Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

People are complicated. Love is not.

We know you aren’t a Democrat but since you seem confused let me help you.

So it was an October Surprise A Day, like an Advent calendar but for crime.

The fight for our country is always worth it. ~Kamala Harris

If you can’t control your emotions, someone else will.

Whoever he was, that guy was nuts.

We’re watching the self-immolation of the leading world power on a level unprecedented in human history.

This fight is for everything.

When someone says they “love freedom”, rest assured they don’t mean yours.

I see no possible difficulties whatsoever with this fool-proof plan.

Sadly, there is no cure for stupid.

If a good thing happens for a bad reason, it’s still a good thing.

Not loving this new fraud based economy.

Republicans do not trust women.

When you’re a Republican, they let you do it.

“But what about the lurkers?”

American history and black history cannot be separated.

Giving in to doom is how authoritarians win.

When they say they are pro-life, they do not mean yours.

Come on, man.

That’s my take and I am available for criticism at this time.

“They all knew.”

Seems like a complicated subject, have you tried yelling at it?

Hey Washington Post, “Democracy Dies in Darkness” was supposed to be a warning, not a mission statement.

You are here: Home / Open Threads / Bipartisan!

Bipartisan!

by | 281 Comments

This post is in: , , ,

Here’s something 98 out of 100 U.S. Senators agree on: Donald Trump shouldn’t be able to unilaterally lift sanctions on Russia. Via Bloomberg:

The U.S. Senate voted to increase sanctions on Russia, and give Congress the power to review any attempt by President Donald Trump to unilaterally lift them, a rebuke of the president’s suggestions that the U.S. improve relations with the country.

It’s almost like they don’t trust him not to be weirdly solicitous of Putin or something…

Reader Interactions

281Comments

  2. 2.

    Mike J

    So now Trump is leaning on people in the House to not pass this, just days after he called their “health care” plan, “mean.”

    Even Republicans should be smart enough to figure out that Trump doesn’t have their back, and when he goes down, his toadies will go too.

  6. 6.

    bystander

    Time for a BJ meeting in NYC? How about we all go to see Hamlet in Brooklyn? It’s very free.

    …Jake Austin Robertson, a 2015 Princeton grad from Illinois…lives in Manhattan and stars as Hamlet. Compared to the enormity of the role, “being nude on stage is small potatoes,” the 24-year-old actor told The News. “Nonetheless, I’d be lying if I said I’m not nervous. Upon being offered the part, I was cautious about the role of nudity, or let’s say nakedness, which I think holds deeper significance, in the play.”

    A lot to think about, and I don’t mean small potatoes.

  12. 12.

    Ceci n est pas mon nym

    @Mike J: Who’s feeding his opinion? I don’t believe he has the capacity to form an opinion pro or con on any substantive issue beyond how many scoops of ice cream.

    I’m on vacation and a semi-break from the political junkie circuit. So I’m missing the detailed play by play. Did Dead Breitbart, Alex Jones or Ivanka come out against it, come up with the “mean” line?

  13. 13.

    Aleta

    Donald J. Trump‏ @realDonaldTrump
    Are you allowed to impeach a president for gross incompetence?
    3:23 AM – 4 Jun 2014

    Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump
    If you read my last number of tweets, only one opinion can be formed – that our President, and therefore “leader,” is grossly incompetent!

    6:45 PM – 1 Aug 2014

  14. 14.

    Kay

    Ben Jacobs‏Verified account
    Lobbyist for Russian interests says he attended dinners hosted by Sessions

    Okay, now we’re just in “really bad lawyer” territory. He’s so forgetful! he has to quit not because he’s in with the Ruskies, but just because he’s a bad employee. He should start taking this job a LITTLE more seriously.

  16. 16.

    Peale

    That said, if he keeps the sanctions and hires US attorneys who won’t prosecute anyone, including his son-in-law, who might have violated them, it won’t matter.

  18. 18.

    Yutsano

    @Mnemosyne: Happy Day of Revolution! Eat all the cupcakes in Anaheim!

    @Ceci n est pas mon nym: I believe Lucretia was in the meeting with him. So it’s possible although I think the influence she actually has over him is less than null.

  20. 20.

    Enhanced Voting Techniques

    Well I guess that’s a sign the Republicans do, in fact have limits with Donal Trump.

  21. 21.

    pacem appellant

    Will this also have a veto-proof majority in the House? Will Ryan even allow the House to vote on it? Won’t Trump just pocket veto it rather than pong it back to Congress?

  22. 22.

    MJS

    I’m just paranoid enough to believe that this is something of a life line the Senate Rs are throwing to Trump, as in, “Here, this will at least give you some appearance of autonomy from Putin. Please sign it.” Of course, President You’re Not the Boss of Me will refuse the life line, and announce the removal of all sanctions with a tweet and phony signing ceremony in the Rose Garden, surrounded by tables full of Trump Russian dressing and Trump caviar*.

    *contains no actual caviar

  23. 23.

    jonas

    We’ll see if in the end there’s smoking gun evidence that Trump and/or his campaign colluded directly with Russia to interfere in the election, but he’s obviously scared of what Mueller’s going to find if he keeps digging. Why not just say he’s happy to cooperate with the inquiry because he has nothing to hide, and then just aggressively ignore the whole thing? My hunch is that what ends up bringing Trump down is the fact that his real estate empire is in fact a massive money laundering front for Russian/Eastern European mobsters.

  24. 24.

    rikyrah

    @Kay:

    Ben Jacobs‏Verified account
    Lobbyist for Russian interests says he attended dinners hosted by Sessions

    Okay, now we’re just in “really bad lawyer” territory. He’s so forgetful! he has to quit not because he’s in with the Ruskies, but just because he’s a bad employee. He should start taking this job a LITTLE more seriously.

    Interesting

  25. 25.

    Roger Moore

    @tom:

    Rand Paul and Bernie Sanders.

