Proboscis

18 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

In reading the NY Times on that general subject, the explanation seems pretty confusing and contradictory. For example:

 

On one hand:

 

 

And there's no sign there that Trump's pardon of Flynn had to elaborate on what other legally questionable things Flynn may have been involved in...

 

But, on the other hand:

 

 

So, which is it???  I'm confused...

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/01/us/politics/rudy-giuliani-pardon.html

 

The difference is that Flynn was only accused/charged/convicted of specific crimes (all of which are naturally detailed) and he had been in the administration for just some days, not long enough to commit other crimes whereas Giuliani's situation is open to investigation and he has been in Trump's orbit for a significant period of time thereby giving rise to a higher possibility of crimes as yet unspecified, depending on what various investigations uncover.

The question is whether there is such a thing as a blanket pardon, ie for all matters to do with Trump's presidency. I believe there is not. But there is the possibility of pardoning someone who has not yet been charged - this precedent was opened by President Ford's pardoning of Richard Nixon before he was charged/indicted. But, as I argue, the potential charge has to be specified in the pardon. Therefore all those pardoned have to "fess up" to whatever they want to be pardoned of.

Such a pardon alone can give rise to further legal complications for a pardoned person. It can and probably will give rise to investigation as to what they actually did. They cannot plead the fifth because they have effectively confessed. It can also give rise to a State investigation which is never covered by a presidential pardon.

The trouble with working for Trump is that he walks everyone into breaking the law. He tried to walk Comey into breaking the law (an FBI director declaring loyalty to the President is breaking the law - this is what Trump wanted Comey to do and fired him for not so doing). He got his personal lawyer to pay off the porn stars and then declared that he knew nothing about it, thereby allowing his lawyer to go to jail. Everyone goes under the bus except Trump. What would be interesting is if the FBI went after Trump AND his family - would he throw members of his family under the bus too?

2 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

Rubbish. Although Thatcher was initially pro the single market, she certainly did not have the influence to force it upon the EEC. The rebate was secured to bring the UK net contributions down to a reasonable level compared to other members. The UK has never had a 'better deal' than others and we are still the second highest net contributor. 

Clearly you never read your history. The Single Market was straight out of the playbook of the free-market monetarists that Thatcher thought highly of. The Europeans tended towards a more customs union (which was the status quo at the time) with restrictions and special pleadings for specific product areas and skills. I find it mighty strange that it is now the Europeans arguing for the Single Market (now that they have seen the huge economic benefit of it) and the British Conservative Party arguing for the special pleadings.

The British focussed on industry back then as opposed to agriculture. Because a huge amount of the EEC budget went on agriculture (Common Agriculture Policy), the UK did not benefit from that policy. It was not because of some anti-British feeling. Of course, the UK benefited hugely from other aspects of the EU, especially in export of industrial products and ultimately services. Out of all the present and former EU countries, UK benefited most from the export of services.

To say that the UK has been treated unfairly or was made to pay much more in proportion to what it got out of EU membership is ludricous. And lets see. Even with a deal, the UK is in for a nasty recession. Sorry to have to say that but that is the private view of British economists that I know. Without a deal, the country is in for a situation worse than 2008.

6 hours ago, tonray said:

Trump supporters urge the President to pardon himself and his entire family. I don't recall President Obama pardoning his family...and if he had imagine the night Fox News would have had !

The trouble for Trump pardoning himself/family is that he has to pardon specific crimes. Whether a presidential self-pardon is indeed possible legally, there is no such thing as a blanket pardon. So he and his family would have to admit to crimes. That would be interesting.

If he/his family accept the pardons, they can no longer plead the fifth and have to spill the beans.

In addition, presidential pardons only cover federal crimes, not state crimes. Those prosecutors in New York Southern District have not been burning the midnight oil for nothing.

13 hours ago, Tropicalevo said:

Of course they are. The EU has been milking the UK financially and depleting its fishing stocks for years. They are going to throw their rattle out of the pram until they get what they want.

The EU does not underestand the meaning of the word compromise. They are just arrogant politicians desperate to rape and pillage the UK because it has said that it wants to leave.

NB Had I been allowed to vote I would have voted to remain. So i am not a Brexiteer.

I too am a remainer but from a different EU country. We have always chaffed at the exceptionalism of the UK who imposed conditions on the EU that the rest of the then membership really did not want but felt they had to just to keep the UK on side. One of those conditions, a huge one, was the SIngle Market. There were many governments in the EU who were not delighted with this British invention - yes, it was the British that came up with this one, none other than Margaret Thatcher. And she pushed it until it became an integral part of EU membership. And while I never agreed with everything Thatcher did, not by a long chalk, this was a good one as it brought huge benefits to the EU.

