US Erection 12 *AND* 16 *AND* 20 *AND* 22 *AND* 24

[Per]

Wow! I had no idea you need photo id to buy groceries in the USA.



But if Trump says it, I guess it must be true.
Why would he lie about something like that?
He is, after all, a very stable genius.

But how come?
Is there a shortage of food?
Are they rationing it?

[Cornuck]

Wow! I had no idea you need photo id to buy groceries in the USA.

But how come?
Is there a shortage of food?
Are they rationing it?

I think he slipped up, and with the coming dark ages, ID will be needed for everything.
(wish they would hurry up with the chip implants, though)

[2Fingers]

He misspoke, he actually meant you do not need ID to buy groceries, but you should. I mean how else will you get rid of all the aliens.

Oh wait, it is fake news, he never said that.

Oh wait again, what about Hilary and her emails???

[Per]

Wow! I had no idea you need photo id to buy groceries in the USA.

But how come?
Is there a shortage of food?
Are they rationing it?

I think he slipped up, and with the coming dark ages, ID will be needed for everything.
(wish they would hurry up with the chip implants, though)

Oh, it's coming.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... hands.html

[2Fingers]

I do not know what to say.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-accuse ... 05093.html

Seriously this guy has some mental issues.

He says the State of California is diverting water to the pacific ocean and that is why they are having wild fires. And still so many people would vote for this guy. WOW. No condolences to the families that lost a loved one but blame everyone else for the fires.

[Per]

The Iran deal.

In 2015, Iran agreed a long-term deal on its nuclear programme with the P5+1 group of world powers - the US, UK, France, China, Russia and Germany.
It came after years of tension over Iran's alleged efforts to develop a nuclear weapon. Iran insisted that its nuclear programme was entirely peaceful, but the international community did not believe that.
Under the accord, Iran agreed to limit its sensitive nuclear activities and allow in international inspectors in return for the lifting of crippling economic sanctions.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-33521655

Now as you notice, this is not a bilateral agreement between the USA and Iran. It is a multilateral agreement, with several signatories.

Trump has decided that the US withdraws from the treaty. All other signatories have said they will still honour the agreement. As they should. Pacta sunt servanda.

With reference to international agreements, "every treaty in force is binding upon the parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith."[2] Pacta sunt servanda is related to good faith, while pacta sunt servanda does not equate with good faith[clarification needed]. This entitles states to require that obligations be respected and to rely upon the obligations being respected. This good faith basis of treaties implies that a party to the treaty cannot invoke provisions of its municipal (domestic) law as justification for a failure to perform. However, with regards to the Vienna Convention and the UNIDROIT Principles it should be kept in mind that these are heavily influenced by civil law jurisdictions. To derive from these sources that pacta sunt servanda includes the principle of good faith is therefore incorrect.

The only limit to pacta sunt servanda are the peremptory norms of general international law, called jus cogens (compelling law). The legal principle clausula rebus sic stantibus, part of customary international law, also allows for treaty obligations to be unfulfilled due to a compelling change in circumstances.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacta_sunt_servanda

Now, the Iran deal includes the right of inspectors from the IAEA access to any site they deem suspicious in Iran, and if Iran should not fulfill it's end of the deal, sanctions automatically snap back in place.

The IAEA and all other signatories than the USA confirm that Iran is following the agreement, unlike North Korea that seems to continue its nuclear programme despite the nice chat they had with Donald, that made him cancel the joint military maneuvres between the US and South Korea.
Huge win for Kim. In fact, thet the US even agreed to a meeting was a huge win for Kim, who has been treated as a pariah by the rest of the world.

So why is the US pulling out? The simple answer seems to be that Trump wants to undo everything Obama did, and damn the consequences.

[Per]

Anyway, as history shows, Trump has never really been that good at living up to the agreements and contracts he signs. He usually refuses to pay, renegotiates or declares bankrupcy, leaving his contractors and business partners hanging. So no big surprise that he also refuses to follow international treaties that the USA has signed.