    So what is St. Wilmer’s justification?

    @Yutsano:

    Happy Day of Revolution! Eat all the cupcakes in Anaheim!

    That should be Burbank, which is where Mnemosyne lives and works. The Mouse’s movie business is in LA County; it’s only amusement parks in the OC.

  26. 26.

    Aleta

    @Mike J: All branches of government must do what he asks because they work for him. Because as Ivanka points out “we want to do big, bold things and we’re looking to change the status quo.”

  28. 28.

    Yutsano

    @Kay:

    He should start taking this job a LITTLE more seriously.

    He is, although his definition of serious is going after marijuana legalization and making sure the rights of straight white men are protected over all others. That’s really the only purpose for him to be there, in his mind.

  31. 31.

    Roger Moore

    @jonas:

    Why not just say he’s happy to cooperate with the inquiry because he has nothing to hide, and then just aggressively ignore the whole thing?

    Because he doesn’t want to cooperate with the inquiry because he has plenty to hide. SATSQ.

  33. 33.

    chopper

    @pacem appellant:

    i imagine with that kind of majority in the senate it’s likely to have a large majority in the house, but the house is also much more chock-full of ignorant maniacs.

  35. 35.

    tom

    @Roger Moore: No idea why Sanders voted against it – nothing I have seen gave his reasoning, or Paul’s either. I guess he’s just a cranky old man.

  36. 36.

    TenguPhule

    I have a bet with Baud and possible Major Major Major Major from yesterday that this goes nowhere in the House.

    Naked mopping with mustard as the stakes.

  38. 38.

    Mike J

    @Ceci n est pas mon nym:

    Who’s feeding his opinion? I don’t believe he has the capacity to form an opinion pro or con on any substantive issue beyond how many scoops of ice cream.

    He came up with the word “mean” the day after Barron moved in.

  40. 40.

    Chyron HR

    @Roger Moore:

    So what is St. Wilmer’s justification?

    “Talking about Russia is an excuse so that the neoliberals don’t have to take any blame for losing white working class voters. P.S. I only lost African-American voters by 50% because of a conspiracy to schedule the primary debates were on the wrong nights.”

  42. 42.

    jl

    @Major Major Major Major: Good point. Maybe if Putin dumps Trump and GOP he is just realizing his gains. Maybe not the jackpot he hopped for, but a solid ROI. We really won’t know right away, maybe never.

  47. 47.

    jl

    I read news of what seem to be solid reports that one of Trump administrations first, and very quiet, foreign initiatives, was to find a way to effectively lift the sanctions on the down low. Which the sinister Deep State managed to stop. So it isn’t like the Senate is just randomly meddling in foreign affairs. Trump admin tried a major change in policy on the sly, and apparently attempted to lift Russian sanctions in return for the Russians doing exactly nothing. But, then, maybe that is an example of the patented Trump Great Deal?

    As an ex Bernie mega-donor, I’m going to try to find some news on why he voted no, if that is what he did Paul, I don’t care why.

  52. 52.

    Brachiator

    @Major Major Major Major:

    Congress tends to agree on increasing the power of congress.

    Ha!
    Very true. Well said.

    @Cheryl Rofer:

    The question now is whether Trump will veto the bill. Looks like the votes for an override are there.

    Would he dare veto it? Would he have a hissy fit if his veto were to be overidden?

  53. 53.

    gene108

    Here’s something 98 out of 100 U.S. Senators agree on: Donald Trump shouldn’t be able to unilaterally lift sanctions on Russia

    Seems like the Senate doesn’t think Putin is our new bestest bestie friend in the whooooole world.

    I wonder why?

    The President sure thinks he’s swell.

  55. 55.

    muddy

    Instead of wondering I looked at Sanders twitter. In it he says he voted that way due to Iran, which was included.

  56. 56.

    Major Major Major Major

    @jl: “As an ex Bernie mega-donor, I’m going to try to find some news on why he voted no, if that is what he did Paul, I don’t care why.”

    I checked senate.gov, they were indeed the only two no votes. Not abstentions, he wasn’t out on a book tour, he voted no.

  57. 57.

    rikyrah

    @Kay:

    I shudder to think what Kamala Harris will say about THIS! :)

    How ‘hysterical’ she will get when she questions Attorney General White Citizen Council next time. [/snark]

  60. 60.

    the Conster, la Citoyenne

    I’m very curious as to why Wilmer voted against this bill. It’s almost like it’s a quid pro quo or something.

  63. 63.

    Shalimar

    @Kay: Sessions had several dozen staff members last year when he was a senator. The idea that they don’t have records he could consult of who was invited to his dinner parties is absurd. It’s not just his supposed bad memory, he is also claiming his staff didn’t keep track of basic information.

  64. 64.

    Chris

    @Major Major Major Major:

    Congress tends to agree on increasing the power of congress.

    You’d think so, and the founding fathers at least assumed so, but Republican congressmen for several decades have actually been perfectly happy to surrender power after power to the president, as long as he’s one of them. It’s nice that this isn’t always the case.

  66. 66.

    rikyrah

    @jl:

    I read news of what seem to be solid reports that one of Trump administrations first, and very quiet, foreign initiatives, was to find a way to effectively lift the sanctions on the down low. Which the sinister Deep State managed to stop.

    that wicked Deep State..LOL

    Understaffed, they still found a way…

  73. 73.

    Mnemosyne

    Thanks, everyone! We did my special celebrating last weekend by seeing Some Like It Hot and going out to dinner, so tonight it will just be my traditional birthday meal at In N Out Burger. ?

  76. 76.

    Fester Addams

    @Mike J:

    He came up with the word “mean” the day after Barron moved in.

    I think you’re on to something! Looking forward to first Dolt 45 tweet featuring poop emoji.