The other condition that really bothered the rest of the EU members was the famous British Rebate. No other country gets that. Everyone else pays up according to the complex formula. But only the UK gets a rebate! Well, as a non-British EU citizen, you can imagine that I am not delighted with this. And one would have thought that the UK would never have left such a good deal with so much in their favour.

So wen you say that the EU has been milking the UK financially, I don't get it. The UK was always getting a better deal than anyone else in the EU. As regards fisheries, the UK is well-known for importing by far most of the fish that they actually consume and exporting by far most of the fish that they catch - to and from EU countries, by the way. If there is no deal, there will be tariffs on all the fish that are exported and so the EU will probably look for fish elsewhere. Retaliatory tariffs on imports of the kind of fish consumed by the British into the UK will mean the cost of fish will skyrocket.

No one is trying to "rape and pillage" anyone (to use your metaphor, or at least I think you take it as a metaphor!). 

11 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Not sure the label really matters either way, but I think the more accurate label is an act of war. 

1 hour ago, ezzra said:

If they will retaliate, it will probably after Trump is gone as he is just itching for an excuse to hit Iran before he leaves office...

11 hours ago, billd766 said:

An act of war by whom?

 

Have either the USA or Iran declared war on each other?

And it it is an act of undeclared war, it is by international law a war crime. So, make the choice: either it is an act of terrorism or a war crime.

1 hour ago, rupert the bear said:

its the duty and purpose of both govts to afford an agreement that continues our prosperity ,freedom to move,travel and work with in a new framework.the uk has left the eu and its territory is now independent,that cannot be excluded within the terms of a new agreement.fishings a small part of the overall picture,uk must allow the french in particular access to uk waters but they no longer have a right to fish in another countrys waters.they are no longer eu waters.a canada agreements been left in the gutter .why?we have millions of eu workers in uk they should remain there and new people allowed to come in search for work ,retire there if they wish and vice versa.to not do so is retarded for individuals economies and countries alike.uk or eu nationals cannot now move to other countries to afford themselves of benefits at higher rates.work yes retire yes but support ourselves not on another states resources.this must be applied in even stronger terms to non eu people who enter the eu or uk ,just because they wish to move to a place that affords greater benefits and they break the law to do so doesnt allow them that right.

It is a pity that you don't bother to use the conventions of full-stop, capital letter and other grammatical indicators that would have made your comment readable. That said, the trouble with the "lets paint ourselves into a corner" extreme brexiteer position is that a no deal means basis for freedom of movement or anything else. There are also some other birds that are coming home to roost that no one even knew about - one is the market in derivatives worth trillions of dollars that will disappear from London. Trade, including shortages as importers get used to new procedures and tariffs, increased costs, all compounded by the economic depression caused by covid-19. No way can anyone polish this up. No deal is really not an option.

6 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

So we cant have a border in Ireland and we cant have a border in the Irish sea.

Only solution is to remain in the EU's single market.

Ergo Johnson will have to accept all the EU's demands for allowing access. 

Will that include freedom of movement?

No, there are other options - including variations that include a customs union. And there are many many other details too, from sharing of law enforcement data to the passporting (exporting of British) services, from the European Arrest Warrant (that involves even those who are not in the EU) to Air Traffic Control, from Drug Standards to Global Positioning Systems. None of these ever included freedom of movement.

There is a separate international agreement between the two countries, UK and Republic of Ireland that has enshrined freedom of movement between those two countries only. But belonging to a custom's union involving the EU does not mean freedom of movement. You would need a separate agreement for that, which as I understand is being proposed as a 90 day visiting permit (UK passport holder can visit an EU country for up to 90 days and EU citizen can visit UK for up to 90 days). This is being opposed by UK citizens who want to retire to Spain or the South of France. THose who already have residence are OK. The Irish government is complaining at the numbers of UK citizens who are suddenly discovering that grandma was born in Ireland and are exercising their rights to an Irish (and therefore EU) passport.

I remember Brexiteers making speeches saying things like, "yeah, we will keep some stuff that suits us from the single market but we will leave the EU." Only when the vote was marginally passed did the "leaving the EU" become a "hard Brexit."

2 hours ago, webfact said:

Thailand praised for Covid response - quick tourism recovery expected

 

REUTERS file photo for reference only

 

John Brown of online booking platform Agoda predicted that Asia would show the way in tourism recovery after the pandemic, reported Thai media RYT 9.

 

Speaking on CNBC Mr Brown said that signs were that both Thailand and Taiwan would lead the way in Asia where recovery is likely to be far quicker than in the west.

