|
FlamingLiberal posted:It amazes me that Iran has even agreed to discuss this again after Trump threw the agreement in the trash out of spite for Obama, and not because Iran did anything wrong Iran likes the deal, because they are essentially getting paid + having other people build nuclear reactors for them + freeing up a lot of money and financial/travel difficulties for their military elite and leaders in exchange for not making a nuclear bomb. If you really don't want a nuke, then that is a pretty sweet deal. The problem is that the hardliners are in power in Iran now and the reformer/Rouhani coalition has been completely eliminated from power there. They don't want to look weak and don't like the idea of foreign inspectors in their nuclear plants. They only want to get back into the deal if it looks like they are gaining even more and they can either guarantee it will stick or get such a win that it doesn't matter because it will be worth it to look like they came out on top of the E.U and U.S. Which obviously makes it very difficult when the U.S. can't guarantee compliance forever and Iran sets the bar really high. Many of the leaders in Iran also definitely do want a nuke because they feel it will give them a huge amount of leverage over Saudi Arabia, the U.S., and Israel and prevent anyone from considering a conventional invasion. Discendo Vox posted:It's describing Iran and Russia sabotaging the deal to Russia's benefit. Iran isn't taking a dive for Russia on this one and Russia doesn't really benefit much from a deal tanking entirely. This is more of a spite move/desperation attempt to get something by Russia.
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 00:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 07:50 |
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Iran isn't taking a dive for Russia on this one and Russia doesn't really benefit much from a deal tanking entirely. This is more of a spite move/desperation attempt to get something by Russia. That doesn't parse because Iran knows that 3) in your post is impossible to confirm, and always has been. It's not how international agreements work. It makes sense only in the context of feeding the "wow look how much better the authoritarian government is" framing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 00:49
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:That doesn't parse because Iran knows that 3) in your post is impossible to confirm, and always has been. It's not how international agreements work. It makes sense only in the context of feeding the "wow look how much better the authoritarian government is" framing. That is an argument for why the hardliners in Iran might want to use it as a fig leaf to not go back to the deal their political rival struck. But, it doesn't really help Russia materially or explain why Iran would engage and then take a dive on something that started before Russia invaded Ukraine to somehow help Russia.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 00:56
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:That doesn't parse because Iran knows that 3) in your post is impossible to confirm, and always has been. It's not how international agreements work. It makes sense only in the context of feeding the "wow look how much better the authoritarian government is" framing. which government unilaterally broke the deal, then followed it up by murdering one of the other government's highest ranking politicians on a diplomatic mission, and then capped it off by turning around and saying 'aww gosh we didn't mean it can we take it back' there is one party in this deal that has acted in good faith, and i regret to inform you it's the one where the unelected council of theocrats officially runs the country, as opposed to ostensibly being limited to acting in a judicial capacity.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 01:22
|
|
|
The revived Iran deal has been dead since January or February when some "centrist" Democrats teamed up with some Republicans to say they would kill any deal the white house tried to make.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 01:26
|
|
|
Mr Hootington posted:The revived Iran deal has been dead since January or February when some "centrist" Democrats teamed up with some Republicans to say they would kill any deal the white house tried to make. I hope Iran has enough time to blunder the US good enough to stop the imperialist bullshit. If you have control of the track signal and the train btinging firewood to you, why would you misdirect it? They want Iran to be completely war hawked into the next Iraq and the Dems are just as bloodthirsty foreign policy wise as the Republican. It's a bipartisan success story. Success for them not for us. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 01:34
|
|
|
Who knew that utilizing every tool at their disposal meant nominating an anti-choice Republican to the bench. Hopefully, Biden gets wise to it and doesn't go through with the nomination. However, this is something the Democrats have done in the Trump years. I remember when they confirmed 15 of Trump's nominees in exchange for being able to go on recess so some democrats can campaign
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 01:48
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Reviving the Iran nuclear deal seems to have gotten 98% of the way there and has been stuck on the last 2% for several months. That last 2% might end up killing the entire effort to revive it. Honestly, it's hard to blame Iran for wanting points 2 and 3, and considering that the US was the one that unilaterally broke the agreement Iran had been faithfully abiding by and is now asking Iran for an equivilant concession for point 2... yeah, I find it hard to blame Iran for sticking to their guns and wanting a better deal and a guarantee on the deal considering the US hosed them over last time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 03:58
|
|
|
in the rare bit of good news coming from american courts https://www.npr.org/2022/06/29/1105551227/r-kelly-sentence-30-years r kelly got 30 years sexual exploitation of minors, racketeering, and more
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 04:59
