abbas, Hussein Agha, for a long and open conversation about a variety of topics. Agha apparently reported details of the conversation to senior PA officials in Ramallah. A senior PA official confirmed to Maariv that the meeting took place.

Agha is one of Abbas’s closest associates and one of the veteran peacemakers with Israel.

He conducted the “London Track,” secret negotiations held from 2010 to 2013 between the emissaries of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, attorney Yitzhak Molcho and Brig.-Gen. Mike Herzog, under the supervision and presence of Dennis Ross. Agha also authored with Yossi Beilin the Beilin-Abbas agreement in the 1990s. He is considered a staunch supporter of the peace process, very close to Abbas, and maintains an extensive network of contacts, including Israelis.

During the conversation, according to the report, Kerry asked Agha to convey a message to Abbas and ask him to “hold on and be strong.” Tell him, he told Agha, “that he should stay strong in his spirit and play for time, that he will not break and will not yield to President [Donald] Trump’s demands.”

According to Kerry, Trump will not remain in office for a long time. It was reported that Kerry said that within a year there was a good chance that Trump would not be in the White House.

http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Kerry-to-Abbas-confidante-Stay-strong-and-do-not-give-in-to-Trump-539643

Yep.

If true technically you could call that a violation of the Logan Act.

Though what Kerry might argue is that he was giving advice in a non official capacity.

Someone with whom he had built a pretty solid working relationship with over the years.

Basically talking to a friend.

Just playing devil's advocate.

[Ruzious]

In other words, HRC wasn't necessarily wrong when she coined the term "Deplorable".

She was correct, but again - it was her single biggest mistake to say it. She wasn't politically correct. It was the equivalent of Romney's 47% comment.

And how did Romney do?

You're preaching to the choir there - unless I'm missing something. Who me?

[closg00]

Read on Twitter

Hence the unprecedented propaganda attack on the FBI/Mueller, cover them with mud so when the real sh_it hits the fan, "The Base" can cry dirty investigation.

[gtn130]

This makes about as much sense as yours - both are simple, to the point and just stupid.

If you say so. Seems like a pretty salient point to me - one that you're not really willing to address.

[Pointgod]

You can't honestly think that what you posted and what gtn130 are in someway equivalent. If we can't at the very least establish a baseline that the Republican party engages in dog whistle racism (as pointed out by Republicans) and it also implements policies that target minorities (as pointed out by court cases) then we'll never actually get to the root of why the government is broken.

Did you NOT look at what he posted... It shows that the Rs are ALL KKK. It shows that the independents are going along with it - it isn't true, it is irrational and it is tribal. If you start at that point then there will NEVER be a middle. Fortunately there seems to be some level heads in the R and D caucuses that are leading the way (common sense coalition).

The baseline should be that we never vote for racists, sexual harassers, embezzlers, etc.

Add to that we need good pols that bring along the right policies. The Ds have not done a good job governing either... if we are good with where they are currently at - our standards are pretty damn low.

Your problem is that you took that cartoon he posted literally. The KKK doesn't represent Republicans but rather a completely unjustifiable position that can't be reasoned with or rectified, but people of color are supposed to somehow find a common ground with. I've seen this crap many times when people make excuses for white nationalists and try to provide them any sort of relevance. Instead of always trying to minimize racism because it's not on the level of the KKK you should look to reward politicians that do the right thing AND govern the way you want them to.

Yes we shouldn't vote for politicians that are racist, sexual assaulters or corrupt individuals but politicians aren't openly sexually harassing people or embezelling money. But some Republicans have been pretty open in their racism. We know being a pedophile should also be disqualifying, but guess which party openly supported and campaigned for a pedophile? Also guess which party the presidential candidate that is blatantly racist, a sexual assaulter and corrupt individual ran under?

The point gtn and I are trying to make is that if you look at all the moral failings of the Republican party and still vote for them then at a certain level you're saying that it's not a deal breaker for you. Because what I'm getting from you is that you're fine voting for lets say a candidate that engages in dog whistle racism as long as they want a sustainable government. Feel free to correct me if I'm interpreting that wrong. And don't deflect with Democrats in your response, I want you to address my post as it relates to the Republican party.

[dckingsfan]

This makes about as much sense as yours - both are simple, to the point and just stupid.

If you say so. Seems like a pretty salient point to me - one that you're not really willing to address.

Okay, I have addressed it many times. But here you go:

You lump everyone together... you are either with me or against me. You are either a D or evil. You are a one issue voter.

