[Discussion] The Donald Trump Administration

Let's follow and discuss what our newest presidential administration gets up to, the good, the bad, the lawsuits.

bekkilyn wrote:
Stengah wrote:
bekkilyn wrote:

Is 45's popularity increasing with black males in general? I've had some interesting conversations (though mostly listening on my part) with black men that I've randomly encountered in various places around town that has made me wonder.

No. About the only explanation I could see is some (very, very few) like his brand of toxic masculinity more than they hate his racism.

Possibly. One conversation I had yesterday concerned 45's stance on China and North Korea. He was saying that he doesn't understand why people were so against Trump since he was the only recent president we've had willing to stand up to these countries. He didn't seem to care for Obama much at all. Thought Obama had sold the country out.

The man I talked to today was super angry and frustrated about the illegal immigrants (among other things) and appreciates that 45 is trying to do something about the problem. Said his brother was shot 5 times in the head and killed by an illegal immigrant, but that everyone wants to cater to "the Mexicans", who are bringing in crime and gangs and drugs, and give them this and that, but the black man still gets ignored, if not killed or put in prison. Said he was getting tired of doing the right thing and never getting anything out of it.

I just seem to lately keep running into these sorts of conversations with random people I meet and wondering if there may be some sort of bigger trend.

Getting groups to fear and hate poorer, more desperate groups has been the Demagogue-in-Chief's most effective strategy. Concerning that he might have success doing the same with African-Americans.

That and he has employed language to signal that black Americans are the biggest victims of immigration and he sometimes includes them as part of the American in-group. Sometimes.

He also sometimes suggests black athletes could “deport themselves” no idea to where he thinks they should self deport. My guess would be “Africa” since he probably thinks it’s an entire continent with one big ethnic group.

The most depressing thing, if this is a trend, is that he wouldn’t stop with immigrants. If magically the wall was built and every immigrant deported he’d just move on to black Americans.

Also,

DSGamer wrote:

That and he has employed language to signal that black Americans are the biggest victims of immigration and he sometimes includes them as part of the American in-group. Sometimes.

This was the impression I was getting in some of my discussions.

Trump will reunite separated families — but only if they agree to deportation

Trump administration using kids pretty explicitly as a bargaining chip to discourage legal asylum seeking...the section headers in this article:

"DHS is promising to reunite parents once they’ve been ordered deported — but not while they’re still fighting an asylum claim"

"Parents might have to choose between access to their children and access to lawyers" [this one's a little subtle]

"Parents who are freed from detention might lose access to children"

"Parents who choose between asylum and reunification might end up getting neither"

Our US government, ladies and gentlemen.

Saw a tweet:

"It’s encouraging that Sarah Huckabee Sanders was judged not by the color of her skin but by the content of her character.

10:51 AM - Jun 23, 2018"

firesloth wrote:

Trump will reunite separated families — but only if they agree to deportation

Trump administration using kids pretty explicitly as a bargaining chip to discourage legal asylum seeking...the section headers in this article:

"DHS is promising to reunite parents once they’ve been ordered deported — but not while they’re still fighting an asylum claim"

"Parents might have to choose between access to their children and access to lawyers" [this one's a little subtle]

"Parents who are freed from detention might lose access to children"

"Parents who choose between asylum and reunification might end up getting neither"

Our US government, ladies and gentlemen.

The Department of Homeland Security stresses that they are not pressuring anyone to withdraw their asylum claims, or explicitly telling anyone to choose between pursuing a claim and reunification.

Oh, f*ck right off. At least have the gonads to be honest about the awful things you're doing. "We're not pressuring you to give us money. There have been a lot of unexplained fires around here lately. Just sayin'."

Cowards. Cowards with no conviction and no conscience.

Top_Shelf wrote:

Saw a tweet:

"It’s encouraging that Sarah Huckabee Sanders was judged not by the color of her skin but by the content of her character.

10:51 AM - Jun 23, 2018"

Citation: https://twitter.com/theanthonyking/s...

Nothing like our President using his 53 million Twitter followers to attack a 24-seat restaurant.

Double fascist points for baselessly accusing it of being dirty when his own restaurants have racked up over 500 healthcode violations over the past five years.

OG_slinger wrote:

Nothing like our President using his 53 million Twitter followers to attack a 24-seat restaurant.

Double fascist points for baselessly accusing it of being dirty when his own restaurants have racked up over 500 healthcode violations over the past five years.

And numerous lawsuits. How is it conceivable in any universe that someone involved in literally thousands of lawsuits and settled many of them for millions of dollars is not a criminal just buying his way out of jail?

Ugh. For a businessman, Trump sure doesn’t know how businesses operate.

BlackSheep wrote:

Ugh. For a businessman, Trump sure doesn’t know how businesses operate.

And there you get to the lie at the center of that notion.

All businesses are not the same. Even if we were to accept the plainly false notion that Trump is a superb businessman in the field of real estate, that means that he knows almost nothing about running a manufacturing businesses. Or a retail business. Or any business at all that doesn't operate like a shady real estate business.

Gremlin wrote:

Op Ed, Paul Krugman: Return of the Blood Libel

Blood Libel already made its come-back during the 2016 election. Even Wikileaks got in on the action.

