Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Politics
posted by janrinok on Tuesday October 01 2019, @06:08PM   Printer-friendly
from the how-to-elect-criminals dept.

Reuters, BBC report on the resignation of Rep congressman Chris Collins before the enquiry into insiders trading

NEW YORK/WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Chris Collins, a Republican U.S. congressman from New York state, resigned on Monday ahead of his expected guilty plea in a criminal insider trading case.

A senior Democratic aide speaking on condition of anonymity said Monday that the office of U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi had received Collins' letter of resignation, and that it would become effective Tuesday.

Collins, 69, is scheduled to appear in Manhattan federal that day to enter his guilty plea, court records show. Collins' son, Cameron Collins, and another man, Stephen Zarsky, are also scheduled to plead guilty in the case on Thursday.

Chris Collins, an early supporter of President Donald Trump, represents New York's 27th Congressional District, which includes areas surrounding Buffalo and Rochester. He won reelection last November, three months after he was criminally charged.

BBC

He was arrested by the FBI last August after prosecutors alleged that he alerted his son to a failed drug trial, allowing him to divest and avoid more than $500,000 (£406,000) in losses.

Prosecutors allege that he called his son in June 2017 after receiving an email during the congressional picnic at the White House, informing him of the failed drug trial results involving Innate Immunotherapeutics, a company in which his son owned thousands of shares.

abc.net.au

Mr Collins immediately told the trial failure news to his son, who in turn told his fiance, Lauren Zarsky, and her parents, Dorothy and Stephen Zarsky, prosecutors allege.
...
Prosecutors said the congressman was "virtually precluded" from trading, in part because he already faced a congressional ethics probe over Innate.

However, prosecutors said others used the insider information to avoid more than $768,000 in losses when Innate's share price plunged 92 per cent after news of the drug's failure became public.


Original Submission

Related Stories

Warrant Issued for Senator Richard Burr's Phone and iCloud Account for Insider Trading 79 comments

Apple Issued Warrant by FBI to Provide Access to iCloud Account for Sen. Richard Burr for Stock Sales Investigation

FBI recently obtained iCloud data access from Apple for Senator Richard Burr, as part of an on-going investigation regarding stock sales.

Richard Burr is under investigation for selling his stock portfolio while he was receiving updates from government health officials regarding coronavirus pandemic. The timing of his stock sales preceded the sharp decline in the stock market, just a week later. He had heavily invested in businesses that suffered the most due to the pandemic.

[...] Burr sold between $628,000 and $1.72 million worth of stocks. He was not the only senator to do so, as a few others are also under investigation. His brother in law also sold his shares worth between $97,000 and $280,000, on the same day as Burr's sell-off.

It is against the law for lawmakers to make trading decisions based on classified intelligence briefings that they receive due to their position in the government.

Also at 9to5Mac.

Previously: US Rep Chris Collins Resigns Ahead of Insider Trading Plea Involving Australian Biotech Company
This Website Tracks Which Shares US Senators Are Unloading Mid-Pandemic


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1) 2
  • (Score: 5, Funny) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday October 01 2019, @06:14PM (111 children)

    by DeathMonkey (1380) on Tuesday October 01 2019, @06:14PM (#901400) Journal

    Corrupt Republicans? Who could've possibly seen that one coming!

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by barbara hudson on Tuesday October 01 2019, @06:46PM

      by barbara hudson (6443) <barbara.Jane.hudson@icloud.com> on Tuesday October 01 2019, @06:46PM (#901412) Journal
      I'm shocked, shocked, I say. That a Trump supporter had enough sense of shame to resign rather than dig in his heels and refuse to resign until they pried his seat from his cold dead hands. Make them kick him out. Insist it's all FAKE NEWS and it's the Democrats who need to be investigated. And the prosecutor is corrupt, must hate America, he was just exercising his 1st Amendment right to free speech when he passed on his tip, same as Trump was when he asked Ukraine, Australia, and Russia to dig up dirt on Biden and his son. And what about Clinton? Lock her up! Make America Nuts Again.
      --
      SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
    • (Score: 0, Troll) by fustakrakich on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:03PM (106 children)

      by fustakrakich (6150) on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:03PM (#901423) Journal

      I know! Right? [baltimoresun.com]

      Damn republicans [governing.com]...

      I mean, look at 'em! [msnbc.com]

      The place is crawling with 'em! [theguardian.com] (When are we gonna see those emails, eh?)

      What will we ever do?!

      --
      La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
      • (Score: 3, Informative) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:10PM (33 children)

        by DeathMonkey (1380) on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:10PM (#901425) Journal

        Two links that are several years old and one that isn't even a crime!

        You need to improve your cherry picking skills my friend.

        • (Score: -1, Troll) by fustakrakich on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:19PM (31 children)

          by fustakrakich (6150) on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:19PM (#901430) Journal

          I put no statute of limitations on these people.

          one that isn't even a crime

          Ah, yes, of course not. Neither is a phone call with a pure hearsay transcript then. A "confession" is not proof.

          Damn! You really are a funny guy!

          --
          La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 01 2019, @10:55PM (13 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 01 2019, @10:55PM (#901534)

            Neither is a phone call with a pure hearsay transcript then.

            ???? A recorded transcript of a conversation with multiple witnesses is now considered hearsay?!? If that is your standard, then many, many criminal convictions should be tossed out. For that matter, all convictions before electronic recording devices existed should have been tossed out.

            A "confession" is not proof.

            I'm confused about what your standard of legal "proof" or evidence is. You do realize that a confession is legally admissible in court, right?

            What alternative universe are you posting from?

            • (Score: 0, Troll) by fustakrakich on Tuesday October 01 2019, @11:14PM (12 children)

              by fustakrakich (6150) on Tuesday October 01 2019, @11:14PM (#901547) Journal

              Where's the recording? The "transcript" is full of personal feelings. There is no chain of custody. No, I would never find that admissible. Damn the judge that does.

              You do realize that a confession is legally admissible in court, right?

              And that is a bad thing. There must be collaborating evidence. Or it too is hearsay. "Confessions" in these kinds of cases involving powerful people are for diverting or terminating an investigation. Take one for the team.

              You are merely playing the same old tiresome tribal politics. Without evidence this is a circus.

              --
              La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
              • (Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 01 2019, @11:46PM (3 children)

                by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 01 2019, @11:46PM (#901572)

                You continue to deliberately (as it's been explained to you, with supporting evidence, multiple times) misunderstand the situation WRT congressional oversight.

                The House of Representatives is not a prosecutor, and the Senate is not an Article III court.

                I can only assume you're shilling or are not bright enough to understand the laws of the nation in which you live.

                • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:25AM (2 children)

                  by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:25AM (#901597) Journal

                  Don't care. Without evidence you are full of shit. Can it be any more obvious?

                  --
                  La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                  • (Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @01:17AM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @01:17AM (#901621)

                    Don't care.

                    Yes, it is now abundantly obvious that you seemingly don't care about your lack of understanding concerning the legal system of your own nation. I also wouldn't be surprised if you somehow consider yourself to be some kind of heroic misunderstood patriot. Such is the nature of delusion regarding your type. Frankly, it is embarrassing that I have to share citizenship with the likes of you.

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @03:31AM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @03:31AM (#901695)

                    WooHoo! Trolls with points! Go nuts babe!

