Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
I was under the impression that a dishonorable discharge pretty much boned you for life in of itself?

Inmate Manning who will now transition(ahem) into being Felon Manning will probably be a quasi celebrity in some circles until people move on to their next passion project. Manning will be alright, as long as help is given for the appropriate mental issues.

I know a few folks that have Dishonorable Discharges and they're doing alright. It used to be a bigger deal, but from what I can see, personally, most employers are so insulated from anything related to military service that they don't even know what a DD entails.

 Janthkin wrote:
Last chance, folks. There's debate on closing the thread permanently, and some voices in favor of closing the OT forum permanently. Kindly conduct yourselves with at least a little decorum, and in accordance with Dakka's few rules.

I would have thought the cooking thread would have redeemed it. There's some serious awesome sauce there.

Get it...awesome sauce...get it...


LAUGH OR I WILL TELL ANOTHER ONE!!!!

 Frazzled wrote:

In actual political news, I'm seeing from numerous sources that the DeVos confirmation hearings aren't going so well for her... Many senators who are in favor of strong public schools are hammering her.... this is good news.

She schooled Sanders though. That was nice.

Source? And DeVos is literally the worst person they could've picked for the job. Well, at least we'll no longer have corrupt politicians, now we'll just have businessmen masquerading as politicians.

Incorrect. You can always find someone worse if you try hard enough...

Absent picking the head of the Chicago ISD I'd agree she's "less than optimal."

Of course I view the next administration as "less than optimal."

Oh man, I've always wanted to go to a military parade, goose steppping in real life is probably a more impressive sight to behold as opposed to historical footage. So should we be calling him Premier Trump, or Chairman Trump, or Dear Leader Trump now?

Jebus x.x

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
I was under the impression that a dishonorable discharge pretty much boned you for life in of itself?

You can petition to have your discharge changed. Depending on time and other factors, it is possible to get a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge upgraded to a general or even honorable discharge. You generally don't have to disclose information about your discharge to an employer but it will show up on a background check should one be done.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Oh man, I've always wanted to go to a military parade, goose steppping in real life is probably a more impressive sight to behold as opposed to historical footage. So should we be calling him Premier Trump, or Chairman Trump, or Dear Leader Trump now?

Jebus x.x

I haven't done a goose step, but I have done both the electric slide and the duck walk.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Oh man, I've always wanted to go to a military parade, goose steppping in real life is probably a more impressive sight to behold as opposed to historical footage. So should we be calling him Premier Trump, or Chairman Trump, or Dear Leader Trump now?

Jebus x.x

Glorious Hairpiece, the Small Handed Emperor.

Manning isn't going to have to worry about cash. I'm sure they'll get paraded around the talk show circuit, get deals, etc.

 nels1031 wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
I was under the impression that a dishonorable discharge pretty much boned you for life in of itself?

Inmate Manning who will now transition(ahem) into being Felon Manning and will probably be a quasi celebrity in some circles until people move on to their next passion project. Manning will be alright, as long as help is given for the appropriate mental issues.

I know a few folks that have Dishonorable Discharges and they're doing alright. It used to be a bigger deal, but from what I can see, personally, most employers are so insulated from anything related to military service that they don't even know what a DD entails.

If they do a background check then that should pop up in the same way a felony conviction would with all the same alarm bells. Some people can do just fine with felony convictions or DD's on their record, but not usually in the corporate world, though I'd suspect that you're probably right and if Manning were to end up doing anything it'd be some sort of "quasi-celebrity" advocacy thing where that's not really an issue and people would specifically be seeking Manning out.

On another note, I think a lot of the emotion bound up in the thing has to do with the culture war aspect being fueled by Manning's identity issues and people either wanting to use that as an advocacy issue in a really hamfisted way, or to alternatively "stick it" to someone they can set up as the embodiment of the "america-hating liberal" or somesuch. The commutation doesn't bother me too much personally. Manning is a person with obvious deep issues one way or the other, and did something stupid, and now has already spent as much or more time behind bars as most people who leaked information have, having gone through the court system and admitted wrongdoing. I just wish all sides had toned down the rhetoric surrounding the whole affair.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Janthkin wrote:
Last chance, folks. There's debate on closing the thread permanently, and some voices in favor of closing the OT forum permanently. Kindly conduct yourselves with at least a little decorum, and in accordance with Dakka's few rules.

I would have thought the cooking thread would have redeemed it. There's some serious awesome sauce there.

Get it...awesome sauce...get it...


LAUGH OR I WILL TELL ANOTHER ONE!!!!

Off Topic to be replaced by Food forum?

 Vaktathi wrote:

 nels1031 wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
I was under the impression that a dishonorable discharge pretty much boned you for life in of itself?

