Ed Breaking: Mueller Grand Jury charges filed, arrests as soon as Monday

[Lurch]

If the old saying that justice delayed is justice denied has merit, why the notion that a sitting President cannot be indicted? He could effectively sit out a double term of eight years without facing the proper consequences of his actions for that considerable interval.

If a supine Congress sees no urgency in impeaching.

The Founding Fathers may have not have envisioned the collective apathy, if not complicity, of a Congress such as we have today. And so a reliance upon political will to exact a price for the Leader's malfeasance would seem to be a not reliable check. Therefore the President must be held by Lady Justice to the same account as any other citizen. No person is above the Law, and all are ostensibly to be treated equally, with duly speedy trials.

An effectively immune President makes for an attractive position to which unsavory types might aspire, from whence they can enact their nefarious enterprises. Ever the danger of a system at all susceptible to populist demagoguery. As in these times, where a cartoonishly ignorant unreality TV personality is seen by a frightfully large number of the credulous as fine material to hoist to power.

 

[Darat]

I think the point is Mueller knows the actual answers. He'll know if Trump lies. And Trump won't know what Mueller knows so he will probably answer, "I don't recall" more times than Sessions.

Do you remember this https://youtu.be/WfaXILOSEf0

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

It's being reported that Mueller told Trump's team that if Trump didn't sit down for an interview, he would consider subpoenaing him to appear before a Grand Jury

 

[phiwum]

Delete, off-topic.

 

[phiwum]

Fact: Only one-third of President Trump's campaign managers and National Security Advisers have been indicted.

I must say that I'm not usually a fan of your one-line posting style, but this was pretty damned funny.

 

[BobTheCoward]

If the old saying that justice delayed is justice denied has merit, why the notion that a sitting President cannot be indicted? He could effectively sit out a double term of eight years without facing the proper consequences of his actions for that considerable interval.

If a supine Congress sees no urgency in impeaching.

The Founding Fathers may have not have envisioned the collective apathy, if not complicity, of a Congress such as we have today. And so a reliance upon political will to exact a price for the Leader's malfeasance would seem to be a not reliable check. Therefore the President must be held by Lady Justice to the same account as any other citizen. No person is above the Law, and all are ostensibly to be treated equally, with duly speedy trials.

An effectively immune President makes for an attractive position to which unsavory types might aspire, from whence they can enact their nefarious enterprises. Ever the danger of a system at all susceptible to populist demagoguery. As in these times, where a cartoonishly ignorant unreality TV personality is seen by a frightfully large number of the credulous as fine material to hoist to power.

Doesn't matter. The Constitution is a suicide pact.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

It's being reported that Trump's legal team don't have the security clearance to discuss with him issues around an interview with Mueller

 

[Stacko]

Sweet Jebus!

In the United States, Paul J. Manafort is facing prosecution on charges of money laundering and financial fraud stemming from his decade of work for a pro-Russian political party in Ukraine.

But in Ukraine, where officials are wary of offending President Trump, four meandering cases that involve Mr. Manafort, Mr. Trump’s former campaign chairman, have been effectively frozen by Ukraine’s chief prosecutor.

The cases are just too sensitive for a government deeply reliant on United States financial and military aid, and keenly aware of Mr. Trump’s distaste for the investigation by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, into possible collusion between Russia and his campaign, some lawmakers say.

The decision to halt the investigations by an anticorruption prosecutor was handed down at a delicate moment for Ukraine, as the Trump administration was finalizing plans to sell the country sophisticated anti-tank missiles, called Javelins.

 

[Border Reiver]

Doesn't matter. The Constitution is a suicide pact.

You realize that suicide pacts can be rewritten?

 

[BobTheCoward]

You realize that suicide pacts can be rewritten?

Of course. No one hates the Constitution here more than me. I always want it rewritten.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Sweet Jebus!

Yeah right, like they actually have some effective investigation of corruption.

 

[Emily's Cat]

So, basically, an indictment of the industry as a whole, which reinforces my mental image of them as sociopaths.