What gets really ugly though is that the USA is now threatening the other signatories that they will be punished if they live up to the agreement they've signed. The deal states that there will be no sanctions against Iran as long as they hold up their end of the deal. And all parties but the USA have stated that the deal is still valid and that there is no indication that Iran have violated the treaty. Thus the honorable thing to do is to live up to the agreement.

Now the USA (or Donald) threatens that any company that does business with Iran will not do business in the USA.

The EU has responded by passing a law that makes it illegal for European companies to back out of deals they have with Iran, while also promising some sort of compensation for losses that are imposed on them by American actions. This probably will not solve the matter, because the US is a much bigger and more important market than Iran for most European countries. Thus most companies may try to weasle out of deals they have with Iran in order to keep doing business with the USA.

But there are much bigger principles at hand here. Should we abide by the rule of law or should we succumb to bullying?
And do we want countries to trust the EU as a partner? If the treaty signed by Germany, France and the UK, which in turn lead to the entire EU dropping its trade sanctions, doesn't hold up, our word, our promises, will become as meaningless as a promise made by Donald Trump.

There was earlier an attempt by the USA (under GW Bush) to prevent European companies from trading with Cuba, by threatening to seize their assets in the USA. That time the EU countered with first of all a similar law as they have passed this time, that companies must live up to their obligations, but also a promise that European companies that had assets seized in the USA would be compensated with assets seized from US companies in Europe. That threat was enough to make the US shelve their pending legislation.

I hope we can come up with something similar this time, but it is getting very annoying to see Trump completely ignoring international law and treaties. I mean, the Russians are happy, because this means the US is losing moral ground and respect, and are no longer viewed as reliable partners, which means they are dropping to the same level as Russia, which means the Russians can safely ignore all protests that they are violating international law when invading parts of Georgia and the Ukraine, strong arming neighbours etc. They can just shrug and say, "So what? The US is no better." They of course already say this, but sadly it is to a greater extent becoming true (which could probably be why Putin helped Trump win in the first place...), as proven by Russia and China still honoring their part of the Iran deal whilst the USA does not.

Sadly, this means there is now a risk that the EU will be driven further away from the US and further into China's embrace. I mean, China has a market big enough to compensate for the loss of US trade, but they're not exactly a beacon on a hill. But neither is the USA under Trump.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-warns- ... on-brknews

[Chef Boi RD]

Mueller is holding out to Midterms hoping the Dems takeover congress and can impeach the president with the dirt Mueller has on him, the Republicans win congress at midterms they will most likely pardon the president.

It’s all about the money behind Trump which is Russian. American banks won’t lend Trump money because he intentionally bankrupts companies and buys them back at a bargain with the financial backing coming from the Russkies. Trump is Putin’s bitch. Keep an eye on Trump Jr. he’s going down. Manafort is hoping the Republicans win congress at midterms and Trump pardons him after congress pardons Trump. Mueller is banking on the Dems winning midterms and getting a hold of congress. Giuliani is trying to put pressure on Mueller to come out before midterms. He knows what Mueller is waiting for and knows they got dirt on Trump. Trump is hyping up his voters with immigration fears, crooked Hillary, the witch hunt, fake news, make America white again etc.This is going to get very interesting

[Per]

BBC reporting on Donald's old mob ties:

[ukcanuck]

Mueller is holding out to Midterms hoping the Dems takeover congress and can impeach the president with the dirt Mueller has on him, the Republicans win congress at midterms they will most likely pardon the president.

