Understanding the US - Again

[Singha]

I was thinking over it. After putting down the perp , best to throw down gun and move out away from scene. Police arriving will shoot at any armed person. Go to police thana and report than be around the beehive

[g.sarkar]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/26/politics ... index.html
Key US allies 'perplexed' as Trump treats friends like enemies
Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump's decision to cancel his historic meeting with North Korea's Kim Jong Un left South Korea's President "perplexed" and sparked angry protests in Seoul. One sign read: "We condemn Trump."
Welcome to life these days as a close US ally.
Under the 45th President, long-standing US friends and partners have come in for surprises, some of them bruising. Trump has questioned enduring alliances, insulted neighbors, threatened tariffs against some of America's oldest friends and made clear he'll sanction their businesses if they don't toe his line. Trump's allies say this is the President's "peace through strength" doctrine at work, where America flexes its military and economic muscles to shape the world it wants. It's a theme Trump warmed to Friday in Annapolis, telling US Naval Academy graduates that the world is "respecting us again," a theme he stressed in his first State of the Union address, declaring that "weakness is the surest path to conflict, and unmatched power is the surest means of our defense." But there are other forces at work that are shifting the ground on US relationships around the world, including the President's personality, his campaign promises and the overwhelming weight he places on domestic politics.
'We're dragging you along'
"Trump's relationships with allies are preternaturally different than any other administration we've had," said Aaron David Miller, a senior vice president at the Wilson Center. The threats to sanction allies aren't so much a case of "if you're not with us, you're against us," said Suzanne Maloney, deputy director of the foreign policy program at the Brookings Institution. "This is the administration saying, 'You're with us, even if you don't want to be with us. We're dragging you along.' " Critics have said Trump's mercurial decision-making on international issues and his treatment of allies are undermining US interests and trust in Washington. Rep. Eliot Engel of New York, the ranking Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, pointed to Trump's decision Thursday to pull out of the North Korea summit and said the President has "alienated our friends, doubted the value of our alliances and undermined American credibility around the world." He and others point to a January Gallup poll that found the image of US leadership is weaker and global approval of the US has sunk to a record low of 30%.
....
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/ ... tis-608662
Mattis: Trump-Kim meeting may be 'back on'
By POLITICO STAFF 05/25/2018 11:25 AM EDT
Defense Secretary Jim Mattis on Friday said the historic summit between President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un may be "back on" and that diplomats are "still at work." "We have got some, possibly some good news on the Korea summit, where it may, if our diplomats can pull it off, may have it back on even," Mattis told reporters, according to a pool report. "Our president just sent out a note about that a few moments ago...That is a usual give and take, you know, of trying to put together big summits and stuff." He added, "The diplomats are still at work on the summit, possibility of a summit, so that is very good news."
......
Gautam

[komal]

This is a dangerous development. Who do you think SWAT will target when they reach the spot? I would think all armed people.

Armed blacks first, then armed latinos, ..

Next to be targeted will be unarmed blacks, latinos, and other brown.

[UlanBatori]

The amazing thing is that both the "Citjens" shot at the (alleged) shooter. Rather than each other. And the polis didn't shoot at all 3 and manage to kill a dozen bystanders.

BUT.. you have to agree. The shooter was stopped with only 3 ppl injured. U can't argue with success.

[Prem]

There is an excellent netflix show named FAUDA (it is in hebrew and arabic) with subtitles
It is about how Mossad agents control the muslim areas.

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

Shows how the mistaravim in IDF work. Season 2 out on netflix today i think

Did watch the Season 1. They were adding unnecessary Bollywoodiska romance with Palestinian girl.

[Lalmohan]

This is a dangerous development. Who do you think SWAT will target when they reach the spot? I would think all armed people.

Armed blacks first, then armed latinos, ..

armed blacks first
then unarmed blacks
then random blacks
then armed latinos
then unarmed latinos
then...
etc.

[Lalmohan]

It doesn’t matter. When this is all over after the fall, they’ll all be pardoned with the stroke of the pen.

for federal crimes yes, but most of them have also committed state crimes, for which there is no presidential pardon
hence all the focus on getting first bharara and then schneiderman out of the picture, the latter having already submitted sealed indictments against many of the great and the good...