  78. 78.

    rikyrah

    Trump’s indifference to Russia’s election attack raises alarm
    06/15/17 12:43 PM
    By Steve Benen

    In the current political climate, it’s rare to see any policy measure receive broad bipartisan support; the parties are simply too far apart on practically every issue. Yesterday, however, offered an exception.

    The Senate voted 97 to 2 in support of legislation imposing new economic sanctions on Russia in response to Moscow’s intervention in the American presidential election. The same measure, which now heads to the House, would block the White House from acting unilaterally on easing sanctions against Moscow – a move Donald Trump has reportedly considered more than once.

    For many Senate Republicans, this was literally the first time in 2017 in which they voted against Trump’s preference.

    There are a variety of interesting questions surrounding the bill – most notably, no one knows if the president would veto it – but let’s not miss the forest for the trees. The fact that the chamber took this action at all demonstrated something important: nearly every member of the Senate cares that a foreign adversary attacked our democracy, and they’re taking steps to do something about it.

    Donald Trump, meanwhile, seems indifferent, if not outwardly hostile, to the core details – which is difficult to accept at face value, and even harder to defend.

    Sen. Angus King (I-Maine), a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, talked to CNN on Tuesday and expressed his frustration about Trump’s and his administration’s indifference. His comments were quite candid:

    “The other question [Attorney General Jeff Session] didn’t answer – I’ve got to say, it really, really disturbed me – and that is, ‘Have you looked into what the Russians did? Have you asked for any briefings? Do you understand the magnitude of what was done to us?’ And the answer was no.

    “And Jim Comey essentially said the same thing last week about the president. He had nine interactions with the president. The president never asked, ‘What did the Russians do? How did they do it? How do you know they did it?’ […]

    “[T]his is the most serious attack on our country since September 11. An adversary is aiming an arrow at the heart of our democracy. And these folks are just shrugging it off and saying, you know, ‘Let’s move on and talk about other issues.’ I understand their defensiveness on whether they were involved in it or not, but the fundamental story of what the Russians did – and that they’re still at it and will continue to be at it – is just being ignored, and it really bothers me when the Commander in Chief takes that position.”

  81. 81.

    PsiFighter37

    Bernie voted against it? Not surprising.

    There’s a reason that shitheel hasn’t released his tax returns either…

  84. 84.

    the Conster, la Citoyenne

    I’m at work reading the news reports that it was Paul and Sanders voting against – what’s the story? Help me out.

  85. 85.

    TenguPhule

    @rikyrah:

    The fact that the chamber took this action at all demonstrated something important: nearly every member of the Senate cares that a foreign adversary attacked our democracy, and they’re taking steps to do something about it.

    Sorry I must disagree with this reporter’s chain of logic. The Republicans don’t care at all about the attack. What they care about are 1) Getting more power and 2) Giving Trump a symbolic slap to the face. 3)Fucking Iran

    If they cared about that attack they wouldn’t be doing their best to kill the damn investigation.

  87. 87.

    muddy

    @the Conster, la Citoyenne: Tweets Tweets, current page. Tweets & replies Media
    Bernie Sanders‏Verified account @SenSanders 6m6 minutes ago
    More
    I strongly support imposing sanctions on Russia. It’s unacceptable for Russia to interfere in foreign elections. There must be consequences.
    129 replies 277 retweets 1,255 likes
    Reply 129 Retweet 277 Like 1.3K
    Bernie Sanders‏Verified account @SenSanders 53m53 minutes ago
    More
    I believe that these new sanctions against Iran could endanger the very important nuclear agreement. That is not a risk worth taking.

  90. 90.

    Chris

    @tom:

    I assume he’s doing it in the name of anti-Cold-War, anti-neocon, old-school-leftie peace and love principles.

  91. 91.

    schrodingers_cat

    @PsiFighter37: Don’t you know there is an innocent explanation since the seer of Burlington is never wrong. Iran something something.
    Of course all the Dems that voted for it are neoliberals, so they signed on for nefarious purposes unlike the pure saintly personage.

  92. 92.

    TenguPhule

    The Senate legislation, passed Thursday 98 to 2, also imposes new sanctions on Iran.

    Yes, Bernie Sanders has legitimate grounds to not agree with this bill.

    You’re welcome.

  94. 94.

    Patricia Kayden

    @rikyrah: It says it all that Republican Senators voted in favor of this bill. Shows that even they know Trump is slimy as hell.

  97. 97.

    Patricia Kayden

    @TenguPhule: Good catch. So Republicans had to find a way to stick it to Iran as a slap to President Obama. Democrats should have pushed to cut that part out.

  100. 100.

    TenguPhule

    @the Conster, la Citoyenne: I am fully aware that our Democrats in the Senate have a fucking blind spot a mile wide when it comes to Iran and Sanctions. It’s why President Obama had to do so much of the agreement down low where none of them could ruin it before it was ready.

  106. 106.

    Mnemosyne

    @TenguPhule:

    I’m also aware that Sanders frantically signals at every turn that he’s better than those corrupt Democrats who vote in lockstep, unlike his principled self.

  108. 108.

    ? ?? Goku (aka Junior G-Man) ? ?

    @Chyron HR: There are people on Reddit who literally believe that. Maybe they’re bots, but I don’t know

  109. 109.

    TenguPhule

    @Mnemosyne: I don’t think Hillary Clinton made the right choice on her email server, but I’m not going to impute the worst motives to her decision either.

    Honestly I understand why the Democrats horsetraded to get the Russia slap in, but I’m not going to be a hypocrite and blame Sanders for not going along with it. Its gonna die in the House anyway when the Russia language is stripped out and only the Iran Sanctions remain.

  110. 110.

    the Conster, la Citoyenne

    @TenguPhule:

    All of them? Merkley? Leahy? Harris? Warren? Murphy? Only pure pure Bernie can see the issues with Iran clearly?

  111. 111.

