The Current Events, News, and Politics Thread
Boost Czar
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/supporter1.gif)
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/admin.png)
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,688
Total Cats: 4,113
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
unrelated to the mueller report, but somehow very?
https://www.foxnews.com/us/san-franc...kzec10jZBC31rg
https://www.foxnews.com/us/san-franc...kzec10jZBC31rg
The Golden City appears to be turning a shade of brown.
San Francisco’s streets have long had a problem with human waste, but new reports show that the Bay Area’s public bowel movements are worse than ever.
SAN FRANCISCO DUBBED 'DOO-DOO CAPITAL' OF THE COUNTRY, AMID SPIKE IN WASTE COMPLAINTS
The poop-data was released by Open the Books, a nonprofit government watchdog, which includes all cases closed by the San Francisco Department of Public Works since 2011, Business Insider reported.
There were over 5,000 documented cases in 2011, according to the data. In 2018, that number rose more than fivefold to over 28,000 reported cases.
Lately there has been a brownout in the Bay Area... Since 2011, there have been at least 118,352 reported instances of human fecal matter on city streets. @ForbesOpinion http://bit.ly/2v98r1V The so-called Bay Area “brownout” has been attributed to the city’s large homeless population. Out of the 7,499 homeless people recorded in 2017, about 58 percent, or 4,353 people, were marked as unsheltered. The other 3,146 were designated sheltered.
San Francisco’s streets have long had a problem with human waste, but new reports show that the Bay Area’s public bowel movements are worse than ever.
SAN FRANCISCO DUBBED 'DOO-DOO CAPITAL' OF THE COUNTRY, AMID SPIKE IN WASTE COMPLAINTS
The poop-data was released by Open the Books, a nonprofit government watchdog, which includes all cases closed by the San Francisco Department of Public Works since 2011, Business Insider reported.
There were over 5,000 documented cases in 2011, according to the data. In 2018, that number rose more than fivefold to over 28,000 reported cases.
Junior Member
iTrader: (-1)
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Southern California
Posts: 423
Total Cats: 16
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
![big grin](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Mainly that was a dig at certain parts of the left-wing party that would like to allow illegal aliens to vote in their local elections.
Boost Czar
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/supporter1.gif)
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/admin.png)
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,688
Total Cats: 4,113
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
https://www.dailywire.com/news/46179...gSe1SPS8_qcbIw
For two years, the mainstream media has claimed President Donald Trump and his 2016 campaign colluded with Russia to steal the election from Hillary Clinton.
“Collusion,” “Collusion,” “Collusion,” Jan Brady might say.
But after Special Counsel Robert Mueller recommended no further indictments — and indicted no one from the Trump campaign with colluding with Russia — the narrative had to change. Trump still did something wrong, something impeachable.
Since Attorney General William Barr summarized Mueller’s report by saying there was “no collusion,” but suggested there wasn’t enough evidence to charge Trump with obstruction, the media has predictably cried foul. It was Barr who determined there wasn’t enough evidence to charge Trump with obstruction, we’re told, which means there really was enough but the president’s hand-picked attorney general saved him.
And this is the story the media is running with today. The New York Times’ front-page headline was, “Mueller Report Lays Out Russian Contacts And Trump’s Frantic Efforts To Foil Inquiry.” The Washington Post went with, “Mueller details Russian interference, Trump’s attempts to disrupt probe.” The Wall Street Journal was a bit more measured, writing “Mueller Report Explains Findings On Obstruction, Conspiracy.”
The Post wrote article after article about obstruction and embarrassing details of the Oval Office, but none of these report the most important finding: That the two year media tantrum over alleged collusion didn’t pan out.
The Mueller investigation was predicated on the idea of collusion. It was, at its core, a counterintelligence investigation, not a criminal investigation, though it did end up charging people with crimes. As Andy McCarthy has explained numerous times, a counterintelligence investigation is done “to inform the president, through his subordinate intelligence officials, of information about threats to, and opportunities to advance, American interests.” He cannot obstruct an investigation done allegedly on his behalf.
Further, there was no underlying crime — this was never a criminal investigation. How can Trump obstruct an investigation into a nonexistent crime?
As Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief Ben Shapiro wrote in his takeaways from the Mueller report, the special counsel went to great lengths to try and twist Trump’s criticism of an investigation into a crime he did not commit into a charge of obstruction.
