[Discussion] Hope to Remember The Trump Administration Thread as being 'transparent and honest'

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

OG_slinger wrote:

President Donald Trump plans to order meat-processing plants to remain open as the nation confronts growing food-supply disruptions from the coronavirus outbreak, a person familiar with the matter said.

Trump plans to use the Defense Production Act to order the companies to stay open as critical infrastructure, and the government will provide additional protective gear for employees as well as guidance, according to the person.

[/quote]

He is a ... not sure what the name is for a despicable human who only serves himself....

Didn't invoke DPA to make ventilators or PPE to save lives (in mostly blue states) but happy to use that power to keep the masses from having to eat less meat.

Because despite all the talk about keeping the food supply going meat is not a human requirement. We could all turn vegan tomorrow and not die off (heck we might even be healtier)

He must have some Tyson stock.

Stele wrote:

He must have some Tyson stock.

More likely- He has a few rich donors that came to him in a panic because their plants were being shut down because workers were getting sick.

Yup...

Total contributions from the meat industry to federal candidates were over $1.7 million during the 2014 campaign cycle, with 83 percent going to Republicans. The industry is such a strong supporter of the GOP that it has given the party 79 percent of its more than $16.6 million in contributions since the 1990 election cycle. [Read more Background]
OG_slinger wrote:

Trump to Order U.S. Meat Plants to Stay Open Amid Pandemic

Bloomberg wrote:

President Donald Trump plans to order meat-processing plants to remain open as the nation confronts growing food-supply disruptions from the coronavirus outbreak, a person familiar with the matter said.

Trump plans to use the Defense Production Act to order the companies to stay open as critical infrastructure, and the government will provide additional protective gear for employees as well as guidance, according to the person.

The order sets the stage for a showdown between America’s meat giants, which have been pressing to reopen plants, and some local officials and labor unions who’ve called for closures in a bid to prevent the virus from spreading. The president himself has long agitated for Americans to return to work and restore an economy crippled by social distancing measures.

Trump signaled the executive action at the White House on Tuesday, saying he planned to sign an order aimed at Tyson Foods Inc.’s liability, which had become “a road block” for the company. He didn’t elaborate.

The order, though, will not be limited to Tyson, the person said. It will affect many processing plants supplying beef, chicken, eggs and pork. Shares in Tyson and poultry producer Sanderson Farms Inc. extended gains after the news, while JBS SA, the world’s top meat producer, was little changed.

JBS’s local unit, Tyson and Smithfield Foods Inc. didn’t immediately respond to calls and emails. Cargill Inc. said it couldn’t comment because it doesn’t have the executive order.

The White House decided to make the move amid estimates that as much as 80% of U.S. meat production capacity could shut down. But a union representing plant workers accused the administration of failing to develop meaningful safety requirements that would have helped contain the disruptions.

“We only wish that this administration cared as much about the lives of working people as it does about meat, pork and poultry products,” said Stuart Appelbaum, President of the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union.

...

Across the country, at least 6,500 meat processing employees have been impacted by the virus, meaning they either tested positive for the disease or had to go into self-quarantine, according to the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, the largest private-sector union. Twenty workers have died.

At least 22 meat plants have closed within the past two months, reducing pork processing capacity by 25% and beef processing capacity by 10%, according to UFCW. Farmers have animals with nowhere to go as a result, and the situation is so dire that the U.S. Department of Agriculture is setting up a center to help growers with “depopulation and disposal methods” for animals.

Experts have warned the U.S. could be just weeks away from fresh meat shortages. While inventories can provide some cushion, stockpiles are limited.

Total American meat supplies in cold-storage facilities are equal to roughly two weeks of production. With most plant shutdowns lasting about 14 days for safety reasons, that further underscores the potential for deficits.

... so is the government going to nationalize this industry? That’s...true socialism there.

BlackSheep wrote:

... so is the government going to nationalize this industry? That’s...true socialism there.

No, silly goose.

he is going to use our military to force people to work at private companies. the profits will still go to the plant owners. The tax payers will just be paying for the overseers to the slaves immigrants stealing our jobs.

farley3k wrote:
BlackSheep wrote:

... so is the government going to nationalize this industry? That’s...true socialism there.