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Australia has a saturation of Murdoch-funded media that would likely favor Trump/Republicans, and is also very proximate to and directly impacted by China's regional influence and manipulation plays. The saturation of Murdoch press as well as the scaremongering about Asian immigration since the 90s as well as one major political party going very hard on anti-china rhetoric is definitely a contributor to the negative view of China. Despite Australia's very high trade volume with China there is quite a big of friction with the countries both consider neighbours as to whose sphere of influence they should fall in, and as Australia has been cutting foreign aid and laughing about "water lapping at their doors" we have understandably alienated some of these neighbours who have made deals with China over us which has created quite a bit of controversy. The incoming government is now working on repairing these relationships and will certainly be scaremongering a lot less about China. Regarding a low view of the US, I wouldn't attribute that to China's manipulation plays because there is very little non Australian press presence here, certainly more so in our neighbours but not within Australia itself. I would guess that things like pushing the TPP, the Submarines deal and a variety of other American lead initiatives that were forced through despite being unpopular with Australians would contribute as well as being dragged into wars that we see as pointless (Iraq, Afghanistan). We've spent billions on fighter jets from the US, which I think Australians resent not being manufactured at home. Australia also has universal health care and very few mass shootings, especially very few shootings by police. From people I speak to (not leftist circles only) the situation in America with healthcare, policing and guns is terrifying in the US and my friends in Australia don't feel safe travelling there. That's anecdote not data though and I'm happy to be shown to be wrong on the US opinions, but I don't think it's China media influence.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 05:14
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:can you post the story, it's paywalled Archive.is tends to be pretty good at bypassing paywalls. quote:LOUISVILLE, Ky. — President Biden is poised to nominate a conservative Republican anti-abortion lawyer for a lifetime appointment as a federal judge in Kentucky, a nomination strongly opposed by fellow Democrat and U.S. Rep. John Yarmuth, D-Louisville. I don't know that I really have much to say about a nomination that hasn't happened yet for a seat that apparently isn't empty. The idea of cutting deals with Mitch isn't an encouraging one, but I also don't see why Mitch would bother to offer a deal unless he saw his position weakening somehow.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 05:57
|
|
|
Sephyr posted:Don't think this has been posted here yet. cinci zoo sniper posted:Ambiguous paywalled link (I.A.5.a). User loses posting privileges for 6 hours. lmao that you can get a probation for posting a link to the most widely circulated newspaper in kentucky about a deal made with biden by the senate minority leader who is from kentucky, which was leaked by the longest serving democrat in the house from kentucky cinci zoo sniper: you're a loving moron for anyone else who, like cinci zoo sniper, is too moronic to bypass paywalls for prominent sites with paywalls like the courier journal, the new york times, or washington post, here you go: archive.ph (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) B B fucked around with this message at 06:48 on Jun 30, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 06:26
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Archive.is tends to be pretty good at bypassing paywalls. Seems like a good move by McConnell if he's getting a judge he wants through an opposing trifecta while undermining what remains of Biden's public support. I don't see any reason to assume he's giving away much of anything in return, given McConnell's history of absolutely fleecing Biden quote:Biden's surprising nomination comes even as he has fiercely defended women's right to abortion, which the U.S. Supreme Court struck down last Friday when it overturned Roe v. Wade. This line from the article made me chuckle though. Not sure about some of those word choices
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 06:40
|
|
|
The establishment has heard the whispers eluded to in this thread and are giving joe the dreaded “vote of confidence.” https://twitter.com/nbcnews/status/1542440334289936386?s=21&t=WPQvhrdLITXYHH7UsJeYHw quote:People who have spoken with the president described to NBC News what’s become a familiar exercise. Biden will argue he’s the only one who can beat Trump, sometimes ticking through the names of potential Democratic candidates if he stepped aside — Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Pete Buttigieg, even Vice President Kamala Harris. Then rhetorically asks: Can any of them beat his 2020 rival? So basically 1. Trump!? 2. Roe v wade 3. African Americans and suburban women Just useless
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 10:43
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Archive.is tends to be pretty good at bypassing paywalls. It's McConnel. I would not at all be surprised if he made this "deal" with 100% full intention of not honoring a single part of it. He would absolutely lie to get another judge installed. There's nothing for him to lose that he gives the slightest hint of a sideways flying gently caress about and it gets him another judge.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 12:16
|
|
|
He's using it as a litmus test like he did in 2018? But like, wasn't the main feel for Joe Biden's candidacy run that he simply wasn't doing anything at all? He was basically handed the position by default because he happened to still be in the running. A huge chunk of states didn't even get to pretend to vote for Bernie because he'd already dropped out by the time their primaries had happened. If the midterms are as close as they were in 2018, is he going to take that as a sign to continue to do nothing?the article posted:Out in the open, the 2024 pitch sounds like the 2020 pitch. The same goes for behind closed doors, where the argument about electability is what he used to hold off a historically crowded field of Democrats in 2020. .... Oh.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 12:22