    Betty Cracker

    @Patricia Kayden: IIRC, any sanctions the US imposes on Iran are pretty toothless since the agreement PBO reached involves other countries lifting their sanctions. It was therefore probably worth it to stop Trump from rewarding his patron.

  113. 113.

    Mike in DC

    The first way to stifle this is to have the Speaker and relevant committee chair slow walk it. The second is to water it down or add loopholes that enable Trump to mostly ignore it. The third is for Tillerson to announce some contrived breakthrough on Ukraine and ask them to “not the the president’s hands during this delicate negotiation”. Finally, if they slow walk it past July, Trump can unilaterally lift sanctions the first time he meets Putin, in return for some token concessions and empty promises re Crimea and fighting terrorism.

  115. 115.

    JPL

    There was a suspicious package left in Karen Handel’s neighborhood, and now the police are searching all the mailboxes.
    Oh great!

  116. 116.

    TenguPhule

    @Betty Cracker:

    IIRC, any sanctions the US imposes on Iran are pretty toothless since the agreement PBO reached involves other countries lifting their sanctions.

    Sure, they shred our national honor even more by violating the spirit of the agreement, but at least they don’t have real teeth.

  120. 120.

    Mary G

    @Mnemosyne: Happy Birthday! ???????
    @the Conster, la Citoyenne: Can’t find a reason for Rand Paul, tweeted him to ask, though I suspect that idiocy explains it. Bernie’s statement attached to this tweet:

    Bernie Sanders explains his no vote — one of only two in the Senate — on Russia/Iran sanctions: pic.twitter.com/rHOou7ObZb— George Zornick (@gzornick) June 15, 2017

    Basically he feels it undermines the Iran nuclear deal, not clear how.

  122. 122.

    Cheryl Rofer

    @Mike in DC:

    The third is for Tillerson to announce some contrived breakthrough on Ukraine and ask them to “not the the president’s hands during this delicate negotiation”.

    Tillerson is doing something very much like that, saying that the sanctions legislation interferes with his delicate negotiations with Russia. No specifics. He did say a few days ago that he thought that the US and Russia could come to an agreement on Ukraine outside the Normandy process but hasn’t put the two of those together.

    And yes, negotiating directly with Russia and cutting out France and Germany is something Putin would prefer and looks very ominous from Ukraine.

  123. 123.

    Mnemosyne

    @TenguPhule:

    Dude, you’re the one who brought up Gitmo in the first place. Don’t act like she’s out of line for responding to something you brought up.

  127. 127.

    TenguPhule

    @Mary G:

    Basically he feels it undermines the Iran nuclear deal, not clear how.

    From the article:

    On Iran, the bill directs the president to impose sanctions on any entity that knowingly contributes to Iran’s ballistic missile program or other programs to develop vehicles to deliver weapons of mass destruction. Those who are sanctioned would have their assets within U.S. jurisdiction frozen and would be barred from entering the country.

    The Iran penalties would also apply to those who own or control entities or who provide financial, technological or other support for a sanctioned party. The bill would allow the president to impose sanctions on anyone who commits internationally recognized human rights abuses, such as extrajudicial killings or torture, against individuals trying to expose illegal activity by Iran or to promote human rights in the country.

    The missile program was not part of the original deal, but imposing similar sanctions against Iran does strike me as a bit…..undermining.

    ETA: And presumably since nukes can be delivered by ship or plane, a lot of things could be targeted by this sloppy legislation.

  129. 129.

    Gin & Tonic

    Sarah Huckabee Sanders is quoted as follows: “We will keep them in place until Moscow fully honors its commitment to resolve the crisis in Ukraine.”

    Novel use of the word “crisis.” I’ve never seen it used to mean “invasion”.

  132. 132.

    FlipYrWhig

    @Mnemosyne: Like when he voted against closing Guantanamo, right alongside a bunch of nincompoops, but for TOTALLY DIFFERENT SUPER AWESOME reasons, which are also why the fact that he voted for the crime bill doesn’t really count, because principles, that’s why.

  133. 133.

    Roger Moore

    @Mike in DC:

    The third is for Tillerson to announce some contrived breakthrough on Ukraine and ask them to “not the the president’s hands during this delicate negotiation”.

    Which, of course, is just bullshit. The bill doesn’t say the sanctions can’t be eased; it just says Trump can’t do it on his own hook. If he negotiates something good, I’m sure Congress will be happy to go along.

  135. 135.

    Gin & Tonic

    @Cheryl Rofer:

    He did say a few days ago that he thought that the US and Russia could come to an agreement on Ukraine

    Last I checked Ukraine is a sovereign nation with interests of its own. It might be seemly for the US to ask the Ukrainians what *they* want.

  136. 136.

    TenguPhule

    @Mnemosyne: I mentioned two blind spots our Democratic Senators had. Guess who committed a fallacy of assuming that just because Sanders has disagreement with one of them, he therefore must also disagree with the other one too.

    Well?

  137. 137.

    Chris

    @Betty Cracker:

    @Patricia Kayden: IIRC, any sanctions the US imposes on Iran are pretty toothless since the agreement PBO reached involves other countries lifting their sanctions. It was therefore probably worth it to stop Trump from rewarding his patron.

    Agreed. And yeah, this is a thing I kept thinking back when the initial treaty was being negotiated – look, the only reason Iran sanctions ever accomplished anything is that all the major powers were on board with them (that consensus would’ve broken down sooner or later anyway, by the way). American sanctions by themselves don’t accomplish shit – look at Cuba. For the U.S. to go back on its word and restore sanctions on Iran would have very little impact – it would just cut off whatever access we had and leave Iran relations entirely in the hands of other countries. All for the sake of making us look like we’re Doing Something.

  140. 140.

    TenguPhule

    @Chris:

    For the U.S. to go back on its word and restore sanctions on Iran would have very little impact

    Aside from the fact that we’re going back on our word. Yeah, I’m sure nothing bad could happen from that.

