#and to be clear the premise is voting whether or not you can forgive the character for their crime or not.) | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

1moremilgram-enjoyer · 5 months

Note

i’m new to Tumblr and i’m not sure if this is the place to ask but i’m a drdt fan and milgram looks really cool, however i’m not sure where to start or how to get into it, is there anything specific i should do or?

Ah, the DRDT -> Milgram pipeline strikes again I see. Welcome! And yeah, you can ask me anything! Milgram is really fun, even if it can feel a bit intimidating. Take your time! It's quite a bit.

Here is a playlist with some of the most important things in chronological order, and I'll also recommend this masterlink post by doctorbunny, but you can take things at your own pace and do whatever you want forever. However, I'll explain the main things, since there's a lot!

1- Jackalope's Announcements

The first thing you should probably watch is "Jackalope's "This is the MILGRAM"", which explains the premise of the series.

Inside a prison named the Panopticon reside 10 prisoners, all of which are, by some definition of the word, murderers. There is a Warden of this prison, named Es, who must observe their sins and decide whether they should be Forgiven* for their murder, or if they shouldn't be. This is done in a system of three trials. At the time of writing, the First Trial has been completed, the Second Trial is about to end, but we still have the entire Third Trial ahead of us!

Es learns of the prisoners' crimes mainly by watching music videos extracted directly from their minds, though they also interrogate them beforehand.

The twist? Es' decisions on Forgiveness are decided by the audience. Every Trial, after a prisoner's MV (music video) is released, for a period of time (three months), the audience votes whether the prisoner should be Forgiven or not for that Trial. This can be done in the Judge page of the official website or the app (link is for browser), and you can vote once per day. (Technically twice if you use both the official website and the app). You can also just not vote if you don't feel like it. Again you can consume media in any way you want.

[*The localization actually says "Innocent" and "Guilty" instead of "Forgiven" and "Unforgiven", but keep in mind when you vote you're not voting innocence or guilt, but forgiveness and unforgiveness.]

The next of Jackalope's announcements is the "Report on the End of the First Trial", which only really tells you about how each prisoner was voted T1 (Trial 1), something you'll learn about in other videos anyways, so it's not too important beyond some characterization for Jackalope if you care.

However, before you start watching the Second Trial MVs, I would recommend you watch "Second Trial Commencement Notice", which will give you insight into how the verdicts affected each prisoner. The consequences weren't made very clear during the first trial, but this video establishes them a bit more explicitly.

2- Music Videos

Welcome to the main event! The music videos are the main draw of Milgram, and through vague symbolism, extremely fun visuals, beautifully written lyrics, and banger songs, they tell you things about each prisoner. Don't worry if you don't quite get them at first, they're really complex and understanding them is a community effort! Feel free to come to your own conclusions or read analyses or anything else!

Now, the order you watch these MVs in... there's really no set order, beyond "you should probably watch the First Trial videos before the Second and Third Trial ones." You can watch them following the prisoner order listed in that playlist I linked, but if there's a character you're particularly interested in, you can also just watch theirs before anyone else's. In my personal experience, I actually watched Amane's and Kazui's before anyone else's because their Second Trial Voting was going on, then hopped around between Shidou, Muu, Kotoko... until a month later I realized "wait I never actually watched This is How to be in Love With You" I am so sorry Mahiru-

My point is: Do what you want, experience Milgram at your own pace.

There is one exception, of an MV you should probably watch before the others, and that's Undercover. This is a video connected to Es, which serves as an introduction to all the other characters. There is a lot to talk about in this video, from Es' characterization to a lot of symbolism for the prisoners, but it's a great starting point to theorize on what exactly each prisoner's murder was.

In any case, these videos are probably the most important pieces of information for the prisoners, to the point some Milgram fans just watch the videos and nothing else, but there's still a lot more if you want to dig deeper.

3- Voice Dramas

In-universe, before the songs are extracted, Es holds an interrogation with the prisoners, which are the Voice Dramas (VDs). The exception is Es' own Voice Drama, which in typical Es fashion is an introduction which also has some interesting information.

If you want to fully put yourself in Es' shoes, you can watch a subtitled version/read a transcript of the VD before watching the MV for that Trial, which is the way they're ordered in the playlist I linked. But again, do what you want.

The only reason I'm only mentioning them after the MVs is that not everyone feels like watching/reading them in full, which is fine, but be careful, you might be missing some critical information. The things stated in VDs are maybe not always as revealing as the MVs, but they're usually more direct and offer great characterization, so I'd recommend at least reading transcripts. Although the voice acting is always on point, so listening to them is always a fun experience!

4- Interrogation Questions

During the course of the Trials, there comes a point when the fans are asked to send the prisoners questions, and a selection of them will be answered by them. Since the creators hand-pick the questions they actually want the prisoners to answer, they range from very interesting to "why the hell are we asking this?" level questions. They're very fun and add a lot of information and characterization to the prisoners!

They're usually done in prisoner duos, so 01-02 (Haruka and Yuno) get the same questions, then 03-04 (Fuuta and Muu) get a different set, etc. The exception for now is T1 Mikoto and Kotoko, because Kotoko's T1 MV was delayed, and it may happen again since Kotoko's T2 MV was also delayed (not confirmed yet).

5- Timelines

In the Milgram app, there will occasionally be updates to the "Timelines" tab, generally during prisoners' birthdays. These feature conversations between the prisoners, which range from extremely funny, very interesting, extremely depressing, etc. They help build up the dynamics between prisoners and are the origin of certain fan-favorite platonic pairings. They sometimes give hints to the prisoners' backstories, but usually they're more for characterization purposes. You can find links to translations of these timelines in the masterlink post I linked to before (thanks doctorbunny you're very cool).

6- Cover Songs

Every Trial, apart from their original song for Milgram, each prisoner gets to cover one song from DECO*27's catalogue. There is no official confirmation these songs are chosen for any reason other than "they sound cool" (which they do!), but as someone who's looked at all of them pretty closely... listen, a lot of them fit extremely well. I personally think they are important, but that's up for interpretation. Also Es had one for T1, Hibana.

These are not to be confused with the Es prisoner song covers, which are done as celebration for when an MV reaches a million views. They are released in hiatus periods, which is why at the time of writing there are no T2 Es covers. These are mostly just for fun, but I wouldn't be surprised if there's a bit of characterization hidden here. I haven't actually heard them all yet oops.

7- And a lot more!

Milgram never really runs out of ways to reveal lore. From distorted lines in the Character Voice Trailers, fun visuals in the "Songs of Prisoners" teasers, fun symbolism in promotional art such as the birthday cakes, album covers, etc etc... There's no real way I can compile it all, just be patient and take your time! Most of it isn't too important, so don't worry too much.

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

Again, take things at your own pace! Milgram is a really unique experience, and given how the story is presented, you can engage with it in the way that feels the most comfortable for you! Just make sure you're always having fun! Take care!

#milgram #ask

11 notes · View notes

blackswaneuroparedux · 5 years

Text

Anonymous asked: What do you make of Prime Minister Theresa May as her rules slowly comes to an end with the election of a new PM, probably Boris Johnson. An improvement? Will he be the one to get the UK out of Europe?

I never rated Theresa May, she was an ambitious but risk averse careerist like most of the modern Conservative Party. When she finally achieved her life time’s ambition by becoming Prime Minister, she made a mess of it.

