US Politics December 2018: ~very legal and very cool~

lol that politico article is one of the stupidest things i've read in ages, just one unsupported statement/prediction after another, totally divorced from anything resembling the real world. a+.

"content"

has there ever been a government shutdown threat that was not a legislative hostage negotiation?

which article and when isn't POLITICO stupid?

Much is made of Trump understanding television, and to a large extent he does. Presentation, suspense, line delivery, etc. But make him share the stage and can fall ass over elbow.

— Richard M. Nixon (@dick_nixon) December 11, 2018

xpost There was that one time.

Anyway, all this and then Butina's sentencing is today, last I heard.

trump just made this easy for the dems

yup, this was Schumer's setup

How schrewd

“The American people recognize that we must keep government open, that a shutdown is not worth anything, and that we should not have a Trump shutdown,” Ms. Pelosi said.

“A what?” Mr. Trump shot back.

lol

really hoping Trump brings back the Mooch for a second act

Nancy w the knives out

“It’s like a manhood thing for him. As if manhood could ever be associated with him. This wall thing,” Pelosi said, according to a congressional aide in the room.

amazing

Pelosi to colleagues: “It was so wild. It goes to show you: you get into a tickle contest with a skunk, you get tinkle all over you.”

— Manu Raju (@mkraju) December 11, 2018

Tinkle tape or gtfo

Quick Manafort update:

Manafort lawyer says they're not completely sure a hearing is necessary, and that it depends on what the government's position is on whether that will impact sentencing. Suggests there's a possibility they won't contest allegations Manafort lied after plea deal.

— Ryan J. Reilly (@ryanjreilly) December 11, 2018

Smart. Very smart.

I mean, the dumbass wasn't smart in the first place with, you know, the crimes. Or lying during cooperation. Or leaking cooperation to Trump.

But this least-awful-alternative approach is smart . . . .

/1https://t.co/rjWqP3aEjJ

— ThankYouForNotSmockingHat (@Popehat) December 11, 2018

/2 . . . . because you don't want the judge focusing on "I'm a big liar" at the time of sentencing. If you make the government prove up a bunch of lies -- and you they'll be able to do so -- that's the first thing on the judge's mind as she exercises sentencing discretion.

— ThankYouForNotSmockingHat (@Popehat) December 11, 2018

What happens now:
- Manafort's lawyers and the govt will continue to talk informally about what the govt is accusing Manafort of
- Manafort's lawyers will file something by Jan. 7 saying what they agree/disagree about in the govt's filing
- Tentative hearing set for Jan. 25

— Zoe Tillman (@ZoeTillman) December 11, 2018

GENIUS

After cameras left room, Trump told Pelosi and Schumer that Mexico was actually going to pay for the wall as part of the re-negotiated NAFTA deal. Unclear how that would work.

— Josh Dawsey (@jdawsey1) December 11, 2018

good

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2018/12/11/house-democrats-scrap-proposed-tax-rule-after-criticism-progressive-caucus/

It will most assuredly not be that. https://t.co/17F3RhykZx

— Susan Hennessey (@Susan_Hennessey) December 11, 2018

keep hope alive

Wooow, just now had the opportunity to watch today's fun lil press conference. I had assumed that Trump just kinda tossed out his line about happily shutting down the government for the sake of border security in the midst of an incoherent rant. I had no idea that he was punctuating the affair with a 'EVERYBODY SHUT UP, I'M SHUTTING DOWN THE GOVERNMENT IF I DON'T GET WHAT I WANT, PRESS CONFERENCE OVER.'

So, yeah, I concur with everyone who asserted that this was a beautiful and very thoughtful gift to the dems.

"It could totally work"

listening to the press conference now

pretty dumb

i like how the "press conference" was a mutation of a photo-op that normally would have resulted in a few stilted smiles for the cameras before rushing everyone out of the room

lol

chuck schumer didn't do so badly

you could tell he hated him, which is good

Should I watch, Treesh?

the part where Schumer goads Trump into owning the shutdown is pretty funny

it's pretty good. not as fun as the first hangover movie but if you have moviepass it's worth it xp

BREAKING: GOP consultant tells me Trump is “absolutely enraged” by the news coverage of his meeting with Pelosi and Schumer today. Trump apparently blames Pence for not speaking up. He thinks Pence “lost it for him.” And he wishes he never held the meeting, calling it a “set up.”