                    This is the DNC at work. This is what they do best, and for free! Poor pitiful little fools they are. They must want the GOP to win!

              • (Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:58AM

                by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:58AM (#901612)

                Where's the recording? The "transcript" is full of personal feelings.

                The transcript is the collated written recollections of the people who were listening in on the conversation. You can read it for yourself right here. [cbsnews.com] Where in that transcript is there anything about the blithering "personal feelings" of the hearers?

                There is no chain of custody.

                Facile usage of legal terms like "chain of custody" will not help you here. What is your theory about the origin of the transcript? That the transcript was completely made up by someone out to smear him? You do know how that could be decisively cleared up, right? Hint: it involves witnesses testifying before Congress.

                No, I would never find that admissible.

                Then you are a deluded fool. (Is anyone surprised by that?)

                You do realize that a confession is legally admissible in court, right?

                And that is a bad thing. There must be collaborating evidence. Or it too is hearsay. "Confessions" in these kinds of cases involving powerful people are for diverting or terminating an investigation. Take one for the team.

                While it is possible for someone to make a false confession, that appears to be highly unlikely in this case considering that Trump has actually admitted to much of the substance of the conversation. [foxnews.com]

                You are merely playing the same old tiresome tribal politics.

                Physician, heal thyself!

              • (Score: 4, Informative) by barbara hudson on Wednesday October 02 2019, @01:35AM (6 children)

                by barbara hudson (6443) <barbara.Jane.hudson@icloud.com> on Wednesday October 02 2019, @01:35AM (#901628) Journal
                First, there are times when voir-dire evidence is admissible in criminal proceedings. Depends on the case, the circumstances, and the judge.

                Second, turns out that the whistleblower was present and heard some of the conversations themselves, so it's not even voir-dire evidence, it's direct witness evidence.

                Third, it's Trump who's the circus clown. If he had any brains he'd be talking to real lawyers, not that clown Rudy.

                The will be a night of the long knives and Trump will not finish his term. Opinion is turning rapidly against him, and Republicans realize that they cannot win with just his hard core base. There's either an article 25 removal from office (probably over dementia and mental health) or a successful impeachment. Republicans won't back a treasonous president in a senate vote - they know that would kill their chances of holding much of their seats.

                They also know Trump won't resign, and that pardoning himself is an admission of guilt, but that Trump is too ego driven to realize that he can't weather such a crisis.

                They are probably secretly praying that he chokes on a cheeseburger and dies, while the Democrats smell blood and want him to live a long life and go through all those state criminal charges he can't pardon himself for.

                The kids will probably retreat to some place that likes dirty money and has no extradition treaty. Uncle Vlad would be most welcoming.

                --
                SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
                • (Score: 0, Redundant) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @02:46AM (4 children)

                  by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @02:46AM (#901675) Journal

                  Third, it's Trump who's the circus clown.

                  Yes, so let's not forget that is a circus, this "impeachment" all of it. Three years of sour grapes. I can only hope that the important work in day to day business is being done behind the scenery, or they better start teaching Chinese in the preschools. This is all so incredibly bogus.

                  --
                  La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by barbara hudson on Wednesday October 02 2019, @03:29AM (3 children)

                    by barbara hudson (6443) <barbara.Jane.hudson@icloud.com> on Wednesday October 02 2019, @03:29AM (#901692) Journal

                    I would have started impeachment proceedings a lot earlier - as soon as he violated the emoluments clause. That's something that is easy to understand and easy to prove. Everyone understands crooked politicians lining their pockets with taxpayer funds is a no-no. Kind of hard to defend against as fake news.

                    --
                    SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
                    • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @03:39AM (2 children)

                      by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @03:39AM (#901699) Journal

                      I hope you're right, but do we have receipts? For this to work it has to be ironclad, open and shut. There cannot be any ambiguity. With so many liars everywhere, all testimony and witness credibilty without paperwork is suspect.

                      --
                      La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                      • (Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Wednesday October 02 2019, @03:52AM (1 child)

                        by barbara hudson (6443) <barbara.Jane.hudson@icloud.com> on Wednesday October 02 2019, @03:52AM (#901702) Journal
                        Unfortunately everything can be faked today, so it's a question of do you trust what is being said beyond a reasonable doubt.

                        People playing internet lawyer keep forgetting that you don't have to absolutely prove anything. They make noises about things that don't have enough weight to meet the reasonable doubt standard. Wacky conspiracy theories might introduce a doubt, but it's not a reasonable doubt, so doesn't matter. Trump supporters can cry conspiracy all they want, it doesn't create a reasonable doubt, especially given the proof that Trump lies almost every time he says anything. The shitty plastic surgery he had done needs maintenance but he can't get away for a few days and it would be spotted immediately, same as Dr Oz and his various face implants aren't holding up that well with age. And that combover is becoming more obvious as cameramen sneak in shots from above and behind that leave the truth exposed, and producers no longer fear retribution from management.

                        --
                        SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
                        • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @03:56AM

                          by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @03:56AM (#901704) Journal

                          Personally, I don't care about conspiracies, but I still want a real hammer to hit the crook on the head. Bury it deep inside, not let it bounce off on appeal.

                          --
                          La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @02:58AM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @02:58AM (#901682)

                  Republicans won't back a treasonous president in a senate vote - they know that would kill their chances of holding much of their seats.

                  While I agree with much of the rest of what you said, sadly, I don't agree with this. I suspect that many Republicans in Congress will back a treasonous president. For them, it is my President, right or wrong. Furthermore, I suspect that much of it is precisely due to valuing holding on to their seats over what is best for the Republic; I really fear that they are going to ride the Titanic to the bottom of the ocean and take the rest of us along for the ride. And, lest anyone think I am being partisan here, I doubt that Democrats would fare much better in displaying moral courage if the shoe were on the other foot. I wish it were otherwise.

                  They are probably secretly praying that he chokes on a cheeseburger and dies, while the Democrats smell blood and want him to live a long life and go through all those state criminal charges he can't pardon himself for.

                  While I understand the reasoning behind this secret desire, I suspect that those who wish for it have not thought about the longer term implications for this possibility. Consider that Reagan was nearly assassinated in office. He didn't even die and yet he has been damn near elevated to sainthood in large part because of it. Ever since, Republicans have measured themselves against Reagan as the standard. Witness the damn near adulation of the man on Fox "News". He left office over thirty years ago and he still casts a shadow over our national politics, even today. Now imagine if Trump dies while in office. How long do you think it will be before we manage to wash that shitstain off of the nation's boot heel? Do you really want to risk that?

                  The kids will probably retreat to some place that likes dirty money and has no extradition treaty. Uncle Vlad would be most welcoming.

                  Indeed. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me at all if Tinyhands, himself, decides he wants to retire to Russia after he leaves office; I've actually made this prediction to people I know IRL. If I were a federal prosecutor, I would make sure that federal agents were waiting at the Whitehouse for him with a warrant for his arrest and a personal set of steel "cuff links" as he is getting on Marine One for his final exit from Washington. Just sayin'.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 01 2019, @11:42PM (5 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 01 2019, @11:42PM (#901568)

            Well, there have been lots of other, more recent *and* more relevant to TFA corruption investigations/convictions.

            I wonder why you chose the ones you did?

            I have a pretty good idea. But I won't blow your "oh so smooth cover."