|
|
|
bird food bathtub posted:It's McConnel. I would not at all be surprised if he made this "deal" with 100% full intention of not honoring a single part of it. He would absolutely lie to get another judge installed. There's nothing for him to lose that he gives the slightest hint of a sideways flying gently caress about and it gets him another judge. Yeah, but why even bother with it at all if he can hold the seat open for two and a half years and get everything he wants from a GOP trifecta in 2025? Even if we assume he's tricking Biden, why does he suddenly need to trick Biden? It's rarely something he bothers with; when he thinks his prospects are good, he can just stonewall and wait.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 12:23
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Yeah, but why even bother with it at all if he can hold the seat open for two and a half years and get everything he wants from a GOP trifecta in 2025? Maybe he thinks Republicans are the dog that caught the car with the Roe v. Wade decision? That's the only thing I can think of.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 12:28
|
|
|
McConnell might realize that time is no longer on his side.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 12:33
|
|
|
Ershalim posted:He's using it as a litmus test like he did in 2018? But like, wasn't the main feel for Joe Biden's candidacy run that he simply wasn't doing anything at all? He was basically handed the position by default because he happened to still be in the running. A huge chunk of states didn't even get to pretend to vote for Bernie because he'd already dropped out by the time their primaries had happened. If the midterms are as close as they were in 2018, is he going to take that as a sign to continue to do nothing? Lol they're going to get loving wiped in 22 and 24
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 12:34
|
|
|
Lol at the juxtaposition of "biden is running again and the party has his back" with "Biden makes a deal with mitch which could only be necessary if Republicans retake the senate" Democrats exist only to keep Republican seats warm
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 12:41
|
|
|
I wonder how long before some states pass laws requiring ISPs to provide data on users doing google searches for 'illegal' things like looking up the drugs mifepristone, engaging in illegal activities like having a telehealth conference with known out of state abortion providers and other things facilitating abortions? Thats really the only way I can think of that really red states can block people from getting prescription pills in the mail. Cimber fucked around with this message at 12:58 on Jun 30, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 12:47
|
|
|
Of course this is how it was gonna go. The only thing Democrats do anymore is make drat well sure that every decrepit old gently caress gets to sit in the big chair until they die.FizFashizzle posted:McConnell might realize that time is no longer on his side. McConnell might be aware no matter what he does, chances are he's going to get unseated by a nazi in 24, so he's gotta get his last kicks in.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 12:56
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Of course this is how it was gonna go. The only thing Democrats do anymore is make drat well sure that every decrepit old gently caress gets to sit in the big chair until they die. Is there someone positioning to run against him?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 13:06
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Of course this is how it was gonna go. The only thing Democrats do anymore is make drat well sure that every decrepit old gently caress gets to sit in the big chair until they die. that is incredibly unlikely unless he dies or something Blue Footed Booby posted:Is there someone positioning to run against him? no unless you count the generic D that will get an insane amount of money to oppose him, but no one really expects that to unseat him.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 13:07
|
|
|
FizFashizzle posted:McConnell might realize that time is no longer on his side. Is he unpopular with his own voters or something? Or do you mean that he’s realized that he’s so old that he’s going to die soon?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 13:07
|
|
|
I'm mixing up Mitch with Manchin again, never mind. Though also likely Biden is graciously letting Mitch inspect his wallet again.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 13:10
|
|
|
I AM GRANDO posted:Is he unpopular with his own voters or something? Or do you mean that he’s realized that he’s so old that he’s going to die soon? A lot is up in the air right now with both the dems and especially the Rs kicking every single political hornet nest that they see. It's also unclear how the gop split over trump is going to resolve. wrt mcconnel, the last one is particularly pertinent, though idk if there're really any trumpists who could unseat him. Ghost Leviathan posted:I'm mixing up Mitch with Manchin again, never mind. who is challenging manchin that seems likely to win?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 13:12
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:who is challenging manchin that seems likely to win? On the democrat side? No one, which is the devil's bargan. As long as the democrats keep Manchin around in solidly red WV they can keep putting judges into seats. Not that judges are important or anything. He's skunking their legislative agenda (well, sorta. He's refusing to abolish the filibuster which is effectively the same thing), but he's at least allowing judges to get nominated.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 13:30
|
|
|
FizFashizzle posted:McConnell might realize that time is no longer on his side. Impossible. Humans have never recorded a turtle dying of old age (as far as I can find, anyways).