No, silly goose.

he is going to use our military to force people to work at private companies. the profits will still go to the plant owners. The tax payers will just be paying for the overseers to the slaves immigrants stealing our jobs.

Apologies. National Socialism. The meat plants are part of the war effort.

JC wrote:

Yup...

Total contributions from the meat industry to federal candidates were over $1.7 million during the 2014 campaign cycle, with 83 percent going to Republicans. The industry is such a strong supporter of the GOP that it has given the party 79 percent of its more than $16.6 million in contributions since the 1990 election cycle. [Read more Background]

Those numbers seem infinitesimally small. An industry that includes Tyson Foods spent $1.7mm on an off year election? That seems crazy small.

Jonman wrote:

How many of you that are still gainfully employed declined/returned the $1200 that turned up in your bank a couple weeks ago?

If the money ever actually shows up, it's just going to get passed right along to my sister-in-law and her husband, who are both unemployed now and whom we're already helping keep afloat since everything started to crater (they're young parents with plenty of college debt just getting started in their adult lives, so they had no savings to fall back on when jobs went POOF).

Is that good enough to give me the right to criticize absurdly wealthy organizations trying to take advantage of a crisis at the expense of small business owners trying not to lose their entire livelihood?

I live next to the Tyson plant in Iowa that is responsible for 100 cases and 3 deaths (not including community transmission). I am scared to death—we are a small town and there are t that many grocery stores, gas stations, etc. There is a chance this will run wild here, and could decimate us.

But at least the hogs will be slaughtered and 45 will get his meat.

Farscry wrote:
Jonman wrote:

How many of you that are still gainfully employed declined/returned the $1200 that turned up in your bank a couple weeks ago?

Is that good enough to give me the right to criticize absurdly wealthy organizations trying to take advantage of a crisis at the expense of small business owners trying not to lose their entire livelihood?

Nope, sorry. Go back to feeling bad, snowflake.

Seriously, though, I know I saw somewhere that these checks were going to be pulled out of tax rebates (if we're getting one). Can anyone confirm that?

Top_Shelf wrote:
JC wrote:

Yup...

Total contributions from the meat industry to federal candidates were over $1.7 million during the 2014 campaign cycle, with 83 percent going to Republicans. The industry is such a strong supporter of the GOP that it has given the party 79 percent of its more than $16.6 million in contributions since the 1990 election cycle. [Read more Background]

Those numbers seem infinitesimally small. An industry that includes Tyson Foods spent $1.7mm on an off year election? That seems crazy small.

No idea. I was looking for confirmation that the republican party is the more significant contributor.

Top_Shelf wrote:
JC wrote:

Yup...

Total contributions from the meat industry to federal candidates were over $1.7 million during the 2014 campaign cycle, with 83 percent going to Republicans. The industry is such a strong supporter of the GOP that it has given the party 79 percent of its more than $16.6 million in contributions since the 1990 election cycle. [Read more Background]

Those numbers seem infinitesimally small. An industry that includes Tyson Foods spent $1.7mm on an off year election? That seems crazy small.

Or it highlights just how cheap it is for corporations to buy themselves a couple of Representatives and Senators, especially if they focus on politicians with the right committee assignments.

Atras wrote:
Farscry wrote:
Jonman wrote:

How many of you that are still gainfully employed declined/returned the $1200 that turned up in your bank a couple weeks ago?

Is that good enough to give me the right to criticize absurdly wealthy organizations trying to take advantage of a crisis at the expense of small business owners trying not to lose their entire livelihood?

Nope, sorry. Go back to feeling bad, snowflake.

Seriously, though, I know I saw somewhere that these checks were going to be pulled out of tax rebates (if we're getting one). Can anyone confirm that?

A new rebate that should not have to be paid back. And does not interact with your 2020 income tax/refund. Source: Kiplinger

Farscry wrote:

Is that good enough to give me the right to criticize absurdly wealthy organizations trying to take advantage of a crisis at the expense of small business owners trying not to lose their entire livelihood?