Many years ago Enoch Powell, the great Conservative politician who was treated pariah for being so prophetic, stated the fate of all who climb the greasy pole of politics. He said, “All political lives, unless they are cut off in midstream at a happy juncture, end in failure, because that is the nature of politics and of human affairs.”

The same fate awaits Boris Johnson.

Is Johnson an improvement? He will be if compared to May who was as about as compelling as watching paint dry.

My main objection to him is character. he doesn’t have the character to be a good Prime Minister. Like Trump he is a charlatan who is entertaining but preening with man-child issues and narcissistic entitlement.

I don’t care about his messy personal life as he bonked women half his life while cheating on all his wives. Nor do I care for the scandal of his love children outside of marriage. You can argue that this shows his true character. Perhaps. But of course, it does show his personal morality but this doesn’t actually stop him being competent at his job. The trouble is that he has never been competent in his life.

By all counts, Johnson is clever but has always been quite lazy and a low attention span to follow through on tasks. When he was Foreign Secretary he never bothered to read his briefs or dive deep into the red boxes. He’s been fired as a journalist for lying - which is pretty hard to do considering many journalists bend the truth. To many he is an opportunistic charlatan but with the confident artifice of Eton and Oxford grooming.

But I think he might be the only one who could takes us out of the EU. Make no mistake, we do need to get out of the EU.

But on what terms? At what price?

I fear his hands are tied, just like May, by the structural challenges of leaving the EU without a deal. The Irish backstop is of course biggest spanner to a meaningful deal. The prospect of a hard border between Ireland and Northern Island is one everyone secretly dreads in terms of what it might mean to return to the dark days of sectarian Protestant-Catholic violence. Ask any seasoned military veteran of the 70s and 80s and they will tell you Northern Ireland was their worst mission or posting than any they ever did. Even today the memories are bitter ones for British soldiers.

How the Irish border question gets resolved in the face of EU insistence of no more negotiations and compromises is a severe headache once the politicians stop their posturing.

Of bigger concern is President Trump.

It may come as news to some Americans but Trump is wildly viewed as unpopular by many in Britain, regardless of political loyalties. Both left and right see his dissing of the UK and interfering in British politics as gross and uncouth.

No one trusts anything that comes out of Trump’s mouth because he is a proven serial liar. When he talks of of trade deals with the post-Brexit UK, we all know he will never seek an equitable deal but one that is about ‘America first’ and screwing us over.

In this regard I do think the encroachment of American big pharma into British health system as well as the relaxing of food quality standards (like chlorinated chicken) is setting off alarm bells because they think Johnson will be will cave and be an obedient poodle.

Johnson’s supine role in not backing the current UK ambassador to the US, Kim Darroch, is a case in point. It doesn’t look good if you are seen to being dictated to by a foreign leader if you don’t back your own foreign ministry. Nor will the British people ever forgive him if Johnson acquiesces as if he was running the 51st state for the USA. It would be simply unacceptable because we are a proud nation with a proud history.

Surprisingly, I’m not blaming Trump because his ‘America First’ beliefs. I think that is fine for the US as that’s his job to look out for his nation first. But conversely it’s bad for us. Trump as it’s now clear only thinks of deals in zero sum terms - there is only one winner so there has to be a loser. That’s his mind set. Again, I’m not holding that against Trump because he is being true to his nature.

America First is fine as far as it goes for American interests but for us we won’t get a fair deal because as a nation just breaking away from the EU umbrella we will not have any cover nor any leverage to punch back.

A pro-Brexit friend who actually worked under a minister told me that perhaps we should stay in the EU until Trump is replaced and then cut a deal. Firstly, I think he’s dreaming as no one can predict what the outcome of 2020 will be in the US. Secondly, who is to say whoever replaces Trump might be any easier to negotiate with? Thirdly, if the longer we delay leaving the more people will get used to us staying in and then it really will be harder to leave.

The big lie is that everything will be smelling daisies the day after we leave the EU with no deal. That’s BS. I know many corporate finance firms already making contingency plans to move to Ireland. Even Jacob Rees-Mogg, the arch Brexiteer, has set up his capital finance holdings firm in Dublin. Everyone I know with any capital or wealth already have insulated themselves as best as they legally can.

At the same time, these very people are salivating at the prospect of making the UK a place where easy money and capital can come and go with little oversight or regulation. Most of these things I agree with in principle. I think the City of London would continue to remain an attractive place to do business despite being outside the EU.

However I sometimes think the City of London has got its head up its own arse and thinks more about quick short term gains and little about the long term impact of its actions. The rot is deep in our country with the continued decline of investment in manufacturing in the country and greater wealth and education gaps between people. McJobs and the gig economy are not going to restore Britian’s greatness only hasten its decline.

Of course small British businesses will be hurt in the short and medium term by a no deal Brexit but don’t forget this is what they voted for. It will be painful. But some might well think it will be a worthy sacrifice to lose jobs and business in order to rebuild properly for the long term free of Brussels and bureaucrats. But that price won’t be paid by capital holding classes.

A very wealthy high flyer working in City of London put it to me over dinner not so long ago that people think that politics is about left vs right but actually it’s about those who have wealth and those who don’t.

The trick is to vent the flames of public passions towards abstract straw men like ‘freedom’ or ‘sovereignty’ or in the US it would take the form of ‘guns’ or ‘abortion’.

People on BOTH sides of an issue expend volatile passion that they each entrench their (legitimate) grievances so deep into permanent persecution complexes. It’s further ossified by the relentless and constant echo chamber they each inhabit to reinforce their own entrenched beliefs and prejudices. So much so they forget about where the real obscene truth lies.

That this has always been a Darwinian world and there will always be winners and losers in life - there will always the rulers (oligarchies) and the ruled, the haves and the have-nots, and the rich and the poor. It’s a very cynical take on human nature and our society.

As much as I wanted to disagree with him, deep down I felt there was more than a tinge of truth to his words. It’s true. The corporate world is not personal nor is it political per se. It’s just about the making money for shareholders and to accumulate capital for the sake of it. It wields power to insulate itself from scrutiny and to have the freedom to do as it pleases. It appeals to people’s base motives at their purest - individual self-preservation. At some stage it’s going to clash with the principles and the institutions of democracy and questions of what takes precedence becomes acute. But that debate is for another day.

I still like to think we live in a world where ideas matter regardless how bare you strip life down to the bones.

In the case of Brexit, to me the sovereignty of Parliament serving at the pleasure of the Queen is paramount. It’s ruling one’s nation from first principles. If it’s your nation then you should have sovereign control over all decisions being made for its citizens. Moreover those making the decisions should be open to public scrutiny and be accountable. The nation state (under a constitutional monarchy in the case of Britain) is only accountable to its subjects and not to outsiders. All fine in theory except it’s an issue when these very elites charged with ruling over the masses have deep structural rot in them and they are just floating to get by like dead wood. Renewal and regeneration looks like a pipe dream.

I love Europe and I consider myself a proud European but I find it unacceptable to be partly ruled from a foreign capital whether it’s Brussels, Berlin, Paris, Moscow or Washington DC.

The hubris of a Franco-German led Europe is real. The EU began on a worthy premise that both France and Germany never go to war again. But it has mutated into some confederated nightmare today. The folly of its confederate policies are apparent and it will only worsen.

I doubt Boris Johnson has the political gravitas - even if he has the low cunning or the wit - to out fox other European leaders and their mad integration policies. They know him too well since he was for years a lazy and incompetent correspondent in Brussels.