This makes perfect sense... Of course you would put this guy in charge.

Trump and Bill Shine discussing White House communications director job

Shine was also ultimately forced out of Fox News in 2017 after being ensnared in the network's sexual harassment scandal. Shine was never accused of harassment himself, but questions arose over how much he knew about the sexual harassment allegations against Ailes, and whether he took all the proper actions at the time. He denied wrongdoing.

That is depressing. Makes the mid terms a bit more exciting.

Y'all just burned out? Can't keep up with the outrages? I get it.

Let's see. Moscow announcing a summit with 45 and Putin. WH doesn't comment.
Justice Kennedy retiring (election year, we should wait until after November to decide on a replacement) so it's very likely the man who history will regard as the worst president ever will get a 2nd SC nominee. That's... just astonishing.
Harley Davidson spokesman calls Trump a moron.

That sounds absolutely terrible. Supreme court can switch further right, and right wingers got a reason to show up at polls to support republicans in november.
Double win. Yes, I am tired.

oilypenguin wrote:

Y'all just burned out? Can't keep up with the outrages? I get it.

Let's see. Moscow announcing a summit with 45 and Putin. WH doesn't comment.
Justice Kennedy retiring (election year, we should wait until after November to decide on a replacement) so it's very likely the man who history will regard as the worst president ever will get a 2nd SC nominee. That's... just astonishing.

Democrats should sincerely consider packing the courts if they ever get power again.

bnpederson wrote:

Oh god damn it all.

Well.... ... ... F**k

Also there's basically zero chance they won't push through a replacement before the November election, or in the lame duck period before the new senate sits in January.

Further worsened by the fact that, while Kennedy is a conservative, he was the last conservative on the bench with any inclination to respect stare decisis over ideological goals. A trump appointee certainly will be in the Gorsuch mold...

edit edit edit edit:
with the new appointee... this is the point where Trump CAN suspend elections or do basically whatever, and be confident that the supreme court will basically give it a thumbs up and declare it constitutional even if it plainly isn't.

DSGamer wrote:
oilypenguin wrote:

Y'all just burned out? Can't keep up with the outrages? I get it.

Let's see. Moscow announcing a summit with 45 and Putin. WH doesn't comment.
Justice Kennedy retiring (election year, we should wait until after November to decide on a replacement) so it's very likely the man who history will regard as the worst president ever will get a 2nd SC nominee. That's... just astonishing.

Democrats should sincerely consider packing the courts if they ever get power again.

Yep. I don't like it, but better that than exist under a conservative court for the next two generations.

DSGamer wrote:

Democrats should sincerely consider packing the courts if they ever get power again.

Even if they do get power again, how many decades will it be before they get the chance to change supreme court again. And even longer if Ginsburg gets replaced by Trump as well.

Shadout wrote:
DSGamer wrote:

Democrats should sincerely consider packing the courts if they ever get power again.

Even if they do get power again, how many decades will it be before they get the chance to change supreme court again. And even longer if Ginsburg gets replaced by Trump as well.

That's why you pack the courts. You justify nominating 2 more justices (to bring the total to 11) to make up for the Merrick Garland bullsh*t.

Yes there's no law that says 9 has to be the number.

After Mitch stole Obama's pick outright, would be the best way to even things up.

DSGamer wrote:

That's why you pack the courts. You justify nominating 2 more justices (to bring the total to 9) to make up for the Merrick Garland bullsh*t.

Ah, I didn't understand 'packing'. Could work. Until the following election anyway?

DSGamer wrote:
Shadout wrote:
DSGamer wrote:

Democrats should sincerely consider packing the courts if they ever get power again.

Even if they do get power again, how many decades will it be before they get the chance to change supreme court again. And even longer if Ginsburg gets replaced by Trump as well.

That's why you pack the courts. You justify nominating 2 more justices (to bring the total to 11) to make up for the Merrick Garland bullsh*t.

If there's one thing the GOP has proven itself capable of time and time again, it's finding new depths to plumb. If Dems add 2 more justices, GOP will add another 5 as soon as they're able.

Stele wrote:

Yes there's no law that says 9 has to be the number.

After Mitch stole Obama's pick outright, would be the best way to even things up.

The numbers have fluctuated a number of times over the years

There are excellent arguments to be made that 9 is an absurdly small number for the size of our nation, and that that small number is what makes them such enormously political and divisive appointments, which is basically the opposite of what they are supposed to be. If there were (say) 17 of them instead of 9 than whatever President happened to get 2 wouldn't matter as much. Germany has 16, for example.

There was no way we didn't have another justice retire while Trump is in office. I hope and pray that Democrats are able to stall this process until after mid-terms. If they manage to put another conservative in place we are well and truly screwed. I see no way that the number of justices will be increased by the current administration. That would prevent them from achieving their agenda of destruction. You don't give up an advantage when you're winning.

I now fully expect voter rights, abortion, LGBTQ rights, and a host of other civil rights to be utterly destroyed in my lifetime. The nominee will most assuredly be a white male.

I would like to see the number of SCJ imcrease and for mandatory term limits to implemented across all three branches.