— Scott Dworkin (@funder) December 11, 2018

yeessssss more of this

BREAKING

he can't really be that much of a dipshit. it has to be an act, right?

i think at this point he is like, existing in some kind of fog

how is it that Trump even has any hinges left to unhinge

It WAS a setup...for some cameras to take photos of the three, I mean four (forgot pence) of them sitting together and exchanging pleasantries. Until trump turned it I to a live argument, against the urging of Pelosi. He’s such a dumbass!

we've got a deranged election season coming up next year

Yeah, seriously. Even Pelosi was all like, dude, maybe do this stuff off camera? But full steam ahead it was.

if the dunning-kruger epidemic / prion disease that produced this id monster doesn't get us all first and he's crowned king on easter, that is

xpost

Lmao dude is so used to surrounding himself with sycophants and getting literally no pushback that he got thoroughly owned by Chuck Schumer

Does that @funder dude actually know anything? I feel like everything I see from him is thinly sourced “Trump is losing it” posts, and apparently he’s part of the Draft Biden movement?

whenever i wonder how this dude has gotten away with being such a total asshole into his 70s, i remember all the suckers in junior high who wanted to be friends with the bullies and now vote republican come hell or (literally soon enough) high water

A House GOP member who lost reelection said Trump's performance on Tuesday "was unbelievable. I literally couldn't believe a president of the United States was acting that crazy." When asked why he didn't come out publicly with his criticism, the soon-to-be-ex-lawmaker deadpanned "Hey, I gotta work, don't I?"

actually no, you don't gotta work, you can just gtfo of town now

https://static.politico.com/dims4/default/5f89653/2147483647/resize/1160x/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.politico.com%2F35%2F44%2F4b7fdbd0417fb0112514b894a2ca%2F181211-paulryan-politico.jpg

^Proof that yeah, Trump does beat dogs.

that tie, with that coat

In an effort to understand how Google search algorithms work, a Democratic congresswoman asked the tech company’s chief executive a simple question: “If you Google the word ‘idiot' under images, a picture of Donald Trump comes up. How would that happen? How does search work so that that would occur?”

In the middle of a congressional hearing ostensibly about privacy and data collection, Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) apparently performed that search from the dais. As it turns out, the image results for “idiot” reveals a page of mostly Trump photos.

Google chief executive sund4r Pichai, who was testifying Tuesday morning before the House Judiciary Committee, tried to explain to the roomful of mostly tech novices how the algorithms take into account some 200 factors — such as relevance, popularity, how others are using the search term — to determine how to best match a query with results.

“So it’s not some little man sitting behind the curtain figuring out what we’re going to show the user. It’s basically a compilation of what users are generating, and trying to sort through that information?” Zofgren asked, facetiously.

Whole article is kinda funny, kinda sad:

Lofgren was reacting to Republicans' allegations that Google employees manipulate results for political reasons. The hearing mostly revealed lawmakers' rudimentary understanding of how the Internet works and provided a platform for them to complain about unfavorable search results.

In one exchange, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.) asked Pichai whether he had ever directed an employee to manipulate search results. Pichai explained that it’s not possible for one person, or even a group of people, to do that because there are so many steps in the process.

But Smith did not accept that explanation, telling Pichai: “Let me just say, I disagree. I think humans can manipulate the process. It is a human process at its base.”

Republicans on the panel couldn’t get past the myth that some person(s) inside Google couldn’t arbitrarily change search algorithms for political gain.

Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) complained that when he googled the Republican health-care bill or the GOP tax cuts the first several pages listed negative articles. “How do you explain this apparent bias on Google’s part against conservative points of view, against conservative policies? Is it just the algorithm, or is there more happening there?” Chabot asked.

Yeah, how do you explain it?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/12/11/congresswoman-google-ceo-why-when-i-search-idiot-do-i-get-pictures-trump/?utm_term=.fa433879fce5