American Politics Thread

[CynthiaLover]

Hasn't his Tax Returns already been revealed though? I remember seeing something about a month or two ago, I may be disremembering but I do feel like some were revealed.

There was something in the New York Times a while ago about at least a portion of it, if memory serves, mostly I think it had some bits of tax fraud, but it wasn't enough to do anything and the legitimacy was brought into question repeatedly. So it's hard to say. However, what people like myself are more interested in is the stuff he did overseas, like that hotel deal or whatever with a German bank, among other foreign deals. Especially since said German bank has now blocked him from ever making deals with them again. So there are still several missing chunks of information out there. Getting everything is the key thing here, as only some chunks were possibly revealed, and even that was considered questionable. The fact that he's been so desperate to stall any attempt to get his full tax returns is what's raising eyebrows, and is what people like me want to see finally exposed to everyone.

 

[TheCapsFan]

"Democrats will need to take a lesson from this"

And what kind of lesson is that? To become more evil, like the Republicans?

The lesson is that Democrats can't run a campaign on simply being anti-Trump when Trump isn't on the ballot. Is Youngkin essentially a better-looking, younger Trump from a policy standpoint? Sure, but Democrats need to quit highlighting the things they aren't and start highlighting the things they ARE. There had been so much work done in Virginia since Charlottesville in terms of racial justice, yet I never heard McAuliffe say ANYTHING about the work that state Dems have done in that department throughout the campaign. The decriminalization of marijuana. Just "Trump, Trump, Trump." That's boring and we've heard ENOUGH about that stuff for the past four years. Tell me why I should vote for YOU, yknow? On the flip side, Youngkin ran an incredibly smart campaign, toeing the line between keeping the Trump base in rural areas while also stressing an issue that appealed to a certain demographic he thought he could win. It was smart, sly, cunning, and effective, and although it was built on a lie, so have the rest of the Republican party talking points in the last ten years, so he fits right in.

Oh, and it helps when your candidate is more interesting than a piece of dry toast. Let me say that as a young, Democratic voter in Virginia, there was absolutely nothing appealing about McAuliffe or his campaign. Absolutely no charisma and so much disconnect with his party's core. The Dems never should have let him run this cycle; he was simply the wrong guy to put on the ballot. And it especially irks me when we had two incredibly interesting, strong, charismatic Black women in the primary that nobody gave a second thought to read up about and vote for because a familiar name was on the ballot.

The Dems need to start putting fighters on the ballot. People who will go toe to toe with the Republicans who spread lies and misinformation to call out those lies and misinformation. People with enough energy who to take it to the other side in a debate. People who are brave enough to go knock on doors in rural areas and galvanize the people who have given up on the political system. People who aren't afraid to necessarily alienate white voters by calling out racist or veiled racist remarks, yet also draw in those same voters with that same strong energy and messaging. It's not being evil, it's actually taking measures to COUNTERRACT evil. And yeah, you could argue it's kind of like fighting fire with fire, but the country's already a dumpster fire anyway, so maybe it's like putting another dumpster next to the current dumpster on fire, but in a different direction from the car that's spilling gasoline all over the alley? Lol idk.

Those are the lessons that the Democrats need to take away from Virginia.

And, by the way, I agree with the rest of your post, but wanted to give my two cents on the matter as a Virginian myself.

 

[CynthiaLover]

So, as of today, the $1.2T infrastructure bill has been signed by President Biden. Now we can finally put that issue to bed and get the needed money out to do what needs to be done for the sake of the country.

On another note, Trump is still fighting to keep the Jan 6 records hidden from the House Committee that is overseeing the insurrection that he caused. It appears to be 136 pages worth of documents that he's desperately trying to keep from being seen. Like his tax returns, the fact he's doing everything he can to hide these means it'll have critical information against him. I just hope the judge that he's appealing to just flatly says "No! Hand it over!" and puts an end to it, as these documents were supposed to be in the House Committee's hands last Friday. His classic stall tactic that drives everyone insane. What else is new...