Inmate Manning who will now transition(ahem) into being Felon Manning and will probably be a quasi celebrity in some circles until people move on to their next passion project. Manning will be alright, as long as help is given for the appropriate mental issues.

I know a few folks that have Dishonorable Discharges and they're doing alright. It used to be a bigger deal, but from what I can see, personally, most employers are so insulated from anything related to military service that they don't even know what a DD entails.

If they do a background check then that should pop up in the same way a felony conviction would with all the same alarm bells. Some people can do just fine with felony convictions or DD's on their record, but not usually in the corporate world, though I'd suspect that you're probably right and if Manning were to end up doing anything it'd be some sort of "quasi-celebrity" advocacy thing where that's not really an issue and people would specifically be seeking Manning out.

On another note, I think a lot of the emotion bound up in the thing has to do with the culture war aspect being fueled by Manning's identity issues and people either wanting to use that as an advocacy issue in a really hamfisted way, or to alternatively "stick it" to someone they can set up as the embodiment of the "america-hating liberal" or somesuch. The commutation doesn't bother me too much personally. Manning is a person with obvious deep issues one way or the other, and did something stupid, and now has already spent as much or more time behind bars as most people who leaked information have, having gone through the court system and admitted wrongdoing. I just wish all sides had toned down the rhetoric surrounding the whole affair.

Good post. And even handed as well.

Manning's crimes are complex IMO. But whatever your view, and I know some people regard Manning as a traitor, but I think Manning has repaid her debt to society with time already served, so I broadly support Obama's decision on this.

Snowden, on the other hand, is different in my book. Anybody who reveals that the American constitution was violated on such a scale, is a hero in my book. A patriot for defending the constitution from unlawful attacks.

The counter argument is that he should have consulted the proper channels, but when the Obama administration is actively pursuing whistleblowers on a scale never before seen, who can blame Snowden for getting out? Not I.

Like I said it's strange when men who actively sought to destroy the Union (Lee and Jackson) and who actively contributed to the deaths of thousands of Americans, get High Schools named after them, but a man who defends the constitution* against an enemy, this time a DOMESTIC enemy, is branded a traitor.

Very strange...

*4th Amendment

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

I strongly disagree mate.... The reason Manning was tried and convicted in the first place was because of the massive stack of paperwork showing behavioral issues. Manning's actions are very clearly a childish lashing out at her leadership and military service.

She was tried and convicted because she embarrassed the US armed forces by for example revealing videos of helicopters strafing vans full of civilians. That Obama chose now to commute her sentence proves that throwing her into solitary was only ever done out of political expediency.

 d-usa wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/17/politics/chuck-schumer-tom-price-may-have-broken-the-law-in-stock-transaction/index.html

"If he knew about it, it could very well be a violation of the law," Schumer told CNN. "Now they say there's a broker, it's kind of strange that this broker would pick this stock totally independently of him introducing legislation that's so narrow and specific to this company."

Schumer also called for an investigation of Price after CNN reported that Price bought up to $15,000 worth of stock in Zimmer Biomet -- a medical device maker -- and then introduced a measure that would have directly benefited the company. One week after Price bought the stock, he put in a measure that would have delayed a new regulation that would have harmed the company.
First on CNN: Trump's Cabinet pick invested in company, then introduced a bill to help it

"This is a very narrow, specific company that dealt with implants—hip and knee—and the legislation specifically affects implants. He puts it in a week after he buys the stock? That cries out for an investigation," Schumer told CNN.

Update to this ordeal... CNN is accused of journalistic malpractice:

However, CNN decided to leave out key facts:

Importantly, Price played no role in the decision to purchase the stock, which was executed under a broker-directed account by Morgan Stanley, according to a source with direct knowledge on the issue. The stock purchase was by his brokerage firm during a regular rebalancing of accounts.

The congressman — who for two decades was an orthopedic surgeon — also went on record opposing the CMS regulation six months before the stock selection had been made.

On Sept. 21, 2015 Price joined 60 Democrats and Republicans who questioned the Obama administration’s new, controversial Medicare reimbursement policy. In the letter, the group asked Andy Slavitt, the CMS acting administrator, to delay the regulation.

Further, Price introduced his legislation before he knew of the stock purchase. He was the chief sponsor of the HIP Act and he introduced it on March 23, 2016, according to House records. But Morgan Stanley did not inform Price of the Zimmer Biomet stock until April 14, according to House financial disclosure forms on the Georgia congressman’s transactions.

How big was the stock transaction that would have allowed Price to clean up? It was 26 shares, amounting to a little less than $2,700.