I haven't lost my job. I'm getting a stimulus payment. I'm keeping it. I have no moral high ground!

But I still object to funds explicitly ear marked for small business going to places like Shake Shack ($1.7B valuation as of April) or the LA Lakers ($4.4B valuation as of February). Those aren't small businesses.

Saying that those billion-with-a-B businesses taking loans designed for small businesses and me keeping a stimulus check that's not far off from my monthly pay check are somehow equivalent just because I'm not laid off... Well, that's a weird flex of privilege.

I know small businesses owners who were turned down for loans in the tens if thousands or who didn't get anything because the pot ran out so fast. How many of those people could have been approved for parts of the $20 million nabbed by Ruth's Chris Steak House?

SallyNasty wrote:

He who controls the hamberders controls the universe.

Bloomberg wrote:

The order sets the stage for a showdown between America’s meat giants

America’s meat giants

meat giants

Sounds like Attack on Titan. I'm in.

ClockworkHouse wrote:
Farscry wrote:

Is that good enough to give me the right to criticize absurdly wealthy organizations trying to take advantage of a crisis at the expense of small business owners trying not to lose their entire livelihood?

I haven't lost my job. I'm getting a stimulus payment. I'm keeping it. I have no moral high ground!

But I still object to funds explicitly ear marked for small business going to places like Shake Shack ($1.7B valuation as of April) or the LA Lakers ($4.4B valuation as of February). Those aren't small businesses.

Saying that those billion-with-a-B businesses taking loans designed for small businesses and me keeping a stimulus check that's not far off from my monthly pay check are somehow equivalent just because I'm not laid off... Well, that's a weird flex of privilege.

I know small businesses owners who were turned down for loans in the tens if thousands or who didn't get anything because the pot ran out so fast. How many of those people could have been approved for parts of the $20 million nabbed by Ruth's Chris Steak House?

One thing to add here.

The stimulus checks for individuals phase out gradually for households making $150k+. So, there's some accountability built in to the $$$ for people in a way that does not exist for corporations valued at billions (with a b).

Again, accountability for individuals. Not for the ultra wealthy.

Look you should just be happy to die for the ultra wealthy, and until you've literally died for their profits, you have no place to complain about any advantage they take. maga.

As the to tax rebate. as I understand it: it cannot be assessed against current or future tax rebates or liabilities without a new piece of legislation explicitly allowing that. That seems extremely unlikely to get through the house, but not impossible if it's hidden deep enough in an omnibus bill somewhere.

Frank Wilhoit said, back in 2018:

Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit:

There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.

The more I have observed of the actions taken by conservatives, particularly in the pandemic, the more the truth of this has been hammered home for me. Laws are there to protect conservatives, but not constrain them, while constraining everyone else without protecting them.

Malor wrote:

Frank Wilhoit said, back in 2018:

Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit:

There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.

The more I have observed of the actions taken by conservatives, particularly in the pandemic, the more the truth of this has been hammered home for me. Laws are there to protect conservatives, but not constrain them, but exist to constrain everyone else without protecting them.

"The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly. The rich have always objected to being governed at all." -- GK Chesterton

CaptainCrowbar wrote:
Malor wrote:

Frank Wilhoit said, back in 2018:

Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit:

There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.

The more I have observed of the actions taken by conservatives, particularly in the pandemic, the more the truth of this has been hammered home for me. Laws are there to protect conservatives, but not constrain them, but exist to constrain everyone else without protecting them.

"The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly. The rich have always objected to being governed at all." -- GK Chesterton

The conservative poor reject it just as much. Freedom for me, consequences for thee.

thrawn82 wrote:

Look you should just be happy to die for the ultra wealthy, and until you've literally died for their profits, you have no place to complain about any advantage they take. maga.

As the to tax rebate. as I understand it: it cannot be assessed against current or future tax rebates or liabilities without a new piece of legislation explicitly allowing that. That seems extremely unlikely to get through the house, but not impossible if it's hidden deep enough in an omnibus bill somewhere.

The purpose is to ensure that it doesn't go to people who don't pay or file taxes (the poor, the freeloaders, the undocumented, etc.) so it's unlikely to change.

