New answers tagged

1

It's morally wrong, because it supports retaliation, and thus discourages future whistleblowers from speaking up. It's morally wrong, because it invites hate crime. Members of a major US party have already ambiguously asked for the whistleblower's head. It serves to distract from the story at hand. Major US newspapers have already been accused of playing a ...


1

The domestic political figures insulted as "little" include Adam Schiff at 5'11, Marco Rubio at 5'9 and Michael Bloomberg at 5'8. Other domestic media figures include: Donny Deutch at 5'10, George Stephanopoulos at 5'5 and Jeff Zucker at 5'6. While this group of men is certainly not tall, they are not especially short either with an average height of 5'8. ...


0

Possibly because the outing of the whistle blower seems to have been done with malice in mind (given the threats of being a traitor) and as a distraction attempt, and the media, already having more than enough story to report on, have decided not to spread the name further so that they can claim the high moral ground. Additionally, if they report the name ...


0

There is another reason that hasn't been explicitly mentioned yet. Media for their reporting depend on anonymous sources, including whistle blowers. It is a very fundamental moral and practical principle for media to keep this anonymous sources protected. People who leak to the media need to be able to stay safe. The journalists will not reveal the names ...


1

The New York Times, 12/17/2007. Charles Bagli wrote a profile on Felix Sater, head of the Bayrock Group through whom multiple actors, including the Mafia and the Russian government, laundered money. In subsequent articles, they directly tied Trump's resurgence after multiple bankruptcies to the help of the Bayrock Group, as no bank was willing to loan a ...


0

With both gerrymandering and the lack of turnout for primary contests, more and more of the unwilling turnover in elected positions happens from within the party during the primary contests. By nature, those most likely to turn out for party-internal-only contests are going to be people motivated and invested in the party, which means your more "moderate" ...


6

NYT opinion piece by a former deputy director of the CIA (5 August 2016) On 5 August 2016 the New York Times posted an opinion piece by former deputy director of the CIA Michael J. Morell. It contained the following paragraph: In the intelligence business, we would say that Mr. Putin had recruited Mr. Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation....


0

You say But will such a scenario repeat itself for 2020? Probably not, given the immense popularity of the most likely Democratic candidates, be that Elizabeth Warren, Beto O'Rourke, or Joe Biden. That seems to ignore the trump card that the Electoral College is. See for example a question here on recent polling; to reuse some material from there to ...


3

There are some journalistic standards that may come into play. First, it's typical to have multiple independent sources before reporting a fact, especially if it's the reliability of the first source is at all questionable. Sometimes they will report that another reputable news outlet is reporting something, but that usually comes with disclaimers like, "...


18

In the US, being a whistleblower is a status that is protected against retaliation by several federal laws. This is to encourage good behavior in government by acting as a check on illegal behavior. President Trump has already engaged in stochastic terrorism by stating that the whistleblower should be executed for treason as a spy. So by refusing to ...


37

The origins of the "identifying" of the whistle-blower come not from any actual fact or confirmation, but from speculation from a right-wing agenda site that bases the speculation upon similar characteristics matching between this person and the description of the whistle-blower. The obvious problem with the identification is that it has not been factually ...


11

Facebook has stated that: "Any mention of the potential whistleblower’s name violates our coordinating harm policy, which prohibits content ‘outing of witness, informant, or activist.’ We are removing any and all mentions of the potential whistleblower’s name and will revisit this decision should their name be widely published in the media or used by ...


54

Mistaken identity It's not clear that the person named by RealClearInvestigations is the actual whistleblower. According to mediabiasfactcheck.com, that website has mixed factual reporting and has frequently run "emotionally loaded headlines" of which they give a few examples. Given the uncertainty as to whether this is the actual whistleblower, it's not ...


0

I can think of no difference that strongly correlates with presidential vs. parliamentary systems. In a presidential system the cabinet members might be more likely to serve at the pleasure of the president and not the parliament, but that is not exclusively so.


2

"Presidential candidates" is a tricky term to define, and a large dataset to gather. Taking the ages of Presidents when first sworn in (comparitively easy data to obtain), and assuming that this is a good approximation for age of candidates despite the notes below, it looks instead like the median age has, broadly, been decreasing. N.B. Grover Cleveland ...


0

Because religion is very important for about half of all Americans. Like all religious people they have a fascination with what other people do in their bedrooms, even though it has nothing to do with their performance regarding political matters. Americans love sex scandals, islamic countries worry about homosexuality. Silly folly diversions are very ...


2

The Formal press briefings had a measure of predictable regularity. Stories and the news hour could be scheduled around the event, to allow for live airing with minimal interruption of other programming. In the informal ambush of the President as he moves towards he helicopter, while there may be a schedule of his activities it isn't the most robust. This ...


