The Biden Presidency - 2020

[Edward64]

Joe, I really don't believe you meant to swipe the materials and this is all due to sloppy end-of-VP stuff. But wouldn't a reasonable person (with the resources you have) have said back in Nov, after the first batch was discovered ...

"Let's look through other stuff and make sure nothing else is there?"

So, we have Nov and I remember reading about 2 more sets found at different times in Jan. Below article implies there were 3 more sets found in Jan (I'm losing track now). What the heck were you doing in Nov & Dec?

Yes, I would like to know what these docs were about.

Biden classified documents: 5 additional pages of classified material found at president's Wilmington residencd | CNN Politics

President Joe Biden’s aides found five additional pages of classified material at his personal residence in Wilmington, Delaware, on the same day a special counsel was appointed to investigate the matter, the White House announced on Saturday.

That new disclosure marks the latest shift in the total number of documents with classified markings discovered by Biden’s lawyers in a week that has dramatically shifted the trajectory of an administration at the same moment it has raised significant questions about its handling of a legally precarious matter

The latest disclosure marks the third in a week, and second time initial information provided was later proved to be incomplete. In fact, Sauber had said the review of Biden’s homes was complete on Wednesday night even though the additional five pages were discovered on Thursday evening. It comes as the White House has struggled to navigate the convergence of ongoing reviews, public messaging and rapidly increasing political pressure.

[Edward64]

White House under pressure to explain why it didn’t reveal documents discovery earlier | The Hill

The White House is under mounting pressure to explain why the discovery of classified Biden documents was not immediately revealed to the public,

Yup, that's what I want to know.

with critics openly questioning if there was an intentional effort to keep the first find quiet in the lead up to the midterm elections.

The first batch of documents were first discovered on Nov. 2, which was just six days away from the election

Yup, this is the most likely answer. Not that I blame Joe for not revealing before the Nov elections, who wants another Hillary Nov surprise that was a nothing burger, that likely had some impact on the elections. But if I was advising Joe, I'd have told him reveal it immediately

But the White House did not disclose the findings until after they were reported by CBS News earlier this week

The real question for me is why not after the Nov elections. It was 2+ months before CBS broke the story

The official WH answer, so far, is ...

“That’s your version of the case,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said when asked on Friday if not revealing the discovery when it happened was to protect the president from political damage.

“I’ve been very clear here and I’ve answered that question multiple times, in different versions, in the last couple of days. Look, I want to very clear: There’s a process here, we are going to respect that process,” she added, responding “no” when asked if staff were involved in crafting a strategy as to when the disclosure should be made.

I didn't watch the press conference but this smells like good old bull crap and non-answering answering the question. No, you haven't answered the question multiple times. You say there was a process? Tell us what the process was and who approved it? (and those frakking reporters should have asked this follow-up question).

An active investigation does NOT mean you could not have said below sometime mid-Nov

Simply say "we found documents on X date, I didn't know about it, we reported it immediately, we'll let the authorities do their investigation how this happened"

[Edward64]

I can go either way here. If we need another 10 years of troops doing training to buy us time for EVs to take off, probably seems worth it (unless troops are dying). But once EVs take off and our heavy crude dependence in that region is over, let's just leave the party.

Iraq prime minister al-Sudani backs continued US troop presence

Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani has defended the presence of United States troops in his country in an interview with the Wall Street Journal, his first since taking office in October.

The position contradicts the stance of several Iran-aligned groups that in part make up the Shia-dominated Coordination Framework, the political bloc that nominated the prime minister last year. Al-Sudani was subsequently appointed by President Abdul Latif Rashid, whose election ended more than a year of political deadlock fuelled by scholar and political leader Muqtada al-Sadr.

The US currently has about 2,000 troops stationed in the country, with NATO housing several hundred troops there, all in non-combat roles.

I hope he has the support of the key factions here and not using us as his proxy against Al-Sadr etc. I can see the factions trying to kill US & NATO troops to get us out. But that hasn't happened yet so maybe they also like the small presence as an insurance policy.

[Atocep]

The GOPs brilliant plan is to eliminate the IRS, eliminating income tax, and just have a national 30% sales tax.