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 13:41
|
|
|
Bel Shazar posted:God struck down Onan for dishonoring his brother's widow and attempting to steal the birthright from the proper lineage. Yeah that ones a bit of a misread. Under the old tribal laws if your brother married but died before he had kids you were supposed to marry his wife(it later became typical to refund the dowery). This resulted legally in two family lines, and the property was kept separate. So let's say your the younger brother. Your inheritance turned out less valuable. Many of you sons have lived past early childhood. Suddenly you brother dies. He had no children, but it's clear the marriage was valid. You now control both inheritances. Problem is the family farm will go to the son you have with wife 2, and your existing children will be basically broke and hire themselves out, likely resenting the youngest all the while. Or you could do the minimum and just support the widow. Make the pretense of the marage. Combine the properties so your existing children do better. God decides to simplify the system by killing you and making your genius plan work instantly. I'm not sure there was a moral in there, just bronze age estate law.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 13:47
|
|
|
The actual reason Mitch is doing it is: - Mitch really wants his friend on the court. - Mitch has been asking for this guy for a while, but Biden has been saying no and that he needs a compromise candidate for the last 8 months. - Mitch isn't putting anyone else up and Rand Paul is letting Mitch take the lead on this issue for KY. - Regardless of what happens in the midterms, Biden will be President for 2.5 to 6.5 more years. - Most of the judges they are slowing down are from blue states with 2 D Senators anyway, so unless Republicans totally trash the blue slip system (which they didn't do for circuit judges when they could have and were being blocked under Trump), then the same D Senators are going to recommend the same people (and Biden has to nominate them anyway). It's not like they are getting a die hard federalist society member in the Vermont circuit. - The judgeship he wants isn't open yet, but probably will be in the next 2 years. Who knows what happens between then and now, but this will lock him in. - There is a small (let's be real, very small) chance that the Dems might work out some kind of waiver for blue slips for circuit judges if they are held open too long or strike some sort of deal to get a batch of judges confirmed like they usually do when there is a holdup, but Mitch can't guarantee that this guy will be part of the batch deal. - These are lifetime appointments, so if Mitch misses his window on this, then his friend isn't going to be a judge. Mitch is agreeing to not slow down a bunch of judges that he couldn't block or pick anyway. He might have delayed some of them long enough to get a Senate majority that might vote some of them down, but Biden + 2 D Senators are still going to be the ones nominating/appointing them. They approve a lot of judges by unanimous consent or by 70+ votes, so even if he gets 3-4 Senate seats in 2022, they probably won't be able to kill every judge endlessly for 2.5 to 6.5 years straight. Mitch gets his friend the lifetime appointment he wants, he doesn't slow down a bunch of judges that were mostly going to be confirmed anyway, Red state Senators can still withhold their blue slips for their states, it avoids him having to spend 100+ attempts trying to derail judges nominated by 2 D Senators for 2.5 to 6.5 years that would most likely fail, make him look weak, and possibly get people angry enough to waive the rules. Thus, freeing up a lot of time for him to do other stuff if he has the majority in 2023. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 14:03 on Jun 30, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 13:53
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The actual reason Mitch is doing it is: These are good points and I don't doubt that Mitch has a lot of reasons for doing this. What is truly baffling is why the gently caress Biden thinks it's a good idea to do this now. Does he not understand how much of an absolute goddamn clown this makes him look like? It's completely bewildering.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 14:03
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The actual reason Mitch is doing it is: Yeah, I did not have the energy or the desire to break it down, but this really is not a big deal. These are just circuit court judges, they don't decide nationally important things. The only reason to not do the deal is if you want to say "gently caress your friend and gently caress you Mitch, I don't like you, so I'm going to be an rear end in a top hat. You want to delay some of our circuit court judges too? Fine" Nephthys posted:Does he not understand how much of an absolute goddamn clown this makes him look like? It's completely bewildering. No one really cares that much. This isn't going to be a thing that even most of the nerds on this board remember in a month. Rigel fucked around with this message at 14:09 on Jun 30, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 14:07
|
|
|