It may well be Johnson is the ‘useful idiot’ Britain needs to take us out of the EU but Britain will need another leader with integrity, character and conviction to lead us to build proper alliances and repair relations with other Europeans to collectively face threats to our shared identities and nationhood.

The trouble is I don’t see that person in the current Conservative Party. But don’t take my word on this please, I have a natural allergic reaction to all politicians of all stripes.

I don’t know how things will turn out but i am beginning to be concerned that whatever path we take is going to be fraught with danger - greater incendiary issues down the road will come back to bite us up the arse.

Thanks for your question

#question #theresa may #enoch powell #boris johnson #british politics

34 notes · View notes

streetlamphalo · 3 years

Text

SPSFC with Team Boundary's Edge: First Cuts

It's time to finally announce the first cuts for SPSFC. As a reminder, we read 10-20% of each book and then voted on whether to continue. It's actually a new experience for me, because I'm not reading any of the summaries for these books, preferring instead to go in blind and see what happens.

It's always difficult trying to cut books and personally I struggle with just letting go of something at 20%, but also we don't have the bandwidth to read everything. That being said, this doesn't mean the books are bad, they just didn't grab the three reviewers that make up the team. I would still recommend you check them out because you might find something to your taste here!

So, the first cut of books goes:

Beneath 5th City: Aliens have already taken over Earth. Billions are dead, and the survivors aren't even allowed to grieve--emotions are punished and memories repressed. While we liked the premise of this one, the sexualization of the characters seemed at odds with the setting Sprague had set up. The tone never quite matched the premise. Additional commentary: I really wanted to like this one, because the aliens were suitably alien and well, creepy, but the focus of one narrator on how everyone else was so much more beautiful than her, as well as the weird sex scene, just didn't make me want to carry on.

Bragg For Hire: A tough, somewhat infamous mercenary gets hired for an easy job to keep a new rich officer safe and away for danger. Things do not go according to plan. One judge did vote to keep reading this. Unfortunately, the other two judges aren't fans of military science fiction, and this didn't have enough to set it apart from other military SF. In addition, the protagonist could be hard to root for. It might be worth a look for fans of traditional military science fiction, however. Additional commentary: To a fan of military sci-fi, this should be a shoo-in. And indeed, one of the judges wanted to carry on reading it! For me personally, there were some tropes of military sci-fi that I couldn't look past and I therefore voted to cut it.

Company Daughter: A teenage daughter of a mercenary captain is tired of feeling trapped in her father's military life and decides to run away and stow on a ship. She's found, but the ship she's on is under attack before they can take her back home. The reviewers generally felt that the writing in this one was well-done, but it skewed younger than our tastes. People looking for more YA science fiction might enjoy it, however. Additional commentary: I think this one could have benefitted from a slightly older protagonist. It has a lot of things I like: exploration, generation ships, weird tech, but making her 15 years old was just a bit much for me. The mix of teenager behaviour with the clear desire for an older protagonist didn't sit right with me. It's a very similar complaint to one about Leigh Bardugo's 'Six of Crows'.

Crystal Deception: A strong new A.I has been devised, and may want self-determination. A race of hostile aliens wants the A.I as well. The A.I's creator and a special agent need to work together to keep Earth and the A.I. safe. We all felt this one had potential, but the writing occasionally felt clunky or prone to info-dumping. We never got a great sense of setting either, as much of the story takes place in similar labs or corporate offices. Additional commentary: The sterile environments in this one really made it hard to place. Is it near future sci-fi? Who's really pulling the strings here? I really felt like this one had a lot of potential, but the infodumps were slightly too reminiscent of 'Snow Crash' for me to be able to forgive it.

So there you have them, the first cuts for team At Boundary's Edge! The plan is to keep reading (we have 30 books in total to go through) and post more cuts when they happen. I'm delighted that we also have some books with 2 and 3 'yes' votes from the judges already, and I can't wait to share my thoughts on them when we do the full reads later on.

#spsfc #self-published science fiction competition #book review

0 notes

aion-rsa · 3 years

Text

Lucifer Season 5 Episode 15 Review: Is This Really How It’s Going to End?!

https://ift.tt/3uzKmNY

This Lucifer review contains spoilers.

Lucifer Season 5 Episode 15

“He’s not trying to win an election; he’s trying to win a war.”

Lucifer does heartwarming and heart wrenching as well as any television series when the story requires it, but nothing adequately prepares us for the devastating news of Detective Daniel Espinoza’s death at the hands of mercenaries hired by Lucifer’s brother Michael. However, it’s the powerful, multi-layered narrative in the season’s penultimate episode that vaults “Is This Really How It’s Going To End?!” into rarified critical air leaving an impossibly high benchmark for others to aspire to. And, oh year, it appears the Book of Revelation may come true.

By its basic premise, the show’s writers turn the biblical story of the archangel Samael, aka Lucifer, on its head and weave an updated version that asks viewers to judge God’s most notorious angel through a different set of lenses. Now, as the show heads into its season finale, the stakes rise exponentially to a point at which it’s totally reasonable to broach the subject of an “end of days” apocalyptic scenario unfolding in present day Los Angeles. Chloe’s last case as a detective quickly takes a back seat to the news that Michael has orchestrated Dan’s death and now appears willing to do whatever it takes to replace his father.

Though many series seem to view episode titles as an afterthought with little care to meaning or relevance, such has never been the case with Lucifer. Nevertheless, “Is This Really How It’s Going To End?!” takes this responsibility to new heights, acknowledging the deeply rooted issues with which the characters struggle. Early on, Chloe wonders aloud what her role as God’s consultant will actually entail and whether she should pull Trixie out of school as a result, leading viewers to expect another episode rife with witty one-liners and Lucifer’s self-centered behavior. When the detective suggests walking away from police work, Lucifer and the audience understand the fragility of his campaign for the top job and silently worry Chloe may end up quitting the LAPD without a solid job offer waiting for her.

“I’m actually helping Lucifer take over the family business,” Chloe tells Ella who playfully punches Lucifer for taking her closest female friend away from her. Thinking the business is located down in the warm climate of Florida, Ella’s reaction simply adds to the playfulness of the scene, and we’re reminded that she’s still the only member of Team Lucifer that doesn’t know the truth. Is this really how Team Lucifer will fall apart? Wondering whether Miss Lopez will be able to forgive the others for being left out of the celestial loop appears to be the deepest concern at this point.

Lucifer Season 5 Episode 14 Review: Nothing Lasts Forever

By Dave Vitagliano

Lucifer Season 5 Episode 13 Review: A Little Harmless Stalking

By Dave Vitagliano

Ordinarily, the murder investigation merely serves as the vehicle through which the characters examine their issues and battle their personal demons, and while that’s true here to some extent, the insidious undertones of Michael’s plan to become God address the fundamental internal conflicts with which Lucifer continues to struggle. The Devil has “found God,” yet for all his desire to do the right thing in his pursuit of Chloe’s heart, he fails to understand the small human details which the detective puts clearly into focus for him. “If you don’t know by now how I feel about you, maybe you shouldn’t be God.” Is this how their relationship will end?

Given the dark turn the episode takes with Dan’s death, it’s easy to forget the solid comedic interchanges between Lucifer and his siblings as he lobbies for their support in the coming election. Miles Burris perfectly plays Jophiel as an empty-headed, party-monster bro, the antithesis of his sophisticated brother Lucifer. “Don’t see you as God material,” he tells Lucifer who gets off to a bad start in his quest to become God.