[Mort Walker]

It doesn’t matter. When this is all over after the fall, they’ll all be pardoned with the stroke of the pen.

for federal crimes yes, but most of them have also committed state crimes, for which there is no presidential pardon
hence all the focus on getting first bharara and then schneiderman out of the picture, the latter having already submitted sealed indictments against many of the great and the good...

Then the state of NY should charge them, but they can not. Because they’re flimsy charges as part of political vendetta. Everyone knows that. When a republican governor gets elected they pardon them.

[Gus]

so the argument is not, they did not do it or "what's wrong with flynn etc meeting russians before taking office, that's THEIR JOB" as one member was making a sappakattu.

it is now - 'so what, they are going to be pardoned haha'..

Fact remains, nobody knows what Mueller knows and how damaging it can or cannot be. Everything else follows from there. Everybody is hedging on the mid-term as an inflection point to decide what to do..

[g.sarkar]

https://www.politico.eu/article/warsaw- ... hout-nato/
Warsaw to Trump: Let’s make a military deal (without NATO)
Poland’s request to put US boots on ground is a bilateral deal that makes Brussels nervous.
By DAVID M. HERSZENHORN 5/30/18
It’s the kind of huge deal that Donald Trump promised would be a hallmark of his presidency: Poland wants a U.S. Army armored division permanently stationed on its territory as a deterrent against Russia, and it’s willing to pay up to $2 billion to make it happen. Warsaw’s pitch, in a 17-page proposal obtained by the Polish news portal Onet, even flatters Trump by quoting abundantly from a speech he gave during a visit to Poland in July 2017.
Potentially even more appealing for the American president is the bilateral nature of the deal — an offer directly from Warsaw to Washington that’s outside NATO and the EU, which Trump has derided as cumbersome and providing more benefit to Europe than to the U.S. on everything from security to trade. But the same aspects of the plan that may prove irresistible to the self-styled dealmaker-in-chief make it fraught for NATO and EU allies. On Russia, they have carefully coordinated policy, including military deployments and economic sanctions, to show a united Western response since Moscow’s invasion and annexation of Crimea in 2014. More broadly, the prospect of Trump suddenly cutting bilateral military deals threatens to shake a European system that has viewed its multilateral framework as a crucial safeguard since the end of World War II. The push by Poland — one of just five countries (including the U.S.) that meet NATO’s military spending target — also reflects a rise in prominence of the new, eastern members of the alliance, which favor a more aggressive posture toward Russia.
Asked about the possibility of provoking the Kremlin by establishing a permanent base in the former Eastern Bloc, a defense ministry official from a Western European nation expressed alarm. “We try to avoid the question — not even proposing it,” the official said.
The Polish proposal not only breaks that taboo but also disputes the legal basis of the 1997 NATO-Russia Founding Act, an agreement intended to ease tensions and bolster cooperation among the former Cold War rivals. Warsaw’s pitch to Trump also calls on the U.S. to consider “moot” a provision that would seem to bar the “permanent stationing of substantial combat forces” in Central and Eastern European countries.