[Flasch186]

would destroy the middle class and poor so that tracks

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

would destroy the middle class and poor so that tracks

They are talking about payments to lower income people to offset the higher prices.

The whole thing is so stupid. If I was the Dems I would have this on the front burner of everything but they won't because they are talking about gas stoves.

This would really nuke the middle class. Imagine making 100K a year in a metro area and needing some kind of government hand out because everything costs 30% more. If you would even be eligible, which I doubt you would be because the cut off will probably be ridiculously low. Also how do you factor in cost of living for certain areas? 100K goes a lot further in Arkansas than San Francisco.

[Qwikshot]

Originally Posted by Atocep

The GOPs brilliant plan is to eliminate the IRS, eliminating income tax, and just have a national 30% sales tax.

Holy fuck that’s dumb.

[Lathum]

I just read an article about it. Apparently McCarthy had to make a concession to allow it to come to the floor for a vote in order to get a congressman from Georgias support for speaker. The GOP knows it is DOA. This is the kind of dumb fuckery waste of time shit we are going to have to deal with while we get the full scope of what he promised. Can't wait to see what he gave MTG.

[albionmoonlight]

Why do they want it to come for a vote? I guess just so they can say they voted to abolish the IRS?

[albionmoonlight]

dola:

That said, the more time they spend doing performative stuff, the less time they spend doing substantive stuff. So perform away!

[Lathum]

House GOP Vote to Abolish IRS Is Kooky and Self-Destructive

[Qwikshot]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

dola:

That said, the more time they spend doing performative stuff, the less time they spend doing substantive stuff. So perform away!

Right just like the abortion stance (oh wait)

[Brian Swartz]

Representatives should do the performative stuff more often. This specifically is definitely a horrible policy idea, but there's way too much 'it'll never pass so we won't even try' going on. Makes a lot more sense to try, fail, and then continue to campaign on the issue if it's something your constituents want.

[albionmoonlight]

So, IMO, if the GOP House really does fail to raise the debt ceiling, and all the "extraordinary measures" run out in June, then I think that Biden's unilateral options (minting the coin, invoking the 14th Amendment, executing the spending laws that Congress has passed, etc.) are better, policy-wise, than default.

But I think that they are bad politics. They will turn the political focus away from "why isn't the GOP raising the limit?" to "Biden's gimmicks."

Also any unilateral option would almost certainly spook markets, and Biden/Dems would get 100% of that blowback.

So if you are the GOP, I think that you would want Biden to take unilateral action.

So that means, game theory-wise, if you are Biden and you have decided that you will take unilateral action before allowing a default, then the only thing that you can do is to continue to insist that you won't do it up until the moment that you do.

Right? As soon as you signal "I will do this politically unpopular thing if you guys don't back down," then you have guaranteed that the GOP won't back down.

[cuervo72]

Part of me feels like the only way to stop them from continually threatening to burn everything down is to let them actually burn something down. I don't know that it's a good solution, but it's like, "Ok -- let's have it your way then. See how that goes."

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Part of me feels like the only way to stop them from continually threatening to burn everything down is to let them actually burn something down. I don't know that it's a good solution, but it's like, "Ok -- let's have it your way then. See how that goes."

The big tactical mistake to me was in 2011. President Obama should have required Congress to eliminate the debt ceiling as part of the GOP spending cuts.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Part of me feels like the only way to stop them from continually threatening to burn everything down is to let them actually burn something down. I don't know that it's a good solution, but it's like, "Ok -- let's have it your way then. See how that goes."

The thing is they will burn it all down then blame the white house. They already ignore the fact it was their guy who blew up the deficit. They will just claim they have to do this to drop out of control spending by the dems.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

The big tactical mistake to me was in 2011. President Obama should have required Congress to eliminate the debt ceiling as part of the GOP spending cuts.

It was absolutely a mistake. I believe there have been a couple of other chances to do away with this vote as well. It really is a dumb thing to have to do.

[Edward64]

I like the debt ceiling, regardless of which party is in charge.