 

[swiftfox]

Parents protesting 'critical race theory' identify a new target: Mental health programs

Groups have voiced opposition to suicide prevention programs, mental health coordinators and social emotional learning, claiming they are being used to indoctrinate students.

www.nbcnews.com

I cannot express how enraged I am at this. These people are sick, and they need to be stopped by any means necessary.

 

[Juliko]

Yeah, that whole article and crusade just screams "Karens don't want their kids to be taught about basic human decency." Because teaching your kids about tough topics and treating them like people whose feelings are valid is certainly brainwashing, riiiiight? Gag me with a spoon. Plus, calling learning about complicated emotions no better than sexually grooming kids? Are you kidding me? These people have their heads so far up their asses, I feel bad for the kids that they're supposedly "fighting for."

 

[swiftfox]

Yeah, that whole article and crusade just screams "Karens don't want their kids to be taught about basic human decency." Because teaching your kids about tough topics and treating them like people whose feelings are valid is certainly brainwashing, riiiiight? Gag me with a spoon. Plus, calling learning about complicated emotions no better than sexually grooming kids? Are you kidding me? These people have their heads so far up their asses, I feel bad for the kids that they're supposedly "fighting for."

My personal theory is that a lot of these parents are worried about their kids telling the schools what happens at home because it would probably result in a visit from CPS.

 

[A Wild Luxray]

And they just declared Kyle Rittenhouse not guilty...Are you fucking kidding me? He absolutely was guilty and he had no reason to be in Kenosha in the first place. The people who hailed him as a hero don't deserve the satisfaction. This is the epitome of what white privilege looks like.

 

[swiftfox]

The worst part of it is during the next big protest, these far-right agitators will be actively looking for situations where they can "defend themselves."

 

[Ryoma Maser]

I think they can overturn this (it wouldn't be the first time for this judge) despite double jeopardy, I think there is a clause that can be made due to judge's attitude during the trial and his overall bias during the trial making him well not a unbiased judge like he's supposed to be.

Though my legal knowledge could use some fact checking. Other wise, when this asshole kid inevitably does this again, I hope the judge gets charged as accomplice since his bias affected most of the jury and made it impossible for the prosecution to do their case.

 

[TheCapsFan]

Yeah, I agree with Ryoma Maser. I think it's way too obvious that this judge was sympathetic and complicit.

 

[A Wild Luxray]

Yeah, its pretty obvious the judge was biased towards Kyle Rittenhouse. The trial was poorly handled, especially throwing in a judge that is biased and sympathetic to a clearly guilty man. Also, this sets a bad precedent. Because he got away with murder by citing self defense, swiftfox is right. Far-right extremists can easily claim self defense and seek out situations where they can kill and claim self defense.

 

[Volphied]

 

[WyndonCalling]

That guy's lying, though - Grosskreutz didn't see a man sitting in the road, shooting people. The footage is pretty clear; Rittenhouse was fleeing from a situation and being chased, fell over, and then shot the attackers bearing down on him, including Grosskreutz.

 

[Volphied]

That guy's lying, though - Grosskreutz didn't see a man sitting in the road, shooting people. The footage is pretty clear; Rittenhouse was fleeing from a situation and being chased, fell over, and then shot the attackers bearing down on him, including Grosskreutz.

Rittenhouse Jury Has to Decide If the Men Who Tried to Stop Him Were Heroes or Villains

Kyle Rittenhouse’s far-right defenders say he is not a murderer but a hero. The prosecutor says the protesters who tried to disarm him were the real heroes.

theintercept.com

He was clearly sitting and aiming with his gun, after he already shot someone before:

Just before Kyle Rittenhouse, seated, shot Gaige Grosskreutz, left, he had fired two shots at an unidentified man in light jeans who tried to kick him. Rittenhouse then fired a fatal shot into the chest of Anthony Huber, foreground, as the three men attempted to disarm the teenage vigilante — who had previously killed another protester, Joseph Rosenbaum — on Aug. 25, 2020, in Kenosha, Wis. Photo: Tayfun Coskun/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images

