Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, February 12, 2018

OTP 12 February 2018: Jeff Samardzija explains why politics and baseball rarely mix

However, there were several curveballs that forced Giants’ players to think outside the box, including one from a fan who asked a trio that included catcher Buster Posey, reliever Cory Gearrin and starting pitcher Jeff Samardzija whether they think baseball players should have a role in voicing their political opinions like football and basketball players have in recent years.

The question temporarily stumped Gearrin and Posey, so as his teammates waited, Samardzija decided to jump in and share his perspective.

“I don’t think so, not necessarily because we’re here to entertain you guys. Every time we step on the field, it’s important,” Samardzija said, before pausing temporarily while a loud round of applause petered out.

(As always, views expressed in the article lede and comments are the views of the individual commenters and the submitter of the article and do not represent the views of Baseball Think Factory or its owner.)

Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: February 12, 2018 at 07:41 AM | 2005 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: off topic, politics, san francisco giants, spring training

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 21 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›
   1. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: February 12, 2018 at 10:48 AM (#5623440)
President Obama's official Smithsonian portrait has been unveiled.

Real footage here.

Improved footage here.
   2. Traderdave Posted: February 12, 2018 at 10:56 AM (#5623444)
Responding to Swoboda from late in last thread:


My ancestors were mostly Irish and I support increased legal immigration. But we need more people with skills and education and an immigration scheme that supports that.



I'll hazard a guess that your Irish forbears could not have passed such a "skills and education" test, as indeed very few of our immigrant ancestors could have. They were the braceros of their day.
   3. Zonk was SHOCKED by #6! Posted: February 12, 2018 at 10:58 AM (#5623446)
Reposting --

No policy, whether on immigration, how we deal with the Israel-Palestine conflict, tax reform, military preparedness, abortion, or *anything else* will be able to address all individuals in a way that is fair and just for each unique individual. By presenting unique individuals as if they are representative of the whole, we obfuscate from the actual whole. And that is especially so when those individuals are presented *because* they are newsworthy in their unusualness. The Joe-the-Plumbering of policy makes it into sound-bites and snippets that, at best, are only tiny slices of the whole truth and more often have the same relationship to truth that Wednesday has to Purple.



As much I can agree with the general idea here, specific to immigration -- I do think there is some value to the individual deportation stories not because of the headline-grabbing 'soft' aspects but because of other long-buried under nonsense facts.

To wit - that most people in the country illegally didn't come here by scampering across the border... they overstayed visas... and the process to gain permanent residence is very difficult, expensive, and not all that kind to the applicants. Stories of people who lived here most of their lives bidding tearful goodbyes to their kids grabs the spotlight, but more often than not in the weeds - you find some commonalities. You find stories of wives or husbands being threatened or badgered into telling ICE marriages were shams (despite offspring evidence to the contrary) because when push comes to shove, who is going to argue with a government official threatening to lock YOU up? You find stories of people detained when they actually go to checkins.

The truth of immigration has gotten so far out of whack from reality -- and the reality our authorities whose duties ought to include actually, you know, helping immigrants who wish to stay and wish to become part of the country are doing exactly the opposite.

I'll grant that I'm biased - not just politically, but I've got a good friend who is an immigration lawyer (and I'm willing to bet she earns a mere fraction of what other JDs do) who could fill volumes with horror stories. Virtually every case she handles - and I'm not talking about deportation cases or the like, but literally the clean, proper, and and legal path where a legal resident simply tries to advance the ball from temporary visa to permanent residence and/or citizenship is not a paperwork case, but an adversarial death match more often than not. She didn't exactly have kind words for ICE under Obama, either (or Bush II)... but it's gotten far, far worse under Trump.
   4. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: February 12, 2018 at 11:01 AM (#5623447)
I'll hazard a guess that your Irish forbears could not have passed such a "skills and education" test


Hell, the Irish today.
   5. Zonk was SHOCKED by #6! Posted: February 12, 2018 at 11:02 AM (#5623449)
I'll hazard a guess that your Irish forbears could not have passed such a "skills and education" test, as indeed very few of our immigrant ancestors could have. They were the braceros of their day.


Mine would not have. An ex-GF was big into that genealogy stuff - my great-grandparents on both sides were "laborers" per their immigration paperwork (and yes, those great-grandparents came with their parents and uncles and siblings).

What amuses me most, though - and I've brought it up before to crickets - is that the loudest contingent of nativists screaming for a "merit" system are also the people who have no shortage of bad things to say about the US citizens who possess those same credentials. High education, good-paying white collar jobs, standardized test scores... that's the "merit-based" system they want.
   6. BDC Posted: February 12, 2018 at 11:04 AM (#5623450)
That Obama portrait is like one of those magic-eye designs: let your vision get blurry in front of it and you probably see the outline of Joe Biden.
   7. Swoboda is freedom Posted: February 12, 2018 at 11:07 AM (#5623456)
I'll hazard a guess that your Irish forbears could not have passed such a "skills and education" test, as indeed very few of our immigrant ancestors could have. They were the braceros of their day.

No they could not. And I am not saying to shut them all out, but the economy of the early 1900's used more manual labor. I am for increasing legal immigration.
   8. Traderdave Posted: February 12, 2018 at 11:15 AM (#5623463)
No they could not. And I am not saying to shut them all out, but the economy of the early 1900's used more manual labor. I am for increasing legal immigration.


You favor legal immigration for people like yourself, but not for people like your ancestors. Or put another way, your Irish ancestors had the right to try to grab the brass ring, but current manual laborers who want to do EXACTLY THE SAME THING for the same reason do not.

I'm not trying to be combative, with you, and if my words seems strong it's because I do feel strongly on this issue, and it is a very important principle to me. But can you understand why your position, which may seem reasonable to you, looks like hypocrisy to others?


   9. BDC Posted: February 12, 2018 at 11:17 AM (#5623464)
A path to citizenship is good. Mass deportations would not be good, but would be defensible in legal terms.

Terrorizing people and sending them underground, when you do not have the political willpower to deport them, is probably the worst of all solutions, from both moral and legal standpoints. So naturally it's Trump's solution.
   10. Zonk was SHOCKED by #6! Posted: February 12, 2018 at 11:23 AM (#5623467)
No they could not. And I am not saying to shut them all out, but the economy of the early 1900's used more manual labor. I am for increasing legal immigration.


The problem is the assumption that getting a job digging ditches for a living is the goal of the "non-merit" immigrants... I mean, sure - just like a baseball team would prefer to draft Clayton Kershaw in the 2018 June amateur draft - it would be swell if immigration were a matter of selecting which foreign citizens we imported.

The problem is that successful, highly educated, white collar professionals in stable, well-run countries don't - you know - really have a big impetus to emigrate to the US.