“The President does have First Amendment rights. To suggest that public criticism of Robert Mueller or public praise of Paul Manafort amounts to criminal obstruction of justice requires an extraordinarily broad reading of obstruction of justice statutes,” Shapiro wrote.
My former Washington Examiner colleague Byron York explained that the investigation was “about something that did not happen,” and why the obstruction investigation existed:
And Volume I was a political assassination attempt by Democrats who were upset their preferred candidate lost the 2016 election.
“Collusion,” “Collusion,” “Collusion,” Jan Brady might say.
But after Special Counsel Robert Mueller recommended no further indictments — and indicted no one from the Trump campaign with colluding with Russia — the narrative had to change. Trump still did something wrong, something impeachable.
Since Attorney General William Barr summarized Mueller’s report by saying there was “no collusion,” but suggested there wasn’t enough evidence to charge Trump with obstruction, the media has predictably cried foul. It was Barr who determined there wasn’t enough evidence to charge Trump with obstruction, we’re told, which means there really was enough but the president’s hand-picked attorney general saved him.
And this is the story the media is running with today. The New York Times’ front-page headline was, “Mueller Report Lays Out Russian Contacts And Trump’s Frantic Efforts To Foil Inquiry.” The Washington Post went with, “Mueller details Russian interference, Trump’s attempts to disrupt probe.” The Wall Street Journal was a bit more measured, writing “Mueller Report Explains Findings On Obstruction, Conspiracy.”
The Post wrote article after article about obstruction and embarrassing details of the Oval Office, but none of these report the most important finding: That the two year media tantrum over alleged collusion didn’t pan out.
Further, there was no underlying crime — this was never a criminal investigation. How can Trump obstruct an investigation into a nonexistent crime?
As Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief Ben Shapiro wrote in his takeaways from the Mueller report, the special counsel went to great lengths to try and twist Trump’s criticism of an investigation into a crime he did not commit into a charge of obstruction.
My former Washington Examiner colleague Byron York explained that the investigation was “about something that did not happen,” and why the obstruction investigation existed:
The Mueller report is divided into two volumes. Volume I covers the collusion question. Volume II considers whether the president obstructed the investigation. But of course there would have been no obstruction investigation had there not been the collusion allegation to begin with. There would be no Volume II if there were no Volume I.
Boost Pope
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/supporter1.gif)
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/smod.png)
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,340
Total Cats: 6,793
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
“I don’t mean to be coy, but I think I can get into a difficult, difficult area when I start commenting on Supreme Court decisions—which are correctly decided and which I may disagree with. Again, my personal, political, or religious views I would set aside—that is Supreme Court precedent. It is binding. If I were honored to be confirmed, I would be bound by it, and of course, I would uphold it.”
That would be Wendy Vitter, one of Trump's recent nominees to the US District Courts (specifically the Eastern District of Louisiana) responding to a question during her interview with the Senate Judiciary Committee as to whether she believed that Brown v. Board of Education had been correctly decided* by the Supreme Court in 1954.
You remember Brown v. Board of Education, right? That was the one where the court unanimously said "No, it's not ok to segregate the little black children into their own separate schools, away from the little white children." Not generally a highly controversial piece of jurisprudence, but Wendy Vitter seems to think she might disagree with it. (She didn't get the job, incidentally.)
What's really interesting though is that Trump seems to be nominating Federal judges who the ultra-libs might actually like. After all, they're the ones whose kids are today demanding that they be segregated into nice little safe spaces.
Neomi Rao, who Trump nominated to replace Brett Kavanaugh on the US Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, also gave a non-answer to the same question. Specifically, that it was “not appropriate to comment on the correctness of particular precedents.”
Not appropriate to comment on the correctness of particular precedents? That is literally the exact thing that Courts of Appeals are supposed to do.
* = clarification: "Correctly Decided" does not mean that the court's ruling was morally right in the eyes of whatever beholder, merely that the court followed correct procedure in reaching its opinion.
Last edited by Joe Perez; 04-19-2019 at 09:45 PM.
Boost Pope
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/supporter1.gif)
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/smod.png)
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,340
Total Cats: 6,793
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
All courts in the US, including the Supreme Court, recognize precedence. And all appellate courts in the US have the authority to create new precedence, and determine that old precedence is either unjust or antiquated, subject to the authority of a higher court (where applicable.)
I will admit that while IP Law was an area of interest for me very early on in my legal education, I did not actually have the chance to pursue Patent & Trademark at any length before my career plans changed.