Also, I really don't like how you used the word "attackers" when describing people who were defending themselves and others from an armed vigilante. Or to quote the prosecutor:

“I want you to keep in mind that we’ve all read stories and heard about heroes that step in to stop an active shooter, or to give their life to save others,” Binger told the jury. “When you think about the defendant’s behavior in this case, contrast it with Anthony Huber, a man who was there because he knew Jacob Blake, who carried his skateboard everywhere, and who rushed towards danger to save other people’s lives.”

“When a bank robber robs a bank and runs away and the crowd comes after him, can he just shoot anybody and claim self-defense?” Binger asked. “In this case, the crowd was right. The crowd knew the defendant had just shot someone.”

“That crowd was full of heroes,” the prosecutor added. “And that crowd did something that honestly I’m not sure I would’ve had the courage to do. If I see a guy running up the street with an AR-15 and I hear he just shot somebody, my first instinct is not to approach. Anthony Huber was different. Jump Kick Man was different. Gaige Grosskreutz was different. That doesn’t make them a threat to the defendant’s life. It doesn’t make their lives worthless. They don’t give up their right to defend themselves.”

 

[WyndonCalling]

Respectable Lawyer is still totally disingenuous. Grosskreutz saw Rittenhouse run (flee) past him and fall over, and he was then attacked from that position. The way RL is trying to frame the situation to suggest that Rittenhouse took a seat and then started shooting is Trumpian.

 

[Volphied]

Respectable Lawyer is still totally disingenuous. Grosskreutz saw Rittenhouse run (flee) past him and fall over, and he was then attacked from that position. The way RL is trying to frame the situation to suggest that Rittenhouse took a seat and then started shooting is Trumpian.

Well, I'm still perplexed about you using the word "attackers" to describe the people defending themselves and others from Rittenhouse. The way you framed it is in my opinion, much, much more Trumpian.

EDIT: No point in bumping this thread over this old debate, so I'm leaving my response here

There is not a scintilla of dispute that Rittenhouse was attacked first by Rosenbaum, who charged at him.

Why did he charge at him? Could it be because Rittenhouse was acting threatening with his gun? In that case, Rosenbaum was not the attacker. You seem to have a very narrow definition of "attacker".

And the way you use words like "scintilla of dispute" is once again very Trumpian.

 

[WyndonCalling]

Well, I'm still angry about you using the word "attackers" to describe people defending themselves and others from Rittenhouse. The way you framed it, is in my opinion, much, much more Trumpian.

There is not a scintilla of dispute that Rittenhouse was attacked first by Rosenbaum, who charged at him. After that first shooting, Rittenhouse attempted to flee the scene with several people in pursuit, one of whom had a makeshift weapon. I won't claim expertise nor deny that it's get murky as to what bystanders might interpret and what might be legally acceptable for those pursuers to do in that situation, but they were most definitely attacking someone who was running - quite possibly for their life - from the scene at that point.

There's many more questions to ask - was Rittenhouse's response to that first attack proportionate? What was he doing there? Was he looking for trouble? How and why did he approach the group? Would a black person have received the same verdict? Why is it legal for a 17-year old to be armed in such a manner? But please, we can address those questions without muddying the waters of what physically happened.

 

[swiftfox]

Changing gears to a less morbid subject, Morning Consult (finally!) released their updated governor approval ratings. There's not really much that's eye-opening, but all 3 Red State Democrats being above DeSantis is not something I expected.

 

[Aulos]

Just popping in to say that the fact that Trump gets booed for saying he got vaccinated and encouraging his audiences to do the same, just proves that he has created a monster that is out of his control. This is very scary.

 

[swiftfox]

I've seen campaign ads for Doctor Oz and some other dude running for office in Pennsylvania while watching the Outback Bowl. Why are these ads airing in Alabama?