[gtn130]

You can't honestly think that what you posted and what gtn130 are in someway equivalent. If we can't at the very least establish a baseline that the Republican party engages in dog whistle racism (as pointed out by Republicans) and it also implements policies that target minorities (as pointed out by court cases) then we'll never actually get to the root of why the government is broken.

Did you NOT look at what he posted... It shows that the Rs are ALL KKK. It shows that the independents are going along with it - it isn't true, it is irrational and it is tribal. If you start at that point then there will NEVER be a middle. Fortunately there seems to be some level heads in the R and D caucuses that are leading the way (common sense coalition).

The baseline should be that we never vote for racists, sexual harassers, embezzlers, etc.

Add to that we need good pols that bring along the right policies. The Ds have not done a good job governing either... if we are good with where they are currently at - our standards are pretty damn low.

Your problem is that you took that cartoon he posted literally. The KKK doesn't represent Republicans but rather a completely unjustifiable position that can't be reasoned with or rectified, but people of color are supposed to somehow find a common ground with. I've seen this crap many times when people make excuses for white nationalists and try to provide them any sort of relevance. Instead of always trying to minimize racism because it's not on the level of the KKK you should look to reward politicians that do the right thing AND govern the way you want them to.

Yes we shouldn't vote for politicians that are racist, sexual assaulters or corrupt individuals but politicians aren't openly sexually harassing people or embezelling money. But some Republicans have been pretty open in their racism. We know being a pedophile should also be disqualifying, but guess which party openly supported and campaigned for a pedophile? Also guess which party the presidential candidate that is blatantly racist, a sexual assaulter and corrupt individual ran under?

The point gtn and I are trying to make is that if you look at all the moral failings of the Republican party and still vote for them then at a certain level you're saying that it's not a deal breaker for you. Because what I'm getting from you is that you're fine voting for lets say a candidate that engages in dog whistle racism as long as they want a sustainable government. Feel free to correct me if I'm interpreting that wrong. And don't deflect with Democrats in your response, I want you to address my post as it relates to the Republican party.

This is a great post. Perfectly captures everything I've been trying to say. Worth everyone's time to read it.

[dckingsfan]

You can't honestly think that what you posted and what gtn130 are in someway equivalent. If we can't at the very least establish a baseline that the Republican party engages in dog whistle racism (as pointed out by Republicans) and it also implements policies that target minorities (as pointed out by court cases) then we'll never actually get to the root of why the government is broken.

Did you NOT look at what he posted... It shows that the Rs are ALL KKK. It shows that the independents are going along with it - it isn't true, it is irrational and it is tribal. If you start at that point then there will NEVER be a middle. Fortunately there seems to be some level heads in the R and D caucuses that are leading the way (common sense coalition).

The baseline should be that we never vote for racists, sexual harassers, embezzlers, etc.

Add to that we need good pols that bring along the right policies. The Ds have not done a good job governing either... if we are good with where they are currently at - our standards are pretty damn low.

Your problem is that you took that cartoon he posted literally. The KKK doesn't represent Republicans but rather a completely unjustifiable position that can't be reasoned with or rectified, but people of color are supposed to somehow find a common ground with. I've seen this crap many times when people make excuses for white nationalists and try to provide them any sort of relevance. Instead of always trying to minimize racism because it's not on the level of the KKK you should look to reward politicians that do the right thing AND govern the way you want them to.

Yes we shouldn't vote for politicians that are racist, sexual assaulters or corrupt individuals but politicians aren't openly sexually harassing people or embezelling money. But some Republicans have been pretty open in their racism. We know being a pedophile should also be disqualifying, but guess which party openly supported and campaigned for a pedophile? Also guess which party the presidential candidate that is blatantly racist, a sexual assaulter and corrupt individual ran under?

The point gtn and I are trying to make is that if you look at all the moral failings of the Republican party and still vote for them then at a certain level you're saying that it's not a deal breaker for you. Because what I'm getting from you is that you're fine voting for lets say a candidate that engages in dog whistle racism as long as they want a sustainable government. Feel free to correct me if I'm interpreting that wrong. And don't deflect with Democrats in your response, I want you to address my post as it relates to the Republican party.

No, I would never ever vote for one of them... that is wrong. I am a never Trumper - and there are many Rs in that camp.

My point is that there are good Rs that aren't racist - see those that are in the coalition for common sense. We should encourage the Rs to sponsor those type of pols.

But there are many single issue Rs (abortion) that aren't racist - you see two see it as black and white and it isn't.

