(10-14-2019, 11:22 AM)hollodero Wrote: Well...in an United Europe's parliament with actual legislative power, sure only the number of citizens should determine the number of representatives per country in it. As for a possible second federalistic chamber (our senate),  I can get why one would prefer overrepresenting the smaller countries in such a chamber. But I sure would find it ridiculous if Malta had just as big of a say in it as Germany or France. That would lead to overrepresenting fisher's problems.
But that wouldn't mean cutting into Malta's souvereignty as defined in some kind of European constitution. They can have their taxes, their local laws, independent school systems, court systems and whatnot. Just on matters regarding the whole United States of Europe, I don't feel the need to overrepresent Maltesian citizens. Or Austrian citizens for that matter.

(10-14-2019, 11:22 AM)hollodero Wrote: States rights have nothing to with it. This is about the federal government, which should represent all Americans equally. And it does not.  And that is just weird.

(10-14-2019, 11:22 AM)hollodero Wrote: On a sidenote, it certainly overrepresents Republicans. Which is why I get that conservatives are fine with that. But especially now, aren't you seriously questioning how a senate could block any presidential impeachment, no matter how severe the accusations, just because a certain political group is grossly overrepresented there?
And I'm trying not to argue that one as an anti-Trump point - this is just weird in a principled sense.

(10-15-2019, 12:27 PM)Dill Wrote: A vote on an EC balanced by a European Parliament, is hardly "as big a say as Germany" in EU affairs.  Their "taxes, local laws, schools and court systems" cannot be wholly independent if they are part of the EU.

(10-15-2019, 12:27 PM)Dill Wrote: This is not cutting into their sovereignty if the Maltese people freely decide they gain more power than they lose through the union--and can "Mexit" if they come to think otherwise.

(10-15-2019, 12:27 PM)Dill Wrote: "Principle" is the operative word here.  I'm not for changing existing constitutional arrangements because they don't favor my party or interests this election cycle. And then maybe changing them back if at some time in the future they do.

(10-15-2019, 12:27 PM)Dill Wrote: Again, as someone who grew upon in a small (population) state--one which had been able, for example, to protect its elections from corporate money very well until Citizens United--I view this double state system as a real protection. Your Laender never had such powers, did they? At least not since the Empire.

(10-15-2019, 02:03 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: It is that compromise that is a bedrock of the system we have here in the US.

(10-15-2019, 03:50 PM)hollodero Wrote: As for your example - it seems like an "it worked fine until it didn't" argument.

(10-15-2019, 02:03 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: On this exchange between Hollo and Dill, I just want to put in my two cents without quoting the text blocks. When a bicameral legislature is involved, it makes absolute sense, IMO, to have one based on proportional representation and one based on equal. It is that compromise that is a bedrock of the system we have here in the US. The issue comes into play when the House of Representatives isn't really great at proportional representation.

California 53 congressional districts have, on average, 746k people. Wyoming's only Representative represents 578k and Montana's represents 1.062 million. [ ] This disparity is what lessens the democratic effectiveness of our system, especially when applied to the Electoral College system for POTUS. when you look at this and how much disparity there are between the states it is easy to see how someone not used to the system we have here can view it as puzzling. Why should a state that holds less than a congressional district's worth of people from another state have the same say in a legislative body as that larger state? Well, it's because that should (key word: should) be balanced by that proportional representation.

(10-16-2019, 09:43 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Trump called impeachment attempts against him "illegal", which is a very dangerous thing to say for a number of reasons.

(10-16-2019, 09:50 AM)GMDino Wrote: How many Republicans in office do you think will disagree with him?

One?  Maybe two?

FOX will have Gym and Gaetz on saying that Trump is 100% right some time today.  

(10-16-2019, 09:51 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Gaetz the gate crasher complaining because he can't attend closed door meetings for committees he's not on. 

Quote:A self-described former pro golfer from South Florida who was indicted last week on campaign finance charges was arrested by federal authorities on Wednesday.



David Correia, who worked with Rudy Giuliani associate Lev Parnas, is now in federal custody and will be arraigned Thursday before U.S. District Judge J. Paul Oetken in Manhattan federal court, a Justice Department spokesperson said.


Spokespersons for the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Manhattan and the FBI confirmed that Correia was arrested Wednesday morning after getting off a flight at JFK Airport.

Correia was one of four people, including Parnas, Igor Fruman and Andrey Kukushkin, who allegedly conspired to circumvent federal campaign finance laws by engaging in a scheme to funnel foreign money to candidates for federal and state office so they could buy potential influence with candidates, campaigns, and the candidates’ governments, according to the indictment.

The indictment also alleges that Parnas and Fruman received two $500,000 wire transfers from an unnamed foreign businessman to use for political contributions to state candidates in Nevada, where the two men and their indicted partners — Correia and Kukushkin — were pursuing a recreational marijuana license.


A neighbor said Wednesday morning there had been no sign of federal agents or police at Correia’s house in Palm Beach Gardens near the Eastpointe Country Club. No one answered the door at the home.