I know many economists have said that debt ceiling doesn’t prevent deficit spending (in contemporary times) as that’s all Congress and the budget process. But it is reassuring to know there are constant reminders.

It’s like using credit cards. Sure spend up to the limit … and then use another card to spend more. Then get reminded of the reckless spending this month (and life to date accumulated spending) when you grimace & pay bills.

[flere-imsaho]

There's a reminder every time a budget is discussed or voted upon, because there will always be a section reserved for "debt service".

The debt ceiling stuff is performative theater, nothing more. If Republicans really cared, they'd engage in actual constructive discussions about how to raise revenue or cut spending, but they don't.

[Edward64]

Debt ceiling debates, crises etc. are far more visible to the public. Like my Chase Visa reminding me of a pending payment in 5 days, every month.

No problem if it’s primarily political theatre. If it helps keep our massive deficits in public discourse, I’m all for it. We need constant reminders how messed up we are

[flere-imsaho]

What have all the debt ceiling crises of the past 10 years (since the advent of the Tea Party) accomplished, in your mind? Is public discourse on debt and deficits more or less constructive now than, say, 20/30/40 years ago?

[PilotMan]

The party now critical of the national debt is responsible for 25% of the existing debt all accrued under trump. 7.75 trillion in 4 years or something like that.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

What have all the debt ceiling crises of the past 10 years (since the advent of the Tea Party) accomplished, in your mind? Is public discourse on debt and deficits more or less constructive now than, say, 20/30/40 years ago?

The first crisis I remember was in the 90s with Gingrich. I do credit that battle with getting me more aware of the Debt.

I know the 2011 fight was also nasty but let’s call it even. Or in other words, compared to the 90s, the multiple crises since then are the same or not as bad.

On your question of public discourse on debt (the Egg) I’d say it’s definitely worse. But I doubt debt ceiling fights are the cause of that. It’s more overall politics, extremism, the train at the end of the tunnel is getting closer etc. (the Chicken) that makes debt ceiling fights less constructive … aka the Chicken before the Egg.

So to restate my point. I don’t disagree that debt ceiling don’t stop or reduce spending, thats the budget and Congress’ fault, along with the President. My point is it brings continuous awareness (hey remember to pay your bills in 5 days) to the general public and there is worth in that.

What is your stance? No need for debt ceilings because …?

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Edward64

The first crisis I remember was in the 90s with Gingrich. I do credit that battle with getting me more aware of the Debt.

IIRC, the Gingrich shutdowns did not involve reaching and not extending the debt limit, but failures to approve budgets or continuing resolutions, meaning that the government did not have money to spend, which is a little different from not being able to borrow money.

I know the 2011 fight was also nasty but let’s call it even. Or in other words, compared to the 90s, the multiple crises since then are the same or not as bad.

Actually, the 2018-2019 shutdown, caused by Trump refusing to sign a budget because it didn't contain funds for his border wall, lasted longer, furloughed more employees, and incured more cost to the government than the Gingrich Shutdown: 2018–2019 United States federal government shutdown - Wikipedia

In fact, since 1980 there have been three shutdown events that lasted a double-digit number of days: the Gingrich Shutdowns of 95/96, the ACA-related shutdown of 2013, and the Trump Border Wall shutdown.

Gingrich we've covered. The GOP was attempting to enact massive spending cuts, restrict the work of the U.S. Treasury to deal with financial crises, and a number of non-budget related items, such as restricting appeals by death row inmates and dramatically reducing the ability of federal agencies to issue rules & regulations. Besides causing the government to shut down, Gingrich also threatened to not raise the debt ceiling.

The 2013 shutdown came about from Republicans trying to pass a budget that stripped all funding from the recently-passed ACA.

And the 2018-19 shutdown happened when both houses passed a budget bill with bipartisan support that did not contain funding for Trump's border wall, and he refused to sign it.

So, IMO, the crises have gotten worse, and they have been, in general, GOP led. Which should not be a surprise, because since 1980 the GOP has been attempting to limit the government's ability to function (c.f. Grover Norquist) and so shutting down the government or even causing it to default is a feature, not a bug.