“The Act is not a legally binding document,” the Polish Ministry of National Defense writes in the proposal. “Additionally, by engaging in increasingly aggressive hostilities toward NATO states since the Act’s signing, Moscow has definitively created a new geopolitical status quo that is no longer consistent with the ‘current and foreseeable security environment’ of 1997.”
......
https://www.politico.eu/article/donald- ... da-canada/
Trump blows up G7 agenda
With less than two weeks until leaders of the world’s seven largest advanced economies meet in Canada, agreeing an agenda is proving tricky.
By TOM MCTAGUE, DAVID M. HERSZENHORN AND ANDREW RESTUCCIA 5/30/18
LONDON — With days to go before leaders of the world’s seven largest advanced economies meet in Canada, organizers have a problem — Donald Trump is making it hard to agree on anything.
The annual gathering of the so-called G7 countries is scheduled for June 8 in Quebec, but there remains unprecedented division over the agenda and what joint statements might be issued out of the summit, according to senior officials in Europe and the United States.
And the disruptive force is Trump. From trade rules to climate change, to defense spending and the Iran nuclear deal, the U.S. president has torn up the global consensus that existed under his predecessor, Barack Obama, leaving diplomats scrambling to paper over the cracks in the Western alliance and find any common ground on which to build the event. Failure to come together would break with years of tradition at the G7 summit, which has historically served as an annual affirmation that the biggest Western powers are largely aligned.
“The Canadians have no idea what to do,” one adviser to a G7 leader said on condition of anonymity. A second aide — a diplomat for a different G7 leader who has been working on the agenda for months — said they have never been this close to a summit without having general agreement on what leaders would say coming out of it.
A third official working for another administration involved in the summit said the talks have been “disconnected and unfocused.”
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau had initially wanted to use the June summit to promote issues central to his administration’s agenda, such as climate change, women’s empowerment, peace, economic growth for all and jobs for the future. The liberal leader said the G7 leaders had “a responsibility to ensure that all citizens benefit from our global economy.”
However, these goals, backed with various degrees of enthusiasm by the other leaders, clashed with Trump’s protectionist “America First” agenda, rupturing the usually consensual build-up to such events, according to senior officials across the G7.
By April 26, Trudeau had narrowed his focus to gender equality as the “top priority” of Canada’s G7 presidency.
“Women’s empowerment is a key driver of economic growth that works for everyone,” he said. “All of us benefit when women can participate freely, fully, and equally in our economies and society, and supporting and empowering women and girls must be at the heart of the decisions we make.” It’s a goal the White House has gone to great lengths to say it supports. But critics accuse the Trump administration of pursuing policies that harm women — pointing to its actions on reproductive health and equal pay. And the president himself has faced a series of allegations from numerous women of unwanted sexual contact. Trump has strongly denied the accusations.
As of last week, there was no agreement on whether there would even be a final communiqué signed by all leaders — as is tradition — or whether Trudeau would simply issue a statement at the end of the summit instead, one official for a G7 country said. A draft communiqué was dropped because it included elements that weren’t signed off by diplomats.
.....
Gautam

