The votes of the collection of people whose children were actually murdered by undocumented aliens is not swinging any election. The people who have an irrational fear of it? I guess so.

Correct, but you have to think beyond the career span of an average CEO.

Dunno. I could imagine large companies lobbying for environmental regulations with which they could afford to comply, but smaller competitors couldn't or perhaps to disadvantage foreign competition. There's also the greenwashing/PR that has been mentioned. They could lobby for some foreign policy that would be good, like opening relations with the Democratic Confederation of Northern Syria because it would be in their interest.

I just expect them to lobby for things which are in their fiduciary interest. Mostly that means more extraction, refining, and sales of fossil fuels.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer...ady-wrong.html

I'm saying the pipeline isn't a terrible idea and while regulations are needed, regulations to make sure everyone operates ideally are excessive

No one said "regulations to make sure everyone operates ideally" but if anything Clovis is closer to that than anyone else. He certainly has made his pro-regulation position clear.

Talking about regulations in the abstract is ~always stupid and concedes points to conservatives that should not be conceded.

So this.

Regulation isn't good or bad. There are good and bad regulations.

Here's a source about Mueller's hire. http://www.esquire.com/news-politics...-russia-trump/

This story will probably be underreported (unless Maddow picks it up.) Anyone remember the New Yorker story about Trump and the FCPA. Well, looks like Mueller will, at a minimum, be able to pin that on him. Apparently Trump's hack lawyer, not Cohen but the better one, is tasked with putting together a competent defense team. Look for them to hire a FCPA specialist early on.

Pete Williams of MSNBC just explained why exec privilege claim would be weak. Not impressed with NY Times reporting on subject, which doesn't expose flaws. WaPo seems to be doing a better job lately, deeper analysis.

Chiat spot on as usual.

Changing the topic some, but the way the gop/trump talk about regulations is basically incoherent. That there shouldn't be monopolies is a regulation, as is prohibition against willfully mislead consumers, so are the many much more specific versions of the general principles that appear in the CFR (code of federal regulations), and in the even more specific guidelines and procedures agencies use in interpreting and following the CFR.

Economists who study regulation as a subject probably have some operational definitions but at a general level is basically a useless category.

While I'm sure we're all glad that Trump chooses to prefer loyalty as opposed to competence in counsel, I REALLY hope this doesn't regress into arguments over legal loopholes, largely ignoring the overwhelming facts that the FBI and others possess. They can't let someone with Trump's non-existent credibility discredit career official under oath with mountains of evidence after career official under oath with mountains of evidence. They can't.

There is among other things a crime/fraud exception to AC Privilege, and there probably is something similar to exec privilege. Asserting exec priv would just be a stall tactic, and Comey has forgotten more about the subject than Trump will ever know.

I don't understand the claim about discrediting. 1) if Trump tries to exert exec privilege it would only discredit Trump 2) Exec privilege is not a substantive legal loophole, just a potential tactic, likely to backfire, to delay Comey testimony on certain topics, over which Trump has most likely already waived privilege (another reason the lawyers don't want him tweeting).

this sounds like a too strong of a statement imo. its true in alot of cases but i think there has to be a good portion of excetions. (i will also add here that im talking business profits in a vacuum specifically here - overall regulation is a damn good thing that the us needs more of)

on the top of my head, one example is the consumer debt industry having a regulation that demands a official debt registry. this is even favored by the relevant companies in the region where i live. it will help companies avoid giving loans to people that cant really pay for it so they lose less money.

You need to master looking busy so you can **** around on 2+2 and no one questions you.

First rule of 2p2 at work: keep your back to a wall and have a clear line of sight to anyone approaching who could see your monitor. Obviously these power desks are harder to come by when you're the new guy.

Second rule: if caught, don't immediately switch over to excel or something. That's a noob move. Your coworker very likely has no idea what 2p2 is. It's not like Facebook or something. So don't act guilty. But don't let them stare at it all day either. Just casually find some excuse to look at excel, or your text editor, or whatever, then switch over.

3rd rule: if my avatar or similar is on the screen when caught, ignore rule #2 and just switch over immediately. Your co-worker will ask what that is and you'll have to explain 2p2 - which is much worse than just getting caught switching. Once you have to explain 2p2, that coworker is forever tainted. If that coworker is your boss, you're ****ed.

not sure what has been said and not said but i dont think all lobbying is bad (if thats relevant).

you could argue that lobbying gives some groups or companies with money and power access to politicians that we normal people dont have, so its unfair, but i think at least the big industries needs to have somewhat of a dialogue with the gouvernment about what is needed and not needed to do business in a good way going forward.

however its important that this doesnt get out of hand and politicians are bought like in the US. then it becomes quite different.

You are exactly right.

There are literally thousands of examples of regulation being great for industry. Mine for example exists solely due to regulation.

The other classic example is requirements for registration in professional associations for things like hair dressers or masseuses. These are great for the industry as they create an artificial supply shortage thus increasing the value of the labor.

This is exactly why Wookie's point is so accurate. There are tons of regulations which hurt some industry but just as many which help another.

As stated earlier the world is not black and white. It's complex.

One man's "lobbying" is another man's "petitioning the gubmint." You'd never end lobbying even if you wanted to because it's a bedrock Constitutional principle.

Yeah. At a certain point, lawmakers know **** all about all manner of **** that does need regulating, and it is better to have people who know something as well as the affected parties at the table rather than having lawmakers flying blind. It's not that we shouldn't have oil industry lobbyists. It's more that the other side lacks representation.

The pro move is to be so very good at a job (where no one else fully understands how difficult it is), that you can get an impressive weeks workload finished in a day or two.

I pray that little Barron does not hear this awful thing

That's called having an above average IQ in pretty much every office job ever.

You should know by now that only violence directed at white men from the left is bad. There is nothing wrong with killing brown people or women. They probably deserved it.