The later scene with his sister Saraqael (Ginifer King) not only gives Lucifer a chance to do what he does best but also sends a fairly powerful signal that something’s afoot here that has not yet made itself clear. She tells him point blank that he’s not getting her vote which leads him to channel his best John F. Kennedy – it’s “not what can the angels do for you, but what can you do for the angels.” The Devil does, after all, grant favors, and pulling out Top Chef’s Michael Voltaggio seems a low blow as Sara melts before our eyes. However, in a brief moment of clarity, she forces her brother’s hand when she asks him why he really wants to be God. Lucifer doesn’t provide a suitable answer, and it’s clear his campaign is rapidly falling apart. Is this how his push to become God will end?

In most cases personal breakthroughs lead the individual onto some sort of redemptive path, and when Lucifer confides to Zadkiel that he was wrong for leading the rebellion against their father, we’re momentarily thrown off balance. Is Lucifer being truthful? But as the Devil explains his journey, it’s immediately clear that he’s sincere when he tells his brother that he now has a better understanding of the difficulty of God’s job. He tries to seal the deal with the final swing vote he needs in the upcoming election by admitting the truth behind his desire to take his father’s place. “I am trying to be God so that I can finally be worthy of her.” Of course, Zadkiel knows exactly to whom Lucifer refers, and when he makes it clear that he’s doing this for love, it seems the balance may have finally shifted in Lucifer’s favor. It’s a wonderfully vulnerable view of the angel who used to run Hell.

Even though she’s got her own demons to slay, Mazikeen’s obsession with finding the perfect outfit for her role as Queen of Hell offers some telling insight into her true desires. Stepping comfortably into her role as therapist/friend, Linda tries to get the guilt ridden Maze to acknowledge the positive steps she’s taken during her time on Earth rather than obsess on her darker side. Yes, Maze can still rage with the best of them as we see in the scene with Lucifer and Michael’s mercenaries, but she’s either unable or unwilling to see the profound significance of the fact that she grew a soul against all odds. Is Maze incapable of accepting her dark side while at the same time acknowledging the good?

Whether these events mark the end of Chloe’s career as an LAPD detective, the end of her relationship with Lucifer, or the end of Lucifer’s crusade to become God, none of it prepares us for the fallout from Michael’s Machiavellian maneuvers. Now that he knows Heaven and Hell are indeed real, Dan struggles even more with his own mortality, and like Maze, he focuses on the bad things he’s done in his life rather than celebrate the overwhelming good for which he’s been responsible.

Dan’s execution at the hands of Michael’s hired killers sets into motion a series of events whose disparate situations force the actors into untouched arenas. Whether the hospital scene in which the doctor breaks the news to Lucifer, Chloe, and the gang, or the funeral at which Amenadiel speaks so eloquently about Dan and the man he was, it’s impossible to remain stoic in the face of so much emotional trauma. More importantly, it’s Amenadiel’s confession that he went to Heaven to see Dan only to learn he’s not there, that prompts Lucifer to reveal just how much he’s spiritually changed. Later, on the couch in Linda’s office, he finally makes his case for being God and finally understands he wanted to be God for all the wrong reasons. “There are no words to convince me that the system isn’t broken. The system is not only broken, it’s unjust.”

cnx.cmd.push(function() { cnx({ playerId: "106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530", }).render("0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796"); });

When the former King of Hell admits that pain should not exist, we have to wonder how Lucifer will approach the coming conflict with his siblings and whether the apocalyptic prophecies of the Book of Revelation are destined to come true in contemporary Los Angeles. Could Dan’s death be part of God’s plan after all, and is it possible that he may not be in Hell after all? Can a celestial war that seems likely to affect all of mankind somehow be averted? “Is This Really How It’s Going To End?!”

Lucifer season 5 is available to stream on Netflix now.

The post Lucifer Season 5 Episode 15 Review: Is This Really How It’s Going to End?! appeared first on Den of Geek.