Even under our current system - the supposedly broken, terrible system that doesn't appropriately measure merit - the data is pretty stark. Rates of seeking higher education are double those of native-born US citizens. Patent applications, entrepreneurship, you name it -- all well, well above that of US citizens. Conversely, rates of criminality are half of those of US citizens.

People come to the US for the opportunities... and people with advanced degrees and good jobs already have those opportunities in their current nations.

Look, I've got no problem with expediting the citizenship of people who already posses the appropriate credentials... but the simple fact is that our pool of people who WANT to come to the US are those who are seeking to achieve those things, not those who already have.

   11. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 12, 2018 at 11:32 AM (#5623471)
A path to citizenship is good. Mass deportations would not be good, but would be defensible in legal terms.

As would segregation, back when segregation was the law of the land on every level of government. Obviously I'm not saying you're making a substantive defense of either of those positions.

Terrorizing people and sending them underground, when you do not have the political willpower to deport them, is probably the worst of all solutions, from both moral and legal standpoints. So naturally it's Trump's solution.

Trump is no outlier here. It's also the default position of a critical mass of veto-wielding Republican primary voters and their congressional representatives, motivated far more by their nativism than by any real concern for "the law".
   12. Commissioner Bud Black Beltre Hillman Fred Posted: February 12, 2018 at 11:37 AM (#5623478)
Hell, the Irish today.

...are overeducated as feck. My company opened an office there and while it's been easy to find qualified staff, keeping them around/engaged is an issue.
   13. Lassus Posted: February 12, 2018 at 11:38 AM (#5623480)
Everyone wave their arms so David knows where the new thread is.
   14. The Yankee Clapper Posted: February 12, 2018 at 11:45 AM (#5623484)
If his only crime is being in the country illegally, or with nothing more than an occasional minor nonviolent offense, then I don't think that he should be deported if he's lived here long enough to establish roots.

Then run on that platform and try to change the immigration laws. Oh, yeah, Andy was the one who repeatedly argued that the refusal of Congress to make such changes somehow justified Obama imposing his own "solution". Obama's unilateral executive order was bad enough, but the idea that Andy's whim trumps the immigration laws is an amazing display of conceit, and probably not nearly as popular as he thinks.
   15. Zonk was SHOCKED by #6! Posted: February 12, 2018 at 11:57 AM (#5623490)
What a wonderful idea!

I guess this would be Trumpian bipartisanship? Taking the dumbest, most loathesome, universally hated, history-proven-to-be-awful idea from the most corrupt urban Democrats and make it national!

Good god... don't we have more than ample instances of local and state divesting of such things that prove it's a really stupid idea?

I think lil Richie Daley's upcoming memoirs are titled "How I Screwed Chicago by Selling Stuff".
   16. The Good Face Posted: February 12, 2018 at 11:58 AM (#5623494)
You favor legal immigration for people like yourself, but not for people like your ancestors. Or put another way, your Irish ancestors had the right to try to grab the brass ring, but current manual laborers who want to do EXACTLY THE SAME THING for the same reason do not.


Because we don't actually need any more manual laborers? Because adding more manual laborers reduces the wages of American citizens that aren't capable of getting work other than manual labor? Because some of us think the interests of those citizens takes priority over the interests of non-citizens? Because the US economy of today isn't the US economy of 100+ years ago?

But I like the implicit argument of "Let's add tens of millions of unskilled alien helots, in a hundred years they'll be people just like us!" It's baffling in that WE ARE ALREADY PEOPLE JUST LIKE US. If we need more people (we don't), we can encourage more breeding, or incentivize more selective immigration. But those are complete non-starters. Nothing will do but to allow de facto open borders because it'll all work out wonderfully for reasons, with nary an acknowledgment that failure or downsides are possibilities. Immigration has rapidly become a religious conviction rather than a policy issue.
   17. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:00 PM (#5623495)
President Obama's official Smithsonian portrait has been unveiled.


Neither one is really to my taste, but if the Obamas are happy, then fair enough.
   18. The Good Face Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:02 PM (#5623496)
My company opened an office there and while it's been easy to find qualified staff, keeping them around/engaged is an issue.


That's probably because the Irish eschew all foodstuffs other than greasy breakfasts and potatoes, and only then when they can't get their hands on strong drink. I've never been to a place where it's harder to find a meal (besides booze) after 11AM.
   19. Zonk was SHOCKED by #6! Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:02 PM (#5623497)
Because we don't actually need any more manual laborers? Because adding more manual laborers reduces the wages of American citizens that aren't capable of getting work other than manual labor? Because some of us think the interests of those citizens takes priority over the interests of non-citizens? Because the US economy of today isn't the US economy of 100+ years ago?

But I like the implicit argument of "Let's add tens of millions of unskilled alien helots, in a hundred years they'll be people just like us!" It's baffling in that WE ARE ALREADY PEOPLE JUST LIKE US. If we need more people (we don't), we can encourage more breeding, or incentivize more selective immigration. But those are complete non-starters. Nothing will do but to allow de facto open borders because it'll all work out wonderfully for reasons, with nary an acknowledgment that failure or downsides are possibilities. Immigration has rapidly become a religious conviction rather than a policy issue.


Irony through juxtaposition.

Or - is it something other than religious conviction that convinces you that unskilled immigrant only wishes to come here to remain an unskilled laborer? I mean, I've got the data on my side that says quite the contrary.
   20. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:03 PM (#5623498)
So, I couldn't respond to too much this weekend because we took the kids away for the weekend (Great Wolf Lodge -- highly recommended if you have pre-teen kids), but a couple of things worth replying to:
Steele's credibility isn't looking so good:

[...]

Steele lying to the FBI may be the last nail in the dossier coffin. More at link.
It does appear that Steele lied about his media contacts. It's not certain, but that's a good working assumption. This is not good, but pretending this invalidates the dossier is silly. (Note that he was under no legal obligation not to talk to the media, however much the FBI might have hoped that he would not; of course, that doesn't exonerate him if he lied to the FBI about having done so.) Yeah, I know the argument: "Accepting the dossier requires an assumption that Steele is telling us the truth about his findings; if he lied about this, then he's a liar and we can't credit his information." I agree that it's not good (in addition to being criminal) if he lied, and it sure as heck doesn't bolster his credibility -- but the fact that someone lied about one thing does not mean that everything he says is false.

The next chain in the argument is especially silly. The argument is that Steele's (supposed) lie about not talking to the media misled the FBI into thinking that media stories corroborated him (giving the dossier undeserved credence), and further that this caused the FBI to misinform the judge, causing the judge to also give the dossier undeserved credence. But as York is forced to admit, all the FBI told the judge was that Steele hadn't directly provided the info to the press. But they knew that other people had seen the dossier, and that those other people would have had incentive to inform the press. There would have been little reason to think that Isikoff had found the info entirely on his own rather than that the Democrats had given the dossier to him.