    ETA: North Korea and Bush fucking up the Clinton Agreement not ringing any bells?

  141. 141.

    Citizen Alan

    @Patricia Kayden:

    More than anything else in the world, I want the pee tape to be released in all its glory. If it ever is, I will thereafter refer to anyone who continues to support Shitgibbon as “pee-drinkers.”

  144. 144.

    Immanentize

    @Betty Cracker: So now this bill goes to the House — they strip out the Russia stuff and vote to return it to the Senate with just the Iranian sanctions. Result in the Senate? (I think we know)

  146. 146.

    Immanentize

    @Cheryl Rofer: Yes, the Tillerson result will probably be something like Russia gets all of Crimea and Ukraine must withdraw from all contested areas….

  148. 148.

    SatanicPanic

    @Aleta:

    Donald J. Trump‏ @realDonaldTrump
    Are you allowed to impeach a president for gross incompetence?
    3:23 AM – 4 Jun 2014

    Even Paul Ryan says Trump is incompetent!

  151. 151.

    Chris

    @TenguPhule:

    Jesus Christ. Very little impact in terms of the supposed point of sanctions which is to hurt their economy to the point that they’re more willing to give in to the demands of the sanctions-imposers. I am agreeing with you that sanctions from the U.S. at this point will do no good. Who peed in your Cheerios, anyway?

  152. 152.

    Citizen Alan

    @Chris:

    I’m actually wondering whether or not Emmanuel Macron would be delighted with new US actions against Iran, since it would clear the way for France to form a closer relationship with them. Maybe Germany as well.

  153. 153.

    Patricia Kayden

    @SatanicPanic: But Paul Ryan said Trump is new at all this presidenting so we should give him a break. As if learning on the job is a great trait in a President.

  159. 159.

    TenguPhule

    @Chris:

    I am agreeing with you that sanctions from the U.S. at this point will do no good. Who peed in your Cheerios, anyway?

    Sorry about that. I’ve had Mnemosyne, schrodingers_cat & the Conster, la Citoyenne all pissing away merrily.

    As I’ve mentioned earlier, the rush to condemnation is getting a bit out of hand to the point of parody. It was in the goddamn article that apparently nobody bothered to read.

  161. 161.

    jl

    @Chris:

    ” Who peed in your Cheerios, anyway? ”

    Conscientious BJ Commenters start soaking their Cheerios in stale pee gathered from public urinals the night before. Just so you know.

  162. 162.

    JPL

    @Immanentize: Anti Handel mailers with white powder, in several mailboxes. It sounds like trying to get out the vote. I really believe that someone in her campaign would do that. ugh
    Ossoff has had to hire extra security details.

  163. 163.

    ? ?? Goku (aka Junior G-Man) ? ?

    @TenguPhule:

    Sorry about that. I’ve had Mnemosyne, schrodingers_cat & the Conster, la Citoyenne all pissing away merrily.

    Not to name any names or anything…?

  164. 164.

    TenguPhule

    @Major Major Major Major: That the Russian sanctions never make it out of the House alive?

    With Paul Ryan and the FC in the House? And their certain delight in pissing off the Senate Dems by stripping the language out?

    I’m the one risking credibility by predicting that dog bites man?

  165. 165.

    ? ?? Goku (aka Junior G-Man) ? ?

    @jl: Is this like a weird BJ version of pouring Bailey’s into a bowl of cereal?

  167. 167.

    TenguPhule

    @? ?? Goku (aka Junior G-Man) ? ?: I’m not Donald Trump. I don’t enjoy it.

    Hell, it annoys me that I have to be the one defending Sanders here against the same type of “immediately assume the worst” shit that we all agree Hillary Clinton didn’t deserve.

  168. 168.

    Immanentize

    @JPL: Mailed right after the identity of the Baseball shooter was released no doubt. Leftist terror!!!
    My great fear is that they will get away with this crap.

  173. 173.

    Chris

    @Citizen Alan:

    France and Germany certainly and Britain possibly all seem to have come to terms with the fact that the U.S. leadership is, at least for the time being, out to lunch and completely unreliable, and reacted by announcing an intention to step up further. Heck, Macron is even trolling the U.S. with announcements that its climate scientists are welcome in France. So yeah, it’d be no surprise to me at all if they tried to do Iran policy themselves. Can’t let Russia and China be the only ones with access.

  174. 174.

    The Moar You Know

    Would really like to hear his reasoning for voting against this bill

    @? ?? Goku (aka Junior G-Man) ? ?: I’m long past giving a shit. He wanted the big boy job and didn’t give a fuck who helped him get it or if he wrecked the country in the process. I want him investigated.

    You might want to ask yourself why Trump never went after him, not once.

  176. 176.

    Jeffro

    Breaking: prez* is tweeting some ridiculous anti-Hillary crybaby shit

    Hilarious!!

  179. 179.

    The Moar You Know

    Who peed in your Cheerios, anyway?

    @Chris: There can be only one answer: RUSSIAN HOOKERS.

    Someone needs to ask Trump if he likes his Cheerios hot or just warm.

  183. 183.

    jl

    @Jeffro:

    ” Breaking: prez* is tweeting some ridiculous anti-Hillary crybaby shit ”

    Had a meeting with a British researcher earlier today. She said no country can have a really interesting history until it endures at least one insane king or queen. I guess she was trying to help me find some silver lining to this crud.

  187. 187.

    Cheryl Rofer

    For those concerned about the Iran sanctions the Senate just passed, I believe they are in response to Iran’s missile tests, not associated with nuclear issues of the JCPOA. The JCPOA was drawn very closely around nuclear issues, which is one of the objections its opponents have to it. So additional sanctions relating to missile testing or human rights do not go against the lifting of nuclear-related sanctions.

    If they violated the JCPOA, I would have heard more about it, and more senators would have voted against. I probably should check to be sure, but it’s hard to see that these violate the JCPOA.