I will admit that while IP Law was an area of interest for me very early on in my legal education, I did not actually have the chance to pursue Patent & Trademark at any length before my career plans changed.
Boost Pope
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/supporter1.gif)
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/smod.png)
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,340
Total Cats: 6,793
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I should clarify that all US courts, not merely appellate courts, have the ability to create precedence.
In lower courts, this is relatively rare. It typically occurs only in cases of first impression, meaning those cases dealing with some unique and novel situation in which no applicable prior ruling from a higher court exists. Most often, this occurs shortly after some new legislation is passed, and a case is presented which challenges it. As most such cases are ultimately elevated to an appellate court, it is uncommon to see citations presented from the original ruling.
While lower courts do technically have the authority to rebuke precedence, this occurs infrequently. And, again, such cases usually wind up being elevated to a higher court, whose ruling is ultimately cited.
EDIT, random photo:
In lower courts, this is relatively rare. It typically occurs only in cases of first impression, meaning those cases dealing with some unique and novel situation in which no applicable prior ruling from a higher court exists. Most often, this occurs shortly after some new legislation is passed, and a case is presented which challenges it. As most such cases are ultimately elevated to an appellate court, it is uncommon to see citations presented from the original ruling.
While lower courts do technically have the authority to rebuke precedence, this occurs infrequently. And, again, such cases usually wind up being elevated to a higher court, whose ruling is ultimately cited.
EDIT, random photo:
![](https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/57471730_1074753986063969_7100025400683659264_n.png?_nc_cat=1&_nc_eui2=AeG_aJ2wci5HmpDQqHUsjir1sLsmTl8Fap8hf99l0HM3U_QOrTzXrIOfQQgDhHRDE8jSc38F1oSZm25BXwUcRNUKdC64nPBdzNhyF5wFbjjRWA&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&oh=868e7235a5f06a46a1639d0d43006ab2&oe=5D463688)
Last edited by Joe Perez; 04-19-2019 at 09:52 PM.
Boost Pope
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/supporter1.gif)
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/smod.png)
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,340
Total Cats: 6,793
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
In unrelated news, Vermont proudly joins New Mexico and South Dakota in legislatively mandating white guilt:
Vermont passes bill abolishing Columbus Day in favor of Indigenous Peoples’ Day
Moderator
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/supporter1.gif)
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/moderator.png)
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 20,887
Total Cats: 3,075
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
The news reader on tv just said they were burning things and throwing rocks to protest wealth inequality. Not to be confused with income inequality, I guess. Doesn't sound like they're feeling much fraternité their pursuit of forced égalité.
Boost Czar
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/supporter1.gif)
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/admin.png)
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,688
Total Cats: 4,113
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
religion of peace strikes again!
![](https://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/57338846_1022527091266619_1656143100189343744_o.jpg?_nc_cat=100&_nc_ht=scontent-iad3-1.xx&oh=2edc61b784be726e4ff4bcb766bb7243&oe=5D39BC82)
shitholes gotta shithole.
(K.R.) MORE THAN 200 PEOPLE DEAD IN 8 CHURCH AND HOTEL BOMBINGS IN SRI LANKA
At least 207 people have been killed and 450 more injured in a series of explosions targeting churches during Easter masses and hotels in Sri Lanka. Two Americans and several Britons are among the dead.
No one has claimed responsibility for the attacks but Sri Lanka’s defense minister says the culprits have been identified and were “religious extremists”.
More than 50 people were killed in St. Sebastian’s gothic-style Catholic church in Katuwapitiya, north of Colombo, with pictures showing bodies on the ground, blood on the pews and a destroyed roof.
There were six initial blasts, at three hotels and three churches, before two more explosions some time later, at a housing complex during a police raid. At least three police officers were killed in those raids when blasts were triggered by suspects as they fled from police.
Ten days before Sunday's bomb attacks, Sri Lanka’s police chief made a nationwide alert that suicide bombers planned to hit “prominent churches”.
”A foreign intelligence agency has reported that the NTJ (National Thowheeth Jama’ath) is planning to carry out suicide attacks targeting prominent churches as well as the Indian high commission in Colombo,” said the alert.
The NTJ is a radical Muslim group in Sri Lanka that came to notice in 2018 when it was linked to the vandalisation of Buddhist statues.