The problem with the pro-Trump arguments is that they can't decide whether they want to attack Steele (to undermine the dossier) or the FBI (to undermine the Russia investigation), so we get York saying things like "the FBI could no longer pretend that its valuable informant was not also sharing his anti-Trump information with the press." But either the FBI already knew -- in which case Steele hadn't tricked them -- or they didn't know, in which case they were not "pretending" anything.


In any case, stripping away all the verbiage, what we have is evidence that Steele lied about his contacts with the media. This does not show that the dossier is false. Even if the dossier is false, that does not show that the warrant should not have been granted. Even if the dossier should not have been granted, this does not show that anyone at the FBI did anything improper. Even if the dossier should not have been granted, and even if some people at the FBI did something improper, that does not show that Trump did not collude with Russia.
   21. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:03 PM (#5623499)
If his only crime is being in the country illegally, or with nothing more than an occasional minor nonviolent offense, then I don't think that he should be deported if he's lived here long enough to establish roots.

Then run on that platform and try to change the immigration laws. Oh, yeah, Andy was the one who repeatedly argued that the refusal of Congress to make such changes somehow justified Obama imposing his own "solution". Obama's unilateral executive order was bad enough, but the idea that Andy's whim trumps the immigration laws is an amazing display of conceit, and probably not nearly as popular as he thinks.


Find me the poll that supports deporting masses of otherwise law abiding illegal immigrants.

Find me the poll that doesn't support a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants who've lived here long enough to establish roots.

The Republicans tried Trump's scaremongering tactics in Virginia last November, and see how far it got them.

Trust me, with a Democratic congress and president we'll see a change in our immigration laws, and even more critically, in their interpretation on the ground. Those goons from ICE might not be pleased, but we'll then see just how devoted you are to the Rule of Law when the law isn't on your side.
   22. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:04 PM (#5623500)
Video from Friday of a West Virginia House Judiciary Committee hearing on a bill that would allow companies to drill on minority mineral owners' land without consent. Current state law requires 100% approval for drilling.

A candidate for the House of Delegates was testifying, and began listing the amounts of oil and gas industry contributions to individual committee members. Here's the video; you can start around 0:48.

If you guessed that the committee would allow the witness to finish up her minute and 45 seconds of time, would leave the microphone alone, and would permit her to exit of her own volition, you might be surprised!
   23. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:06 PM (#5623502)
Because the US economy of today isn't the US economy of 100+ years ago?


It's stunning that they don't understand this point.

And it's worse than that: the US economy of today isn't the US economy of 10+ years ago -- let alone 100.
   24. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:06 PM (#5623503)
What a wonderful idea!

I guess this would be Trumpian bipartisanship? Taking the dumbest, most loathesome, universally hated, history-proven-to-be-awful idea from the most corrupt urban Democrats and make it national!


Ah, but what if National Airport's new owners changed the name from "Reagan" to "Soros"?
   25. BDC Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:08 PM (#5623505)
Great Wolf Lodge -- highly recommended if you have pre-teen kids

Was it in a nice setting? There's a Great Wolf Lodge near DFW airport that sits on a blasted section of prairie surrounded by warehouses and hangars and highways. I bet it's fun for kids (there's even a observation area nearby where you can watch planes), but the ambiance is strange for a resort.
   26. Zonk was SHOCKED by #6! Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:09 PM (#5623506)
And it's worse than that: the US economy of today isn't the US economy of 10+ years ago -- let alone 100.


And as you've many times regaled us with tales of your calloused handed youth, the Ray of 10+ years ago isn't the Ray of today.

   27. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:10 PM (#5623507)
But I like the implicit argument of "Let's add tens of millions of unskilled alien helots, in a hundred years they'll be people just like us!" It's baffling in that WE ARE ALREADY PEOPLE JUST LIKE US. If we need more people (we don't), we can encourage more breeding, or incentivize more selective immigration. But those are complete non-starters. Nothing will do but to allow de facto open borders because it'll all work out wonderfully for reasons, with nary an acknowledgment that failure or downsides are possibilities. Immigration has rapidly become a religious conviction rather than a policy issue.


100 years ago there were many budding industries that needed unskilled labor. There's no such massive void to fill now, as far as unskilled labor goes. We still need unskilled labor, to be sure, but much less of it, and what we need we have.

There has to be a better argument. If it just boils down to "it's racist not to let everyone in," then fine, but don't be surprised when half the country finds that argument less than compelling.

This has indeed become purely a religious conviction.
   28. -- Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:11 PM (#5623509)
It's stunning that they don't understand this point.


They kind of do understand it, but they measure a policy by one thing and one thing only: Does it give them an opportunity to virtue signal and call other people "racist"?
   29. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:11 PM (#5623510)

Because we don't actually need any more manual laborers?
Says who? I mean, people who call themselves conservatives used to understand (or claimed to) that a big Washington bureaucracy is not capable of running an economy (even if they were justified in doing so). Markets are far too complex to be centrally planned, and indeed in a country the size of the U.S., local conditions vary so much that one-size-fits-all solutions imposed in D.C. do not actually fit all. And yet, somehow, when it comes to labor markets, some of these self-proclaimed conservatives suddenly turn around and argue that politicians and bureaucrats can decide -- months or years in advance -- what supply we "actually need," and that what is actually needed is uniform across the country.
   30. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:11 PM (#5623511)
Video from Friday of a West Virginia House Judiciary Committee hearing on a bill that would allow companies to drill on minority mineral owners' land without consent. Current state law requires 100% approval for drilling.

A candidate for the House of Delegates was testifying, and began listing the amounts of oil and gas industry contributions to individual committee members. Here's the video; you can start around 0:48.

If you guessed that the committee would allow the witness to finish up her minute and 45 seconds of time, would leave the microphone alone, and would permit her to exit of her own volition, you might be surprised!


Or maybe you wouldn't be. I'm sure that the Free Speech Brigade around here will want to rise up in protest, even if the suppressed speaker here isn't a white nationalist.
   31. Zonk was SHOCKED by #6! Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:12 PM (#5623513)
Ah, but what if National Airport's new owners changed the name from "Reagan" to "Soros"?


I suppose THAT would be amusing, at least... though, I suspect Chicagoans would ultimately feel the same way about the Skyway sale if the sale had renamed it the Obama Social Justice Road and the parking meters were now called Sanctuary Boxes.
   32. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:12 PM (#5623515)
Was it in a nice setting? There's a Great Wolf Lodge near DFW airport that sits on a blasted section of prairie surrounded by warehouses and hangars and highways. I bet it's fun for kids (there's even a observation area nearby where you can watch planes), but the ambiance is strange for a resort.
The one we went to is in the Poconos, so, yeah, it's nice. It's a pretty rural area.
   33. Zonk was SHOCKED by #6! Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:13 PM (#5623516)
There has to be a better argument.