  192. 192.

    Le Comte de Monte Cristo, fka Edmund Dantes

    @MJS:

    Of course, President You’re Not the Boss of Me will refuse the life line, and announce the removal of all sanctions with a tweet and phony signing ceremony in the Rose Garden, surrounded by tables full of Trump Russian dressing and Trump caviar*.

    *contains no actual caviar

    Tapioca that’s been soaked in salty black bean broth. Much cheaper than Beluga, looks similar, and the patrons will be afraid to remark on how shitty it is.

  193. 193.

    The Moar You Know

    Breaking: prez* is tweeting some ridiculous anti-Hillary crybaby shit

    Hilarious!!

    @Jeffro: I’m sure.

    You all realize that orange sack of cat diarrhea would have never gotten elected if not for the existence of Twitter. Sadly, it looks like they’re pretty damn healthy, cash wise.

  195. 195.

    Mike in NC

    Expect a Trumpian tweet at about 5 AM on Friday: “Senate losers don’t want to join with President for Life Putin to wipe out terrorism. Sad!”

  196. 196.

    the Conster, la Citoyenne

    @The Moar You Know:

    You might want to ask yourself why Trump never went after him, not once.

    The fact that in all the news coverage yesterday not one Republican called out Sanders specifically by name as inciting the shooter (*that I saw) tells you that they see him as a useful idiot, or they know he’s not a threat to them.

  197. 197.

    jl

    Actually, let Trump rant against Hillary all he wants. If he keeps it up, probably a good way to get her approval ratings up.
    Not that I want her (or Bernie) to run again unless we can’t find better candidates, but would nice to see her popularity increase.
    At least half her popularity problems due to smear campaign, a lot of it due to Trump, so he can do a good deed despite himself.

  198. 198.

    TenguPhule

    @ruemara: You have it backwards.

    He voted to add the Russian sanctions to the Iran bill.

    So vote yea to add the Russian sanctions to Iran.

    Vote nay to the Iran Sanctions.

    Welcome to the US Senate!

  199. 199.

    Wyatt Derp

    @The Thin Black Duke:

    So how long before Putin decides to cut his losses?

    What losses? He only has wins (Ukraine, Syria, NATO, etc.) and ties (sanctions – no better or worse than before). Only when wins become more and more scarce until Putin decides the benefit of further discrediting our system by exposing Trump outweigh any potential benefits Trump can provide will we see the pee-pee tapes.

  205. 205.

    Immanentize

    @ruemara: So he would have an excellent reason for voting against the Russian sanctions part?

    ETA He was for it before he was against it?

  207. 207.

    TenguPhule

    @Iowa Old Lady: Now we know what Donnie has been up to while away from Twitter all this time.

    Maybe the hammer still has his tiny little fingerprints on it.

  209. 209.

    TenguPhule

    @Immanentize: No, ruemara got it backwards.

    And yes, due to how the Senate has to vote multiple times, you can be for parts of a bill before you were against the entire bill.

    Senator John Kerry. This is an institutional problem in Congress. A lot of votes can be made to look bad if you have a long enough record.

  213. 213.

    the Conster, la Citoyenne

    @TenguPhule:

    Oh please. He ran as a Dem. He had Sanders stuff all over his FB. The GOP loves Wilmer – he’s a useful idiot, at best.

  214. 214.

    Trentrunner

    If you aren’t already watching, Trump is right now melting down on Twitter…

    As with all of this, it’d be pathetically funny if it weren’t so fucking consequential.

  215. 215.

    Patricia Kayden

    @germy: That was a well written response. To be honest, any Trump supporter talking about political violence needs to be laughed out of the country. Trump supported and encouraged violence during his campaign rallies, talked about second amendment solutions if Secretary Clinton was elected President and has engaged in language which is bigoted and demeaning. If you support Trump, you can miss me with any pleas for a return to civility in politics. Looking at you Hannity (in the ballpark where the shooting occurred).

  216. 216.

    TenguPhule

    @Immanentize: And it still pisses me off as much now as when it was birthed. One of many slanders I have never forgiven the Bushies for.

  217. 217.

    Immanentize

    @TenguPhule: That’s even better for Bernie — Vote to add the Russian sanctions to the Iranian sanctions which he already knows he will vote against. Never has to explain a straight up vote on Russian sanctions.

  219. 219.

    D58826

    Since the previous thread seems to have died and I’ve seen this question/comment in other places I’ll repost my non-lawyer understanding of whither Trump is above the law. As I non lawyer I can offer legal opinions at a very cheap rate. In fact given the bad advice that Trump is getting from his 1500 dollar an hour lawyer, my 1.98 an hour is probably just as good and it will save him a ton of money

    @? ?? Goku (aka Junior G-Man) ? ?: Impeachment is a political act. Once Trump is removed from office either via impeachment, resignation or loss at the polls he is subject to the same criminal law that you and I are. Obviously there are the usual things like statute of limitations and proof beyond a reasonable doubt that have to be adhered to . Since there is no case law that I have seen referenced in the recent articles it seems like an open debate about when the statute of limits runs. So if there is a 5 year statute of limitation and Trump committed a crime in the first year of his eight year term, does the statute start to run when the crime is actually committed or when he leaves office and is a subject to the usual criminal laws as a private citizen. Obviously if he committed the crime in year 1 and was removed from office in year 2 the statute of limitations would not apply and he would be in, as they have been saying for the past few weeks, legal jeopardy.

  221. 221.

    Major Major Major Major

    @TenguPhule: Well, he’s never not been talking about actual bleach when he mentions this, it’s just sad and actually pretty troubling the way his brain has latched onto this one brand name as if it meant something. Sign of mental decline.

  222. 222.

    TenguPhule

    @Immanentize:

    Vote to add the Russian sanctions to the Iranian sanctions which he already knows he will vote against. Never has to explain a straight up vote on Russian sanctions.