On your question of public discourse on debt (the Egg) I’d say it’s definitely worse. But I doubt debt ceiling fights are the cause of that. It’s more overall politics, extremism, the train at the end of the tunnel is getting closer etc. (the Chicken) that makes debt ceiling fights less constructive … aka the Chicken before the Egg.

There are multiple variables, sure, but doing the legislative equivalent of holding a gun to the country's economy (at least) probably doesn't aid in constructive discussion.

So to restate my point. I don’t disagree that debt ceiling don’t stop or reduce spending, thats the budget and Congress’ fault, along with the President. My point is it brings continuous awareness (hey remember to pay your bills in 5 days) to the general public and there is worth in that.

I mean, there's so much wrong with this analogy. First of all, last time I checked, I can't print my own money to solve my own budget problems.

Second, failing to raise the debt ceiling is the equivalent of not paying your bills since debt service is part of what is affected.

The correct analogy would be deciding to not pay my bills starting next month because I suddenly decided that I was spending too much money, even though I could certainly cover my bills if I wanted to. Oh, and in this analogy, the entities who own the vast majority of my debt are my own family.

What is your stance? No need for debt ceilings because …?

If your concern is that the U.S. government has too much debt, the constructive solution is to raise revenue (corporate and upper-income taxes have been at historical lows for ages, capital gains taxes are similarly low) while at the same time looking at constructive spending cuts. Failing to raise the debt ceiling is the destructive solution. Simple as that.

And I scoff at the idea that Americans routinely forget how much debt the U.S. has, or how big the deficit is, when it's been the litany of every Republican politician since Reagan (and probably before). And, ironically, every Republican president since Reagan has left office with a greater budget deficit than the one they inherited, and every Democratic president since then has left office with a smaller budget deficit than the one they inherited, even Obama with The Great Recession. Clinton even left office with a budget surplus.

[RainMaker]

https://t.co/tlU72L3arv pic.twitter.com/akqqLK8JJm

— Reality Winner (@reazlepuff) January 24, 2023

[Kodos]

I wonder if the documents issue might help convince Biden not to run for a second term.

[Lathum]

I am sure this will be the lead on all the Fox News prime time shows

BREAKING: A lawyer for former VP Mike Pence discovered about a dozen documents marked as classified at Pence's Indiana home last week, and he has turned those classified records over to the FBI, per multiple sources. @jamiegangel @jeremyherb @evanperez https://t.co/A3AldD95Cg

— Jeremy Diamond (@JDiamond1) January 24, 2023

[albionmoonlight]

As someone joked, GWB is probably the only ex-Pres/VP totally safe from this because you know he's a "leave work at the office" kind of guy.

[Ksyrup]

Before it hits the web, I just want you guys to hear it from me first: they found classified documents in my basement office. My fucking dogs ratted me out.

[Thomkal]

But they are still good boys Ksyrup?


As for the documents at Pence's house as I was telling my Mother the other day, pretty sure every living VP/President are going to find some classified documents now. There is a breakdown somewhere in how these documents are supposed to be tracked, and other than Trump's blatant stealing of them, changes need to be made in it going forward.

[cuervo72]

It'll be really interesting when they discover documents at DeSantis's house!

(j/k. Maybe.)

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

But they are still good boys Ksyrup?


As for the documents at Pence's house as I was telling my Mother the other day, pretty sure every living VP/President are going to find some classified documents now. There is a breakdown somewhere in how these documents are supposed to be tracked, and other than Trump's blatant stealing of them, changes need to be made in it going forward.

This, or if you want to go conspiracy on it, elements of the Secret Service are planting classified documents in an attempt to make Trump's theft less likely to be prosecuted.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

This, or if you want to go conspiracy on it, elements of the Secret Service are planting classified documents in an attempt to make Trump's theft less likely to be prosecuted.

You do you Grant

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

You do you Grant

I don't believe it. Or at least I hope that wouldn't be the case.

[Edward64]

It’s pretty clear they need a better process of accounting for TS documents. Don’t they have a library card check-out-in system? There needs to be a central point with that old librarian lady stamping that card and sliding it in the sleeve at the inside of the front cover (I worked in library in college).