I've made them.

Several times - including three times on this page.
   34. Swoboda is freedom Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:14 PM (#5623518)
Great Wolf Lodge -- highly recommended if you have pre-teen kids

I have heard it is fun, but if you go in the pools, make sure your shots are up to date.
   35. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:15 PM (#5623519)
In any case, stripping away all the verbiage, what we have is evidence that Steele lied about his contacts with the media. This does not show that the dossier is false.


It undermines his credibility and trustworthiness and bolsters the argument that he wasn't some objective actor but that he was hopelessly biased -- not surprising, since he was being paid (ultimately) by the Hillary campaign and the DNC for his work product.
   36. Traderdave Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:16 PM (#5623520)
When did the [deleted] arrive on these shores and what were their qualifications?
   37. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:17 PM (#5623521)
Find me the poll that supports deporting masses of otherwise law abiding illegal immigrants.


More goalpost shifting. You complain about ANY deportation of a non-violent offender.
   38. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:18 PM (#5623522)
Because we don't actually need any more manual laborers?


Says who? I mean, people who call themselves conservatives used to understand (or claimed to) that a big Washington bureaucracy is not capable of running an economy (even if they were justified in doing so). Markets are far too complex to be centrally planned, and indeed in a country the size of the U.S., local conditions vary so much that one-size-fits-all solutions imposed in D.C. do not actually fit all. And yet, somehow, when it comes to labor markets, some of these self-proclaimed conservatives suddenly turn around and argue that politicians and bureaucrats can decide -- months or years in advance -- what supply we "actually need," and that what is actually needed is uniform across the country.

I welcome the return of libertarian David. I hope his Attorney-General won't take it personally.
   39. Swoboda is freedom Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:19 PM (#5623523)
You favor legal immigration for people like yourself, but not for people like your ancestors. Or put another way, your Irish ancestors had the right to try to grab the brass ring, but current manual laborers who want to do EXACTLY THE SAME THING for the same reason do not.

I have said that I am in favor of greatly increasing legal immigration, and while I said I would favor those with education, I did not say stop all manual labor immigration. We need more Indians with computer science backgrounds than ditch diggers. Besides, I agree that we are not going to get a lot of college educated Norwegians moving in. But I am sure there are better educated Venezuelans, Colombians, Indians, and others who would love the chance to work here. I think bringing in other family members (chain migration) is actually a pretty good thing. People who have support are more likely to do better.

I am not for mass deportation of the people who are here. That is crazy.
   40. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:20 PM (#5623525)
When did the [RDPs] arrive on these shores and what were their qualifications?

That's a pertinent question, but let's honor Ray's wish for anonymity.
   41. Traderdave Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:20 PM (#5623526)
it just boils down to "it's racist not to let everyone in,"


If you don't believe that race is THE driving force behind deportation & attempts to reduce immigration. then this conversation will go nowhere. Hard to discuss reality with flat earthers.
   42. Zonk was SHOCKED by #6! Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:23 PM (#5623528)
I have said that I am in favor of greatly increasing legal immigration, and while I said I would favor those with education, I did not say stop all manual labor immigration. We need more Indians with computer science backgrounds than ditch diggers. Besides, I agree that we are not going to get a lot of college educated Norwegians moving in. But I am sure there are better educated Venezuelans, Colombians, Indians, and others who would love the chance to work here. I think bringing in other family members (chain migration) is actually a pretty good thing. People who have support are more likely to do better.


Does everybody have me on ignore?

What is it except a religious assumption that pretends someone who immigrates to the US as essentially an unskilled, uneducated laborer does so with the intention of remaining so?

Again... the data says otherwise. The data says that immigrants pursue higher education at far higher rates than natives. The data says that immigrants start new businesses at higher rates than natives.

People who have those opportunities in their homeland don't go elsewhere to find them.
   43. Traderdave Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:27 PM (#5623530)
This thread reminds me of post made a while back by the late, great Harvey Wallbanger. I'm paraphrasing here but this is a reasonable facsimile:


To be anti-immigration is to be anti-future, anti-growth, anti-family and anti-American.



   44. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:30 PM (#5623533)
We need more Indians with computer science backgrounds than ditch diggers.


Maybe they could serve as mascots for a baseball team.
   45. Swoboda is freedom Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:32 PM (#5623535)
What is it except a religious assumption that pretends someone who immigrates to the US as essentially an unskilled, uneducated laborer does so with the intention of remaining so?

I did not say no immigration though. I said favor. And I think there are a lot of people who might want to get out of Venezuela right now. That would be a place to look. Last time I checked, those people would not be white. I can see wanting people who want to leave their home. They have the drive to get out.

I would need to see you numbers of the new businesses. Are they from higher education people? What kind of businesses? Also do a lot of them do it because they can't find legal employment, so they start a lawn service company for example.
   46. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:36 PM (#5623537)
If we need more people (we don't)


And that right there is one of the big problems with this debate. The truth is exactly the opposite of that statement. We need people, lots of them. The other problem is the myopic short term view that we don't need laborors. While that might be true in a sense, it overlooks the fact that people don't always remain laborers, and the children of laborers don't remain laborers.
   47. Traderdave Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:36 PM (#5623538)
And I think there are a lot of people who might want to get out of Venezuela right now. That would be a place to look. Last time I checked, those people would not be white


Minute sample size, but the two Venezuelan families I know here in California are white enough to fit in at a klan rally.
   48. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:37 PM (#5623539)
If only the congressional debate could be between the Traderdaves and the Swobodas, rather than between the Democrats and the Freedom Caucus.
   49. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:38 PM (#5623540)
Turley:

For weeks, the FBI and Democratic leaders like House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and House Intelligence Committee ranking minority member Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) declared that the release of the memo would seriously undermine national security due to its highly classified content. The FBI said that the release of the memo would cause “grave” consequences to national security. When the memo was released, the public found that it was devoid of anything even remotely sensitive, let alone the disclosure of “sources and methods.”

For civil libertarians, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) controversy does raise a serious national security issue of a different kind. First, there is the underlying issue involving the use of national security powers for political purposes. While the true facts have not been fully established, there are aspects of the controversy that are troubling. The Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee hired former British spy Christopher Steele to gather dirt on Donald Trump.

For many months, the Clinton campaign denied any connection to the dossier and only recently admitted that they were behind the effort when confronted with new information. Moreover, there are indications that close associates of Clinton may have fed material to Steele, who tried to get the information into the media during the campaign and told an FBI official that he was “desperate” to stop Trump from being elected.