            Why not these?
            https://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/politics/albany/2018/07/20/new-york-corruption-scandals-heres-who-has-been-convicted-2018/795849002/ [democratandchronicle.com]
            https://www.governing.com/topics/politics/gov-public-corruption-crystal-city-texas.html [governing.com]

            Or just link to this:
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_state_and_local_politicians_convicted_of_crimes [wikipedia.org]

            Hmm...I'm shocked! Shocked I say!

            • (Score: 0, Troll) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:10AM (4 children)

              by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:10AM (#901589) Journal

              Thank you, sir/ma'am! You are of great assistance! And the federal list [wikipedia.org] is even more interesting... very good. I shall indeed use this next time I hear all this garbage about which crook is better than the other.

              I just picked the low hanging headlines from Google.

              Let the democrat hand waving commence! Commence?! Continue!

              Let's see if DM pops by... "I count two more republicans than democrats! See? We ARE better!"

              --
              La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
              • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:53AM (3 children)

                by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:53AM (#901607)

                "I count two more republicans than democrats! See? We ARE better!

                AC you replied to here.

                I'm someone who values honesty (both literal and intellectual) and transparency. You don't value either. Fuck off.

                • (Score: 0, Flamebait) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @01:03AM (2 children)

                  by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @01:03AM (#901616) Journal

                  That's funny. A simple troll, but still funny. You get a gold star.

                  --
                  La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @02:12AM (1 child)

                    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @02:12AM (#901646)

                    Ah! So now the troll is going to poison the forum with moderation. Isn't that special!

                    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @10:15AM

                      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @10:15AM (#901770)

                      AC you replied to. Yes, I know that this is Fusty posting AC. Not very original, but that's not so surprising is it?

                      No. I didn't mod you down. That was someone else.

                      And I'm not trolling, I actually believe the things I say and am not doing so to get a rise out of you or anyone else. Just expressing myself.

                      Don't like what I have to say? Rebut it thoughtfully (fat chance) and maybe you'll have better luck.

          • (Score: 2) by ilPapa on Wednesday October 02 2019, @02:46AM (10 children)

            by ilPapa (2366) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @02:46AM (#901676) Journal

            Ah, yes, of course not. Neither is a phone call with a pure hearsay transcript then. A "confession" is not proof.

            A transcript is not "hearsay". You used to be smart enough to know that, fusty. It can be presented as first hand testimony in a court case.

            Serious question: Did Fustakrakich sell his Soylent News account on craigslist or something. A year ago, he was an outspoken Marxist and is now full-blown #MAGA. Are you OK, buddy?

            --
            You are still welcome on my lawn.
            • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @03:16AM (9 children)

              by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @03:16AM (#901688) Journal

              How can that be without a recording? I don't like the man, but it's still not right.

              I do have to say that I find it very amusing that people think I'm defending the prez. No, I am defending the right to a fair trial, not this kangaroo court in mass media. The nature of the defendant means absolutely nothing to me. Unfortunate that most of you all choose to believe otherwise. And this is just one of those things about the accusers nd the mob supporters that is so bloody repulsive.

              I don't like the prez, but I dread what is happening here. I've seen the movie, and it's damn ugly. Very distressing, if not downright frightening.

              --
              La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
              • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @04:09AM (8 children)

                by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @04:09AM (#901708)

                How can that be without a recording? I don't like the man, but it's still not right.

                But there is a record of the conversation! The transcript is that record. Just because it is not a voice recording doesn't make it any less valid.

                I do have to say that I find it very amusing that people think I'm defending the prez. No, I am defending the right to a fair trial, not this kangaroo court in mass media. The nature of the defendant means absolutely nothing to me. Unfortunate that most of you all choose to believe otherwise. And this is just one of those things about the accusers nd the mob supporters that is so bloody repulsive.

                Look, I think you are just going to have to get used to the fact that the press is going to continue covering this story and the rest of us are going to have opinions on what we see and hear; some are going to be very vocal about their opinions. Believe it or not, that is an important part of the political process. The only real requirement on the part of the press is that they be fair and accurate in their reporting. Frankly, in my opinion it is often Trump's supporters who have gone out of their way to obfuscate and misdirect/misinform in their public statements to the press.

                Very distressing, if not downright frightening.

                What do you find so distressing and/or frightening about this? That the President and his team have to answer for their words and actions? Frankly, it looks to me like what really frightens you is that they are about to be held accountable for their deeds. While I can understand how unpleasant this is going to be for everyone, I don't see much of any way around this unless you actually like having a President who is above the law. And don't give me any of this bullshit about him neither being below the law either. If anything, this President has been coddled by Republicans in Congress and his adoring base for far too long.

                • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @04:34AM (7 children)

                  by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @04:34AM (#901716) Journal

                  You're way off base. I know what these people are. Just show some paperwork, and I'll be right there calling for his head with all of you. For now it's just an angry mob.

                  --
                  La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                  • (Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @10:43AM (6 children)

                    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @10:43AM (#901773)

                    You're way off base. I know what these people are. Just show some paperwork, and I'll be right there calling for his head with all of you. For now it's just an angry mob.

                    Well hold on a second. Let's take just the facts as have been elucidated by the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG):
                    1. A government employee filed a whistleblower complaint perfectly legally under the appropriate law [wikipedia.org];
                    2. The ICIG did a cursory inspection of the complaint and deemed it "credible" and "urgent", which is the standard in the law linked above which requires the complaint to be forwarded to the House and Senate Intelligence committees;
                    3. The ICIG forwarded said complaint to the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), as is required by the law;
                    4. The law requires the DNI to forward such complaints within seven days;
                    5. The DNI did not do so, at the direction of the White House and the DOJ;
                    6. The ICIG, only knowing that the law had not been followed, informed the House and Senate Intelligence committees of the existence of such a complaint, but not the contents of the complaint;
                    ======
                    Elsewhere:
                    7. Congress demanded the complaint from the Executive Branch, who eventually complied;
                    8. At the same time, various news outlets broke the story about the complaint, and provided some details about what was in said complaint. I'd note that the story turned out to both true and pretty accurate;
                    9. The Trump Administration released a transcript of a phone call that was *part* of the issues raised in the whistleblower complaint. Such a transcript is (according to the White House and other administration officials) is created whenever the President communicates with foreign folks. In addition to whoever else is in the room with the President during the call, there are multiple staffers whose job it is to create these transcripts, with the goal that they are *verbatim*;
                    10. Given the allegations in the complaint, that various steps (not just the phone call) were taken by the President and members of Executive Branch to pressure a foreign government to investigate a political rival, the House made the risky decision to being Impeachment hearings.

                    If you believe that any of the above is false, please provide evidence to support your claims.

                    So. Where does that leave us? A government employee reports that they believe there is criminal activity in the government. Those within his department who are tasked with determining the credibility of such allegations come to the conclusion that these allegations are credible.

                    Since some of the players involved are in the White House and Justice Department, the only place where these *allegations* can reasonably be investigated (which has not been done) is Congress.

                    That they've chosen to do so isn't a statement that *anyone* is guilty of anything. Just that these allegations need to be investigated.

                    And that's just what Congress is proposing to do.

                    Do you object to such an investigation? I would hope not, given your stated desire for facts and evidence.

                    If you do object to such an investigation, why?

