The nuclear expansion that wasn’t.
Better late than never, right?
- Merrill resigns a day before possible guilty plea in corruption probe — I hope for The State‘s sake that he really does plead guilty Friday morning, after that hed.
- In Tit-for-Tat Move, U.S. Orders Russia to Close a Consulate — You close one a ours, we close one a yours — bada-bing!
- Trump officials slash advertising, grants that help Americans get health coverage — You know how Trump and Republicans talk about letting the ACA fail on its own. Their plan for letting it do that involve shooting it in the head first.
- Santee Cooper leaders were paid bonuses for failed nuclear project — Drip, drip, drip. The hits keep comin’.
- Trump-Russia inquiry: what you missed in a week dominated by Harvey — A nice service from The Guardian for distracted Americans.
Related Posts
For those who may have missed it, I’d like to pass along this link to a Nicholas Kristof piece in the NYT yesterday. Just another example of America shouldering its “unique global responsibilities” and proving its “indispensibility.”
American “Excetionalism”?
Yep. And isn’t it a wonderful thing that the world’s greatest power is the one with a free press that can hold it accountable when it screws up?
Which is of course one of my main points when we talk about America’s role in the world: It’s absolutely essential that the United States (and Britain, since this involves them) not shrink back to its borders and leave a vacuum that WILL be filled by the likes of China or Russia.
Seriously, looking at this horror story in Yemen, what is it that you want to see happen in a global sense? You think that if the United States weren’t involved in the world, this situation and others would be BETTER? How do you see that working? Do you think that, if the U.S. were not Saudi Arabia’s friend, it wouldn’t do things like this?
In which situation do you believe there’s a chance for this particular problem to get better — one in which the United States is engaged, or one in which we don’t give a damn and stay out of it?
What are the options? What are the choices before us? And what are the likely outcomes attached to those choices?
If we do something, we have an effect. If we don’t do something, we have an effect. That’s just the way things are.
In this case, we should do as suggested in this piece: Work for a cease-fire, and peace talks. Cut Saudi Arabia off until it stops doing what its doing. But doing any of those things are examples of the United States, as the world’s one superpower, throwing its weight around. They are examples of “America shouldering its ‘unique global responsibilities’ and proving its ‘indispensibility.'” There’s no other way to see it.
Of course, the problem at the moment is that the world’s one superpower is led by a malevolent ignoramus. Which is why it is so essential to change THAT situation. In the meantime, maybe with the help of pieces such as Kristof’s, next time maybe a few more senators beyond those 47 vote to cut off arms to the Saudis…
Malevolent ignoramus notwithstanding, this US support of the Saudis in this particular current Yemeni situation began with Obama. Trump may be doubling down on Saudi support but much of the responsibility for the scenes we are witnessing lie with Obama.
Yes, but he had started a course correction, which Trump reversed:
That’s why it matters who is in charge. Some people respond constructively to new information; others call it “fake news”…
“And isn’t it a wonderful thing that the world’s greatest power is the one with a free press that can hold it accountable when it screws up?”
“The one”? That’s an overdose of self-praise, my friend. Another American tradition. Other western countries (as well as some eastern ones) have a free press. But you don’t see them constantly congratulating themselves for it. Besides, a quarter to a third of the American people dismiss outlets like the NYT as the (lying) liberal media – diminishing any effect the reporting may have.
“The one” among those in the running to be the world’s greatest power. Sorry. I thought that was clear from the context, but maybe not…
Nope, wasn’t — not even on second or third reading.
But the excess of self-praise is still there no matter how it’s worded.
It’s about oil. No matter how much Brad and Lindsey protest. If Saudi Arabia produced flour, our involvement would be much different.
We shouldn’t just cut arms to Saudi Arabia. We should hold them accountable on the world stage for their terrible human rights policies. Oil man Bush never quite could direct the proper amount of outrage toward them after 9/11. That’s why I still hold Bush in lower regard than Trump (to this point).
When have I ever protested at that? Our relationship with Saudi Arabia is largely based in oil. I’ve said so many times.
The 1991 Gulf War was, by and large, about oil.
Where you see me protest is when people say our involvement in Iraq was about oil.