Correia has been a pro golfer, a restaurant owner, a Philadelphia real estate investor and a commercial mortgage lender, according to his company biography. His LinkedIn profile describes him as a “serial entrepreneur.”


He has been associated with Lev Parnas since at least 2012, when he was listed as the secretary of a company called Parnas Holdings, Florida corporate records show.


[color=var(--tc,#707070)]David Correia and Igor Fruman appear to have met President Donald Trump at a campaign event for America First Action, a pro-Trump super PAC, according to a photo posted on July 4, 2018, on the Facebook page of Ukraine’s chief rabbi. FACEBOOK[/color]


Their biggest venture together has been a South Florida firm called Fraud Guarantee that told investors it could protect their money from swindlers. Correia was listed as a co-founder.


Over the summer, Correia called a New Jersey couple seeking to enforce a $500,000 court judgment against Parnas in Florida over a movie deal gone bad.


“He said we no longer knew who we were dealing with and that [they] had ties all the way up to the State Department and the White House and they were partners with Rudy Giuliani,” Dianne Pues recalled in an interview with the Miami Herald.


Pues’ attorney, Tony Andre, said in an interview that Correia “seems like he’s worked with [Parnas] for years.”


“It seems like Lev is the boots-on-the-ground henchman for Fruman and Correia is like that for Parnas,” Andre said. “That’s the only thing I’ve been able to really gather.”


Giuliani told Reuters that he received $500,000 for his work with Boca Raton-based Fraud Guarantee.


On its website, Fraud Guarantee lists two office locations within walking distance of each other in Boca Raton.


When a Miami Herald reporter visited the locations on Monday, Fraud Guarantee was not listed on any of the directory signs. An employee of the offices’ leasing company Danburg Properties said she was not familiar with the name Fraud Guarantee. She wouldn’t give specific tenant information.


Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said Wednesday that he knew Parnas as “one of the top” Trump supporters in Florida.


“This is a guy who was at [Republican National Committee] functions, Trump Victory functions,” DeSantis said at an event in Jupiter. “He was at a lot of these things. It was like any other donor, nothing more than that.”


DeSantis received a $50,000 contribution from Global Energy Producers, a natural gas company that federal prosecutors say was created by Correia, Parnas, Fruman and Kukushkin to conceal illicit campaign funds. He returned the contribution to the U.S. Treasury after the Miami Herald reported Parnas hosted fundraisers for DeSantis.


Photos of DeSantis’ Election Night victory party show Parnas and Fruman both attended the event, snapping pictures and standing in close proximity to the future governor.


Voter records show Correia is not affiliated with a political party — but he seems to have become a fan of President Donald Trump. A photo posted online in January 2018 shows Correia with the president. Correia and Fruman also appear to have met Trump at a campaign event for America First Action, a pro-Trump super PAC, according to a photo posted on July 4, 2018, on the Facebook page of Ukraine’s chief rabbi.


Correia has not donated to any federal political campaigns within the last 10 years, federal records show. A search of Florida political contributions also came up empty. Correia’s wife, Katie, donated $2,700 to Trump’s presidential campaign in October 2016 and $2,300 to the National Republican Committee in October 2016, according to federal records.



In 2016, Correia and his wife paid $337,000 for a home in Palm Beach Gardens, according to county property records. He has found himself in Palm Beach County courts over several debts, including an eviction action against Fraud Guarantee that ended in a $26,000 judgment against the company, Parnas and Correia.

Quote:Gordon Sondland, a central figure in the Ukraine scandal, threw Trump and Giuliani under the bus in his opening statement to Congress

• Gordon Sondland, the US's ambassador to the European Union, will turn on President Donald Trump and his lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, when he testifies as part of Congress' impeachment inquiry on Thursday.
• Sondland will tell lawmakers he was against Trump's decision to conduct Ukraine policy through Giuliani, according to his opening statement.
• He will also say he didn't know "until much later" that Giuliani wanted Ukraine to investigate Burisma Holdings, the natural gas company whose board Hunter Biden sat on, to get dirt on former Vice President Joe Biden.
• The ambassador is also expected to criticize Trump's decision to hold up a $400 million military-aid package to Ukraine over the summer. It "should not have been delayed for any reason," Sondland will testify.
  

Gordon Sondland, the US's ambassador to the EU, turned on President Donald Trump and his lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, in his opening statement to Congress on Thursday.


Sondland is testifying as part of House Democrats' formal impeachment inquiry looking at whether Trump used his public office for private gain.

Sondland is part of a the trio of diplomats — which also includes the former Special Representative to Ukraine Kurt Volker and the US's chief diplomat in Ukraine Bill Taylor — whose explosive text messages to one another revealed just how intricately involved US government officials were in Giuliani's pressure campaign on Ukraine.

Sondland will tell lawmakers that he staunchly opposed Trump's request to conduct Ukraine policy through Giuliani. Trump and Giuliani have been working since at least last spring to urge the Ukrainian government to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son for corruption, and to help discredit the FBI's finding that Russia interfered in the 2016 US election.