                    Inquiring minds aren't really all that interested, but I'm curious as to whether or not you can make a cogent argument one way or another.

                    • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @02:24PM (5 children)

                      by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @02:24PM (#901850) Journal

                      I never objected to an investigation. Anybody who says I did is full of shit. But everything is being relayed by "people familiar with the matter to protect anonymity*. There is no credibility with bullshit like that. And the accusers, well, we should be investigating them too. I doubt the credibility of anyone that has been in congress for damn near 30 years. We have to demand more transparency, vote out the dead wood, or the doubts and the fraud will remain an indefinite problem.

                      I'm perfectly willing to give the thing more time, but the press has to demand to know what is happening first hand, not print gossip from ACs "familiar with the matter". Print that kind crap in the National Inquirer UFO/Michael Jackson section, not in the Post/Times

                      --
                      La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                      • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @04:52PM (4 children)

                        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @04:52PM (#901929)

                        I never objected to an investigation.

                        Well, you sure as hell could have fooled me!

                        But everything is being relayed by "people familiar with the matter to protect anonymity*.

                        The whistleblower's identity is being concealed for a reason. Do you really not understand why? [nytimes.com]

                        There is no credibility with bullshit like that. And the accusers, well, we should be investigating them too.

                        So, is it really your theory that merely coming forward with an accusation is grounds for being investigated? You wouldn't happen to be posting from North Korea, would you? As for credibility and corroborating evidence, perhaps you would like to consider that there is now a publicly released transcript [cbsnews.com] verifying at least some of what the whistleblower has alleged.

                        I doubt the credibility of anyone that has been in congress for damn near 30 years. We have to demand more transparency, vote out the dead wood, or the doubts and the fraud will remain an indefinite problem.

                        And what does corruption in Congress have to do with a whistleblower complaint that the ICIG has already characterized as "credible and urgent"? The whistleblower complaint should stand on it's own, regardless of what anyone in Congress says or does.

                        I'm perfectly willing to give the thing more time....

                        And yet...and yet...you are now calling for an investigation of the accuser. Looks to me like you are already impatient to see an end to this.

                        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @05:20PM (3 children)

                          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @05:20PM (#901938)

                          Posting AC. Fuck it, when in Rome... try to blend in.

                          The whistleblower has to provide evidence! Do you really not understand why??

                          This is bullshit:
                          Oh dear! Did you hear what Martha told Sally on the telephone the other day? Oh yes! It was horrible!

                          You don't print the story until you have evidence. And it should be admissible in a court of law. Admitting this crap is grave mistake.

                          This whole thing is a bullshit grudge match, because people won't see their failures are in the damn mirror, not in Russia or D.C.

                          Sure hope all that cool hardware the Chinese are showing off is nothing but cardboard cutouts. You know? Because look at you people! It's classic!

                          • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @05:55PM (2 children)

                            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @05:55PM (#901959)

                            The whistleblower has to provide evidence!

                            Actually, all that the whistleblower has to do is make an accusation. It is Congress' job to dig for evidence. Fortunately, they already have a transcript of a telephone conversation which lends quite a bit of credence to the accusation, a transcript which BTW the President has already largely corroborated.

                            Do you really not understand why??

                            What I am having a hard time understanding is why you seem so willing to give the President a pass on what is apparently illegal abuse of his office while, at the same time, wanting to commence with an investigation of a whistleblower. Do you really not see the incongruity there?

                            This is bullshit:

                            Indeed it is. I am tempted to wash my hands of this whole affair and let you live in the hell you are so willing to build with your own hands. The only thing that is stopping me is that all the rest of us would have to live with it as well!

                            This whole thing is a bullshit grudge match, because people won't see their failures are in the damn mirror, not in Russia or D.C.

                            And this is just the usual Republican talking point misdirection. The issue here is not whether Democrats want to see the President removed from office. The issue is whether Trump is abusing the office of the President. Why are you not concerned about that?

                            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @06:37PM (1 child)

                              by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @06:37PM (#901980)

                              See? You're still full of shit if you think I'm giving him a pass. You are just the stereotypical angry mob. Since I can't convince you people otherwise, bye! May the best man win...

                              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 03 2019, @01:24AM

                                by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 03 2019, @01:24AM (#902125)

                                ...bye! May the best man win...

                                How about "let the truth come out and the chips fall where they may" instead?

                                Or don't you care about the facts? It certainly seems that way. After calling this investigation "crooks investigating crooks," you were unable or unwilling to corroborate that statement with any evidence at all.

                                You've also repeatedly stated that evidence is *always* necessary, even demanding that *actual* evidence, legally admissible should be ignored because *you* know better than everyone else.

                                Or do your calls for evidence only apply to other people? That's pretty convenient for you, eh?

                                Do you even read what you write? Your discourse (I use that term loosely here) is a mass of unsubstantiated claims, lordly pronouncements and insults. It would be humorous if it wasn't so sad.

                                In your rhetoric, poor as it might be, you've alternately demonized dems and glorified L'Orange. or claimed that you think they're *all* crooks.

                                You've then trotted out puerile and uninformed arguments, tinged with widely debunked conspiracy theories to claim, without *any* evidence whatsoever, that you're right and anyone who doesn't agree is a shill for the corrupt ones, stupid and/or cattle.

                                You say 'bye!' But I don't think you *can* stop demonstrating just how uninformed and naive you really are.

                                One can hope, but I won't hold my breath. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

        • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:16AM

          by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:16AM (#901592) Journal

          You need to improve your cherry picking skills my friend.

          Your wish is my command! [wikipedia.org] Got bucketfuls of cherries!

          --
          La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Thexalon on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:15PM (71 children)

        by Thexalon (636) on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:15PM (#901427)

        If you believe $THEIR_PARTY is corrupt as all get out, and $MY_PARTY isn't, you're very very wrong.

        And that's not just the 2 big players: The Greens, Libertarians, and I'm guessing quite a few others have the same problems. Heck, I at one point ran into a booth run by a group describing themselves as the Revolutionary Communist Party, and in chatting with their representatives it became abundantly clear to me that (a) they knew jack squat about communism, and (b) the group's primary purpose was to sell its leader's books.

        --
        The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
        • (Score: 2, Insightful) by fustakrakich on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:22PM (8 children)

          by fustakrakich (6150) on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:22PM (#901433) Journal

          You really can't blame people for pulling this shit. It is highly rewarding. You are watching Pavlov's experiment en vivo. It's just mother nature acting out.

          --
          La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
          • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:27PM (7 children)

            by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:27PM (#901436) Journal

            Sad, but True.

            I want $MY_PARTY to be above reproach, but I completely expect $OTHER_PARTY to be, well, let's just say bad, instead of puffing it up.

            The fact is, politicians are always corrupt.

            The best you can hope for is: Sanity. Good Policy.

            I wish I didn't have to say "sanity", but wow.

            As for good policy, it would be nice if people who live in dense populated areas and people who live in sparse populated areas could realize that the other group does have legitimate concerns about their own best interests.

            --
            People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
            • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:32PM (4 children)

              by fustakrakich (6150) on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:32PM (#901441) Journal

              The fact is, politicians are always corrupt.

              But nobody will acknowledge the reason... In fact the denials are most vehement... becoming accusations of a weird kind. All to cover up...