[Pointgod]

Did you NOT look at what he posted... It shows that the Rs are ALL KKK. It shows that the independents are going along with it - it isn't true, it is irrational and it is tribal. If you start at that point then there will NEVER be a middle. Fortunately there seems to be some level heads in the R and D caucuses that are leading the way (common sense coalition).

The baseline should be that we never vote for racists, sexual harassers, embezzlers, etc.

Add to that we need good pols that bring along the right policies. The Ds have not done a good job governing either... if we are good with where they are currently at - our standards are pretty damn low.

Your problem is that you took that cartoon he posted literally. The KKK doesn't represent Republicans but rather a completely unjustifiable position that can't be reasoned with or rectified, but people of color are supposed to somehow find a common ground with. I've seen this crap many times when people make excuses for white nationalists and try to provide them any sort of relevance. Instead of always trying to minimize racism because it's not on the level of the KKK you should look to reward politicians that do the right thing AND govern the way you want them to.

Yes we shouldn't vote for politicians that are racist, sexual assaulters or corrupt individuals but politicians aren't openly sexually harassing people or embezelling money. But some Republicans have been pretty open in their racism. We know being a pedophile should also be disqualifying, but guess which party openly supported and campaigned for a pedophile? Also guess which party the presidential candidate that is blatantly racist, a sexual assaulter and corrupt individual ran under?

The point gtn and I are trying to make is that if you look at all the moral failings of the Republican party and still vote for them then at a certain level you're saying that it's not a deal breaker for you. Because what I'm getting from you is that you're fine voting for lets say a candidate that engages in dog whistle racism as long as they want a sustainable government. Feel free to correct me if I'm interpreting that wrong. And don't deflect with Democrats in your response, I want you to address my post as it relates to the Republican party.

No, I would never ever vote for one of them... that is wrong. I am a never Trumper - and there are many Rs in that camp.

My point is that there are good Rs that aren't racist - see those that are in the coalition for common sense. We should encourage the Rs to sponsor those type of pols.

But there are many single issue Rs (abortion) that aren't racist - you see two see it as black and white and it isn't.

The bold is what I've been trying to say and is why I stay clear of saying all Republicans are racist but I often implicate party leadership and more prominent members.

So what to do about people that are so focused on a single issue ie abortion that they look the other way on moral failings?

[gtn130]

No, I would never ever vote for one of them... that is wrong. I am a never Trumper - and there are many Rs in that camp.

My point is that there are good Rs that aren't racist - see those that are in the coalition for common sense. We should encourage the Rs to sponsor those type of pols.

But there are many single issue Rs (abortion) that aren't racist - you see two see it as black and white and it isn't.

Good Rs that vote for every single piece of Trump legislation, support Jeff Sessions, support all the racist goons in the house like Steve King, supported repealing ACA for the lib tearz. So good!

Have to lol pretty hard at the extremely not racist single issue abortion voters. Yes those evangelicals are definitely the most not racist people around.

Tea Party also a pillar of tolerance!

Basically nobody is racist except Trump and David Duke when you close your eyes and stick your head in the sand

[gtn130]

The thing about all these olds and baby boomers is their anti-hostility, tone-policing, let's-all-compromise pseudo-rationality is fundamentally based on their complacency with the white supremacist patriarchal social structure.

I'm not racist, but I'm totally fine with the system in place. I vote R for other reasons, not the racist ones! Let's all get along and keep this good thing going! *wink wink*

[dckingsfan]

Your problem is that you took that cartoon he posted literally. The KKK doesn't represent Republicans but rather a completely unjustifiable position that can't be reasoned with or rectified, but people of color are supposed to somehow find a common ground with. I've seen this crap many times when people make excuses for white nationalists and try to provide them any sort of relevance. Instead of always trying to minimize racism because it's not on the level of the KKK you should look to reward politicians that do the right thing AND govern the way you want them to.

Yes we shouldn't vote for politicians that are racist, sexual assaulters or corrupt individuals but politicians aren't openly sexually harassing people or embezelling money. But some Republicans have been pretty open in their racism. We know being a pedophile should also be disqualifying, but guess which party openly supported and campaigned for a pedophile? Also guess which party the presidential candidate that is blatantly racist, a sexual assaulter and corrupt individual ran under?

The point gtn and I are trying to make is that if you look at all the moral failings of the Republican party and still vote for them then at a certain level you're saying that it's not a deal breaker for you. Because what I'm getting from you is that you're fine voting for lets say a candidate that engages in dog whistle racism as long as they want a sustainable government. Feel free to correct me if I'm interpreting that wrong. And don't deflect with Democrats in your response, I want you to address my post as it relates to the Republican party.