It’s all about the money behind Trump which is Russian. American banks won’t lend Trump money because he intentionally bankrupts companies and buys them back at a bargain with the financial backing coming from the Russkies. Trump is Putin’s bitch. Keep an eye on Trump Jr. he’s going down. Manafort is hoping the Republicans win congress at midterms and Trump pardons him after congress pardons Trump. Mueller is banking on the Dems winning midterms and getting a hold of congress. Giuliani is trying to put pressure on Mueller to come out before midterms. He knows what Mueller is waiting for and knows they got dirt on Trump. Trump is hyping up his voters with immigration fears, crooked Hillary, the witch hunt, fake news, make America white again etc.This is going to get very interesting

Those midterms are going to say a lot about America, the stability of the democrats and the truth behind the republican claims that trump is popular.

It’s been observed that in Obama’s elections there were huge lines of blacks waiting to vote.

At trumps there huge lines of dusty white trash waiting to vote.

These midterms there better be huge lines of everyone.


Not voting is condoning this asshole

[ukcanuck]

Mueller is holding out to Midterms hoping the Dems takeover congress and can impeach the president with the dirt Mueller has on him, the Republicans win congress at midterms they will most likely pardon the president.

It’s all about the money behind Trump which is Russian. American banks won’t lend Trump money because he intentionally bankrupts companies and buys them back at a bargain with the financial backing coming from the Russkies. Trump is Putin’s bitch. Keep an eye on Trump Jr. he’s going down. Manafort is hoping the Republicans win congress at midterms and Trump pardons him after congress pardons Trump. Mueller is banking on the Dems winning midterms and getting a hold of congress. Giuliani is trying to put pressure on Mueller to come out before midterms. He knows what Mueller is waiting for and knows they got dirt on Trump. Trump is hyping up his voters with immigration fears, crooked Hillary, the witch hunt, fake news, make America white again etc.This is going to get very interesting

Those midterms are going to say a lot about America, the stability of the democrats and the truth behind the republican claims that trump is popular.

It’s been observed that in Obama’s elections there were huge lines of blacks waiting to vote.

At trumps there huge lines of dusty white trash waiting to vote.

These midterms there better be huge lines of everyone.


Not voting is condoning this asshole

[Per]

Those midterms are going to say a lot about America, the stability of the democrats and the truth behind the republican claims that trump is popular.

It’s been observed that in Obama’s elections there were huge lines of blacks waiting to vote.

At trumps there huge lines of dusty white trash waiting to vote.

These midterms there better be huge lines of everyone.

Not voting is condoning this asshole

Well, in the US, they do their best to limit the amount of people who vote. Thus voting on a normal week day with limited opening hours and far between poll stations. Many states, especially in the South, block ex-cons from ever voting again, etc, etc. Also, you have to register at a prior date in order to be able to vote, which complicates matters further.

We have elections in Sweden this September. We always vote on a Sunday so that most people don't have to take time off from work, polling stations are evenly spread out to accomodate between 1000 and 2000 voters and are open from 8 am and 8 pm. If there is a line outside the polling station at 8 pm, all who are in line at that point should be allowed to vote before the polling closes. And all citizens older than 18 have a right to vote. You cannot get stripped of your voting right. No need to register. Each polling station has a list of all citizens residing in that area that are eligible to vote. If you are out of town, you can cast an absentee ballot. The idea is that it should be as easy as possible to vote and to get as large a turnout as possible.

Voter ID? Yeah, all voters must identify themselves, but we allow three methods:
1) presenting a valid photo ID
2) being recognised by an officer at the polling station that vouches for the identity of the voter
3) having another person with a valid photo ID signing an affadavit confirming the identity of the voter

I usually work at a polling station during elections, and I'd say 99% present a photo ID. The rest are friends or family of those working at the polling station, but even then they usually pull out their ID...

---

Anyway, the mid terms in the USA will be interesting to follow.

Donald has stated that he expects the Russians to try to help the Democrats win.
Most people scoff and say he is deflecting, but you know what - he could be right!

There are basically three schools of thought about the Russian meddling in the 2016 elections:

a) Putin specifically wanted Trump to win, because he has something on him and thinks he can control him.

b) Putin just mainly wanted to do everything to prevent Hillary from winning, because of a personal grudge against her.

c) Putin's main goal was to destabilise the USA by polarizing the country and sowing mistrust in the democratic process.