    Its all idle speculation until an actual straight up vote becomes available to test this theory.

  225. 225.

    Immanentize

    @TenguPhule: I know, and if what I expect from the House happens, we will never get that straight up opportunity. Well, maybe if the President lifts sanctions and Congress is asked to do something in response?

    ETA I thought the raison d’etre of Balloon Juice requires idle speculation?

  226. 226.

    TenguPhule

    @the Conster, la Citoyenne: I’m open to being proven wrong. But jumping to a conclusion without even bothering to check whether there was more to this then the little bit that Betty quoted isn’t the way to do it.

  228. 228.

    TenguPhule

    @Immanentize:

    Well, maybe if the President lifts sanctions and Congress is asked to do something in response?

    I predict Democrats and Sanders vote against Trump and all the GOP fall in line and vote for him.

  229. 229.

    TenguPhule

    @Immanentize:

    I thought the raison d’etre of Balloon Juice requires idle speculation?

    Only against Republicans, Trump and Republicans.

  230. 230.

    Applejinx

    Looks to me like the USA is trying to go to war with Iran. I don’t trust any of them and certainly don’t trust them MORE than Bernie, so I assume there is some kind of horrible shit going down. Isn’t the open-endedness of this a problem, allowing for sanctions for all sorts of ambiguous reasons?

    Meanwhile, Putin has offered Comey political asylum.

    If all the Democrats and all the Republicans suddenly agree on something, NOW, I think it’s some kind of stunt. It’s a quid pro quo, most likely allowing for posturing by Dems (who seem to really be fond of posturing and kabuki, that being the only weapons left to ’em) as the price of enacting some sort of horrible shit.

    Why are you all frantically justifying some sort of something that all minus 1 of the Republicans are doing? Are you not suspicious, do you not see that as indicative of a problem? If this is so great why are Republicans voting en masse for it? Find me a thing where all the Dems are voting for and the Republicans voting against and THEN show me Bernie voting with the Republicans and then I’ll be as concerned as you.

    This is some kind of fuckery.

  234. 234.

    Morzer

    @tom:

    nbcnews.com/politics/congress/senate-passes-new-russian-sanctions-bill-would-curb-trump-s-n772826

    Sanders said he voted against the larger bill because he said sanctioning Iran could harm the Iranian nuclear deal. “I am strongly supportive of the sanctions on Russia included in this bill,” Sanders said in a statement. “But I believe that these new sanctions could endanger the very important nuclear agreement that was signed between the United States, its partners and Iran in 2015.”

    Which, you know, makes sense. I rather suspect Obama would agree with Sanders on this point. The bill really should not be bodging together sanctions on different countries like this and the Iran sanctions are simply stupid at this time.

  235. 235.

    TenguPhule

    @Applejinx: As I said earlier, our Senate Democrats have two blind spots.

    Iran and Guantanamo Bay. Not even President Obama was able to do anything about this and nothing has changed.

  238. 238.

    jl

    @Butthurt Jordan Trombone (fka XTPD):

    ” Speaking of LGM: Why don’t you hang around there anymore? ”
    LGM? Does that mean Lawyers Guns and Money blog?
    I never commented there, ever. There must be several ‘jl’ handles on the internet, or something similar.
    BJ, for better or worse, is my one and only blog presence.

  239. 239.

    The Moar You Know

    Well, looks like the bat signal bought the batshit out of the woodwork as always. I’ll wait for the next thread.

  241. 241.

    the Conster, la Citoyenne

    @jl:

    They didn’t really need to bother with the fake quote – he had Sanders stuff all over his social media, and volunteered for him. Congressional Republicans didn’t even mention Sanders by name – imagine if it was a Hillary supporter that had shot Republicans.

  242. 242.

    Chris

    @TenguPhule:

    If you’re doing blind spots, I’d rank Israel at the top of the list myself, though that’s a blind spot for the entire United States.

  246. 246.

    D58826

    Blimp Crashes To The Ground At U.S. Open

    Pilot was injured and taken to the hospital. And in what ranks in the top ten understatements of the year :

    The sheriff’s office also said that an initial investigation found the blimp “may have experienced mechanical problems

    Gee you think? Or maybe the pilot just wanted to swoop in for a souvenir golf ball.

  248. 248.

    TenguPhule

    @schrodingers_cat:

    is it a a labor of love or does Putin pay that well? So many commenters defending the honor of the one true savior.

    So Miss “Fuck you Democrats for not standing up for Indian Nationals over American Citizens” are there any other stones you’d like to throw from that glass house of yours?

  250. 250.

    SFAW

    @Mnemosyne:

    Happy Birthday!

    I heard that G got LMM to do the Candy-Gram thing for y — what’s that? I wasn’t supposed to say anything yet??? shit

    Um … never mind about that last line.

    Happy Birthday!!

  252. 252.

    Applejinx

    @LurkerNoLonger: I leave people here to their own devices most of the time; it’s useful to lurk and know what people are thinking, in this bubble.

    I ask again, why are you endorsing shit that all but one of the Republicans are trying to do? Don’t you think that if this was actually good, in any way, the Republicans would not be doing it?

    I say again: this is some fuckery, and the Democrats are signing on because of optics and the ability to do some sort of powerless kabuki. The reason Rand Paul also went against it would appear to be that it’s further escalation of powers to do stuff like impose sanctions to whoever for trumped-up reasons, and he’s the kind of right wing nutjob who’s allergic to increased government power. Otherwise he would not have broken ranks.

    I think this will prove to be an intensely cynical and counterproductive move by the Dems, done solely to be on record doing something ‘against Russia’.

    And that is entirely appropriate, but this is a STUNT and any Russian sanction language is going to be stripped back out again. If it wasn’t, I think Bernie would not have broken ranks. Rand Paul broke ranks because this is more unchecked government power for fuckery, and Bernie broke ranks because it’s FAKE Russian sanctions and is really about going to war with Iran, and he has a record of opposing wars in the Middle East.