              --
              La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 01 2019, @11:50PM (3 children)

                by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 01 2019, @11:50PM (#901575)

                But nobody will acknowledge the reason...

                Sure we do. All the time in fact. Money as a factor in political campaigns. That's the reason.

                Take the money out of elections (public financing and *only* public financing) and people with no axe to grind and a desire to make this country a better place will have a chance to get elected.

                Your deliberate obtuseness has worn really thin.

                • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:23AM (2 children)

                  by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:23AM (#901595) Journal

                  :-) You may want the rephrase that. How does money put a guy in office if nobody votes for him? The object of your desire is not to blame for anything. The winners' corruption is only a reflection of the voters'.

                  And no I don't want my tax dollars financing political campaigns. The lobbying will be just as bad. You want the job, do it on your own dime. Actually, if you want the job, you're disqualified!

                  --
                  La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:55AM (1 child)

                    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:55AM (#901608)

                    More idiocy and deliberate obtuseness. So business as usual for you, eh?

                    Jackass.

                    • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @01:06AM

                      by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @01:06AM (#901617) Journal

                      Do tell! Such projection!

                      Back at ya! Buuudy

                      --
                      La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
            • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 01 2019, @10:18PM (1 child)

              by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 01 2019, @10:18PM (#901517)

              It makes the news when a man bites a dog. It doesn't make the news when a dog bites a man.

              Similarly, it makes the news when a republican is corrupt. It doesn't make the news when a democrat is corrupt.

              • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday October 02 2019, @06:45PM

                by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday October 02 2019, @06:45PM (#901986) Journal

                The reverse may be true depending on which news source you consume.

                --
                People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
        • (Score: 5, Interesting) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:24PM (14 children)

          by DeathMonkey (1380) on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:24PM (#901434) Journal

          If you believe $THEIR_PARTY is corrupt as all get out, and $MY_PARTY isn't, you're very very wrong.

          I believe it is possible for one party to be significantly more corrupt than another party, yes.

          And when one party has 38 times as many criminal convictions than the other you can guess which one I think it is. [rantt.com]

          • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:29PM (12 children)

            by fustakrakich (6150) on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:29PM (#901438) Journal

            Yes, the numbers make all the difference, nothing to do with the nature of the beast at all. Everything is ok if your side is slightly "better" (in your eyes only), right?

            Very tribal...

            --
            La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
            • (Score: 5, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:31PM (10 children)

              by DeathMonkey (1380) on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:31PM (#901440) Journal

              Most people don't consider a 3800% difference to be small.

              • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:40PM (9 children)

                by fustakrakich (6150) on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:40PM (#901445) Journal

                Please, crooks investigating crooks? Your numbers are meaningless. And furthermore so are the "confessions". Not a single one has been cross examined. It's like when Trump's sister quit her judgeship to kill an investigation. This is nothing new, or abnormal. It goes with the territory.

                Really, save your breath... The solution is to vote them out.

                --
                La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:10AM (3 children)

                  by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:10AM (#901588)

                  Please, crooks investigating crooks?

                  So...You are claiming that *every single politician*, *everywhere*, is corrupt. That's not new, you've been blathering on about that for a while.

                  Now you're claiming that *every single law enforcement officer and prosecutor* in *every single jurisdiction* is also corrupt and a "crook?"

                  Is that about the size of it?

                  Get a grip. Get a clue.

                  • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:30AM (2 children)

                    by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:30AM (#901600) Journal

                    Your wild hand waving not withstanding, I am talking about this case at the present time. Yes, it is crooks against crooks.

                    --
                    La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:56AM (1 child)

                      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:56AM (#901609)

                      So you're blathering on about irrelevant stuff, huh?

                      There's a shocker. Not.

                      • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @01:09AM

                        by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @01:09AM (#901618) Journal

                        :-) I guess this is where I tell you *talk to the hand*, for this and all your future replies, save the trouble of answering each one.

                        Thankyouverymuch

                        --
                        La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @10:11AM (4 children)

                  by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @10:11AM (#901768)

                  Please, crooks investigating crooks?

                  Which crooks? Name names here. Presumably you're talking about members of the House committees holding impeachment hearings. As such, there aren't all that many people involved.

                  You're making allegations that specific individuals have committed crimes. Who are these people, and what, specifically are their crimes?

                  While you're trying to answer what should be for you, since you're completely convinced of the guilt of these individuals, a very simple question, I'll remind you of *your own words* [soylentnews.org] in this discussion:

                  Don't care. Without evidence you are full of shit.

                  I will hold you not to my standard, but to *yours*. No evidence means you're full of shit.

                  So. Do tell. We're waiting.

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @02:31PM (1 child)

                    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @02:31PM (#901856)

                    Who are you?!

                    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @08:49PM

                      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @08:49PM (#902025)

                      Who are you? (I know it's Fustakrakich posting AC, but that's not what you're going on about is it?)

                      Let's have a legal name and ASL [dictionary.com].

                      If it's good for the goose, it's good for the gander, eh?

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @02:36PM (1 child)

                    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @02:36PM (#901859)

                    Yeah! Who are you? You're just a bullshit AC! C'mon! Cough up the fuckin' name or get the fuck out!

                    • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @08:46PM

                      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @08:46PM (#902024)

                      No evidence? You're full of shit. Full stop.

            • (Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:35PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:35PM (#901443)

              Everything is ok if your side is slightly "better" (in your eyes only), right?

              Slightly better? You have a rather idiosyncratic notion of "slightly", dude.

          • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Thexalon on Tuesday October 01 2019, @09:46PM

            by Thexalon (636) on Tuesday October 01 2019, @09:46PM (#901501)

            Is it possible? Yes. Does it mean you eliminate corruption by eliminating $THEIR_PARTY? Not in a million years.

            For example, I was until recently in a metro area that is largely controlled by a Democratic Party machine. This machine probably has mob ties in addition to controlling the government. Some of the players were busted by the FBI fairly recently ... and yet the city and county governments continue to have significant amounts of cash going to things like no-show jobs, kickbacks from favorite contractors, and suspicious sweetheart tax deals for certain larger businesses. One guy got elected to the city council as a Green specifically on an anti-corruption platform, but once in office he promptly (quite possibly after some threats) switched his party affiliation to Democrat and voted for the same corrupt deals his predecessor had supported.

            Meanwhile, at my state's level, the corruption by Republicans is pretty notorious as well. One governor got busted and managed to plead down to misdemeanors.

            Corruption is corruption is corruption. It's not to be tolerated regardless of whose team is doing it.

            --
            The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
        • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:59PM (46 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 01 2019, @07:59PM (#901458)

          Granted both parties have corruption, but if you can't see the stark contrast between the two that has been developing for 40+ years then, I dunno, look into brain transplants ;P

          I don't care about tribal politics, I care about issues. Dems have so far made big promises and not delivered, but at least they drew the line at motherfucking treason! The "both sides" bullshit only gets trotted out when the GOP gets caught being naughty, time to stop YOUR tribalism.

          • (Score: 4, Funny) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday October 01 2019, @08:04PM

            by DeathMonkey (1380) on Tuesday October 01 2019, @08:04PM (#901460) Journal

            For how much these folks claim to care about corruption they sure do spend a lot of time defending corruption, don't they?