not sure where to post this, so if this is the wrong thread, let me know. Opening arguments are setting up a foundation to best harness fundraising to blunt the hell out of the row v wade decision. here are the details as well as the latest podcast. https://openargs.com/oa609-surprise-jan-6-hearing-bombshells-within-smocking-guns-within-more-bombshells/ and here's the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvbrQF30oBY Seeing as the cognitive dissonance guys are going to be involved, I'm guessing it's going to be seriously NSFW, but that's part of the fun.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 14:09
|
|
|
Rigel posted:Yeah, I did not have the reason or the desire to break it down, but this really is not a big deal. These are just circuit court judges, they don't decide important things. The only reason to not do the deal is if you want to say "gently caress your friend and gently caress you Mitch, I don't like you, so I'm going to be an rear end in a top hat. You want to delay some of our circuit court judges too? Fine" Circuit court judges do decide important things and this deal enables both sides to get a little of what they want without each side totally preventing the other from getting anything they want. If they had the will and coordination to break 225 years of tradition and all 50 Dems agree to give up a lot of individual power, then they could end this right now. But, that is obviously not happening, so they are working within those constraints. There are arguments for and against the deal and this individual judge most likely won't be a big deal (in terms of national public policy) on his own, but there is absolutely a chance he could be. Saying it isn't a big deal isn't accurate. It COULD be, but a single circuit judge probably won't be (especially since the most likely result otherwise is the seat stays open for a long time until a Republican President can nominate someone to it who won't be much different or they strike a mass deal for judges and someone else who isn't much different is picked by Rand Paul or Mitch). They could also gamble and just give up the pretense of passing any legislation to dedicate every day to getting the very slow process of getting the judicial nominations out of committee and to a floor vote with the obligatory 72 hour delays between each and every vote to try and ram nominations through as quickly as possible just to be 100% sure that they don't run out the clock. They would have to basically abandon the vacancies in 2 R states, though. This deal is a potentially reasonable path forward (from an entirely strategic angle of trying to maximize butts in judgeships), but it isn't the only path forward. It also is terrible timing and politics to do it right now (even though the guy wouldn't likely be up for a seat for around 2 years, announcing it right now is hilariously tone deaf politically).
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 14:15
|
|
|
Rigel posted:Yeah, I did not have the energy or the desire to break it down, but this really is not a big deal. These are just circuit court judges, they don't decide nationally important things. The only reason to not do the deal is if you want to say "gently caress your friend and gently caress you Mitch, I don't like you, so I'm going to be an rear end in a top hat. You want to delay some of our circuit court judges too? Fine" This is the part that has me shaking my head. Mitch has shown that he will gleefully gently caress the Dems with a pineapple turned sideways every chance he gets, so why do any favors for him? It's not like he's going to have a magical change of heart after the past 8 to 12 years of ignoring decorum and playing Calvinball with the judicial system appointments.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 14:16
|
|
|
This is in reference to a question about oil prices. It was the worst possible way to answer the question. https://twitter.com/DeItaone/status/1542496552282951684?t=IFb-50u9WkDHlh4dpyKQmw&s=19 Here is his (in my opinion) dumb nato speech and questions he is taking. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTcXTHXUsy0
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 14:20
|
|
|
Randalor posted:This is the part that has me shaking my head. Mitch has shown that he will gleefully gently caress the Dems with a pineapple turned sideways every chance he gets, so why do any favors for him? It's not like he's going to have a magical change of heart after the past 8 to 12 years of ignoring decorum and playing Calvinball with the judicial system appointments. In this situation, Mitch is actually giving something up now for the promise of something later. And, to fulfill that promise, Mitch needs either a Senate majority or for a majority of a Democratic judiciary committee to go along with it before Biden could even be obligated to fulfill his end. In a completely neutral scenario, Mitch would be the one taking a big risk. But, we all know that the Dems aren't coordinated or ruthless enough to actually pull that and renege on the deal. So, it's not really much of a risk for him at all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 14:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 07:50 |
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Circuit court judges do decide important things At the micro level for a particular business owner or a Federal defendant? Sure. For anything important, no not really. The appeals courts are not shy about overturning anything they don't agree with, unless its so unimportant that no one above the circuit level cares one way or another.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 14:22
|
|