Takeaway point, though, is that the exceptions to CFC restriction for medical devices were provided annually until the pharmaceutical companies confirmed they no longer wanted them.

My (i suspect very reasonable) assumption is that the propaganda campaign falsely claiming that they were 'forced' to move to new propellants (forced by... i'm trying to grasp this... you're saying they want us to believe they were forced by "scientists"?) was funded by their usual approaches. Letters to the editor from 'concerned citizens' are a popular misinformation vector.

The claim that it was voluntary is incorrect. It was actually prompted by the FDA, not the manufacturers.
https://www.raps.org/regulatory-focus%E2%84%A2/news-articles/2015/5/fda-ban-on-cfcs-in-asthma-inhalers-raised-costs-for-patients,-new-study-finds

Note that this article talks about the patient's experienced out of pocket cost, not the underlying cost of the drug experienced by the insurers. And for people with drug or integrated deductibles, the impact was much more significant.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Or rather, that you have been convinced that you are losing out, even if you really aren't.

Gee, I'm sorry you feel that way. I know you're a low income person with asthma... and I know it *seems* like you're really getting screwed by this policy... but it's only because you've been convinced that you're losing out by having your costs go up. Really you're not losing - see the environment will be much better for your grandkids, so you're actually winning!

Again, I'll reiterate: Policies that are net beneficial on an aggregate basis are often detrimental (sometimes severely so) to a subset of people affected by those policies. "For the greater good" doesn't mean that it's good for all people... and when you're one of the people being sacrificed for the good of others, you'll often meet that with resistance for obvious reasons.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Side note - the asthma meds discussion is a derail. It was intended as an anecdote illustrating a broader point, not but doesn't seem to have stayed there.

 

[Aridas]

Gee, I'm sorry you feel that way. I know you're a low income person with asthma... and I know it *seems* like you're really getting screwed by this policy... but it's only because you've been convinced that you're losing out by having your costs go up. Really you're not losing - see the environment will be much better for your grandkids, so you're actually winning!

Again, I'll reiterate: Policies that are net beneficial on an aggregate basis are often detrimental (sometimes severely so) to a subset of people affected by those policies. "For the greater good" doesn't mean that it's good for all people... and when you're one of the people being sacrificed for the good of others, you'll often meet that with resistance for obvious reasons.

And to reiterate: my point was that all it takes to meet with that resistance is for the people to think that they'll lose something, even in cases where they would actually end up gaining more than they lost. Do you have any actual disagreement with that or just misdirected snark? Again, though, you seem intent on using an example that confuses the policy with the profiteering that it was used as cover for.

 

[phiwum]

You realize that suicide pacts can be rewritten?

You realize that Bob's notion is nigh insane?

The Constitution is more or less a codification of various flavors of social contracts. It is not well described as a suicide pact.

 

[acbytesla]

Doesn't matter. The Constitution is a suicide pact.

A suicide pact? The longest existing nation state governing document is a suicide pact? Thanks for playing.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

The Trumpster is boiling. He's about to get subpoenaed, his lawyers are coming and going and I believe we'll see Rosenstein gone and rather than firing Mueller, Trump will look for a new deputy AG who will simply re-write Mueller's mandate.

Trump is incompetent. I don't think we can expect any genius means of getting out of this.

I do think he will defy the subpoena.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Lewandowski is on CNN arguing the DoJ won't turn over documents to Congress aka Nunes so he can leak them to the Trumpster.

I think Lewandowski and Kellyanne Conway took speech lessons together. They both talk as fast as they can, spewing anything remotely supporting their arguments without ever really rebutting the questions the news anchors ask.


MSNBC is saying the point of this latest complaint about documents is really about knocking out Rosenstein (who likely will OK the subpoena).

Painting the rigged system, deep state, yada yada.

 

[Minoosh]

But do they realllly think that Trump is the man to fight their corner.

Yes, for reasons I really don't understand.