          • (Score: 2, Interesting) by fustakrakich on Tuesday October 01 2019, @08:07PM (44 children)

            by fustakrakich (6150) on Tuesday October 01 2019, @08:07PM (#901462) Journal

            There is no "both sides".. It is one team that shares power.

            And there is no getting through to you people that believe that only republican voters oppose democrats, and vice versa. You won't see outside your little box.

            The simple message is, vote them out.

            --
            La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
            • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday October 01 2019, @09:05PM (41 children)

              by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Tuesday October 01 2019, @09:05PM (#901476)

              The simple message is, vote them out.

              That is not an option.

              • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Tuesday October 01 2019, @10:58PM (40 children)

                by fustakrakich (6150) on Tuesday October 01 2019, @10:58PM (#901539) Journal

                Maybe not where you live :-)

                But it is in the U.S. It is fake news that says they don't.

                --
                La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday October 01 2019, @11:34PM (39 children)

                  by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Tuesday October 01 2019, @11:34PM (#901560)

                  Where I live we vote them out on a regular basis.

                  It is American where that is not possible. If it were possible it would have happened.

                  • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Tuesday October 01 2019, @11:56PM (38 children)

                    by fustakrakich (6150) on Tuesday October 01 2019, @11:56PM (#901580) Journal

                    The only reason it doesn't happen is because less than 5% want it to happen. The choice is there for them to make.

                    Please, the blame passing must stop.

                    --
                    La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                    • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:25AM (29 children)

                      by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:25AM (#901596)

                      No, the reason it doesn't happen is because the people who run your country don't want it to happen.

                      • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:36AM (28 children)

                        by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:36AM (#901603) Journal

                        Ok you win. Not going through this again. I'll just have to let you chase your tail.

                        You still haven't explained the compelling external force behind your theory. The psychological issues are well understood and documented, and all that is still on the voters to remedy it.

                        --
                        La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:59AM

                          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @12:59AM (#901613)

                          It's been explained to you over and over. Yet you refuse to consider facts and evidence in your ridiculous blather.

                          I can only assume that you're either shilling/stirring up shit with an agenda or have significant brain damage.

                          The result is the same, however.

                        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @01:01AM

                          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @01:01AM (#901615)

                          How does that old saw go, "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. Likewise, you can lead a fool to knowledge, but you can't make him think."

                          You're in there, and not as the horse.

                        • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday October 02 2019, @01:15AM (25 children)

                          by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @01:15AM (#901620)

                          You still haven't explained the compelling external force behind your theory

                          Why would you think it is an external force? As far as I can tell from this distance it is entirely built in to your weird system.

                          Why do you need primaries for example, and why are so many of them closed?

                          If someone wants to stand for office, why do they have to go through that?

                          Where I live, if I want to run for office, I send a form to the electoral office, and they put me on the ballot. You can't do that without the permission of a Democrat or a Republican.

                          The psychological issues are well understood and documented...

                          It shouldn't be too hard to provide a link then.

                          ...and all that is still on the voters to remedy it.

                          Not in America it is not. If it was, they would have done it a long time ago.

                          • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @01:31AM (19 children)

                            by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @01:31AM (#901626) Journal

                            Why do you need primaries for example

                            Primaries are fine, in theory to sort out the best. Peoples' choice make it something else entirely. They do not have to accept closed primaries. They can register as independents and vote as such. It would help if they demanded simple voter registration without any party restrictions. Nobody is required to vote in the party primaries. Let them run the candidates they choose and they can be on the ballot in the general. The more people registering as independents will make it easier for such candidates to get on the ballot. The entire thing is voter driven. Exactly as it should be.

                            The system we have emerges from voter apathy (and antipathy), again, no conspiracy required. The degradation is very natural.

                            Sorry, but you're just plain wrong. And an American should take it as an insult. You're saying they can't deal, that they are incapable of running their political system. I'm just saying they won't. And instead of taking responsibility for it and rising up, they whine like little babies. Whether they can or not, it is still on the voters. Once again, what else is there?

                            --
                            La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                            • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday October 02 2019, @01:52AM (18 children)

                              by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @01:52AM (#901635)

                              They do not have to accept closed primaries. They can register as independents and vote as such.

                              Why should they have to register as anything? That is none of the government's business, and in proper democracies is not something that is needed.

                              The entire thing is voter driven. Exactly as it should be.

                              Try and get on a ballot in Wisconsin (for example). You have to be from a recognised party (why? who cares?) and get a thousand signatures. Once again,. why? Surely getting votes is for the election?

                              Unless maybe it is to prevent non-Republicans or Democrats from standing? Maybe.

                              The psychological issues are well understood and documented...

                              But still no link explaining it? OK.

                              • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @02:23AM (17 children)

                                by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @02:23AM (#901661) Journal

                                Why should they have to register as anything?

                                Didn't see where I mentioned that, huh? Nothing you mention up there can possibly happen without the demand from the voters. Americans are accustomed to the system they have, they are comfortable enough with it to not want to rock the boat for the irrational fear of losing their little personal fiefdoms. The power is on, the TV works, and dinner's on the table... What is not obvious about this that needs useless paragraph after paragraph over and over?

                                I asked a simple question, who is going to fix it? Does anybody have an answer?

                                --
                                La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                                • (Score: 3, Insightful) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday October 02 2019, @06:43PM

                                  by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @06:43PM (#901983)

                                  The point I made is that the voters have no control over the US system, by design. The requirement to get 1,000 signatures on a nomination from and to have to register your voting preference are just a couple of examples of how that control is kept from them.

                                  ... they are comfortable enough with it to not want to rock the boat...

                                  That is true. You also have the most effective propaganda system humanity has ever devised.

                                  Who is going to fix it? Your system is not broken, it works very well.

                                • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday October 02 2019, @07:56PM (15 children)

                                  by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @07:56PM (#902002)

                                  I just read this piece. [slate.com]
                                  Tell me again how the voters control your system?

                                  • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @08:19PM (9 children)

                                    by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @08:19PM (#902012) Journal

                                    Heh, it's right there in the article.

                                    Westmoreland, the former Georgia congressman who co-chaired a Republican 2010 redistricting initiative called REDMAP, told a story about giving black Democrats in his state mapmaking software and encouraging them to draw their “perfect district,” knowing that districts filled with minority voters would make surrounding districts whiter and more Republican.

                                    That was a gimme...

                                    --
                                    La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                                    • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday October 02 2019, @08:56PM (8 children)

                                      by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @08:56PM (#902029)

                                      A gimme? You've lost sight of what we're debating.

                                      Can voters influence this? No.

                                      • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @09:12PM (4 children)

                                        by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @09:12PM (#902035) Journal

                                        But of course they do. Just because they play along for convenience (and because of animal psychology) doesn't make a bit of difference. They choose the path of least resistance. This is fundamental and perfectly natural. The statistics document and quantify instinctive behavior. It describes determinism. You saying there's no way out?

                                        --
                                        La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                                        • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday October 02 2019, @09:23PM (3 children)

                                          by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @09:23PM (#902039)

                                          You saying there's no way out?

                                          No, there's obviously any number of ways the US could have a better, more inclusive electoral system.

                                          Every other democracy in the world has done it, so there are lots of ways to do it.

                                          The people who rule your country have no interest in having that happen however. The link I posted about gerrymandering points out one of the ways they achieve control and keep it. Needing 1,000 signatures to even appear on the ballot is another way.