from Den of Geek https://ift.tt/3hZM9JB

#aion-rsa #Den of Geek

0 notes

orbemnews · 3 years

Link

An Pressing Reckoning for the Trump Model Within the span of 4 days, President Trump’s household enterprise has misplaced its on-line retailer, the thrill from Mr. Trump’s promotional tweets about its luxurious resorts and bragging rights as host to one of many world’s most prestigious golf tournaments. The mob assault on Congress final week by Mr. Trump’s supporters has spurred a reckoning for the Trump Group by companies and establishments, at a scale far higher than his earlier polarizing actions. And the Trump model, premised on gold-plated luxurious and a super-affluent clientele, might not totally recuperate from the fallout of his supporters violently storming and vandalizing the U.S. Capitol, hospitality analysts say and a few individuals near the enterprise acknowledge. Different corporations linked with the Trumps, together with Deutsche Financial institution, the president’s largest lender, and Signature Financial institution, are additionally looking for distance from him and his enterprise. The backlash is a part of a broader shunning of Mr. Trump and his allies unfolding within the wake of the lethal assault on the Capitol. Colleges stripped the president of honorary levels, some distinguished Republicans threatened to depart the get together and the New York State Bar Affiliation introduced it had begun investigating Mr. Trump’s private lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani, which may result in his removing from the group. As Home Democrats launched an article of impeachment on Monday, greater than a dozen large companies vowed to withhold sure political donations. Coca-Cola mentioned it might pause donations from its political motion committee, saying in an announcement that “these occasions will lengthy be remembered and can issue into our future contribution selections.” Marriott, the enormous lodge chain, mentioned it might pause donations from its political motion committee “to those that voted towards certification of the election,” a reference to the congressional Republicans who joined Mr. Trump’s false claims of election fraud. Morgan Stanley and AT&T mentioned they, too, would droop contributions to these lawmakers. The Trump Group had already been going through appreciable monetary challenges. Lots of its golf and resort properties had been dropping cash, and the pandemic had compelled it to shut some eating places and bars and drastically cut back lodge occupancy, together with at its lodge a couple of blocks from the White Home. And with greater than $300 million in debt coming due within the subsequent few years that the president has personally assured, there had been some urgency for the corporate to line up new offers. Whereas such an array of challenges would spell doom for almost any hospitality model, executives of the Trump Group mentioned they deliberate on cashing in on Mr. Trump’s international fame with abroad branding offers. “There has by no means been a political determine with extra assist or vitality behind them than my father,” Eric Trump, the president’s son, who helps run the household enterprise, mentioned in an announcement on Monday. The household can also be already contemplating beginning a media outfit that will cater to Mr. Trump’s tens of hundreds of thousands of supporters, an effort that gained some urgency final week when Twitter and Fb barred the president from their platforms. “There will likely be no scarcity of unbelievable alternatives in actual property and past,” Eric Trump mentioned. Earlier than turning into president, Mr. Trump had cycled by way of many strains of enterprise, together with casinos, an airline and actuality tv. Some ventures had been wildly profitable, whereas others had been colossal failures. However they revealed his potential to camouflage his wares and capitalize on alternatives, even when his identify appeared irreparably tarnished. This time, the challenges are steeper. The fallout started on Thursday, when the e-commerce supplier Shopify mentioned it had terminated on-line shops affiliated with the president. The largest blow got here on Sunday, when the P.G.A. of America introduced it might strip Mr. Trump’s New Jersey golf membership of a serious match. Mr. Trump was mentioned to be “gutted” by the P.G.A. choice, in keeping with an individual near the White Home, as he had labored personally for years to push the match executives to carry occasions at his programs. In an announcement that hinted at a possible authorized problem, the Trump Group referred to as the choice “a breach of a binding contract,” including that “they don’t have any proper to terminate the settlement.” The P.G.A. Championship, scheduled for Might 2022, was the last word golf-world trophy for the Trump model, which during the last 20 years has assembled a world assortment of golf programs and resorts that now collectively symbolize a few third of the corporate’s income, in keeping with the newest monetary disclosure report. The match itself just isn’t a serious supply of revenue, however internet hosting an internationally acknowledged occasion is enormously priceless for advertising. It additionally would have bestowed higher legitimacy on Mr. Trump and his model, which incorporates 16 golf golf equipment around the globe. “It has grow to be clear that conducting the P.G.A. Championship at Trump Bedminster could be detrimental to the P.G.A. of America model,” Jim Richerson, the P.G.A. of America president, mentioned in a video assertion. The loss related to the cancellation is troublesome to calculate, nevertheless it could possibly be very massive and final for years when it comes to missed future revenues, mentioned Jay Karen, chief government of the Nationwide Golf Course Homeowners Affiliation. “You might have hundreds of thousands of avid golfers who’ve a proverbial bucket checklist,” tied to main tournaments just like the P.G.A. Championship, he mentioned. “When you had a serious coming to you and it was pulled from you, that will surely sting.” In an e-mail to members on Monday, the golf membership mentioned, “We have now had a beautiful partnership with the P.G.A. of America and share your disappointment on their choice.” The harm is anticipated to proceed as numerous corporations and industries reassess their relationship with Mr. Trump and his household enterprise. Mr. Trump’s accommodations, just like the Trump Nationwide Doral close to Miami, had already misplaced most of the main company conferences after he made disparaging remarks about Muslims and Mexicans, amongst others, throughout his first presidential marketing campaign, and his feedback after a lethal rally by white supremacists in Charlottesville, Va., in 2017 suggesting that “there may be blame on either side.” However the fallout from the assaults final week will likely be steeper and longer lasting, analysts and folks conversant in the corporate mentioned. Some members of the president’s golf golf equipment are reassessing whether or not to maintain their memberships due to attainable protests and vandalism, one of many individuals mentioned. David J. Sangree, a lodge business marketing consultant from Ohio, mentioned that Mr. Trump’s function within the assault on the Capitol would additional undermine the corporate’s efforts to enchantment to prosperous clients who weren’t Trump supporters. “It is a large adverse,” Mr. Sangree mentioned. “There’s no query they’re going to lose extra occasions as a result of many teams are saying, ‘We don’t need to be related to this model.’” That grew to become even clearer on Monday night time when the New England Patriots’ coach, Invoice Belichick, mentioned he would refuse the Presidential Medal of Freedom due to the “tragic occasions of final week.” The president had deliberate to present Mr. Belichick the award on Thursday. Even plans to launch a Trump media platform will face obstacles. If Mr. Trump seeks to forge a brand new conservative information community, or be part of an present one like OAN or Newsmax, company advertisers are hardly assured to assist him. “There’s solely a lot that My Pillow man can subsidize,” mentioned Jon Klein, the previous president of CNN U.S., referring to Mike Lindell, the chief government of My Pillow who’s an outspoken supporter of the president. “It’s out of the blue much more daunting a proposition than it was per week in the past for OAN and Newsmax.” As a substitute, Mr. Trump may discover extra success in producing a e-newsletter — embedded with a hyperlink to a streaming channel — for hundreds of thousands of paid subscribers, mentioned Mr. Klein, who’s chairman of TAPP Media, a subscription streaming service. “He has ignited the passions of his tribe and subscription companies are all about tribalism.” After Twitter completely suspended the president’s account on Friday, he recommended he may construct his personal social media platform, however doing so would seemingly current daunting logistical and authorized challenges. And no matter he seeks to create might require vital sources and presumably loans, which could possibly be briefly provide from mainstream sources. Deutsche Financial institution, which has been Mr. Trump’s main lender for 20 years, has determined to not do enterprise with Mr. Trump or his firm sooner or later, in keeping with an individual conversant in the financial institution’s pondering. Mr. Trump at present owes Deutsche Financial institution greater than $300 million, which is due within the subsequent few years. The financial institution has concluded that, wanting forgiving the debt, it has no method to extricate itself from the Trump relationship earlier than the loans come due. One other longtime monetary accomplice of the Trumps, Signature Financial institution, is also reducing ties. The financial institution — which helped Mr. Trump finance his Florida golf course and the place Ivanka Trump, the president’s daughter, was as soon as a board member — issued an announcement calling on Mr. Trump to resign as president “in the most effective pursuits of our nation and the American individuals.” Susan Turkell, a spokeswoman for the financial institution, mentioned Signature had determined that it “won’t do enterprise sooner or later with any members of Congress who voted to ignore the Electoral Faculty.” Ms. Turkell mentioned that within the wake of the riots the financial institution started closing Mr. Trump’s two private accounts, which had about $5.3 million. As his presidency ends, Mr. Trump is returning to a far totally different enterprise than the one he ran when he took workplace. A number of lodge properties that carried his identify have been erased from the portfolio, together with ones in New York, Panama and Toronto. Plans for 2 new budget-friendly lodge strains, as soon as a precedence, have been indefinitely shelved. And a product branding windfall, which led Mr. Trump to endorse an array of things from steaks to mattresses, has dwindled. The corporate additionally faces a prison investigation from the Manhattan district legal professional’s workplace, which is analyzing whether or not the president and his firm dedicated any monetary or tax crimes in recent times. Leaving the White Home, nevertheless, signifies that Mr. Trump will now not face moral restrictions like bans on worldwide offers, probably opening new enterprise potentialities. The corporate may search for new offers in locations the place firm executives imagine Mr. Trump stays fashionable, akin to Brazil, Argentina, Israel, Saudi Arabia and India. Mr. Trump may additionally hit the talking circuit, gathering massive funds for every look, an organization government mentioned. And a few clients are more likely to stay loyal to the present Trump properties — significantly in crimson or purple states like Florida and North Carolina — it doesn’t matter what the president does or says, or what number of occasions he’s impeached. Mickael Damelincourt, the managing director on the Trump lodge in Washington, proclaimed on Twitter on Sunday that “America’s Dwelling Room is prepared for you,” because the lodge steakhouse and foyer bar deliberate to reopen on Friday. (Tuesday morning, Mr. Damelincourt mentioned the reopening had been delayed.) In Miami, at Trump Nationwide Doral, the bar was busy at pleased hour on Friday, as was the members-only clubhouse, with clients overheard speaking each about golf video games and enterprise offers, nearly none of them carrying masks. Marion McCarthy and her husband, Donald, had been having drinks there — the place they’ve been members for many years. Dozens of different friends had been arriving on the resort for the U.S. Am Tour, which drew greater than 100 gamers, in keeping with one scorecard, which added “Doral Beginner is SOLD OUT!!!!” “What we’re seeing is an overreaction,” Mr. McCarthy mentioned. “As soon as he’s out of workplace, I feel he’ll be capable to come down right here and play a bit extra golf.” Maggie Haberman, David Enrich and William Okay. Rashbaum contributed reporting. Supply hyperlink #Brand #Reckoning #Trump #Urgent

0 notes

xtruss · 4 years

Text

Argument

America Needs to Prosecute Its Presidents

Pardoning Trump, like Nixon before him, would be a disaster.