[Lalmohan]

Everyone knows that.

"everyone" is a newspeak term

[ramana]

Guys you are being back to making snarky comments on each other.

[g.sarkar]

https://thediplomat.com/2018/05/the-u-s ... trade-war/
The US-China Trade War
A simple plan: action, confusion, and retreat
By Roncevert Ganan Almond
May 27, 2018
......
When examining the state of U.S. President Donald Trump’s self-described “trade war” against China, one cannot help but wonder whether the White House has a coherent strategy or whether the plan has been to engage in battle in order to reach a policy. Given this confusion, it is perhaps both unsurprising and appropriate that the Trump administration has momentarily lost its taste for confrontation with China. After another round of high-level negotiations in Washington, D.C., on May 19, 2019, U.S. Secretary of Treasury Steve Mnuchin, Trump’s apparent lead negotiator, meekly announced that U.S. and China were “putting the trade war on hold.”
Following months of action – barbs and complaints, investigations and enforcement actions, tariffs and threat of tariffs – this ceasefire should be interpreted as a U.S. retreat. How else to describe an outcome where the party on the offensive, the Trump administration, agrees to a truce without having achieved any measurable gains? Nevertheless, a break in the action may be the best option for a U.S. trade policy in disarray.
Putting Zte Back to Work
The surprising moratorium began ahead of the second round of high-level discussions between China and the United States in Washington. Early in the morning of May 13, 2018, Trump tweeted that he and Chinese President Xi Jinping were working together to give ZTE Corporation, China’s telecommunications giant, “a way to get back into business, fast” as there were”[t]oo many jobs in China lost.” Trump announced that he had instructed U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross to “get it done.” The following day, however, Ross contradicted the president by saying that ZTE would not be subject to trade negotiations: “Our position has been that that’s an enforcement action separate from trade.”
A year before in March 2017, as part of a settlement with the U.S. Commerce Department, ZTE had agreed to a combined civil and criminal penalty and forfeiture of $1.19 billion after shipping telecommunications equipment, with U.S. components, to Iran and North Korea in violation of U.S. export laws. ZTE also agreed a seven-year “suspended denial” of export privileges – a probationary period – which could be triggered if ZTE failed to meet any aspect of the agreement or committed additional violations of U.S. export laws.
Just as the White House was ramping up its tariff offensive against China, on April 15, 2018, the U.S. Commerce Department issued a “denial order” lifting the suspension and blocking ZTE’s access to U.S. exports due to alleged violations of the settlement agreement – namely that ZTE had made false statements regarding disciplinary action taken against the employees who engaged in the illegal conduct. For ZTE this was a fatal blow: the company sources nearly 30 percent of its components from U.S. companies, like Intel and Qualcomm, industry leaders in producing micro-processing chips, the brains of computers. Soon thereafter, trading of ZTE stock was suspended on Chinese markets, in Hong Kong and Shenzhen, and less than a month later, on May 9, 2018, ZTE announced the closure of its main business operations. No wonder ZTE’s 75,000 employees cheered upon learning of Trump’s tweet. According to Soumaya Keynes of The Economist and Trade Talks, that is similar to the number of employees at Google.
What is remarkable about the ZTE exchange is not that Trump undercut his Cabinet, and vice versa; we have seen this drama before. Nor is it that the president might recognize that harming ZTE could also hurt U.S. workers since global supply chains and capital, particularly in the technology sector, stretch across national boundaries. Just ask Qualcomm. Instead, what is notable is that Trump’s concession on ZTE preceded another round of trade negotiations, led by Chinese Vice-Premier Liu He and U.S. Treasury Secretary Mnuchin, the result of which was the lack of any tangible U.S. gain, any material change in the status quo in favor of the United States. This speaks to a confused strategy in Washington.
.....
Gautam

[Singha]

ibnlive

PEARL HARBOR, HAWAII:

The US military on Wednesday renamed its Pacific Command to US Indo-Pacific Command, in a largely symbolic move underscoring the growing importance of India to the Pentagon, US officials said.

US Pacific Command, which is responsible for all US military activity in the greater Pacific region, has about 375,000 civilian and military personnel assigned to its area of responsibility, which includes India.

[Philip]

Let them rename the S.China Sea as the " Indo China Sea " as we've done a long time ago!

[g.sarkar]

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/31/trump-r ... he-us.html
Trump reportedly poised to ban German luxury carmakers in the US
Sam Meredith
President Donald Trump is preparing to impose a total ban on German luxury carmakers from the U.S. market, according to an exclusive report by German magazine WirtschaftsWoche.
Citing several unnamed U.S. and European diplomats, the weekly business magazine reported that Trump told French President Emmanuel Macron last month he would maintain his trade policy with the aim of stopping Mercedes-Benz models from driving down Fifth Avenue in New York.
The report comes less than two weeks after the U.S. Department of Commerce launched an investigation into automobile imports to determine whether they "threaten to impair the national security" of the U.S. That could lead to tariffs of up to 25 percent on the same "national security" grounds used to impose metal imports charges in March.
....
Gautam

[UlanBatori]

EU show why they are Pakistan Occidentale:

Katty Kay
(@KattyKayBBC) Today the WH is breaking bread (or steak and ice cream) with North Korea while imposing tariffs on EU, Canada and Mexico. It's quite a juxtaposition.

IOW, the USA has a foreign policy of trying to solve problems and make deals for US interests as Americans see them, not as the British lecture Americans on how to see them. 1775? Duh?

[Mort Walker]

so the argument is not, they did not do it or "what's wrong with flynn etc meeting russians before taking office, that's THEIR JOB" as one member was making a sappakattu.

it is now - 'so what, they are going to be pardoned haha'..

Fact remains, nobody knows what Mueller knows and how damaging it can or cannot be. Everything else follows from there. Everybody is hedging on the mid-term as an inflection point to decide what to do..