                                          • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @09:35PM (2 children)

                                            by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @09:35PM (#902044) Journal

                                            The people who rule your country have no interest in having that happen however.

                                            I lost count on how many times I asked the question: Then who will, and how?

                                            The voters rule the country. This is the way they do it, by being submissive (and passive aggressive) to the alpha. Do they have the choice not to be?

                                            --
                                            La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                                            • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday October 02 2019, @10:12PM (1 child)

                                              by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @10:12PM (#902064)

                                              The voters rule the country.

                                              No they don't.

                                              • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @10:35PM

                                                by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @10:35PM (#902073) Journal

                                                You still haven't explained how. You simply deny the choices they have. Let's give a rest, shall we?

                                                --
                                                La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                                      • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @10:07PM (2 children)

                                        by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @10:07PM (#902063) Journal

                                        Sorry, but in case you're interested:

                                        Can voters influence this? No.

                                        Can voters influence this? Yes! [freep.com]

                                        The Voters Not Politicians initiative started as a Facebook post...

                                        Here you see why the government hates Facebook so much...

                                        --
                                        La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                                        • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday October 02 2019, @10:21PM (1 child)

                                          by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @10:21PM (#902069)

                                          Thanks for the link, it was an interesting read and an interesting way of trying to deal with the problem of gerrymandering.

                                          However:

                                          It would create a 13-member citizens redistricting commission made up of four Republicans, four Democrats, and five people who identify with neither party.

                                          Oh. Goodness. That must another example of this "bipartisanship" I keep hearing about.

                                          "I actually voted no because there was too much uncertainty to know whether it was going to be better," said Gallagher, a married father of three.

                                          Gallagher's main concern? How would the public know the commissioners who identify themselves as "independent" truly are independent?

                                          That is a very good question Mr. Gallagher. A very good question.

                                          • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @10:37PM

                                            by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @10:37PM (#902076) Journal

                                            They just have to sort it out themselves. I don't expect a shooting war...

                                            It still shows the system is a reflection of the voters

                                            --
                                            La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                                  • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @08:27PM (4 children)

                                    by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @08:27PM (#902016) Journal

                                    And I do believe voters are reacting to this and are working to change it. So there is always hope. I am more optimistic than it appears. We may be able reduce incumbency without needing any silly laws like term limits. The voters always prevail. They are in absolute control.

                                    --
                                    La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                                    • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday October 02 2019, @09:07PM (3 children)

                                      by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @09:07PM (#902034)

                                      No they're not. The voters are almost irrelevant.

                                      • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @09:16PM (2 children)

                                        by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @09:16PM (#902037) Journal

                                        Then why are billions spent to influence them? You're saying they are sheep. Are they really?

                                        --
                                        La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                                        • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday October 02 2019, @09:36PM (1 child)

                                          by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @09:36PM (#902045)

                                          I am not saying they're sheep, but the billions are spent largely to convince them that they have the best of all possible systems, and that has worked really well. As your arguments illustrate nicely.

                                          • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @09:39PM

                                            by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @09:39PM (#902047) Journal

                                            To be convinced is not a free choice?

                                            --
                                            La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                          • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @02:09AM (2 children)

                            by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @02:09AM (#901644) Journal

                            It shouldn't be too hard to provide a link then.

                            Personal fave [archive.org]. Though I don't know why fundamentals and the self evident need explaining, aside from learning language, I guess.. Not having the words for the things you know is a hindrance.

                            And here, you have the best Freud [youtube.com]! What's not to understand? The campaign is on. The take away quote: "They happen to be very nice people" A variation on a theme...

                            --
                            La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                            • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday October 02 2019, @02:17AM (1 child)

                              by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @02:17AM (#901656)

                              Oh good lord.

                              I was expecting something that actually related to the US electoral system. Disappointed again...

                              • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @02:26AM

                                by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @02:26AM (#901663) Journal

                                You wanted to know what drives it. There it is. It would be silly to single out Americans. People are ruled because they want to be.

                                --
                                La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @03:30AM (1 child)

                            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @03:30AM (#901693)

                            Why do you need primaries for example, and why are so many of them closed?

                            Since fustakrakich is somewhat clueless I'm going to try answering at least some of your questions. First, while many states have closed primaries there are some where primaries are open. Not sure which ones but I distinctly remember from my grade school civics class that this is true.

                            Where I live, if I want to run for office, I send a form to the electoral office, and they put me on the ballot. You can't do that without the permission of a Democrat or a Republican.

                            My understanding is that this is simply not true. All that is necessary is that you have to fill out some forms and get signatures of a certain number of registered voters to get on the ballot. In fact, there are some (typically) local elections that are non-partisan. In fact, in my city we are having such a non-partisan election coming up next month. Furthermore, you don't have to be registered as either Democrat or Republican to run for President; in the 2016 election I think there were roughly half a dozen candidates on the ballot in my state for President. Of course, that doesn't change the fact that the winner would inevitably be a Democrat or a Republican but that is more down to voter resistance to change than to any rules barring a third party candidate from winning the election. I hope that clears things up for you.

                            • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday October 02 2019, @09:43PM

                              by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @09:43PM (#902049)

                              Have a quick look at this link Ballot access requirements for political candidates in Wisconsin [ballotpedia.org]
                              It states that to even become a candidate, the applicant must get 1,000 sigantures on the nominating form.

                              Why would that be necessary? Getting 1,000 votes or more is surely what the election is for isn't it?

                              Which of the independent candidates is going to be able to jump that hurdle? Not many is the answer.

                              In fact, in my city we are having such a non-partisan election coming up next month.

                              That is entirely my point. All elections should be "non-partisan" and in democracies they are.

                    • (Score: 3, Informative) by hendrikboom on Wednesday October 02 2019, @04:00AM (7 children)

                      by hendrikboom (1125) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday October 02 2019, @04:00AM (#901705) Homepage Journal

                      It is widely believed that a vote for none of the two major parties is a wasted vote.
                      And this does seem to be true.
                      So people choose whichever of the major two parties is closer to their desires.
                      And the third parties are frozen out of the process.
                      The cure is a preferential ballot with instant runoff.
                      Then you can vote for your favorite other candidate knowing your vote won't be wasted.
                      You simply place that major party you otherwise feel compelled to vote for as second or third choice.
                      Result: People feel free to vote for the party of their choice as first choice,
                      knowing their second choice is there as a backstop.
                      The third party then has a fairer chance of getting enough votes to get in.

                      -- hendrik

                      • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @04:11AM (6 children)

                        by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @04:11AM (#901709) Journal

                        To me the vote for the Party is the wasted vote... whatever, I didn't come to argue that, but how do you get preferential ballot with instant runoff unless there is a demand from the voters?

                        --
                        La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                        • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Wednesday October 02 2019, @10:58AM (5 children)

                          by NotSanguine (285) <NotSanguineNO@SPAMSoylentNews.Org> on Wednesday October 02 2019, @10:58AM (#901775) Homepage Journal

                          To me the vote for the Party is the wasted vote... whatever, I didn't come to argue that, but how do you get preferential ballot with instant runoff unless there is a demand from the voters?

                          Except there *is* demand for that. Perhaps not where you live, in which case it's *your* fault that it isn't being discussed/put on the ballot there.