— September 29, 2020 | Foreign Policy | Paul Musgrave

Electoral defeat for Donald Trump, even if the transition of power goes smoothly, will not be the end of the country’s political crisis. It would instead be the beginning of the next test of the American political system: confronting the record of wrongdoing left by the Trump administration, both the crimes committed in office and crimes overlooked due to his power.

Grappling with the Trump post-presidency will include delicate questions about how to investigate potential criminal and civil wrongdoing committed by the president, his associates, and his family. And there is a chance the country may not be up to this task.

There’s one clear precedent for worrying: President Gerald Ford’s pardon of his criminal predecessor (and tax cheat) Richard Nixon, and the subsequent elite embrace of that pardon. That means it’s important to lay out the case for why a potential President Biden should not pardon Trump for offenses committed against the United States.

To be sure, Biden has pledged not to do so. Yet there have been signs that he may be going wobbly. Whereas in 2019, Biden emphasized that Trump’s actions merited scrutiny (“This guy does all these things that put us in jeopardy and he gets off?” he said to Radio Iowa), in an August NPR interview he emphasized instead that pursuing criminal charges against a former president would be “a very, very unusual thing” and “probably not very—how can I say it?—good for democracy.”

These shifting stances may just be an attempt to calm nervous voters. But the direction of that shift is also what we would expect from a candidate attuned to the conventional wisdom of U.S. elites: that pardons of even criminal ex-presidents can heal the country.

The American political system has no tradition of official disgrace or damnatio memoriae. All presidents are honored, even those who were awful or, in the case of President John Tyler, disloyal. Tyler, the tenth president, not only ran a disastrous administration but ended his public life as a congressman in a brief-lived treasonous slave power. And yet even Tyler receives official remembrances, including a presidential dollar coin featuring his image.

That coin illustrates the natural arc of American political culture: institutional ignoring of the misdeeds of the powerful in the name of “healing.” Yet this norm does not heal; it harms. It makes a mockery of Americans’ belief that they have a government of laws, not of men, if those laws do not apply to the men who enforce the laws. It constitutes a denial of justice and an amnesty granted only to the powerful. Left unchallenged, this norm will protect Trump from the reckoning that the country needs.

Consider how the system dealt with Nixon.

Time has so effaced the details of Nixon’s malfeasance that he has regained a patina of statesmanship. Thus, Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, could recently tweet a favorable comparison between Nixon and Trump, arguing that that “Nixon, for all his flaws, was a conservative who abided by norms.”

Haass’s viral tweet reflects an irony that, in death, Nixon has finally been accepted by the sort of institution whose rejections kindled in him a lifelong resentment of the Eastern Establishment he tried to join. In doing so, it reflects a general amnesia about why Watergate was so bad that illustrates how far elite culture will go to forgive the crimes of the powerful.

The signature moment of Watergate is the June 17, 1972, break-in, when a team of burglars were caught in the Democratic National Committee headquarters. Reporting and investigations soon uncovered ties to the White House. But that was just the tip of a very dirty iceberg. Subsequent prosecutorial and congressional investigations broke apart not just the Nixon administration’s frantic, illegal cover-up of its ties to the burglary but uncovered an entire panoply of what Attorney General John Mitchell called the “White House horrors.”

These included use and the attempted use of government agencies like the IRS to go after the president’s political enemies. The administration sought to persecute its enemies, leading to abuses like an attempt to steal the files of dissident Daniel Ellsberg’s psychiatrist. The president directed his aides to retrieve classified papers from the Brookings Institution by any means necessary, including stealing them or firebombing the think tank. Even the Watergate break-in turned out to be the second one—the first, on May 28, 1972, had been undetected.

And Nixon was not above using his position to enrich himself. He used government agencies to improve his private residences. And he evaded taxes, including by improperly claiming deductions related to his gift of his vice-presidential papers to the government. Far from abiding by norms, he broke them with abandon.

None of this should have come as a surprise given Nixon’s pre-presidential career, including his use of campaign funds for personal expenses (sanitized as his so-called Checkers speech), his attempt to win the 1968 election by sabotaging Vietnam peace talks, and his ties to various underworlds.

Nixon’s wrongdoing extended far beyond the break-in and coverup. His administration displayed a consistent pattern of abuse of powers matching or exceeding that of Trump.

And yet somehow minimizing that pattern of abuse has become the literal textbook version of history. In Alan Brinkley’s widely assigned high school history textbook The Unfinished Nation (1992), for example, Watergate receives two and a half pages, without mentioning any specific crime other than the break-in.

This revisionist history may explain why, in a 2014 CNN survey, only 51 percent of Americans reported considering Watergate a “very serious matter” that revealed unusual corruption in the Nixon White House, while 46 percent reported that the scandal was “just politics–the kind of thing both parties engage in.”

Brinkley’s textbook later blandly mentions that President Gerald Ford, Nixon’s successor, suffered political consequences from his decision to offer Nixon a blanket pardon for wrongdoing while in office.

Pointedly, Ford had rejected pardoning Nixon during his confirmation hearings as vice president. Once in office, though, a chorus of voices lobbied him to change his mind, claiming that neither the country nor Nixon himself might survive the trial.

Ford’s pardoning of Nixon was unpopular at the time, with 53 percent of Americans rejecting it. It has since become conventional wisdom among America’s institutional elite that Ford’s act was merciful and correct. In 2001, a panel of eminences recruited by the John F. Kennedy Library Foundation honored Ford’s pardon of Nixon by giving him its Profiles in Courage Award.

At the awards dinner, Senator Ted Kennedy praised the wisdom of Ford’s decision. “I was one of those who spoke out against his action then,” Kennedy said. “But time has a way of clarifying past events, and now we see that President Ford was right. His courage and dedication to our country made it possible for us to begin the process of healing and put the tragedy of Watergate behind us.”

It’s hard to find dissenters from this view in D.C. power circles. Yet there are those who view Kennedy’s argument as dangerously wrong-headed. One of those was Elizabeth Holtzman, who in 1974 was a firebrand first-term liberal representative from New York City who sat on the House Judiciary Committee during its impeachment hearings.

In an oral history with the federal Nixon Presidential Library, Holtzman called the “healing” argument “nonsense”. “In my mind, the impeachment process brought the country together, because whether you had voted for Nixon, whether you’re Republican or Independent or Democrat or unaffiliated, you felt that the rule of law had finally been carried out,” she said. “We reconnected to our commitment to the rule of law and then we had President Ford come in and [shatter] that.”

By downplaying the seriousness of Nixon’s crimes, and stopping further consequences, the pardon made it possible to reduce Watergate from the White House horrors to the break-in. It also enabled Nixon’s rehabilitation.

When Nixon died, President Bill Clinton ordered the closing of government offices “as a mark of respect for Richard Milhous Nixon.” In a cloying eulogy delivered “on behalf of a grateful nation,” Clinton praised Nixon’s legacy in domestic and foreign policy, without a single reference to Watergate or abuse of power other than the banal acknowledgment that “He made mistakes.”