Malor wrote:

Frank Wilhoit said, back in 2018:

Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit:

There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.

The more I have observed of the actions taken by conservatives, particularly in the pandemic, the more the truth of this has been hammered home for me. Laws are there to protect conservatives, but not constrain them, while constraining everyone else without protecting them.

Always worth a share when talking.thinking about what conservatism really is.

UpToIsomorphism wrote:

I live next to the Tyson plant in Iowa that is responsible for 100 cases and 3 deaths (not including community transmission). I am scared to death—we are a small town and there are t that many grocery stores, gas stations, etc. There is a chance this will run wild here, and could decimate us.

But at least the hogs will be slaughtered and 45 will get his meat.

I am really sorry to hear that. I really wish you and yours all the best and man if I wouldn't be washing my hands every 5 minutes and taking a shower a half a dozen times a day. And I wouldn't eat meat. (or cut it back by like 90%) Maybe only frozen meat? Not that it can't be infected but there is no time where the meat's juices aren't being cooked and not lying around to contaminate.

fangblackbone wrote:
UpToIsomorphism wrote:

I live next to the Tyson plant in Iowa that is responsible for 100 cases and 3 deaths (not including community transmission). I am scared to death—we are a small town and there are t that many grocery stores, gas stations, etc. There is a chance this will run wild here, and could decimate us.

But at least the hogs will be slaughtered and 45 will get his meat.

I am really sorry to hear that. I really wish you and yours all the best and man if I wouldn't be washing my hands every 5 minutes and taking a shower a half a dozen times a day. And I wouldn't eat meat. (or cut it back by like 90%) Maybe only frozen meat? Not that it can't be infected but there is no time where the meat's juices aren't being cooked and not lying around to contaminate.

Actually the amount of ammonia used in these plants I'd be extremely surprised if the meat itself can be contaminated.

Still these places are not social distancing friendly. If they come back online with a reduced workforce it will mean that a lot of animals will just be put down because there's no room for them on the conveyor belts.

Hilton CEO shatters Trump's testing conspiracy theory while sitting beside him

Early in the White House roundtable, Trump boasted of how well he says his administration has done in supplying ventilators and masks, saying you don't even hear about these issues anymore, and about how well he claims it has done on testing. He added, "And you shouldn't be hearing about testing, but that's the last thing they can complain about, I guess."
Talk about testing is not an anti-Trump scheme. Rather, it's talk about a matter vital to the country's future. Public health experts, who say the Trump administration was too slow to create an adequate testing system, have emphasized that conducting far more tests now is critical to limiting the further spread of the virus and safely lifting economic restrictions.
Republican governors and corporate executives have emphasized the same. When a reporter asked Wednesday if any of the executives present were worried people won't really come back to their businesses until there is a coronavirus vaccine, Nassetta spoke up -- and used the word "testing" three times.
Nassetta said "of course we worry about it." Customers are "desperate" to get back out and travel, he said, but want safety. He continued: "...Our customers are saying they're looking for the government, both state and federal government, to focus on testing so that they understand, you know, what real mortality rates are..."
Nassetta argued that more testing would help customers understand that people who are not elderly or infirm are probably at much lower risk than originally estimated. Then, after touting a new Hilton cleanliness program, Nassetta said his customers "want to know that people are being responsible. Right? They want to know that we are doing the testing, the social distancing..."
We still have a lot to learn about the coronavirus and mortality, and we know the virus can kill even younger people without serious health problems. Again, though, Trump had just said that you shouldn't even be hearing about testing. Here was a business leader, invited to the White House by Trump's own staff, talking repeatedly about the importance of testing while on camera with Trump.
Asked by CNN later Wednesday if Hilton wanted to add anything, company spokesman Nigel Glennie noted that the emphasis on testing was not Nassetta's alone.
Glennie pointed out that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's reopening guide says that "reopening the country also strongly relies on public health strategies, including increased testing of people for the virus," and that the White House's own reopening guide prominently mentions the importance of testing.
Once again, the conspiracy is in Trump's head.