                          You just need to get it on the ballot in an election and have the voters decide that they want it. Just as New York City [politico.com] is doing this November.

                          In fact, it's already been approved and is in place in a bunch of places [wikipedia.org] in the United States.

                          --
                          No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
                          • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @01:56PM (4 children)

                            by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @01:56PM (#901833) Journal

                            Well good, people are doing something. Because all I hear around here is a bunch of complaining from the losers about rigged systems, foreign influence, and how nobody can do anything about it because, money... So if voters can defeat the money, where's the problem? I've said all along that the voters are in control. The system works, and we can with the mere desire vote the incumbents out without any concern about Russian ad buys on Facebook.

                            --
                            La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                            • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @04:18PM (1 child)

                              by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 02 2019, @04:18PM (#901914)

                              So if voters can defeat the money, where's the problem?

                              Yes, it is possible for voters to "defeat the money" but, honestly, wouldn't you rather live in a democracy in which a few high-rolling donors won't be able to buy the election? Even if they don't succeed the mere attempt is odious enough on it's own.

                              • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @04:27PM

                                by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @04:27PM (#901918) Journal

                                Even if they don't succeed the mere attempt is odious enough on it's own.

                                Yes it is. And only the voters can control that too through their response at election time. The attempt only happens because it is so extremely successful. Without the attention it will wither and die.

                                --
                                La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                            • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Wednesday October 02 2019, @08:39PM (1 child)

                              by NotSanguine (285) <NotSanguineNO@SPAMSoylentNews.Org> on Wednesday October 02 2019, @08:39PM (#902020) Homepage Journal

                              we can with the mere desire vote the incumbents out without any concern about Russian ad buys on Facebook.

                              Except Advertising/marketing *works*. Not necessarily every ad or marketing plan, but in the aggregate, yes it does.

                              And that goes for political candidates just as much as it does toothpaste or laundry detergent.

                              You are right that the voters decide. But don't reject the power of money for *effective* advertising/marketing to make a difference in the aisles of a supermarket or in the voting booth (see below for a brief discussion of this).

                              But voters, while they generally hate folks in Congress, they like their *own* congressperson much more [fivethirtyeight.com].

                              How is that possible? If you think Congress is doing a horrible job (and most folks do), why doesn't that extend to *their own congressperson*? It seems counter-intuitive, doesn't it? But that's how human brains work -- if you're familiar with someone (or at least their name) and they are considered to be "part of the group" (i.e., your party and/or a local boy/girl), you will have a higher opinion of them than others who aren't "part of the group."

                              Advertising exploits this. And whether you want to accept it or not, it works. Which explains (in part) why incumbency rates are so high, while general approval ratings are so low.

                              The more money you have to spend on advertising, the more you can exploit this. Since incumbents have significantly more access to lobbyists, special interests and big money donors, *and* they have name recognition (are known better to their voters, see "top-of-mind awareness" below), they are usually able to get re-elected.

                              Leveling the money playing field (both in terms of lobbyists/big money contributors and money spent on campaigns) can move us toward reducing that incumbent advantage.

                              There are lots of other factors involved, and ranked-choice-voting, among other things can help, but the elephant (no pun intended) in the room is the money.

                              Which is why If you actually "vote the scoundrels out," the need for more and more money to win re-election will create *new* scoundrels. It's the money that *often* (note, I did not say always) corrupts. Often, really idealistic people are corrupted before they even realize it, because they want to deliver for their constituents -- but they can't do that unless they're in office -- so they take the money and are now beholden.

                              I don't have all the answers, or even know all the right questions to ask.

                              However, the idea that advertising/marketing is irrelevant, and all we need to do is *vote the bums out* to address the issues we have with Congress, state and local governments (where corruption is even more prevalent and flagrant, as it's much cheaper to buy a city council person or state senator than a member of Congress) is to just "vote them out" isn't viable when the political system forces candidates and elected representatives to focus on the money almost all the time.

                              Unfortunately for us, the solutions aren't as simple as you would like them to be. I wish they were. We need better, and more responsive, governance.

                              Advertising/Marketing:
                              I despise advertising, despite (or perhaps, because of) the fact that it (well, Advertising Research [wikipedia.org]) housed, fed and clothed me for the first 18 years of my life. And then for another five years when I worked in that industry as well.

                              The tools and techniques employed are sophisticated and time-tested. And these tools/techniques do (not with everyone and not all the time) work.

                              Top-of-mind Awareness:
                              An important feature of this is what's known as Top-of-mind Awareness [wikipedia.org]. If you can get a consumer to think of your brand (or candidate -- the same thing in this context) *first* when contemplating a purchase of (or vote for) a particular product, you've won more than half the battle.

                              I'll give you an example: Without clicking on the link, do you know who Lenora Fulani might be? No? She ran for President in 1988 and 1992. In fact, she received >250,000 votes in 1988. I'm betting you can name the Democratic and Republican Presidential candidates in those election years. Why not Fulani?

                              Because her name wasn't forced in everyone's faces all the time as G.H.W. Bush, Scooby Dukakis and Bill Clinton's were. That's top-of-mind awareness. And it makes a *measurable* difference. And *money* spent on advertising/marketing creates it.

                              --
                              No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
                              • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday October 02 2019, @09:01PM

                                by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday October 02 2019, @09:01PM (#902033) Journal

                                I'm aware of all that. Pstch101. Pavlov and Skinner... And some Freud for the irrational element.

                                So then we need to teach resistance to those appeals to animal instincts in the schools, instead of using them to reinforce conformity. The adults are on their own. They need a neuralizer.

                                --
                                La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
            • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 01 2019, @09:05PM (1 child)

              by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 01 2019, @09:05PM (#901477)

              Sorry bub but this round has two excellent options running under the D platform. As I said I'm not not tribal politics so I will vote Sanders, Warren in that order because they have stellar records and are supporting the average person.

              While I don't like tribal politics I dislike puerile nihilism even more. If you don't support Sanders or Warren because they running as Democrats then you're probably an idealistic teenager who should stop skipping class.

              • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Tuesday October 01 2019, @11:23PM

                by fustakrakich (6150) on Tuesday October 01 2019, @11:23PM (#901555) Journal

                stellar records

                Very funny. If Sanders is serious he will run outside the democrat party.

                And please, look in the mirror. Your attempts to offend fall short. All you have to offer is four more years...

                --
                La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
    • (Score: 2) by EJ on Tuesday October 01 2019, @08:53PM (2 children)

      by EJ (2452) on Tuesday October 01 2019, @08:53PM (#901473)

      HAHAHAHAHA! You think Republicans are the only people who would ever trade on inside information?

      You really believe that your angelic Democrat heroes would just let their own kids lose their entire life savings without at least trying to protect them?

      You are very naive.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 01 2019, @09:15PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 01 2019, @09:15PM (#901480)

        And you should read the thread before acting the fool.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 01 2019, @10:25PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 01 2019, @10:25PM (#901521)

        HAHAHAHAHA! You think Republicans are the only people who would ever trade on inside information?

        If you have evidence of specific Democrat politicians trading on inside information (or any other sort of corruption) then, by all means, put it out there before a candid world. This is not about my tribe, right or wrong. This is about giving a specific politician, who happens to be Republican, a well-deserved planking.

        You are very naive.

        Again, if you have specific, actionable information then put it out there. Ball is again in your court.

(1) 2