It’s like night and day — liberating Kuwait was about going to the status quo ante and keep business as usual going. Iraq was about upsetting applecarts, whatever the cost…
Brad will be the last person on earth to acknowledge Iraq 2 was about oil. There have been a number of good reports, including an excellent piece by CNN, that removes all doubt. I’ll try to track it down.
ww.cnn.com/2013/03/19/opinion/iraq-war-oil-juhasz/index.html
You know why?
Note that I say “largely about oil.”
Nothing is just about one thing. The world’s just not that simple. Our relationship with the Saudis is also about our need for reliable allies in the region. And historically, we’ve turned a blind eye to too many things in order to maintain that strategic relationship.
The largest oil importer to the United States is Canada. But no one would say our relationship with Canada is just “about oil”…
Merrill pleads guilty to 1 count and Pascoe says there are 29 more hanging over his head if he doesn’t cooperate fully in the investigation.
The first domino falls. Courson next? Will Courson go out doing the right thing finally or keep using his lawyers to try and find some loophole to prevent a trial? An innocent man doesn’t look for loopholes. An innocent man relies on the evidence.
So Merrill gets a year probation for misusing $1 million dollars. How many other legislators would sign up for that deal?
“The charges, made in December in separate indictments, include specific counts of taking money from various groups to influence legislation on their behalf and using his office to make money. The charges date to 2002.”
Brad – you still unwilling to ascribe bad intent to others just because you wouldn’t do the same thing? Run for office and if you win, I bet you have a whole new set of friends interested in your financial well being.
“he payments from groups such as the S.C. Association of Realtors, Student Transportation of America, Thomas & Hutton Engineering, Infilaw Management Solutions, the S.C. Association of Convenience Stores the S.C. Trial Lawyers Association and the S.C. Manufacturer’s Alliance.”
I guess we should assume these are all just altruistic organizations without any specific concerns about any legislation that might impact them financially.
I assure you that no legislation will impact them financially.
Because “impact” is a noun, not a verb. 🙂
“So Merrill gets a year probation for misusing $1 million dollars. How many other legislators would sign up for that deal?”
I don’t know. You didn’t describe the whole deal.
Basically, Merrill has to be a very good boy and do everything prosecutors want, because they still have the 29 other charges hanging over his head. In fact, they have SUCH leverage on him that if I were defending another legislator against whom Merrill testifies, I would make a HUGE deal out of the fact that he has an enormous personal interest it incriminating my client, justly or unjustly.
Anyway, that’s the way I read it. You seem to think Merrill is out of the woods and getting a sweet deal. This is just starting for him. He has a new career implicating other people…
He also lost his seat in the General Assembly. While some grow weary of life at the State House, for others that loss would be a very big deal.
On the other hand, a year from now Merrill can come back as a lobbyist and make more money. That assumes that he wouldn’t be the kind of lobbyist that I am, but not many returning legislators come back as unpaid volunteers for public interest groups.
Is this a felony charge or a misdemeanor? If a misdemeanor, it’s like pleading guilty to a $1,000,000 parking ticket and told to be good for a year. I’m surprised there’s no restitution required. But it’s business as usual between judges and politicians.
Really? You read it that way, too? I certainly didn’t.
Bryan, help me out here. I’m not a lawyer. But it seems to me that the technical legal term for the relationship between Merrill and prosecutors going forward is described as habent per eum capillos brevi et crispos.
That may not be quite right, but that’s what Google Translate gave me as the Latin for “They have him by the short and curlies…”
He should probably check his brakes before he drives very far going forward.
Actually, to my frustration, there doesn’t seem to be a really good way to adequately render that idiomatic phrase in Latin…
So, let me ask it again… felony or misdemeanor?
I don’t know…
So all that writing by reporters, all that arguing and we don’t even know w hat we’re arguing about???
Then there’s that slam about, ” it’s like pleading guilty to a $1,000,000 parking ticket and told to be good for a year. I’m surprised there’s no restitution required. But it’s business as usual between judges and politicians.”.
I didn’t know I was arguing. Was I? What about?
Why is anyone surprised about Merrill? This is business as usual in Columbia. The problem has been and to a large extent still is a perfect example of the fox guarding the henhouse. Anyway, when the henhouse is full, who notices a few chickens disappearing?
Looks like FitsNews is going subscription based… we’ll see how that affects his numbers. Ron Aiken tried it and I bet he dropped 90% of his viewers.