Pence staff threatens action against reporter who tweeted about visit to clinic without surgical mask

WaPo wrote:

Vice President Pence’s office has threatened to retaliate against a reporter who revealed that Pence’s office had told journalists they would need masks for Pence’s visit to the Mayo Clinic — a requirement Pence himself did not follow.

Pence’s trip to the clinic Tuesday generated criticism after he was photographed without a surgical mask — the only person in the room not wearing one. The Minnesota clinic requires visitors to wear masks as a precaution against spreading the coronavirus.

Pence’s wife, Karen Pence, said in an interview with Fox News on Thursday that he was unaware of the mask policy until his visit was over.

But Steve Herman, who covers the White House for Voice of America, suggested that there was more to the story after Karen Pence’s interview.

“All of us who traveled with [Pence] were notified by the office of @VP the day before the trip that wearing of masks was required by the @MayoClinic and to prepare accordingly,” tweeted Herman, who covered the trip as part of his rotation as one of the pool reporters, who share information with other reporters in limited-space situations.

The tweet apparently enraged Pence’s staff, which told Herman that he had violated the off-the-record terms of a planning memo that had been sent to him and other reporters in advance of Pence’s trip.

Herman said he was notified by the White House Correspondents’ Association that Pence’s office had banned him from further travel on Air Force Two, although a spokesperson in Pence’s office later told VOA managers than any punishment was still under discussion, pending an apology from Herman or VOA.

...

The issue, according to people involved, is whether Herman’s tweet violated the off-the-record terms of a planning document sent via email Monday evening by the vice president’s office to reporters who planned to travel with Pence to the clinic.

A copy of the document obtained by The Washington Post explicitly stated that masks are required for the visit and instructed reporters to wear them. “Please note, the Mayo Clinic is requiring all individuals traveling with the VP wear masks,” the document said. “Please bring one to wear while on the trip.”

The directive confirms that Pence’s staff was well aware of the need for masks, raising the possibility that none of his aides alerted him to the requirement or that Pence had intentionally flouted it, perhaps to avoid being photographed in a mask. (Pence himself told reporters after the visit that because he doesn’t have the coronavirus — he is tested frequently — he decided he could “speak to these researchers, these incredible health-care personnel, and look them in the eye and say thank you.”)

However, the planning document is marked, “OFF THE RECORD AND FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY.” The off-the-record designation is standard for such logistical memos, indicating reporters are obligated not to publish or report the information. The White House typically keeps planning information confidential to maintain security for official trips.

But there’s some question about how long the obligation lasts — whether it is permanent or only applies to the period before and during the trip.

Herman’s tweet came nearly 48 hours after the vice president’s trip had ended, suggesting the vice president’s staff was more embarrassed by the disclosure than concerned about security.

thrawn82 wrote:
Malor wrote:

Frank Wilhoit said, back in 2018:

Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit:

There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.

The more I have observed of the actions taken by conservatives, particularly in the pandemic, the more the truth of this has been hammered home for me. Laws are there to protect conservatives, but not constrain them, while constraining everyone else without protecting them.

Thanks for posting the video. Fun! Good ol' Burke and his little platoons!

Wanted to go back to this since it brings up Corey Robin's Reactionary Mind. He's updated it for the Trump era (Trump being the natural extension of Sarah Palin) and if folks want to really understand what conservatism is, it is by far the best treatise on the subject.

Here's part of his interview on the original from early last decade when the Tea Party was ascendant.

The key takeaway is that conservatism has always been about resisting egalitarian movements (French Revolution, slavery, labor, suffrage, civil rights, feminism, LGBTQ, etc.) and that it seizes on the sense of loss associated with these movements in order to tap into the popularity of the underlying movement (won't someone please think of:
- the aristocrats
- slaveholders
- big business
- husbands
- whites
- men
- straight married people
etc.)

Those groups DO experience loss. They also must in order for us to have a more just world. Conservatism does more than "stand athwart history yelling, 'Stop!'" It says to the less powerful, "Power is not for you."

It'd be a shame if that story about Pence not wearing a mask to the Mayo Clinic got retweeted 10,000 times per day.