No. Not mid-term elections, but conclusion of two years of Mueller investigations this fall. In 1972, McGovern's team was meeting with NVA officials, in 1980 Reagan's team was meeting the Iran's representatives of the Supreme Council. Charges placed by Mueller are purely political.

[ramana]

I was listening to a BBC segment The Inquiry episode "Inside the Box"

Apparently US courts are now using an AI computer tool with predictive analytics to give sentences to suspects found guilty.
it all looks fair based on data but the data is totally skewed.

Colored get heavier sentences than whites on the specious premise that they are prone to be repeat offenders. So program recommends heavier sentence at the outset.

Judges are hard-pressed to go against the program recommendations as it is claimed to be based on data analytics.

Would suggest people go to BBC podcast of "The Inquiry".

[Mort Walker]

I was listening to a BBC segment The Inquiry episode "Inside the Box"

Apparently US courts are now using an AI computer tool with predictive analytics to give sentences to suspects found guilty.
it all looks fair based on data but the data is totally skewed.

Colored get heavier sentences than whites on the specious premise that they are prone to be repeat offenders. So program recommends heavier sentence at the outset.

Judges are hard-pressed to go against the program recommendations as it is claimed to be based on data analytics.

Would suggest people go to BBC podcast of "The Inquiry".

Judges have a lot of leeway in sentencing. They are after all elected at the local level and in the south have been known to give harsher sentences to colored people.

[ramana]

Well now they have AI backed computer output to justify.

No many are exercising the leeway.

[A_Gupta]

http://fortune.com/2018/05/31/trump-mer ... n-car-ban/

President Donald Trump is hoping to effectively ban sales of Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and other German cars, according to reports from a German magazine.

A report in WirtschaftsWoche cites unnamed diplomatic sources who say Trump told French president Emmanuel Macron he would maintain his trade policy “until no Mercedes models rolled on Fifth Avenue in New York.” The trade policy would seemingly affect any German automaker, though, putting sales of Porsche and Volkswagen (and its Audi luxury division) at risk as well as Daimler.

Trump began pushing for heavy tariffs (as much as 25%) on car imports a week ago. U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said at the time “there is evidence suggesting that, for decades, imports from abroad have eroded our domestic auto industry.”