Trump will get a pass on this one. Let’s move on from this fiasco.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

This, or if you want to go conspiracy on it, elements of the Secret Service are planting classified documents in an attempt to make Trump's theft less likely to be prosecuted.

Now that you mentioned it, did the Jan 6 commission ever interview those SS agents?

I wonder if there are 2+ groups within SS and if there has been any corrective actions. But then, I guess it’s normal to be sided with someone you’ve sworn to take a bullet for.

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I wonder if there are 2+ groups within SS and if there has been any corrective actions. But then, I guess it’s normal to be sided with someone you’ve sworn to take a bullet for.

Dan Bongino would disagree. Maybe it's the opposite

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Now that you mentioned it, did the Jan 6 commission ever interview those SS agents?

I wonder if there are 2+ groups within SS and if there has been any corrective actions. But then, I guess it’s normal to be sided with someone you’ve sworn to take a bullet for.

The secret service skews hard to the right. It's mostly ex-military and ex-cops. There's a reason Biden has shuffled agents around and reportedly expressed concerns about SS loyalties.

[albionmoonlight]

https://rollcall.com/2023/01/25/hous...mit-suspension

This makes some sense. The tl;dr version is that the House GOP is considering suspending the debt limit so that the timing of the debt crisis lines up with the new fiscal year budget that the parties have to negotiate.

The GOP has said it will never pass a clean debt ceiling increase.
The Dems have said that they will not negotiate a debt ceiling increase.

So that's actually a pretty dangerous game of chicken.

But of course you have to negotiate the budget. So if you tie the debt ceiling to the budget, then the parties can negotiate it and neither side has to go back on their word.

[albionmoonlight]

dola:

I'm not sure how it plays out, but that seems like kind of smart tactics by the GOP. It forces the Dems to the budget table but lets the GOP keep a nuclear bomb in its pocket during the talks.

(Time was, a shutdown was considered a nuclear bomb. But now that feels almost expected.)

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by Atocep

The secret service skews hard to the right. It's mostly ex-military and ex-cops. There's a reason Biden has shuffled agents around and reportedly expressed concerns about SS loyalties.

I have a neighbor that has been an SS agent for 25 years he does not do the preside trial protection but he thought Trump early on back in 2016 ish was a great leader😳…. So yeah they are a hard right group in general.

[PilotMan]

I present to you, the Republican version of "transparency". Courtesy of the state of Arizona.

The new rules will greatly limit the public release of lawmakers’ communications. State senators will not have to discloseany text messages sent on personal devices, even when dealing with state business. For lawmakers in both the Senate and the House, emails and other documents will be destroyed after 90 days — in many cases, well before members of the public know to ask for them.

[Lathum]

Just what the American people want!

Rep. Comer vows to probe Hunter Biden’s art sales, dealer’s China connections: 'It is deeply concerning' | Fox News

[PilotMan]

I'm so glad he was voted in as president. This matters.

[stevew]

There’s some awful police brutality video about to come out so it could be a helluva weekend.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by stevew

There’s some awful police brutality video about to come out so it could be a helluva weekend.

Yes that Memphis police murdering the innocent citizen is horrific. There isn’t even evidence of the supposed reckless driving now. They fired the fire cops with 20 days of the incident and they are all now arrested. I wonder if they would have been fired or arrested this fast if they had been white?

[Ksyrup]

The race thing is interesting to me because there is undeniably an element of racism throughout law enforcement - even when it doesn't rise to the level of brutality - but there's also an overriding element of abuse of power. This is a perfect example. If even one of these guys had been white, it would have been re-framed as a racial incident, even if limited to that one cop's motivation. But sometimes, people in power abuse their power, and race really doesn't matter.

[GrantDawg]

The police chief in Memphis used to be over the "Reddog" unit in Atlanta. That was an "anti-gang" unit that would go into housing projects with batons out and forcibly search anyone they could catch. They were notorious for their "violence first" approach.
She had instituted the same kind of unit in Memphis, and this was one of those groups. So, really no surprise.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Galaril

I wonder if they would have been fired or arrested this fast if they had been white?

I don't. I'm pretty sure of the answer.