 

He singled out Thailand for praise in dealing with the pandemic and said that both Thailand and Taiwan's domestic tourism market was getting going again.

 

Vietnam's domestic tourism was also doing well. 

 

He said the world was looking towards Asia.

 

RYT based their comments on a report by Infoquest (IQ).

 

Source: RYT 9

 

-- © Copyright Thai Visa News 2020-11-25

 

- Whatever you're going through, the Samaritans are here for you

- Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking COVID-19 updates

This is nothing more than commercial public relations by a representative of Agoda, a hotel booking company, that actually has no expertise in fighting or "responding to" a pandemic and would have no way of singling out Thailand for its response. Public health specialists believe that there are factors that have helped reduce the R(0) or rate of infection of the virus in Thailand, Laos and Vietnam - possible factors include climate (heat and humidity lower transmission), proximity to China may have led to some levels of resistence to the virus due to earlier versions coming through and even the prevalence of dengue fever which, according to observation in Brazil, has led to some protection against the virus. The fact that these countries do not have a refugee problem and do not have refugee camps on their borders also helps lower the transmission rate.

But lets be sure about one thing. Apart from closing the borders, there is nothing that any of these countries, including Thailand, has done that would reduce the level of infection to that below a country like Germany.

1 hour ago, Deli said:

OK, but who eats bats and spreads the virus ? The Chinese.  Definitely not dirty farang.

But the prevailing scientific view is that no one got the virus from eating bats. It is that bats passed the virus on to at least one intermediary species through which humans got it.

As in the case with Spanish Flu back in the early part of the 20th century, the Americans who first contracted the flu virus were most likely the workers at the turkey farm, not the consumers of the turkeys. Those Americans wearing uniforms then brought it over to Europe during WW1.

Similarly, the intermediary species that caught the covid-19 virus from bats in Asia (does not even have to be caught in China) then went on to infect humans. Although the first known human to human infection was observed in December 2019, it is believed that this virus or a version of it was around for much longer. For instance, a separate study on cancer carried out in the Summer of 2019 found that remnants of covid-19 were found in 14% of the samples, and that study was an Italian one!

So simplistic throwing around of racist claims, such as your implication that we would not have covid-19 if Chinese people did not eat bats, is unhelpful, wrong and racist.

A brief look at the Biden front line and you are in for a surprise - they are all qualified for the job!

Remember the qualifications that Trump required. Apparently Yellen did not qualify for a second term as Chairman of the Federal Reserve (equivalent of Head of the Central Bank in other countries) because she was too short.

31 minutes ago, Pedrogaz said:

Hypocrite and warmonger.

Yes, isn't it so much better to have the Middle East on a knife edge with the threat of nuclear war hanging over it?

I am no apologist for the Revolutionary Guards of Iran but if the West was prepared to do a deal with Stalin (a far bigger killer than even Hitler), then the EU and USA should be able to do a deal with Iran.

Actually anyone who has that sort of money lying around doing nothing for months will have it in some sort of bond or investment, not in a bank account getting almost no interest.

My suspicion is that this is a ruse to keep out the very cheap Chinese tourists who come with their own packed lunch and sleep on the coach. Of course they cannot single out the Chinese and so have to apply it to everyone.

2 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

Liar. He's interrupting now by not congratulating Biden on his win. McConnell is just pandering to the GOP base to save his job.

 

Horrible politician.

I agree on the horrible politician part. But Mitch wants to remain Senate Majority Leader too. And this depends on the run-off in January in Georgia where two seats are up for grabs and are damn close. Unfortunately, the hold that Trump seems to have on many Republican voters (or is perceived to have) is such that the only way those Georgia Senate seats will be won is by whipping up the Trump vote in that state. And the only way of doing that is by whipping up the grievance element - Trump was cheated out of the election by those nasty Democrats. The fact that the election was overseen by a Republican in the state of Georgia is neither here nor there, of course.

A little thought though might indicate how short-sighted this tactic is. First, having had it drummed into them that the Democrats stole the election, the Trump voters might just think that voting is just not worth it as any election they might win will be stolen from them. Second, while Mitch seems to love the idea of gumming up the works of government and blaming the opposition (as he did in the case of Obama, blocking large numbers of appointments of federal court judges etc), the population is begining to notice this tactic and they didn't elect senators to Washington just to gum up the works of government and play games. Whether Minority or Majority Leader, he will have to work with Biden and pissing him off right now is not just politics.

He could also find himself in the future at the end of a microphone having to defend his position of supporting Trump after Trump has been indicted (whether you are a Republican or Democrat or Independent, this is a distinctive possibility, most likely on bank or tax fraud but there are other possible charges too).