These associates reportedly include controversial Hillary Clinton adviser Sidney Blumenthal, who has been long been accused of spreading rumors against Clinton opponents and critics. It also includes a State Department official, Jonathan Winer, who seemed to function as a transit point on dirt involving Trump. He has admitted to both passing along hundreds of Steele reports to high-ranking officials as well as sending information from Cody Shearer, a freelance writer with close ties to the Clintons. If people in the Obama administration used the FBI to target political opponents, it would be a national security concern.

Second, it is also a national security concern if the FBI has used its classification authority to try to bar the release of embarrassing information. The FBI has a long history of classifying abusive or criminal conduct. It has used national security to pursue political figures like Martin Luther King. On this occasion, it not only misused classification laws but misled the public.

The primary objection of the FBI proved to be not the disclosure of national security secrets but what it viewed as an unfair portrayal of its own conduct.

...

Whatever your definition of national security, it should not mean job security for the FBI or political security for any party. National security is meant to protect something other than the agencies themselves. First and foremost, it protects our lives and our liberties. It is a national security threat when politicians or agency officials lie to the public about declassification dangers. It is also a national security threat to use secret courts and classified proceedings to hide government abuse.
   50. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:39 PM (#5623542)
You can tele-work Indian programmers. You can't tele-work picking lettuce.
   51. dlf Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:39 PM (#5623543)
T.Dave ~ It might be past the edit window, but #36 isn't good.
   52. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:41 PM (#5623544)
If we need more people (we don't)

And that right there is one of the big problems with this debate. The truth is exactly the opposite of that statement. We need people, lots of them.


We have enough people here who can do manual labor.

If illegal immigrants weren't doing it off the books then the wages for the work would increase and therefore the work would become more attractive for others to do.
   53. The Yankee Clapper Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:42 PM (#5623545)
Or put another way, your Irish ancestors had the right to try to grab the brass ring, but current manual laborers who want to do EXACTLY THE SAME THING for the same reason do not.

This is an exceedingly weak, but often repeated, argument. We don't have the 19th century (or pre-1920) immigration laws anymore. Neither do we have a largely unpopulated continent, or nascent industries dependent on low wage, unskilled workers. That someone's ancestors migrated to the United States legally when the laws were much different doesn't excuse today's illegal aliens who flaunt the current laws.
   54. The Good Face Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:43 PM (#5623546)
What is it except a religious assumption that pretends someone who immigrates to the US as essentially an unskilled, uneducated laborer does so with the intention of remaining so?


How many of them have the intention of dating supermodels and playing SS for the Yankees?
   55. Count Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:44 PM (#5623547)
Hard to say we don't need unskilled labor when we use massive amounts of unskilled labor, many of them illegal immigrants who can be paid crap wages with no job security. For the legal workers, oddly most of* the same people who profess to oppose illegal immigration because of the effect on wages (to the extent it exists - my understanding is that one study showed a minor negative effect for the lowest educated citizens and positive effects for everyone else) want to strip labor protections and provide more tax cuts for the wealthy.

*not including those white nationalists who ostensibly want to spend more on infrastructure but vote for and support plutocrats
   56. BDC Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:44 PM (#5623549)
My great-grandfather, a coachman in the old country, cleaned streetcars when he got to Chicago. My great-grandmother could read and write … in Slovak. By the next generation, their kids were all working-to-middle-class homeowners, veterans, etc.; the next generation had a lot of college graduates and professionals. And that's still America for Latinos and Asian-Americans where I live. Older Vietnamese people cleaned office buildings and their kids are doctors. One of my (Mexican) neighbors mows lawns for a (very good) living; his kids are in college. The typical outstanding English major at my university, on her way to teaching or to law school, is a Latina with native English, from generation 2 or 1.5. Etc. etc., this is nothing more than what so many others have said in this thread.

Race comes into rightist thought at the present moment not just as a superficial color prejudice, but as a belief that these newer immigrants come from some stock that can never match the more highly-evolved strain our ancestors brought from the Carpathians or wherever TF. I don't think that's true, because I see the opposite happening right in front of me.
   57. The Yankee Clapper Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:48 PM (#5623551)
Trust me, with a Democratic congress and president we'll see a change in our immigration laws, and even more critically, in their interpretation on the ground. Those goons from ICE might not be pleased, but we'll then see just how devoted you are to the Rule of Law when the law isn't on your side.

Ah, so Andy's insistence that the current immigration laws not be enforced isn't based entirely on whim - it's also dependent on his predictions of who will win future elections and what legislation will be enacted! Personally, I'm not willing to cede Andy that much control over immigration policy.
   58. Zonk was SHOCKED by #6! Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:48 PM (#5623552)
I did not say no immigration though. I said favor. And I think there are a lot of people who might want to get out of Venezuela right now. That would be a place to look. Last time I checked, those people would not be white. I can see wanting people who want to leave their home. They have the drive to get out.

I would need to see you numbers of the new businesses. Are they from higher education people? What kind of businesses? Also do a lot of them do it because they can't find legal employment, so they start a lawn service company for example.


Here for one -

1. Immigrants constitute 15% of the general U.S. workforce, but they account for around a quarter of U.S. entrepreneurs (which we define as the top three initial earners in a new business). This is comparable to what we see in innovation and patent filings, where immigrants also account for about a quarter of U.S. inventors.

The figure below shows that this immigrant share of entrepreneurship has been increasing dramatically since the mid-1990s, when the immigrant share of founders was closer to 17%. This rise in immigrant contributions to entrepreneurship is sharper than the rise in the immigrant share of all employees in new firms. You can also see that, in total, 35%-40% of new firms have at least one immigrant entrepreneur connected to the firm’s creation.


This study as noted in HBR is primarily focused on what you might call "high-end" startups - I'd have to dig around to find it, but if you expand it to include more mundane entrepreneurial endeavors (i.e., mom and pop open a diner), the numbers get even more stark.
   59. -- Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:49 PM (#5623553)
The nutty left has gone so loon that Barack Obama ca. 2013 would be deemed a “racist” on immigration. This just shows how much they’ve rallied around the imperative of virtue signaling for the sake of virtue signaling. They really have little to add to the real issues of the era beyond “Everyone other than committed modern liberals is a racist.”
   60. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:49 PM (#5623554)
We have enough people here who can do manual labor.

If illegal immigrants weren't doing it off the books then the wages for the work would increase and therefore the work would become more attractive for others to do.


We need people in a general sense. If we cut off immigration we become Japan.
   61. Traderdave Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:50 PM (#5623556)
This is an exceedingly weak, but often repeated, argument. We don't have the 19th century (or pre-1920) immigration laws anymore. Neither do we have a largely unpopulated continent, or nascent industries dependent on low wage, unskilled workers. That someone's ancestors migrated to the United States legally when the laws were much different doesn't excuse today's illegal aliens who flaunt the current laws.