But, hey... antagonistic journalism is back baby!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Rosebuddy wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

I strongly disagree mate.... The reason Manning was tried and convicted in the first place was because of the massive stack of paperwork showing behavioral issues. Manning's actions are very clearly a childish lashing out at her leadership and military service.

She was tried and convicted because she embarrassed the US armed forces by for example revealing videos of helicopters strafing vans full of civilians. That Obama chose now to commute her sentence proves that throwing her into solitary was only ever done out of political expediency.

She very clearly broke the law in an egregious manner.

Don't forget, that Al qaeda used the leak for their propaganda and these documents were found in Bin Laden's compound.

If she had any interest in whistle-blowing over a specific case or instances of what she viewed as misconduct in Iraq... there were ample channels available for her to take that up the chain or reached out to the IG for whistle-blower status. If, however, she received no satisfaction there... she could of pulled out the specific videos, instances and communications and then went to press, asking for anonymity from the reporter. She'd still be breaking the law, but at least she'd have a case...

However, she was accordingly tried and convicted by a military tribunal.

If there were issues with dealing with her dysphoria, it's incumbent to the incarceration system to deal with it appropriately... not to be used as a 'get out of jail' card.

If anything, Snowden's actions seemed more like a 'whistle-blower' act compared to what she did...

That manning clearly broke the law isn't disqualifying. Kinda the point o a pardon.

Serious question.... Man in let out active info on what we were doing and had done. What exactly, besides processes, did Snowden leak?

Oh, and considering the topics discussed i think everyone on the thread has been awesome. The mods are being way too prickly. I bet that criticism will be enough to get the thread closed.

 ender502 wrote:
The mods are being way too prickly. I bet that criticism will be enough to get the thread closed.

Uh, some of the replies on this thread, like most OT, have been pushing the line of Rule #1, if not damn sprinting up to the edge of it.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Oh man, I've always wanted to go to a military parade, goose steppping in real life is probably a more impressive sight to behold as opposed to historical footage. So should we be calling him Premier Trump, or Chairman Trump, or Dear Leader Trump now?

I'm a fan of "Il Douche"

Pronounced, of course, to sound rather like "Il Duce", but juuuuust enough like "douche" for people to know its an insult.

Point of order as some comments on the matter are getting sloppy with the terminology. Manning received clemency, not a pardon. Big difference.

 jreilly89 wrote:

 ender502 wrote:
The mods are being way too prickly. I bet that criticism will be enough to get the thread closed.

Uh, some of the replies on this thread, like most OT, have been pushing the line of Rule #1, if not damn sprinting up to the edge of it.

Not even close IMO. If the people involved with the thread don't mind then I don't see a problem.

Also, the mods have an incredible bias toward certain viewpoints. From conversations with others I has become abundantly clear that liberals are suspended for being "rude" and conservatives are not. Personally, I'd rather see that addressed.

Btw, can anyone help me out with what Snowden let out?

 jreilly89 wrote:

 ender502 wrote:
The mods are being way too prickly. I bet that criticism will be enough to get the thread closed.

Uh, some of the replies on this thread, like most OT, have been pushing the line of Rule #1, if not damn sprinting up to the edge of it.

First reply to OP in this thread was a moderator having to tone down the title, right out of the gate. Its lasting longer than I expected.

 BigWaaagh wrote:
Point of order as some comments on the matter are getting sloppy with the terminology. Manning received clemency, not a pardon. Big difference.

Yep. Refusing to use correct gender pronouns and not noticing the difference between clemency and a pardon shows this topic is about feelings, not facts.

Is the US really going forward with Trump "divesting" control of his companies to his kids? That seems an insufficient level of insulation between the PotUS and his conflicts of interest.

 feeder wrote:

 BigWaaagh wrote:
Point of order as some comments on the matter are getting sloppy with the terminology. Manning received clemency, not a pardon. Big difference.

Yep. Refusing to use correct gender pronouns and not noticing the difference between clemency and a pardon shows this topic is about feelings, not facts.

Is the US really going forward with Trump "divesting" control of his companies to his kids? That seems an insufficient level of insulation between the PotUS and his conflicts of interest.

One would think...but ah...who's gonna do something about it? He's head of the executive branch and as president he gets to ostensibly be in charge of the Republican party as well, which happens to control both houses of congress, and he's got an open supreme court spot to fill that will break the current makeup with a court split 50/50 down ideological lines in his favor.

Yay!

 ender502 wrote:


Also, the mods have an incredible bias toward certain viewpoints. From conversations with others I has become abundantly clear that liberals are suspended for being "rude" and conservatives are not. Personally, I'd rather see that addressed.

This thread is not the place to debate forum policy, but as someone who has been banned by the mods for being rude I can say I totally deserved it each and every time, and I know they have banned conservative members for doing the same.