The fact that Russian bots and trolls also seemed to back Sanders (especially they formed the backbone of the group of Sanders supporters who insisted they'd never vote for Hillary) makes it plausible that it was b or c rather than a.

If in fact it is increased polarization and destabilisation that is the primary goal, I'm not sure what would be more effective.
Having Trump win and dismantling the tenets of liberal democracy one by one, while his opponents grow ever more desperate OR having the democrats take over the House of Representatives and the Senate and having the entire system go into lockdown? Perhaps with an impeachment as a bonus, resulting in vitriolic rage among Trump supporters.

Heck, maybe this really is a win-win situation for Putin and he can just sit back and stir his tea while giggling like a little girl.

---

Bonus: Sanders supporters who voted for Trump in three key swing states. If these Sanders supporters instead had refrained from voting, Hillary would be president of the United States. Think about it.

STATE - SANDERS PRIMARY VOTES - SANDERS VOTERS SUPPORTING TRUMP - SANDERS-TRUMP VOTERS (EST.) - TRUMP'S 2016 MARGIN OF VICTORY
Michigan ........ 598,943 .... 8% ..... 47,915 ... 10,704
Pennsylvania ... 731,881 ... 16% ... 117,100 ... 44,292
Wisconsin ....... 570,192 .... 9% ..... 51,317 ... 22,748
Source: 2016 National Popular Vote Tracker, U.S. Election Atlas, Brian Schaffner

[Chef Boi RD]

The Donald has had a difficult time for years getting financing for his business ventures on his own soil - American banks/lenders, due to his reputation of intentionally bankrupting/tanking his own companies, then buying them back cheap. The dude is dirty. Word is his financial backing has been coming from off shore - Russia, for awhile. Don is in bed with the Russkies, Mueller is building a case around this and will present it post midterms with the hope of the Dems getting control of Congress. Only congress can nail a president. The Don could murder someone then pardon himself. Only a Democratic Congress can impeach the Don

[Per]

Danes are really pissed off by Fox network's fake news lies about Denmark:

https://www.thelocal.dk/20180814/comple ... -broadside

[UWSaint]

Well, in the US, they do their best to limit the amount of people who vote. Thus voting on a normal week day with limited opening hours and far between poll stations. Many states, especially in the South, block ex-cons from ever voting again, etc, etc. Also, you have to register at a prior date in order to be able to vote, which complicates matters further.

Hi Per. I haven't engage in any political talk for years. Probably since the days of the other CC.

But I wanted to respond to my international friends.

* It isn't hard to register to vote in the United States. That people don't is a choice. Now if you think that people want to but can't, what are you saying about their capabilities?

* It isn't hard not to commit felonies. And if you do, voting rights are restored when your sentence is done. Until your sentence is complete, you can't exercise a lot of rights..... In a couple of states it takes longer than the completion of your sentence; your once-upon-a-time-home (if I am remembering correctly) of Iowa (neither the south nor a traditionally republican stronghold) is basically the most severe on this score, as many felons can permanently lose the franchise. FWIW, personally, I agree with disenfrachisement-while-serving-sentence as a policy matter. If you violate core and substantial components of the social compact (felonious crimes are those the elected representatives deem pose the greatest harm to society), you don't get to participate in making the social compact for awhile.

* It isn't hard to go to the polls on a Tuesday. You don't have to take off work. They are open more than 8 hours. And if you can't make it, some form of early voting is a feature in most states and absentee voting is always available.

* Yes, in some places, a polling place might be far away. And yes, this is a VERY BIG country with some sparsely populated areas -- these people (generally republican leaning) have a larger "cost" to getting to the polls (though the price of procuring a mail in ballot is the same). And at the margins, distance can mean some people decide it isn't worth their while to vote. Given early voting and absentee mail in options, the effects of this are mitigated. Isn't distance to the polling place an issue in every large country with rural populations?