The healing myth has become part of a bipartisan catechism even though its central premise—that the pardon healed the country—is unsupportable. In the long run, as Holtzman said, “the Nixon pardon has had terrible ramifications.” It set the stage for later pardons related to executive self-interest, including George H.W. Bush’s pardons of many figures involved in the Iran-Contra scandal.

If U.S. political culture can congratulate itself for rehabilitating Nixon, then the temptations for a Biden administration to do the same for Trump will be powerful. Doing so will let the administration move on to other priorities, sensible centrists will argue. And the next election is only two years away—do you really want to have Trump still in the news by then?

Advocates of a pardon or other forms of clemency will point to other factors as well. They will argue that, in a polarized country, the specter of politicized prosecutions will raise the possibility that vengeful Republicans will retaliate later. And indeed, it would be disastrous for democracy were each administration to misuse prosecution against its political enemies.

Yet given what we already know about the president’s finances and conduct in office, an investigation of the Trump administration is unlikely to be politicized in any meaningful sense. It is only a refusal to prosecute that could be politicized, in the sense of being guided by political calculation rather than a commitment to the rule of law. (That would apply doubly to the idea that a pardon could help ease Trump out of the White House without strife.)

More sophisticated observers might caution that even potentially justifiable prosecutions could have deleterious effects on U.S. politics and the country’s standing in the world. The prosecutions of Brazil’s most recent presidents—Lula, Dilma, and Michel Temer—did much to clear the way for the election of the country’s disastrous current president, Jair Bolsonaro. Similar concerns have been raised about other prosecutions elsewhere, like Ecuador’s conviction of former president Rafael Correa, which barred him from a return to politics.

But it’s strange to argue that democracy depends on not prosecuting those who commit crimes. In France, even a prime minister caught misusing public funds may now go to jail rather than retire to a villa. And although some have criticized South Korea for prosecuting its ex-presidents (over half of whom are now in prison), measures like the Varieties of Democracy index show that Seoul’s record on liberal democracy is stronger than that of the United States.

It should not be surprising that democracy and prosecutions of former officials can go together. That is, after all, the entire point of the rule of law. Holding officials to account forms a critical part of strengthening democratic institutions. And the ballot box is only one way to do that.

That is why Biden must not waver. If a former president has never been prosecuted in American history, that’s because the last time the country had a chance to do so it was denied that opportunity. Far from being bad for democracy, a sober, lengthy, and deliberative investigation would be good for establishing a record of the rot in the Trump administration. And it would be a major boost for liberal democracy and anti-corruption efforts by demonstrating that in mature democracies, officials face consequences.

Having a president who committed crimes is not unprecedented in American history. What would be unprecedented would be to end this long national nightmare by letting them face the same justice that any other American should.

0 notes

kerahlekung · 4 years

Text

Siap sedia hadapi PRU dalam tempoh 3 bulan lagi...

Siap sedia hadapi PRU dalam tempoh 3 bulan lagi....

youtube

Kembalinya zaman gelap UMNO...

youtube

PH tak lagi memerlukan Dr. Mahathir...

youtube

Si Katak 6 kotak lompat masuk PKR semula...

Masuk dalam rumah baru tau...

Bila Menteri Kewangan Tengku Zafrul Abdul Aziz kata, kewangan negara kukuh banyak orang tersalah faham. Ada yang terus tuduh bekas Menteri Kewangan Lim Guan Eng bohong sebab dia kata, kerajaan tak ada duit. Hakikatnya, negara banyak duit tapi kerajaan tak pernah cukup duit. Duit yang banyak itu bukan duit kerajaan tapi duit kita rakyat jelata yang simpan dalam bank dan Tabung Haji, labur dalam Amanah Saham Bumiputera dan carum kepada Kumpulan Wang Simpanan Pekerja dan sebagainya. Duit kerajaan adalah daripada cukai dan hasil yang hanya cukup untuk bayar gaji dan pencen kakitangan awam, selanggara pentadbiran dan bayar balik hutang.

Dah tengok akaun terus buat pinjaman Ah Long RM35b...

Sekarang Zafrul sendiri mengaku kerajaan tak cukup duit bila dia kata kerajaan akan pinjam dari sumber dalam negara sebanyak RM35 bilion. Pinjam daripada siapa? Siapa lagi kalau bukan kita sebab yang akan beli surat hutang kerajaan (MGS) ini adalah bank, KWSP, PNB, TH dan KWAP yang semuanya akan guna duit kita. Satu lagi, pinjam dalam negara tak semestinya lebih murah daripada luar negara. Nak tolong kita, kerajaan pinjam daripada kita. Lepas itu cukai kita untuk bayar balik hutang kepada kita. - A.Kadir Jasin Bila Menteri Kewangan kata kerajaan akan meminjam wang dari pasaran tempatan, itu maknanya wang simpanan rakyat dah nak kena sakaulah tu.

A prime minister for six months?

Anwar Ibrahim is no longer in prison. There is no longer a need to create an unusual arrangement like Pakatan Harapan did before the 14th general election - Dr Mahathir Mohamad to be the seventh prime minister for two years and hand over the baton to Anwar as the eighth prime minister. The logic at that time was that a loose two-year timeline would ensure that Anwar is out of Sungai Buloh as a prisoner of conscience. In the stalemate on a prime minister candidate for Pakatan Harapan Plus now, it appears that there are a few options forward: (a) Mahathir as prime minister and Anwar as deputy prime minister (b) Mahathir as PM for “several months” and Anwar as DPM (c) Anwar as PM and Mukhriz Mahathir as DPM (d) Shafie Apdal or a Sarawak-based party leader as PM Out of these options, (b) appears to be the most likely outcome. Anwar has held out on option (a) because it puts him in a far worse position compared to before the Sheraton Move – at least back then there was a two-year agreement to hand over power to him. Option (c) is also unlikely since Mahathir would not want to see Anwar as prime minister in his lifetime (deemed as too “liberal” and unsuitable by Mahathir), and Mukhriz’s strength still has some way to go. Option (d) would not receive consensus from most component parties. Therefore, option (b) would be most likely as Harapan would want to seek a reversal to the pre-Sheraton Move status quo. Harapan generally believes that they are a force of moral good and getting back to power is an urgent necessity. Before Muhyiddin Yassin’s coup, the revised timeline for the handover of the prime ministership was “after the Apec summit” that was scheduled to be held in November this year.

Toksah dok bagi lah 6 bulan pun.Jenih akai jenuh ni satgi dia cari cara nak hantaq bang Non balik ke Sg Buloh...

Of course, Harapan Plus will definitely not agree to put this down to paper and would once again impose a loose timeline of “several months roughly after Apec” for a handover to Anwar. What this translates to is a Mahathir prime ministership of six months. This is a hazardous proposition. One of the common claims against a two-year timeline or any call for Mahathir to hand over to Anwar was that it would destabilise the government. Anwar’s oft-repeated statement was to “give space” to Mahathir to govern since assurance and stability were essential to govern well. In other words, if it wasn’t for the unusual circumstance of Anwar being in prison before GE14, any imposition of a transition plan with a timeline would not be good for anyone. What we have learned is that there is no such thing as a peaceful handover of prime ministership as most prime ministers would want to stay on as long as they can. What has been revealed through the backdoor meetings of Harapan leaders is that leaders aligned to Mahathir had always wanted the nonagenarian to stay on as prime minister – even to the point of reneging on the agreement to hand over power to Anwar. From the people’s perspective, continually changing the premier is also scarring. Policies change, personnel reshuffle and politics go on overdrive. Granted, the coup that changed our premier from Mahathir to Muhyiddin was not Harapan’s fault. But inviting and necessitating a transition plan after six months, or worse, “several months”, converts the government into a farce. Mahathir once told Anwar that setting a timeline to hand over the prime ministership will make him a lame-duck prime minister. I agree. A prime minister needs the confidence and respect of the cabinet, civil service, and the people. If the people know that Mahathir will not be a prime minister for long, they will gather around his successor and only treat what he says with a caution of transience. Therefore, imposing a timeline for a second time is untenable. In fact, on a practical standpoint, no one can get much done in six months. Even an experienced prime minister like Mahathir got little done in the 22 months he served as the seventh prime minister. He has often lamented that he does not have enough time to make the changes he wants.