Christian groups say they have faced increasing intimidation from extremist Buddhist monks as well, in recent years. And last year, there were clashes between the majority Sinhalese Buddhist community and minority Muslims, with some hardline Buddhist groups accusing Muslims of forcing people to convert to Islam.
According to the country’s 2012 census, 70% of Sri Lankan’s are Buddhist, 12.6% Hindu, 9.7% Muslim and 7.6% Christian.
At least 207 people have been killed and 450 more injured in a series of explosions targeting churches during Easter masses and hotels in Sri Lanka. Two Americans and several Britons are among the dead.
No one has claimed responsibility for the attacks but Sri Lanka’s defense minister says the culprits have been identified and were “religious extremists”.
More than 50 people were killed in St. Sebastian’s gothic-style Catholic church in Katuwapitiya, north of Colombo, with pictures showing bodies on the ground, blood on the pews and a destroyed roof.
There were six initial blasts, at three hotels and three churches, before two more explosions some time later, at a housing complex during a police raid. At least three police officers were killed in those raids when blasts were triggered by suspects as they fled from police.
Ten days before Sunday's bomb attacks, Sri Lanka’s police chief made a nationwide alert that suicide bombers planned to hit “prominent churches”.
”A foreign intelligence agency has reported that the NTJ (National Thowheeth Jama’ath) is planning to carry out suicide attacks targeting prominent churches as well as the Indian high commission in Colombo,” said the alert.
The NTJ is a radical Muslim group in Sri Lanka that came to notice in 2018 when it was linked to the vandalisation of Buddhist statues.
Christian groups say they have faced increasing intimidation from extremist Buddhist monks as well, in recent years. And last year, there were clashes between the majority Sinhalese Buddhist community and minority Muslims, with some hardline Buddhist groups accusing Muslims of forcing people to convert to Islam.
According to the country’s 2012 census, 70% of Sri Lankan’s are Buddhist, 12.6% Hindu, 9.7% Muslim and 7.6% Christian.
![](https://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/57338846_1022527091266619_1656143100189343744_o.jpg?_nc_cat=100&_nc_ht=scontent-iad3-1.xx&oh=2edc61b784be726e4ff4bcb766bb7243&oe=5D39BC82)
shitholes gotta shithole.
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
https://quodverum.com/2018/12/344/fr...-uprising.html
Boost Pope
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/supporter1.gif)
![](/mt2011/images_td/ranks/smod.png)
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,340
Total Cats: 6,793
![Default](https://www.miataturbo.net/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I stumbled across this article. If at all accurate, I think it explains a little what’s going on - et maintenant, le deluge!
https://quodverum.com/2018/12/344/fr...-uprising.html
https://quodverum.com/2018/12/344/fr...-uprising.html
Check.
The following is satire:
Trump Awards Self The Presidential Medal Of Not Committing Crimes
April 19th, 2019
![](https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.miataturbo.net-vbulletin/700x396/image_30a486da6e8506f86dfff10a54426d4adafdb6d0.png)
WASHINGTON D.C.—After the release of the Mueller Report, which stated there was no evidence that President Donald Trump had committed a crime, Trump held an awards ceremony in which he gave away what he described as “the most prestigious award ever in all history”— the Presidential Medal of Not Committing Crimes. The recipient: himself.
“I am honored to give this award to me,” Trump told the press and the one non-press member in attendance, Vice President Mike Pence, whom Trump stared at every so often to get him to clap. “This is only given to someone who, after a long and exhaustive investigation, was found to have not committed crimes and to be the most honest and law-abiding person ever.”
Trump then went on to note that he is the only president to ever receive the award. “Does that mean all the other presidents colluded with Russia?” Trump asked. “Well, you can’t know for sure. The only one you know for certain didn’t is me, as the others have never been investigated.”
The ceremony ended with Trump getting Pence to edit Trump’s Wikipedia page so that his winning the medal is mentioned in the opening paragraph. He then had Pence edit Russia's page so the opening paragraph states that it is a country that Trump did not collude with.
https://babylonbee.com/news/trump-aw...mitting-crimes
Trump then went on to note that he is the only president to ever receive the award. “Does that mean all the other presidents colluded with Russia?” Trump asked. “Well, you can’t know for sure. The only one you know for certain didn’t is me, as the others have never been investigated.”
The ceremony ended with Trump getting Pence to edit Trump’s Wikipedia page so that his winning the medal is mentioned in the opening paragraph. He then had Pence edit Russia's page so the opening paragraph states that it is a country that Trump did not collude with.