No, I would never ever vote for one of them... that is wrong. I am a never Trumper - and there are many Rs in that camp.

My point is that there are good Rs that aren't racist - see those that are in the coalition for common sense. We should encourage the Rs to sponsor those type of pols.

But there are many single issue Rs (abortion) that aren't racist - you see two see it as black and white and it isn't.

The bold is what I've been trying to say and is why I stay clear of saying all Republicans are racist but I often implicate party leadership and more prominent members.

So what to do about people that are so focused on a single issue ie abortion that they look the other way on moral failings?

They would ask the same question to you... I don't have the answer to that one - I just know it is an issue from talking to both sides.

[dckingsfan]

No, I would never ever vote for one of them... that is wrong. I am a never Trumper - and there are many Rs in that camp.

My point is that there are good Rs that aren't racist - see those that are in the coalition for common sense. We should encourage the Rs to sponsor those type of pols.

But there are many single issue Rs (abortion) that aren't racist - you see two see it as black and white and it isn't.

Good Rs that vote for every single piece of Trump legislation, support Jeff Sessions, support all the racist goons in the house like Steve King, supported repealing ACA for the lib tearz. So good!

Have to lol pretty hard at the extremely not racist single issue abortion voters. Yes those evangelicals are definitely the most not racist people around.

Tea Party also a pillar of tolerance!

Basically nobody is racist except Trump and David Duke when you close your eyes and stick your head in the sand

You are right on a black and white issue - you are the only one that is tolerant

[I_Like_Dirt]

But there are many single issue Rs (abortion) that aren't racist - you see two see it as black and white and it isn't.

I agree with your larger point here, but I'd like to point out that there comes a point where, if you're willing to look the other way for your single issue, it becomes entirely irrelevant whether or not you want to argue that you are or aren't for the issue you're accepting in order to get at your single issue, and it's well past that point here. If you're willing to accept the kind of stuff we've seen in the search for banning abortion, then yes, you do support that stuff, too, whether you want to admit it or not. If you didn't support those other issues, you'd be arguing against them just as strong as you are on abortion if you were actually against them, and trying to find another way to achieve your anti-abortion goals. After a while, acceptance becomes complicity. You can't say "I'm not racist, I care, I just am not willing to really do anything about it or sacrifice anything that might possibly harm the most immediate achievement of my goal such as I have chosen to define it regardless of the consequences." It just doesn't work that way. If the bridge is out, you don't try to ramp the gulley to get there faster because your only issue is getting to your destination as fast as possible and then get to say you don't support anyone trying to stunt with their vehicles.

[gtn130]

No, I would never ever vote for one of them... that is wrong. I am a never Trumper - and there are many Rs in that camp.

My point is that there are good Rs that aren't racist - see those that are in the coalition for common sense. We should encourage the Rs to sponsor those type of pols.

But there are many single issue Rs (abortion) that aren't racist - you see two see it as black and white and it isn't.

Good Rs that vote for every single piece of Trump legislation, support Jeff Sessions, support all the racist goons in the house like Steve King, supported repealing ACA for the lib tearz. So good!

Have to lol pretty hard at the extremely not racist single issue abortion voters. Yes those evangelicals are definitely the most not racist people around.

Tea Party also a pillar of tolerance!

Basically nobody is racist except Trump and David Duke when you close your eyes and stick your head in the sand

You are right on a black and white issue - you are the only one that is tolerant

Not at all. I am capable of calling a spade a spade however.

[dckingsfan]

Good Rs that vote for every single piece of Trump legislation, support Jeff Sessions, support all the racist goons in the house like Steve King, supported repealing ACA for the lib tearz. So good!

Have to lol pretty hard at the extremely not racist single issue abortion voters. Yes those evangelicals are definitely the most not racist people around.

Tea Party also a pillar of tolerance!

Basically nobody is racist except Trump and David Duke when you close your eyes and stick your head in the sand

You are right on a black and white issue - you are the only one that is tolerant

Not at all. I am capable of calling a spade a spade however.

They are all black spades...

[gtn130]

If the Republicans supported importing ISIS soldiers into the US but also sustainable government, I'd have to bite the bullet (heh, probably literally!) and vote R! There are no conceivable impediments to my single issue vote here, and this is fine and doesn't make me an ISIS supporter.

That being said, if you vote against Republicans because a few of them are racist, you are a tribalist and shame on you.