What was destroyed by many governments before will take many years to repair. Mahathir knows this more than anyone else. Imposing a much shorter timeline now – albeit much looser – will inevitably reduce the prime minister to a lame-duck prime minister. Those who prefer Mahathir to return as prime minister for the third time often base their claims on two notions. One is that without Mahathir, Harapan would not have won GE14. Two, the “strong influence” and “miracle” of Mahathir is needed to negotiate the seats that Harapan is short of claiming a majority in Parliament. The first notion has often been repeated but never proven, empirically or otherwise. The broad idea was Mahathir was the key reason why Harapan won the people’s mandate in GE14 – without any proof of public opinion data compared to other vital reasons such as economic pessimism, the GST, employment, or the cost of living. It also ignores the fact that Bersatu only won 13 seats and only 25-30 percent of Malays voted for Harapan, casting doubt on Mahathir’s influence. The second notion is even more problematic as it relies on the assumption that Mahathir does not require the rest of the component parties – chiefly, Anwar’s 39 seats from PKR – to get back into power. Mahathir’s reliance on Harapan’s 92 seats to form a government is greater than Harapan’s reliance on Mahathir’s additional 20 seats to form the government. Bearing this in mind, the question is whether there is any necessity for Mahathir to hold on to several months as prime minister before Harapan Plus can enjoy a breath of fresh air again – when reforms are no longer an impossible dream. In the absence of a strong moral, procedural or political claim to the prime ministership, there is no reason why our country needs Mahathir to return for the third time. After all, Mahathir only has six MPs on his side – a 2.7 percent legitimacy to stake a claim for equal and overriding partnership. - James Chai

Its really madness ...he resigned n now he wants it bc.....crazy ..Dont think for a second for TunM to be in the equation for pm again......may be he still want to put you back again at Sg Buloh... if you gv him the 3rd chance...rakyat will not forgive you for this mistake....no more SABAR PERENGKAT DEWA.....time to teach TunM some lessons n rakyat love to see that happen.....PH lost because of him n this need to be remembered.." Jangan menyerah Ds Anwar. Terus kunci ketat permainan sang saka tua yu. Kali ni jangan beri muka lagi!!! If rakan2 PH yg pro sang Saka tua tu bolehlah kembali stand asal iaitu bersatu letak Anwar as pm9. Sang saka tua bila rasa ditinggalkan nak tak nak terpaksa mengikut. Haaa nampak? - Man Toba

I can see clearly now - Anwar

is Harapan’s PM candidate...

I can see clearly now that the "rain" is gone – all the obstacles (read traitors and turncoats) inside the Harapan coalition we voted into power in GE14 are now gone - and for the better. I can see clearly now that the Perikatan Nasional (PN) administration of Muhyiddin Yassin is shaky as his "backdoor government" clearly lacks the support of the majority of Malaysians. Its legitimacy is also seriously in doubt. Even Muhyiddin can see that clearly himself as he is now considering the option of calling for fresh elections by year-end, as reported. I can also see clearly now that PKR president Anwar Ibrahim is the new chairperson of the Pakatan Harapan Plus coalition and that it is very clear to me that he should be the prime minister candidate of the opposition group. Unfortunately, there is another contender to be PM – Dr Mahathir Mohamad. This is where the dynamics in Harapan turns delicate and tricky. It is also clear to many of us that Mahathir is now planning a counter-coup with his Harapan Plus allies. To those supporting such a move, they are probably saddened that the choice of the PM candidate remains the sore point. Early this week, Mahathir made a rare appearance (below) at the PKR headquarters in Petaling Jaya to attend a Harapan meeting chaired by Anwar. Also present was Parti Warisan president Shafie Apdal who was on the PKR premises for the first time. All later emerged from the meeting declaring that there would be “positive news” from the coalition within a week. It soon became clear that the meeting has yet to decide on the PM candidate – the issue continues to stick out like a sore thumb. Last Friday, PKR, DAP and Amanah leaders met again – this time without Mahathir and Shafie. We can guess the meeting’s top agenda after a Harapan announcement that their PM candidate will be revealed coming Tuesday. There is something which I cannot see clearly – why is Mahathir still keen on becoming prime minister for the third time? I keep asking myself whether I am blind or is it Mahathir who is blind. I find it difficult to comprehend why a man of 95 is still interested to be the nation’s chief executive, a position he had held for 22 years and 22 months over two different periods of his long life.

And if I have heard correctly, Mahathir only wants to be prime minister for six months after which he would pass the baton to Anwar. Perhaps there is something Mahathir can clearly see ahead of him which you and I cannot. However, I am still uncertain whether I should trust Mahathir’s instincts again and give him the benefit of the doubt after what had happened over the past two years. What I cannot see, ahead of Mahathir’s moves, has put me in a dilemma. Somehow, the trust and confidence I had in Mahathir prior to GE14 are sadly lacking this time. Let me be honest and relate this little tale. In April, a Harapan leader, a dear friend, asked me what I thought of the Mahathir-Anwar joint statement where the duo have agreed to set aside their differences and work together again to wrest power from the backdoor government of Muhyiddin. My initial reaction was sheer disbelief: “Seriously? Mahathir and Anwar together – surely, not again. What a dumb move!” With due respect, after what happened in February, I had had enough of the Mahathir-Anwar combo. I wanted Harapan to move on and start afresh. I no longer have faith in the hopeless Harapan that was hopeless in handling power, leaving Malaysians hopelessly in a limbo. We need leaders who know what they are doing to inspire and bring hope and positive changes to the nation. Malaysians need role models around them. Leaders must provide clear directions on how to move the nation forward. My dream for Malaysia is a fresh start with 222 new members of Parliament. No more Harapan, Harapan Plus or PN. Enough of the same breed of politicians. Since that is not likely to happen, I am stuck with what is on display before me and will make the most of it. In Pakatan Harapan Plus, Anwar should be the PM candidate just as he has rightly been chosen to be the opposition leader. In a recent interview with Malaysiakini, Anwar conceded that some Harapan lawmakers have pragmatic views and want Mahathir to be the premier candidate in order to secure the numbers needed to gain a majority in Parliament. But realpolitik or not, Anwar, the decision is not yours alone to make. It is also not for the 20-odd people on the Harapan presidential council to make. Ultimately, the position of Malaysians matters. On this issue of the PM candidate, there is only one name for now. He should be Anwar Ibrahim, love him or loathe him. That, I can see clearly now. - Francis Paul Siah

cheers.

Sumber asal: Siap sedia hadapi PRU dalam tempoh 3 bulan lagi... Baca selebihnya di Siap sedia hadapi PRU dalam tempoh 3 bulan lagi...

#Blogger

0 notes