* Last comment on this: policies have waxed and waned in the US in terms of ease of ballot access. Since the despicable Jim Crow laws were done away in the south (those laws passed by Democrats to keep blacks from voting, for my international friends' historical edification), though, the difference is that it is either easy to vote or very easy to vote.

Voter ID? Yeah, [in Sweden] all voters must identify themselves, but we allow three methods:
1) presenting a valid photo ID
2) being recognised by an officer at the polling station that vouches for the identity of the voter
3) having another person with a valid photo ID signing an affadavit confirming the identity of the voter

In the US, many states use this system, but it is called "voter suppression".... (I think its perfectly sensible to have minimal integrity controls such as this in place).

I usually work at a polling station during elections, and I'd say 99% present a photo ID. The rest are friends or family of those working at the polling station, but even then they usually pull out their ID...

Good for you. I've done the same. But all those poor people that have to go to the polls!!!! What a cost on the franchise!!!!

And as for those "friends and family," the same thing was once very common in Chicago. Mrs. O'Leary had friends and family working in many Chicago precincts, in fact....

[All your stuff about Russia]

Trump is not dismantling liberal democracy with his policies. You can like his policies or disagree with his policies, but they are not illiberal (in terms of a challenge to the democratic state). The idea that he is some kind of fascist strongman is one born of imagination, not evidence. Moreover, American democratic institutions are *very* strong; it is the oldest form of this kind of government after all.

But I agree that there is more distrust in America's democratic institutions more today than since Nixon. Because of Trump Derangement Syndrome and conspiracy theories combining with the general vilification of conservatives that has been a 40 year project of the American left (not just wrong, but evil and dangerous; i.e., they will push grandma down the stairs and everyone will be homeless!!!!). That and the rapid decline of the press (and the rise of fake news -- both as Trump describes and as perniciously in the alternative press and the social media hovels on the right and the left).

It makes perverse sense -- if you believe that Trump is the end of democracy as we know it, then you want to remove the threat. Through undemocratic means, if necessary. (Personally, I am pretty certain that the Republic will survive fine until 2020 and that maybe Democrats ought to find/mold a couple of good candidates; you know, settle policy disagreements at the polls by finding a candidate with a message that resonates and without the baggage of CROOKED HILLARY).

The only thing I blame Trump for is that he is cavalier with facts. To the extent that people trust the press like the village trusts (or does not) trust Peter, this is bad long term. Because truth matters and truth is a democracy-stabilizing force.

---

Bonus: Sanders supporters who voted for Trump in three key swing states. If these Sanders supporters instead had refrained from voting, Hillary would be president of the United States. Think about it.

STATE - SANDERS PRIMARY VOTES - SANDERS VOTERS SUPPORTING TRUMP - SANDERS-TRUMP VOTERS (EST.) - TRUMP'S 2016 MARGIN OF VICTORY
Michigan ........ 598,943 .... 8% ..... 47,915 ... 10,704
Pennsylvania ... 731,881 ... 16% ... 117,100 ... 44,292
Wisconsin ....... 570,192 .... 9% ..... 51,317 ... 22,748
Source: 2016 National Popular Vote Tracker, U.S. Election Atlas, Brian Schaffner

BONUS -- these voters didn't want Hillary to be President. Consider than many Sanders voters are not socialist democrats (like Sanders), but were rejecting Clinton kleptocracy; or less pejoratively, "the establishment." Consider also that in Michigan and Wisconsin, these are open primary states. You don't have to be a democrat to vote in the democratic primary, and crossover primary voting exists.

Trump's biggest problems in 2016 to any voter who would consider voting R were two-fold: (1) his character (e.g., statements about women, impulsive constitution, etc.); (2) his experience (it was difficult to imagine him being President). (2) is no longer an obstacle -- and as is the case with most things causing anxiety, the then-future was scarier than the actual-present.