[g.sarkar]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/31/politics ... index.html
Congressional Republicans lining up against Trump on trade
By Phil Mattingly, Lauren Fox and Ted Barrett, CNN
Updated 6:39 PM ET, Thu May 31, 2018
Washington (CNN)Republicans on Capitol Hill were fuming after the White House abruptly announced it would begin imposing steel and aluminum tariffs Friday on US allies Canada, Mexico and the European Union.
The move Thursday came after Republicans had tried to convince the administration for months to target China with tariffs rather than US trading partners, and it could trigger Republicans on Capitol Hill to consider taking action against their own President on trade.
"I disagree with this decision," House Speaker Paul Ryan, a Wisconsin Republican who had quietly tried to convince Trump to hold back on the action, said in a statement. "There are better ways to help American workers and consumers. I intend to keep working with the president on those better options." The clear -- and public -- break between the President and top congressional Republicans had been simmering for months, with weeks of behind-the-scenes efforts to walk back, or just water down, what Trump and his team pledged to put in place. But Thursday's move underscored the depth of the divide between the two sides of Pennsylvania Avenue, even as a legislative counter to the action was far from a sure thing, aides said.
For Republican lawmakers, the administration's decision came as a surprise, according to several senior GOP aides. Republicans didn't get wind that it might be coming until Wednesday evening, and the White House briefing for congressional staff didn't take place until after the announcement.
One Republican senator, who asked not to be identified, complained Thursday about President Donald Trump's decision to impose the tariffs, 25% on steel imports and 10% on aluminum imports. "I don't like trade wars. There are no winners in trade wars. And this scares me," the senator said.
.....
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story ... ump-218583
Trump Pardoned Dinesh D’Souza to Troll Liberals
Forget the arcane legal theories. He did it to tick off the left.
By JACOB HEILBRUNN May 31, 2018
President Donald Trump’s Thursday-morning announcement may have been unexpected—“Will be giving a Full Pardon to Dinesh D’Souza today. He was treated very unfairly by our government!”—but it really shouldn’t come as much of a surprise. Once again, the president gets not only to signal that he will exculpate any of his confederates entangled in the Russia inquiry but also to troll liberals—much as D’Souza himself has done for decades. Now known largely for his fringey books and bizarre Twitter attacks on universally admired figures like Rosa Parks, he was once considered a respectable right-wing intellectual. In 1991, the late Tom Wolfe told the conservative Manhattan Institute at a Harvard Club lunch, “No longer is he going to enjoy the benefits, and there are some, of anonymity. The hive is buzzing over Dinesh D'Souza.” After the Gingrich Revolution in the midterm 1994 election, David Brooks published a piece in the Wall Street Journal called “Meet the New Establishment” in which he hailed D’Souza as a constituent member. That was then. Today, D’Souza’s more outlandish comments have prompted some conservatives to distance themselves from him, including David French, a senior writer at one of his former haunts, National Review. After D’Souza mocked Roy Moore accuser Beverly Young Nelson, French asked, “What has happened to you?” After D’Souza issued a tweet ridiculing the students at Stoneman Douglas High School, the Conservative Political Action Conference deemed his comments “indefensible.”
But did anything drastic really happen to D’Souza? Or is his current stance the logical destination point of his embrace of conservative radical chic—an endless series of provocations masquerading as thought? Even as NeverTrumpers try to distance conservatism from the president, what D’Souza’s intellectual odyssey really reveals is that the movement has not strayed from its roots with the ascension of Trump. Quite the contrary: It has returned to the virulent populism that intellectuals such as William F. Buckley Jr. had originally promoted in the 1950s, when a revanchist right opposed civil rights for African-Americans, praised apartheid in South Africa, and lauded Senator Joseph McCarthy, who rose to fame by smearing loyal Americans as agents of the Kremlin and Red China. In 1991, the Washington Post’s Charles Trueheart observed that D’Souza’s “technique relies heavily on newspaper accounts and outrageous anecdotes, all of it borne along on a narrative river of castigation.” Sound familiar?
Much of D’Souza’s early career centered on an attempt to become the next Buckley, who once admiringly referred to him as “President D’Souza”—heady stuff for a young Indian immigrant who had first come to America in 1978. It would be hard to overstate how much of a gravitational pull Buckley exerted upon the budding young conservatives who orbited around him in the early 1980s. It was Buckley who had pioneered the art of outraging the liberal establishment when he attended Yale along with his brilliant friend and future brother-in-law L. Brent Bozell. Both were phenomenal debaters, and Buckley’s maiden book God And Man At Yale was essentially the first of the welter of books, ranging from Allan Bloom’s bestselling The Closing of the American Mind to D’Souza’s Illiberal Education, denouncing political correctness and the university. Again and again, the right pounded home the message of liberal hypocrisy: The professoriate, far from being open-minded and tolerant and humanistic, consisted of a bunch of incipient totalitarians intent on brainwashing their innocent young charges into mindless conformity with putrid liberal doctrines.
.......
Gautam

[Lalmohan]

Well now they have AI backed computer output to justify.

No many are exercising the leeway.

there have been a few articles about this recently. I think it highlights one of the problems with data analytics, i.e. that if the data is skewed towards one set of (historically subjective) outcomes, then the machine spits out an 'objective' outcome that is in fact driven from a subjective assumption. this problem comes up frequently in a number of predictive data analytics situations, but when it sends people to prison its something to be deeply concerned about. the US has a disproportionately large prison population, of whom there is a disproportionately large component of black and Hispanic inmates, and yet crime levels (or the perception of crime levels) and gun ownership (and misuse) remain very high

[g.sarkar]