The laws are not identical but we most assuredly DO have country-by-country visa caps, similar to the 1920's laws. (Note: I said SIMILAR, not SAME).

http://blog.al.com/breaking/2011/07/14_million_mexicans_waiting_to.html

And the US has vast areas of developable land and a greater capacity to expand its population than any other nation except (maybe) Canada.


My opinions on immigration are based on principle. We are a nation of immigrants. Immigration has been one of the greatest strengths of this nation and children of immigrants who made the leap have no moral right to bar others from doing so. Your principles are likely different, if they exist.
   62. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:51 PM (#5623557)
The cartoonist provides an answer for James Woods:

James Woods
‏Verified account @RealJamesWoods
10h10 hours ago

I have a liberal friend, a very intelligent man, who hates Donald Trump. He hates him with the kind of insane fervor only a jilted lover could express. I’m genuinely interested in why people who hate him, hate him so fervently. Any thoughts? Spare me the “orange man” nonsense...
7,370 replies 3,941 retweets 16,180 likes

---------------------------
---------------------------

Scott Adams‏Verified account @ScottAdamsSays
Replying to @RealJamesWoods

Trump has power without (according to his critics) empathy. It is the scariest combination.
6:27 AM - 12 Feb 2018 from Pleasanton, CA
   63. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:52 PM (#5623560)
I’m genuinely interested in why people who hate him, hate him so fervently.


He is sub-human filth.
   64. Zonk was SHOCKED by #6! Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:53 PM (#5623561)
This isn't exactly what I was looking for - outside of the higher end start-ups... and it's dated (numbers from 2012)


Immigrants were twice as likely to start a new business last year as someone born in the U.S., CNN reports. That’s in spite of a weak economic climate that seems to have had a flattening effect on the number of overall businesses being created.
* * *
That can help explain the jump in immigrant-owned new businesses since the recession hit. In 2008, immigrants represented about 17 percent of all new business owners in the U.S., according to The Washington Post. By 2011, immigrants were creating 28 percent of all new businesses, CNN reports.
   65. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:53 PM (#5623562)
Personally, I'm not willing to cede Andy that much control over immigration policy.


You'll do anything to maintain political power for your preferred gestapo, Adolf.
   66. Traderdave Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:55 PM (#5623563)
I’m genuinely interested in why people who hate him, hate him so fervently.


I don't hate him at all, in fact he's the most lovable lying, ignorant, bigoted narcissist who daily embarrasses his country, rips off the taxpayers and runs roughshod over any standard of decency. What's not to love about him?


   67. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:57 PM (#5623565)
My opinions on immigration are based on principle. We are a nation of immigrants. Immigration has been one of the greatest strengths of this nation and children of immigrants who made the leap have no moral right to bar others from doing so. Your principles are likely different, if they exist.


"It's not fair if brown people out work white people" is a sort of principle.
   68. Zonk was SHOCKED by #6! Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:57 PM (#5623566)
More....

In fact, 40% of the Fortune 500 was founded by immigrants or the children of immigrants. But the examples of immigrant entrepreneurs aren't just restricted to huge, household name companies. According to research conducted by The Kauffman Foundation:

- Immigrants started 28.5% of all new businesses in 2014.
- Between 2006-2012 immigrants founded one quarter of the engineering and technology companies in the United States.
- In 2012 immigrant founded engineering and technology firms employed approximately 560,000 workers and generated $63 billion in sales.
- Immigrants have seen their rate of business generation rise by more than 50% since the start of the new millennium, while native-born citizens have seen their rate of new-business generation decline by 10%.
- Immigrants are now more than twice as likely to start a business than native-born citizens.
   69. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:58 PM (#5623567)
Trust me, with a Democratic congress and president we'll see a change in our immigration laws, and even more critically, in their interpretation on the ground. Those goons from ICE might not be pleased, but we'll then see just how devoted you are to the Rule of Law when the law isn't on your side.

Ah, so Andy's insistence that the current immigration laws not be enforced isn't based entirely on whim - it's also dependent on his predictions of who will win future elections and what legislation will be enacted! Personally, I'm not willing to cede Andy that much control over immigration policy.


I'm not sure where you're getting that from, as all I meant was that my views on immigration laws will be much better reflected by a Democratic president and Congress than by the current collection of nativists whom you support. I only wish that "Andy" had the magical powers you're ascribing to him, but unfortunately I don't.

But thanks for admitting that you're in favor of the Rule of Law only when the law favors your barren views on immigration. You could have knocked me over with the combined weight of all of Donald Trump's brain cells.
   70. The Good Face Posted: February 12, 2018 at 12:58 PM (#5623568)
We need people in a general sense. If we cut off immigration we become Japan.


A peaceful, cohesive, equitable society with a strong social safety net, a sky-high standard of living, and virtually no crime, renowned for its cultural and technological contributions to the world? Yeah, that sure would suck.
   71. dlf Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:00 PM (#5623571)
Ah, so Andy's insistence that the current immigration laws not be enforced isn't based entirely on whim - it's also dependent on his predictions of who will win future elections and what legislation will be enacted! Personally, I'm not willing to cede Andy that much control over immigration policy.


I'm not sure I'd cede control to Andy over anything other than picking the pool halls to visit should I ever decide that would be a worthwhile endeavor. But taking him out of the loop for a minute, there is an incredibly long history of what, for lack of a better phrase, we can simply call prosecutorial discretion. Those charged with enforcing the laws make priority and policy decisions about what laws to enforce, when, and under what circumstances. The executive branch has never been seen as a mere rubber stamp nor should it be.
   72. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:00 PM (#5623572)
Show me a mainstream economic growth model that doesn't predict an increase in long-run output per capita with an increase in population.

Alternatively, show me a mainstream economic growth model that predicts an increase in long-run output per capita with static population growth and an aging population.

The proposition that we don't need young people (either working age or children) is simply false.
   73. Traderdave Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:01 PM (#5623573)
A peaceful, cohesive, equitable society with a strong social safety net, a sky-high standard of living, and virtually no crime, renowned for its cultural and technological contributions to the world?



....is the last thing that Trump and the GOP are interested in. But they do find Japan's extreme ethnic homogeneity a worthwhile goal.
   74. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:06 PM (#5623578)
Ah, so Andy's insistence that the current immigration laws not be enforced isn't based entirely on whim - it's also dependent on his predictions of who will win future elections and what legislation will be enacted! Personally, I'm not willing to cede Andy that much control over immigration policy.