0

No. The JCPOA is not a treaty, or even an executive agreement, as viewed by US Law. It is merely a non-binding political agreement. It was never put before the Senate to "Advise and Consent," and thus was never challenged to the 60 vote threshhold. Instead, there was a measure of political cowardice in the passage of the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act, ...


0

Note that Iran themselves point out how they are gradually disengaging from the deal, e.g. news from Oct 16: On Wednesday, the spokesman for the Iranian parliament’s national security committee, Hossein Naghavi-Hosseini, said: “In the fourth step of reducing JCPOA commitments, we will probably impose limits on inspections, which means the International ...


4

The practice of calling a person, in public service, by the highest title they had ever held is not new. It goes as far back as the beginning of the country. At least, that is what the movies would have us believe. Here's a quote from the movie Amistad (as it is presented on IMDB): Theodore Joadson: I know you, Mr. President. I know you and your ...


-5

Two reasons: America is fundamentally a Christian nation. In terms of our values, our heritage, and our founding principles, there is only one thing that is more scandalous than extramarital affairs. This can be read straight from the Ten Commandments delivered by the Savior. What this means for politicians is that stories about such scandals are extremely ...


1

Mr. Obama, Mr. Bush, or Mr. Washington are all entirely appropriate. This question goes back as far as the first president of the United States and the precedent he wished to set for the nomenclature of the office. To distinguish itself from monarchy and dictatorships elsewhere, Washington and Congress settled on the term "Mr. President" for the President ...


1

Sure, if you are working in government, want to show deference to the office or office-holder, or cretainly if you are part of the active military, Joe's answer and the Wiki page hold. But is that proper? America also has a fine and noble tradition of booing, heckling and generally reminding whomever the jackwagon is in office that they actually works for ...


2

While most answers quite reasonably look at the question in detail, stepping back and taking a philosophical overview has some merit. A potentially applicable aphorism is John Godfrey Saxe's codification of the ancient "6 blind men described an elephant" . Note: This image (without my added text in red) is used without attribution on so many sites that ...


6

You have answered your own question. The answer you found is correct, that the proper way to address a former President is "Mr. President" or "President Barack Obama". It may only seem weird because there have been a number of cases during the past two decades where people have used other forms of address to refer to current or former Presidents for unusual ...


6

In the normal process of things, Congress would refer to this as 'criminal contempt' and refer the matter to the Department of Justice for the Attorney General to prosecute those who had defied subpoenas, with the end result being fines and jail time for those who violated the subpoena. Unfortunately, given William Barr's behavior towards obstructing the ...


3

Because they can't (easily) In most european healthcare systems, there is some sort of official body that decides which measures (treatments, medication, ...) it pays. This gives that body an enormous negotiating power. That's most probably the reason why we don't see price-hiking (such as the notorious epi-pen) in europe. The official body would simply ...


13

The US was a bit opaque in their other reasoning, just vaguely speaking of "overly narrow scope and politicized nature" of the resolution. In 2014 however, when a similar resolution was proposed, the EU, which only abstained had a more direct explanation: The European Union’s member states have abstained en masse from a United Nations resolution against ...


1

This is a difficult question because calculating a net benefit involves subtracting from the taxes on marijuana losses on other things. I don't know of a federal estimate, but some state-level data exists: In 2018, Colorado legal pot sales topped $1.2 billion, with the state pulling in about $270 million in taxes. Compare that to the approximately $45 ...


3

Assuming that they do get summoned and do show up, how would their anonymity be preserved? Is there any precedent to bringing in an anonymous person that we can look to for an example? Whistleblower.org has an example from a similar (though probably not as high profile) situation in the US (emphasis mine): An IRS hearing in September 1997 illustrated the ...


9

This answer is going to be a bit circular put a Pew poll found that the US public disapproves of adultery more than the Europeans do. And there's a fair inference from that that the US public cares more about such matters (like adultery) in politicians' private lives than the European public does. (There might be even polls on this explicitly, but I don't ...


5

"Sex stories" as you put them are usually extremely relevant to determing whether or not a politician behaves ethically. It is generally believed that people who do not act ethically in some parts of their lives will also act unethically in others, some of those being very relevant to the voting public. "Sex stories" are also embarrassing and therefore ...


-1

As Americans, our flavor of capitalism conflates the concept of virtue and prosperity in our attempts to paint ourselves as a meritocracy. X person is richer/more powerful because he's a harder worker, stuff like that. Why? Part of it is our White, Anglo Saxon Protestant forebears who found hard work to be one of the greatest virtues. Another part is that ...