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/96 ... ts-exports
TRADE WAR: China lining up countries to take on Trump in brutal tariff battle
CHINA is looking to line up other countries to fight back against the US as the bitter trade war between the two superpowers threatens to spiral out of control.
By PAUL WITHERS
PUBLISHED: 11:51, Thu, May 31, 2018 | UPDATED: 12:42, Thu, May 31, 2018
On Tuesday, the White House said it would have a final list of $50 billion in imports that would be subject to 25 percent tariffs by June 15, and two weeks later would announce investment restrictions on Chinese acquisitions of US technology.
The move has infuriated China, which on Wednesday lashed out and threatened to fight back if Washington is looking for a trade war, days ahead of a planned visit by US Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross to Beijing.
According to the Wall Street Journal, citing Chinese officials, China is looking to line up countries against the US.
The unnamed countries in question are mostly in Europe and Asia, where companies would benefit from China’s plans to give foreign firms more open access to its markets. It will also respond to the threats from US President Donald Trump by imposing tariffs on up to $150 billion of Chinese goods.
This latest trade escalation comes after the two sides had agreed during talks in Washington in May to find ways of narrowing China’s $375 billion trade surplus. Mr Ross is set to arrive in Beijing on Saturday where he is expected to try to get China to agree to firm numbers to buy more US goods, but the latest aggressive move from Washington could cast doubt over whether negotiations can progress to the next level.
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said: "We urge the United States to keep its promise, and meet China halfway in the spirit of the joint statement," adding Chine would take “resolute and forceful” measures to protect its interests if Washington insists upon actin in an “arbitrary and reckless manner”.
....
____________________________________________________________________________________
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story ... red-218549
Bob Mueller’s White Hot Summer
The special counsel’s investigation is likely hurtling toward a conclusion. Buckle up.
By NELSON W. CUNNINGHAM May 29, 2018
pecial counsel Robert Mueller may well be in the final stages of wrapping up his principal investigation. Last week, I argued here in Politico that Mueller will want to avoid interfering with the November midterms and so will try to conclude by July or August. On this one we can believe Trump’s new lawyer, former prosecutor and New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who claims Mueller’s target is September 1.
How will Mueller wrap up his investigation? What will he produce? And then — what can we expect from the other players in this saga: Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, President Donald Trump and his lawyers, and the Republican and Democratic leaders in Congress?
As a former prosecutor and Senate Judiciary and White House lawyer who has carefully studied presidential investigations since Watergate, the next steps in this constitutional dance seem clear. Mark Twain was certainly right when he said, “History does not repeat itself, but it often rhymes.” And this summer may well be the most consequential in presidential politics since 1974, the year Watergate came to a head. Here’s what could happen:
Mueller will not indict the president, but he will issue a comprehensive and detailed report.
None of us outside the famously tight-lipped Special Counsel’s Office can know what Mueller will conclude. Will it rival Watergate? Not yet clear. But we do know that the modern standard for impeachment was set in 1998, when independent counsel Kenneth Starr and a Republican House concluded that one instance of lying under oath about a sexual indiscretion was enough. Starr even concluded that he had the authority to indict President Bill Clinton on those grounds, though he did not do so. If that is the standard, Mueller’s findings involving Trump will easily clear that very low bar.
But a presidential indictment would take Mueller down a constitutional rabbit hole from which he might not emerge for years. It would also be contrary to long-standing Justice Department policy, and Mueller, a careful institutionalist, is required to follow department policy where he can. So no indictment. Here, too, we can believe Giuliani.
There may well be other indictments, against lesser figures involved in Russian meddling, obstruction of justice and other alleged crimes. Mueller might even name Trump an “unindicted co-conspirator” in some of these crimes, just as Watergate special prosecutor Leon Jaworski named Richard Nixon in 1974. A bold move, but with a clear historical precedent, and just what we could expect from a former Marine, homicide prosecutor and FBI director known for hitting fairly — but hard.
.....
Gautam

[Lalmohan]

vanity fair had an article recently about Mueller's younger days, his college, enlistment in the marines after being rejected for (and then getting over) a sports injury and his combat record in Vietnam. a rich smart boy with options who chose gritty non glamourous soldiering through mud and blood and was sent home with a bullet in his leg as he was pulling a wounded man out of harms way. well liked by his men, even though he was the young 2nd lt. sent to the unit to replace casualties. he left the marines when they said you have done enough combat, now time for a desk

[Singha]

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/all/my-hea ... ed-n879026

Jaw dropping verdict

[Austin]

FAREED ZAKARIA INTERVIEWS STEVE BANNON ON TRUMP COUNTRY

[Lalmohan]

US China trade talks break up without conclusion
wonder what jongaboy's next move will be?