I'm not sure I'd cede control to Andy over anything other than picking the pool halls to visit should I ever decide that would be a worthwhile endeavor. But taking him out of the loop for a minute, there is an incredibly long history of what, for lack of a better phrase, we can simply call prosecutorial discretion. Those charged with enforcing the laws make priority and policy decisions about what laws to enforce, when, and under what circumstances. The executive branch has never been seen as a mere rubber stamp nor should it be.

Since I couldn't have put it any better, I'm glad you put it that way.

But P.S. If you ever want to build up a good library on immigration, I can steer you to some very good books ranging from the 1920's on up. I'm not just a pool bum, even if I sometimes act like one.
   75. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:07 PM (#5623579)
A peaceful, cohesive, equitable society with a strong social safety net, a sky-high standard of living, and virtually no crime, renowned for its cultural and technological contributions to the world? Yeah, that sure would suck.


Japan GDP growth:

2016 1%
2015 1.2%
2014 0.3%
2013 2%
2012 1.5%
2011 (-)0.1%

Japan's GDP growth has topped 2% oce since 2000, 4.2% in 2010 on the heels of -5.4% in 2009. That sort of sluggish econmy would absolutely kill us.
   76. Zonk was SHOCKED by #6! Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:07 PM (#5623580)
I’m genuinely interested in why people who hate him, hate him so fervently.


This is the application essay question for Bovine University...
   77. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:09 PM (#5623581)
We need people in a general sense. If we cut off immigration we become Japan.


I've been to Japan multiple times. The country seems to be doing very well to my eye. Tokyo is the only other city in the world of the several I've visited I would be happy to move to and live in. Clean and safe and nice. I love it there.

Keep in mind: diversity and multiculturalism is pretty much an American / western thing. Few other countries in the world are obsessed with it, and none are obsessed with it in the fashion that we are.
   78. Zonk was SHOCKED by #6! Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:09 PM (#5623582)
Japan GDP growth:

2016 1%
2015 1.2%
2014 0.3%
2013 2%
2012 1.5%
2011 (-)0.1%

Japan's GDP growth has topped 2% oce since 2000, 4.2% in 2010 on the heels of -5.4% in 2009. That sort of sluggish econmy would absolutely kill us.


Hey, hey - it's not like they have a debt-to-GDP ratio highest in the world!
   79. Traderdave Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:10 PM (#5623583)
So go. And stay.
   80. The Good Face Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:12 PM (#5623584)
Japan's GDP growth has topped 2% oce since 2000, 4.2% in 2010 on the heels of -5.4% in 2009. That sort of sluggish econmy would absolutely kill us.


Yes, heaven forbid our billionaires don't realize a sufficient return on their capital. What's good for Mark Zuckerberg (or Charles Koch) is good for America!
   81. Swoboda is freedom Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:13 PM (#5623587)
I've been to Japan multiple times. The country seems to be doing very well to my eye. Tokyo is literally the only other city in the world of the several I've visited I would be happy to move to and live in.

I have had several friends who have lived there and said it was very hard. Very small living spaces, very hard for a foreigner, especially if you don't speak Japanese.

But the real problem is the low birth rate and aging population. They won't be able to keep that great social safety net with all the aging population.
   82. The Good Face Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:14 PM (#5623588)
Keep in mind: diversity and multiculturalism is pretty much an American / western thing. Few other countries in the world are obsessed with it, and none are obsessed with it in the fashion that we are.


Relevant.

   83. -- Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:15 PM (#5623589)
"It's not fair if brown people out work white people" is a sort of principle.


Who can leap tall buildings in a single bound???

The Noble Illegal Immigrant!!!
   84. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:15 PM (#5623590)
Yes, heaven forbid our billionaires don't realize a sufficient return on their capital. What's good for Mark Zuckerberg (or Charles Koch) is good for America!

Nearly as economically illiterate as the proposition that we don't need more people in this country is the belief that GDP growth only benefits the super-wealthy.
   85. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:15 PM (#5623592)
But the real problem is the low birth rate and aging population. They won't be able to keep that great social safety net with all the aging population.


Yes, that's my point, which Ray and TGF were either too dim to grasp, or purposely ignoring.
   86. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:16 PM (#5623593)
I’m genuinely interested in why people who hate him, hate him so fervently.


I don't hate anyone. I hate his policies and am not fond of the fact that such a person is President, but I most certainly do not hate GOP President Trump.
   87. Zonk was SHOCKED by #6! Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:16 PM (#5623594)
If you're looking for a pacific rim country to emulate, it's South Korea - not Japan.

While Japan is entering its 3rd decade of sluggish growth coupled with an actually crippling and frightening debt-to-GDP ratio, it's South Korea that has actually been the shining star of the last 3 decades or so. Standard of living growth, GDP growth, birthplace of newer technologies and business...

What a shock that the tired old Trumpkins are still stuck in the 70s and 80s.
   88. Lassus Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:21 PM (#5623598)
I’m genuinely interested in why people who hate him, hate him so fervently.

This has to be trollery, because people have gone on and on regarding why they hate him for two years, if not 20.
   89. The Good Face Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:22 PM (#5623600)
Nearly as economically illiterate as the proposition that we don't need more people in this country is the belief that GDP growth only benefits the super-wealthy.


So we're no longer claiming that economic gains over the past decade or two overwhelmingly accrued to the benefit of the wealthy? Huh, interesting. What are the new talking points?
   90. Zonk was SHOCKED by #6! Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:23 PM (#5623601)
Sessions

“The office of sheriff is a critical part of the Anglo-American heritage of law enforcement,” Sessions said. “We must never erode this historic office.”
   91. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:24 PM (#5623602)

I spent many months assuring people that nothing like this could ever happen — that the FBI and Justice Department would not countenance the provision to the FISA court of uncorroborated allegations of heinous misconduct. When Trump enthusiasts accused them of rigging the process, I countered that they probably had not even used the Steele dossier. If the Justice Department had used it in writing a FISA warrant application, I insisted that the FBI would independently verify any important facts presented to the court, make any disclosures that ought in fairness be made so the judge could evaluate the credibility of the sources, and compellingly demonstrate probable cause before alleging that an American was a foreign agent.

I was wrong.
McCarthy is a hack. (The only reason he may have previously "assured" people of that is because he's even more of a pro-law-enforcement hack than he is a partisan hack.) Keep in mind that he has not seen the warrant application. (Neither has Nunes, for that matter.) I love how he talks about the Grassley memo as if it were something other than a political stunt. The "criminal referral" -- a term meant to sound meaningful, but actually simply someone asking the government to prosecute someone, which you or I or even Andy could do if we wanted -- involved telling the FBI stuff that by definition the FBI already knew. (All the information in it came from the FBI.) So it served no function except to get Grassley in the headlines. But again, the only thing it "corroborates," if at all, is the thing I discussed above: that Steele may have lied to the FBI about his contacts with the media.