6

According to CATO (page 5), the "State-Level Expenditures" of marijuana prohibition in the US was $5,386,753,000 annually, as of 2008, a figure encompassing judicial, incarceration, treatment, and other costs. On the federal level specifically, according to the U.S. Sentencing Commission's 2018 numbers, there were 2,118 federal inmates incarcerated for ...


30

According to justsecurity.org which provides a timeline which starts with: September 28, 2018 – Congress enacts a Department of Defense spending bill that includes $250 million in Ukrainian military assistance funding. Later appropriations bills provided additional funding for Ukraine. That date links to H.R.6157 - Department of Defense and Labor, Health ...


47

This is a bit of a phony question on several levels. To answer, they absolutely HAVE emphasized the healthcare cost savings. First of all, you claim that they focus on "increased healthcare spending," in the title, but then you talk about increased GOVERNMENT spending in the body of the question. In a system that is based on PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT healthcare ...


1

100% In principle the electors can completely ignore the popular results and vote for anyone they like, even people not in the party that selected them.


1

It depends. According to the Washington Post, it depends on whether a vote on disqualification from holding office in the future is held: The question of whether Trump could nonetheless run for president next year is more complicated. In the impeachment of federal officials, the Senate has adopted the practice of holding a separate vote on the issue of ...


11

More than one press article attributed the October jump (e.g. as seen in in SurpriseDog's answer from cumulative 538 data) to have been caused by independents, e.g. as Reuters reported on Oct 23: Support for impeachment was relatively steady among Republicans and Democrats over the past week but it surged among independents, a group that includes people ...


21

Nate Silver's website FiveThirtyEight has been collating and adjusting all of the polls related to both starting the impeachment query and conviction. Source: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/impeachment-polls/?ex_cid=rrpromo As you can see support for impeachment was unaffected by the years long Russia gate scandal, but the Ukraine scandal caused ...


2

You're right in saying that many aspects of the ERA are already covered by federal laws. One of the most glaring reasons to include this amendment is that, just any federal law, it could be repealed. The amendment would be a guarantee for those protections under any and all circumstances (although there could also be an amendment to invalidate the ERA). I'll ...


4

I cannot find corroboration or explicit confirmation on this, but it's in line with similar political decisions that have been made in the past (= observing how voters respond to specific talking points). If anyone can find information to back this up, I'd be very happy. Because people's initially approving response to decreased costs is going to be ...


3

Campaign contributions do not go directly to the politician. They go to the politician's campaign, to be spent on the campaign, theoretically. This can include perks like visits to fancy hotels, meals, plane trips, etc. So long as they are done for a campaign purpose. Campaign money helps ensure that the politician retains their jobs, and the power ...


4

These donations are for a political campaign, and under federal law, such funds are not allowed for personal use. It therefore follows that the candidate cannot transfer any remaining funds to their personal account. Any campaign funds that remain after all debts have been paid can go to a number of places, such as a future campaign, a national party, or ...


2

Because all peoples votes should be weighted equally and have equal influence on the result of an election. Why should the vote of someone in Wyoming be worth 3 times that of someone in California, New York, Florida, or Washington? However, divibisan's answer gives an excellent explanation as to why it wouldn't actually have a large impact on the election ...


3

Are the polls trustworthy? For most of them, yes, they're pretty reliable with actual results usually falling within their stated margins of error. However, whether these results will actually translate into election night results is an entirely different question. We're still an entire year away from election night. We're still likely several (and ...


8

As Brythan argues in their answer to a related question, the Electoral college doesn't actually give a greater voice to small states, or prevent urban areas from dominating rural areas: in practice, what it does is give disproportionate power and influence to states that are evenly divided between the two parties, so called "swing-states". Does it give ...


6

That everybody's vote should have equal weight, rather than the outcome being decided by voters in a few key states is a position that needs no defence. The question is surely, why would anyone not want that? One can make sound arguments to the latter question based on the history and Constitution of the USA. Or, of course, unsound ones based on self-...


0

If a political party loses a national election with a slight majority in the popular vote, but a deficit in the electoral college due to lack of broad appeal, that party isn't going to like the EC, and is going to make arguments to abolish the EC. That has happened to the US Democratic party twice now: in 2000 with Al Gore's loss to George Bush, and in ...


6

nationalpopularvote.com is a good resource for this. This year a bill was introduced by three Virginia delegates HB 2422, but it was defeated in Privileges and Elections subcommittee in February. Last year two of the same delegates (Mark Levine and Marcus Simon, both Democrats) introduced a similar bill, HB 99, that was also defeated in the same subcomittee ...


Top 50 recent answers are included