Btw, can anyone help me out with what Snowden let out?

Snowden in 2013 released classified files to The Guardian and The Washington Post pertaining to the NSA's PRISM program.

EDIT: lol, putting links in quote boxes XD

 feeder wrote:

 BigWaaagh wrote:
Point of order as some comments on the matter are getting sloppy with the terminology. Manning received clemency, not a pardon. Big difference.

Yep. Refusing to use correct gender pronouns and not noticing the difference between clemency and a pardon shows this topic is about feelings, not facts.

Is the US really going forward with Trump "divesting" control of his companies to his kids? That seems an insufficient level of insulation between the PotUS and his conflicts of interest.

No, you don't understand. Trump's spent his life building his brand. It's the most important thing he's ever been entrusted with. You can't expect him to turn it over to some competent stranger just so he can do some piffling little job like being President.

It's absolutely insufficient, but the GOP's going to let it go ahead anyway, I'm sure.

 ender502 wrote:
Also, the mods have an incredible bias toward certain viewpoints. From conversations with others I has become abundantly clear that liberals are suspended for being "rude" and conservatives are not. Personally, I'd rather see that addressed.

I've heard the exact same complaint from the Conservative side too. So the Mods must be doing something right.

Yes, we mods are Commie Nazi Alt-Right SJWs.

Please feel free to start the usual "Mods Are Biased" thread in the Nuts & Bolts section but please keep discussion ITT on US Politics. Thanks!

 Peregrine wrote:

 whembly wrote:
So the question remains... why should her gender dysphoria have any bearings to the merits of her commutation?

Because it's related to her poor treatment in prison. If she was receiving proper treatment (as a woman) for it in prison then it wouldn't be relevant, and the merits of the commutation would be entirely the fact that her sentence was a disproportionate act of revenge.

Obama is the Commander in Chief, if he thought Manning wasn't receiving proper treatment in prison then he could easily rectify that by issuing orders through the chain of command. The only reason to commute Manning's sentence would be if Obama had doubts regarding her guilt or the appropriateness of her sentence. Commuting her sentence because of poor treatment in prison is an admission by Obama that as Commander in Chief he can't control the conduct of the personnel in charge of military prisons. There's no excuse for the military to mistreat prisoners but there's no excuse for the President not to be able to put a stop to it either.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 feeder wrote:

 BigWaaagh wrote:
Point of order as some comments on the matter are getting sloppy with the terminology. Manning received clemency, not a pardon. Big difference.

Yep. Refusing to use correct gender pronouns and not noticing the difference between clemency and a pardon shows this topic is about feelings, not facts.

Is the US really going forward with Trump "divesting" control of his companies to his kids? That seems an insufficient level of insulation between the PotUS and his conflicts of interest.

One would think...but ah...who's gonna do something about it? He's head of the executive branch and as president he gets to ostensibly be in charge of the Republican party as well, which happens to control both houses of congress, and he's got an open supreme court spot to fill that will break the current makeup with a court split 50/50 down ideological lines in his favor.

Yay!

Filling Scalia's vacant seat with a "conservative" justice would simply retain the same "conservative":"liberal" ratio the court had under Obama. Isn't divesting himself from his companies' operations and investment the same thing every president does? It's always been explained to me as every POTUS has their investments hidden out of their reach while they're in office.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 ender502 wrote:
Also, the mods have an incredible bias toward certain viewpoints. From conversations with others I has become abundantly clear that liberals are suspended for being "rude" and conservatives are not. Personally, I'd rather see that addressed.

I've heard the exact same complaint from the Conservative side too. So the Mods must be doing something right.

Yeah it's almost as if.... both sides are equally bad.

Btw, can anyone help me out with what Snowden let out?

Snowden in 2013 released classified files to The Guardian and The Washington Post pertaining to the NSA's PRISM program.

 LordofHats wrote:

 ender502 wrote:


Also, the mods have an incredible bias toward certain viewpoints. From conversations with others I has become abundantly clear that liberals are suspended for being "rude" and conservatives are not. Personally, I'd rather see that addressed.

This thread is not the place to debate forum policy, but as someone who has been banned by the mods for being rude I can say I totally deserved it each and every time, and I know they have banned conservative members for doing the same.

Btw, can anyone help me out with what Snowden let out?

Snowden in 2013 released classified files to The Guardian and The Washington Post pertaining to the NSA's PRISM program.

EDIT: lol, putting links in quote boxes XD

Thats sorta what I figured I was less "a met with b" and more "this system is doing XYZ" in that case I would give Snowden a pass before Manning. Though, when Manning dis give info to WikiLeaks at least they seemed to actual audit the material rather than just a straight dump.