From McCarthy:
As I outlined at greater length last week (here, in section C), in applying for a warrant, the government must establish the reliability of the informants who witnessed the alleged facts claimed to support a probable-cause finding.
McCarthy is wrong, or is describing this sloppily. Before 1984, that would've been the case; but Illinois v. Gates replaced the Aguilar-Spinelli framework. There are no rigid rules about what information the government must supply in a warrant application to use information supplied by an informant. Nor is hearsay forbidden. If Steele is deemed reliable, and if Steele says, "In my professional experience, these guys are reliable," that may be good. And, again, we have no idea what other information was in the warrant application. None. Zero. Zilch. We don't. McCarthy doesn't. He adds:
If you don’t have witnesses with verifiable, first-hand knowledge, you don’t have anything. Without them, to borrow Director Comey’s notorious dictum, no reasonable prosecutor would bring a warrant application to a federal judge, and no reasonable judge would issue a warrant.
Again, McCarthy misstates the law, but more importantly, the judge did issue a warrant. So either (a) the judge was unreasonable (or biased because he was a Mexican Judge™ or something), or (b) the warrant application was more substantive than McCarthy guesses that it was.

One other point I want to stress: law enforcement lying to (or materially misleading) a judge to secure a warrant would be ethically and legally problematic. But law enforcement presenting to the judge a warrant application that is insufficient to establish probable cause is not ethically or legally problematic. It's the judge's job to decide whether the application is sufficient. I mean, for practical reasons a cop should try to provide sufficient evidence; otherwise he's wasting everyone's time. But if he doesn't, the remedy is that the application is denied, not that someone is punished.
   92. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:24 PM (#5623603)

Great Wolf Lodge -- highly recommended if you have pre-teen kids

I have heard it is fun, but if you go in the pools, make sure your shots are up to date.
It's actually -- at least the one in the Poconos -- quite clean.
   93. Lassus Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:24 PM (#5623604)
If you're looking for a pacific rim country to emulate, it's South Korea - not Japan.

It appears to be China, as per Good Face.
   94. Zonk was SHOCKED by #6! Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:26 PM (#5623605)
Shocking.

Top Justice Department official Brand quit partly over fear she might be asked to oversee Russia probe

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department's No. 3 attorney had been unhappy with her job for months before the department announced her departure on Friday, according to multiple sources close to Associate Attorney General Rachel Brand.

Brand grew frustrated by vacancies at the department and feared she would be asked to oversee the Russia investigation, the sources said.
   95. The Good Face Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:28 PM (#5623607)
Who can leap tall buildings in a single bound???

The Noble Illegal Immigrant!!!


There's literally nothing they can't do better than Americans! Except build a society that's not a ######## apparently.
   96. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:29 PM (#5623609)
Shocking.

Top Justice Department official Brand quit partly over fear she might be asked to oversee Russia probe


Even more shocking is that she's donating her massive salary increase to charity.

Oh, wait.
   97. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:30 PM (#5623610)
So we're no longer claiming that economic gains over the past decade or two overwhelmingly accrued to the benefit of the wealthy? Huh, interesting. What are the new talking points?

Learn the difference between "all" and "most."
   98. OCF Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:32 PM (#5623611)
The typical outstanding English major at my university, on her way to teaching or to law school, is a Latina with native English, from generation 2 or 1.5. Etc. etc., this is nothing more than what so many others have said in this thread.

Yes, that is my experience. OK, I teach math instead of English, so not so many going to law school - and perhaps more Vietnamese, Cambodians, Filipinos, etc. than you have at your university - but the point stands.
   99. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:32 PM (#5623612)
Re: #94/#96--
I wish Ms. Not-Gonna-Be-Bork well in her new career.
   100. Zonk was SHOCKED by #6! Posted: February 12, 2018 at 01:33 PM (#5623615)
Shocking.

Top Justice Department official Brand quit partly over fear she might be asked to oversee Russia probe



Even more shocking is that she's donating her massive salary increase to charity.


A big salary increase she would NOT have been able to get had she found herself in the crosshairs of some future #THEMEMO.

I mean, I doubt Hot Rod Rosey is going to go hungry when he gets fired for refusing to kowtow to whatever conspiracy theory du jour does him in... but not a lot of Fortune 500 companies will be eager to open a C level suite for a partisan flashpoint.

Unless your future career plans involve the cable TV commentariat circuit -- it's probably a good idea to get out of dodge before the Trumpkins train their fire on you.
Page 1 of 21 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Brian
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOTP 2018 August 13: 'Don't confuse sports with politics,' Kosovo tells Bosnia
(1852 - 12:28am, Aug 20)
Last: David Nieporent (now, with children)

NewsblogOT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (August 2018)
(942 - 12:26am, Aug 20)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogDodgers lose to Mariners in extra innings with walk-off balk
(36 - 12:04am, Aug 20)
Last: Davo and his Moose Tacos

NewsblogWeekend OMNICHATTER for August 18-19, 2018
(161 - 11:01pm, Aug 19)
Last: What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face?

NewsblogIt’s official: PawSox to move to Worcester - The Boston Globe
(31 - 9:38pm, Aug 19)
Last: dlf

NewsblogWaPo - Washington Nationals Unveil Bullpen Cart
(1 - 7:52pm, Aug 19)
Last: RMc Has Bizarre Ideas to Fix Baseball

NewsblogMinnesota Steakhouse Pranks Umpire Joe West With Braille Menu
(1 - 7:49pm, Aug 19)
Last: RMc Has Bizarre Ideas to Fix Baseball

NewsblogYankees 1998 reunion was missing Derek Jeter and completely ignored Joe Girardi
(3 - 7:35pm, Aug 19)
Last: Stormy JE

NewsblogLatest bigotry reminds us that baseball is a white man's game.
(319 - 6:33pm, Aug 19)
Last: Rennie's Tenet

NewsblogOT - August/September 2018 College Football thread
(40 - 6:18pm, Aug 19)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogOT: Soccer Thread (2018-19 season begins!)
(339 - 5:09pm, Aug 19)
Last: G. Bostock

Hall of Merit2019 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion
(151 - 4:22pm, Aug 19)
Last: Bleed the Freak

NewsblogBig Al speaks: Meet the dinger-hitting 12-year-old who became a viral Little League sensation
(9 - 1:55pm, Aug 19)
Last: Bote Man is no David

NewsblogCalcaterra - Dusty Baker Drops Truth Bombs
(40 - 10:07am, Aug 19)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogOT: Wrestling Thread November 2014
(2276 - 10:26pm, Aug 18)
Last: Chokeland Bill

Page rendered in 0.7494 seconds
46 querie(s) executed