[kit]

US China trade talks break up without conclusion
wonder what jongaboy's next move will be?

Being unpredictable. He is a businessman.here he will go ahead with what he said. Not a politician.

[Lalmohan]

jongaboy = kim

[ramana]

Xi and Jong are decoupled vis-à-vis the de-nuke talks.

[A_Gupta]

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/6 ... ies-of-law
The power that Trump is claiming overturns centuries of law

In 1616, Chief Justice Edward Coke ruled that a command by King James that went against English law, was invalid, saying "In case any letters come unto us contrary to law, we do nothing by such letters, but certify your Majesty thereof, and go forth to do the law notwithstanding the same." In response, James tossed Coke from the privy council, stripped him of his position, and did as he pleased. Other judges “threw themselves on their knees” and begged for James’s mercy. It’s no coincidence that King James also ruled over the last execution for heresy in British history.

It took a civil war in England to drive home the requirement that the legal constraints of the Magna Carta applied to the king as well as a shopkeeper. This was understood not just as a matter of legal rights, but also as a matter of free speech—no one could tell a jury who might be indicted, instruct them on how they should vote, or force them to reveal their thinking. Justice, free speech, and the right to prosecute even the highest officials, even the king, was enshrined in law decades before there was a United States.

In insisting that he be is immune to prosecution, Donald Trump isn’t looking back to the some early interpretation of the Constitution. Immunity from prosecution was a power that England did not even present to the King. When Rudy Giuliani insists that Trump could shoot James Comey and still not face prosecution, he’s claiming a power that has not existed since the early 17th century.

[chanakyaa]

When someone starts talking about national debt, you know it is time for mid-term or general elections...But, the number are mind numbing.

(CFR) The National Debt Dilemma

[nandakumar]

A nice and insightful piece on Trump's skill as a negotiator. The articles makes two points. His skill as a negotiator in business dealings is over rated. Two, they are in any case ill suited for political diplomacy.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story ... eal-218584

[chetak]

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/6 ... ies-of-law
The power that Trump is claiming overturns centuries of law

In 1616, Chief Justice Edward Coke ruled that a command by King James that went against English law, was invalid, saying "In case any letters come unto us contrary to law, we do nothing by such letters, but certify your Majesty thereof, and go forth to do the law notwithstanding the same." In response, James tossed Coke from the privy council, stripped him of his position, and did as he pleased. Other judges “threw themselves on their knees” and begged for James’s mercy. It’s no coincidence that King James also ruled over the last execution for heresy in British history.

It took a civil war in England to drive home the requirement that the legal constraints of the Magna Carta applied to the king as well as a shopkeeper. This was understood not just as a matter of legal rights, but also as a matter of free speech—no one could tell a jury who might be indicted, instruct them on how they should vote, or force them to reveal their thinking. Justice, free speech, and the right to prosecute even the highest officials, even the king, was enshrined in law decades before there was a United States.

In insisting that he be is immune to prosecution, Donald Trump isn’t looking back to the some early interpretation of the Constitution. Immunity from prosecution was a power that England did not even present to the King. When Rudy Giuliani insists that Trump could shoot James Comey and still not face prosecution, he’s claiming a power that has not existed since the early 17th century.

Doesn't this remind one of IG??

[Lalmohan]

Xi and Jong are decoupled vis-à-vis the de-nuke talks.

who is the primary beneficiary of a de-nuclearized Korean peninsula? (i.e. all of it)

[ramana]

China

[g.sarkar]

China

There is no NK, only China. And the way Pukes are declining, soon there will be no Pakistan, only China. Then everyone there will have to eat polk fly lice and enjoy it.
Gautam

[Lalmohan]

China

okaaayy... so how do you conclude "decoupled"?