    It’s possible that any Iran sanctions would be a deal breaker for him, to be honest: but Iran sanctions under the cover of Russian sanctions that won’t ever exist is clearly too much for him. He has to know how it looks, he’s not that stupid, not that much more stupid than everybody else up there.

  256. 256.

    TenguPhule

    @Applejinx:

    The reason Rand Paul also went against it would appear to be that it’s further escalation of powers to do stuff like impose sanctions to whoever for trumped-up reasons, and he’s the kind of right wing nutjob who’s allergic to increased government power.

    And if you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you.

  258. 258.

    Applejinx

    @TenguPhule: Hey, I don’t like him, but he’s Ron Paul’s son and they are known to be isolationist and totally against US-driven wars in the Middle East. He broke ranks too, and it’s a legitimate question why that is. Rand Paul can be an evil fuck AND an isolationist. I’m just suggesting motives, when clearly the whole collusion is to do something and try to get unanimity under some sort of cover.

  261. 261.

    Major Major Major Major

    @Applejinx:

    Iran sanctions under the cover of Russian sanctions that won’t ever exist

    He could always… vote for it while it has the Russian sanctions, and they vote against it if they’re stripped out. Your argument makes no sense.

  262. 262.

    Applejinx

    @TenguPhule: So the question remains: why is anybody here supporting anything that ALL the REPUBLICANS (except Paul) are doing? What the hell is going on that some kind of optics kabuki stunt is suddenly the best thing ever?

    They know what’s going to happen with the bill. The Republicans cannot be suddenly all eager to sanction Russia and look into Trump’s ties to Russia. On every other subject they are a stone wall and suddenly this? This is outright fuckery and exploitation of the deep cynicism of the Democrats. People here would rather believe the impossible than consider that Democrats would willingly go along with something terrible to score points on OPTICS and get the words ‘sanctions on Russia’ into the news.

    And THAT is not wrong at all, that would be great, but I don’t think there is the slightest faintest chance it will happen. This is playing games to manipulate the optics, when the actual payload of the thing has to do with Iran (and if upthread comments are on the mark, the ability to slap sanctions on damn near anybody, much more easily than before).

    You’ll see, possibly very very very quickly.

    It’s collusion, and the Democrats are being bought off very cheaply, and getting nothing out of it.

  263. 263.

    jl

    @Butthurt Jordan Trombone (fka XTPD): No, that website name is new to me. I have no clue what it is. I’ll check it out though.

    Edit: apparently, in the wider blog world, I seem to be a fairly generic commenter. A couple of times it has been claimed that I am same person as some commenter who hangs out at some blog or other. But no, you find this ‘jl’ here an nowhere else. I wish the other ones good luck and God speed.

  264. 264.

    TenguPhule

    @Major Major Major Major: I pointed out the very real problems that the Democratic party would face to do what she wanted. She went bonkers. If that’s how you want to define nativist, that’s your words, not mine.

  267. 267.

    TenguPhule

    @Applejinx:

    What the hell is going on that some kind of optics kabuki stunt is suddenly the best thing ever?

    Democrats get their Russian sanction vote.

    Republicans get their Iran sanction vote.

    Both sides get to declare victory when it comes time to fundraise for the next election.

  269. 269.

    Applejinx

    @TenguPhule: And the Republicans get to claim that all the Democrats (minus one) voted for the Iran sanctions, therefore they’re bipartisan, a message no doubt reinforced happily by the media when it comes time to do the real thing with only Iran in there. And then they get to call all the Democrats flip-floppers and no longer caring about national security?

    This is fuckery. Real things matter. This is a path towards war with Iran with supposed Democratic ‘backing’.

  270. 270.

    Uncle Ebeneezer

    @Mnemosyne: Happy Birthday Mnem!! Enjoy your day and try to find a way to keep cool in this miserable heat.

    PS- not sure if you have had any involvement with them, but I hear that Indivisible Burbank has been doing some good work. One of my fellow admins went to a BBQ with them the other day and was very impressed. We are going to try and coordinate actions with them regularly (especially since we share a particularly crappy Supervisor for our County District.) Let me know if you have any interest in connecting with them or me/my group on local activism. Cheers.

  273. 273.

    Chyron HR

    @Applejinx:

    Have you ever considered the possibility that the bird was a coincidence, and that that Senator Sanders is not actually God’s chosen one?

    Is your brain even capable of processing that concept?

    I’m asking sincerely.

  274. 274.

    Captain C

    @Corner Stone: TIAs, maybe? He doesn’t look healthy, and a diet of McD’s and KFC, while enjoyable to some, isn’t exactly healthy for a 70-year old with probable obesity who’s dead set against exercising.

  275. 275.

    Mnemosyne

    @Uncle Ebeneezer:

    Thanks! I haven’t gotten involved with them because I am an introvert and I’m not making enough progress on my novel, but if you say they’re good people, I believe you. I’ll try to look them up when I’m feeling like I’ve made better progress creatively.

  276. 276.

    Morzer

    @Chyron HR:

    Have you ever considered the possibility that the bird was a coincidence

    But how do you explain the Lady of the Potomac giving Sanders Washington’s sword?

    Asking for a friend.

  278. 278.

    liberal

    @Applejinx: the answer is obvious: instead of addressing the issue on its merits, they’re just taking the position that Sanders must be wrong.

    Kind of a twist on Cleek’s Law.

  280. 280.

    AnotherBruce

    @Immanentize: Bullshit. So you’re ok with erasing the negotiated settlement that Obama worked out with Iran? I would argue that a settlement that recognized the Iran deal would undercut Putin in the long run. Maybe that is not going to survive with Trump in power, but I think it’s important to keep our international negotiated promises.

Comments are closed.