Read more: The FBI's investigation of Rudy Giuliani includes a counterintelligence aspect that suggests he may be a national security threat

At the heart of those efforts is a July 25 phone call during which Trump repeatedly pressured Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to accede to his demands. Days before the call, Trump held up a nearly $400 million military-aid package to Ukraine. During their conversation,
Trump reminded Zelensky that "we do a lot for Ukraine," and followed up by asking Zelensky to "do us a favor, though," and investigate Biden and the origins of the Russia investigation.

Sondland and Volker were instrumental in conveying Trump's demands to Zelensky both before and after the phone call.

In addition to establishing a channel of communication between Giuliani and senior Ukrainian government officials, Volker and Sondland also furthered the impression that a good relationship between Trump and Zelensky — and a White House meeting between the two — was conditioned on Zelensky helping the US president's political agenda.

On Thursday, Sondland will tell lawmakers he was "disappointed by the president's direction that we involve Mr. Giuliani."

He will also testify that despite being disappointed, he got in touch with Giuliani at Trump's direction anyway, and that Giuliani indicated that a White House visit for Zelensky was predicated on Ukraine investigating Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian natural gas company whose board Hunter Biden sat on, and the Russia probe.

Read more: Trump's presidency is disintegrating as he faces his worst 30 days since taking office

Sondland will testify that "Giuliani specifically mentioned the 2016 election (including the DNC server) and Burisma as two anti-corruption investigatory topics of importance for the president," according to his opening statement.

However, Sondland will say, he didn't know Giuliani's focus on Burisma was linked to the Bidens "until much later," and that seeking foreign help in an American election "would be wrong."

The ambassador is also expected to criticize Trump's decision to hold up the military-aid package. It "should not have been delayed for any reason," Sondland will testify. But he will add that there was "no quid pro quo" involved in the matter.

Sondland has emerged in recent days as one of the central figures in Trump's and Giuliani's efforts in Ukraine. His outsize role in the matter has puzzled US officials because as the ambassador to the EU — which Ukraine isn't a part of — Sondland shouldn't have been involved in the first place.

On Tuesday, the deputy assistant secretary in the State Department's Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, George Kent, outlined for congressional investigators how he was all but cut out of decisions regarding Ukraine by Sondland, Volker, and energy secretary Rick Perry.

Rep. Gerald E. Connolly, one of the lawmakers who heard Kent's testimony, told The New York Times that Kent described the move as "wrong."

"Here is a senior State Department official responsible for six countries, one of which is Ukraine, who found himself outside of a parallel process that he felt was undermining 28 years of US policy and promoting the rule of law in Ukraine," Connolly told The Times. He added that Kent testified that after Volker, Sondland, and Perry sidelined him, they "declared themselves the three people now responsible for Ukraine policy."

Quote:President Donald Trump's acting chief of staff acknowledged Thursday the aid to Ukraine at the center of an ongoing House impeachment inquiry was withheld because of the president's desire for the country to look into U.S. domestic politics.



"Did he also mention to me in passing the corruption related to the DNC server? Absolutely," Mulvaney told reporters during a rare briefing at the White House on Thursday, noting that was part of the president's concern about corruption in Kiev. 
"That’s it," Mulvaney said. "That’s why we held up the money."


Speaking publicly for the first time since House Democrats launched an impeachment inquiry following a July 25 call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Mulvaney said there is nothing wrong with an administration using the threat of withholding foreign aid to pressure a country to adopt a different policy – in this case, to fight corruption.   


"We do that all that time with foreign policy," Mulvaney said. 

Mick Mulvaney, acting White House chief of staff. (Photo: Jacquelyn Martin/AP)

Mulvaney's remarks appeared to undercut Trump's repeated assertion that his administration did not withhold the money in exchange for Ukraine's help in looking into his political opponents. Mulvaney framed the issue as Trump calling on Ukraine to help the U.S. government with an ongoing investigation and denied that the president sought Zelensky's help in digging up dirt on Democratic candidate Joe Biden.


But the difference in this case, Trump critics have pointed out, is that the administration was seeking Ukraine's help in looking at the genesis of the Russian investigation in the 2016 election and was demanding Kiev help Attorney General William Barr investigate a computer server owned by the Democratic National Committee that had been hacked.

(10-17-2019, 03:09 PM)GMDino Wrote: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/10/17/mick-mulvaney-says-ukraine-aide-held-over-us-domestic-politics/4009147002/

(10-17-2019, 03:09 PM)GMDino Wrote: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/10/17/mick-mulvaney-says-ukraine-aide-held-over-us-domestic-politics/4009147002/

(10-17-2019, 03:27 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Wow...

Nice one, Mick, lol.

(10-17-2019, 03:41 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: So, he just admitted to violations of campaign finance laws by Trump. Good times.

(10-17-2019, 04:02 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: but we ALWAYS do it!