US Politics: Paradise Lost

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

A few more headlines from today, but I strongly suggesting reading the previous two that X posted.

New York judge rules against Trump and his family, and the lawsuit against his "foundation" is allowed to go through:

Quote

A New York state judge on Friday denied a request by attorneys for President Trump to throw out a lawsuit alleging that Trump and his family violated charity laws with the management of their personal foundation.

Justice Saliann Scarpulla sided with New York Attorney General Barbara D. Underwood in allowing the case to continue, saying it was fair for the attorney general to argue that the president used the Donald J. Trump Foundation to advance his campaign.

Attorney Alan Futerfas, who represents Trump and his three eldest children, had argued that the president was acting in his individual capacity — not on behalf of the foundation — in hosting a televised fundraiser for veterans and allowing his campaign staff to dictate what groups received donations.

But the allegations, Scarpulla wrote in her decision , “show that Mr. Trump was acting in both of his capacities as campaign candidate and president of the Foundation.”

She wrote that Underwood “adequately alleges that the political acts by Mr. Trump and the Campaign are attributable to the Foundation.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/new-york-state-judge-allows-suit-against-trump-and-his-personal-charity-to-proceed/2018/11/23/f5674d0e-ef4f-11e8-96d4-0d23f2aaad09_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.537ca3835a09

 

Trump is pushing to get his transgender ban in the military through, and is asking the Supreme Court to take up the case:

Quote

In yet another aggressive attempt to bypass federal appeals courts, the Trump administration asked the Supreme Court on Friday to hear a challenge to President Donald Trump's policy that bars most transgender individuals from military service.

The policy, first announced by the President in July 2017 via Twitter and later officially released by Secretary of Defense James Mattis, blocks individuals who suffer from a condition known as gender dysphoria from serving with limited exceptions. It also specifies that individuals without the condition can serve but only if they do so according to the sex they were assigned at birth.

 

District courts across the country have so far blocked the policy from going into effect. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments in one challenge earlier this fall and the DC Circuit will hear arguments in early December.

 

On Friday, Solicitor General Noel Francisco filed petitions asking the justices to take up the issue in three separate cases that are still in lower courts so it could be decided definitively this term. Francisco argues that lower court rulings imposing nationwide injunctions are wrong and warrant immediate review.

He writes because of the injunctions, "the military has been forced to maintain that prior policy for nearly a year" despite a determination by Mattis and a panel of experts that the "prior policy, adopted by (Defense Secretary Ash Carter), posed too great a risk to military effectiveness and lethality."

 

Earlier in the month, the Department of Justice warned the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that it planned to ask for emergency relief to lift the nationwide injunction.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/23/politics/military-transgender-ban-supreme-court/index.html

[Centrist Simon Steele]

8 hours ago, maarsen said:

The problem with Bush is that he set a bar for non-intelligence in a President and once that was set, Trump could limbo under it. Don't wish for him back, blame him for setting the bar so low.

Maybe a few years after Trump's presidency ends, he'll take up painting sad dog faces and everyone will say, "Oh, he's okay."

[Rippounet]

21 hours ago, Altherion said:

The social contract between experts and the rest of society is that the experts are allowed to put significant resources to uses which, to almost everyone else, may as well be a black box... but the visible output of this black box must be both what the experts predict and overwhelmingly positive for the vast majority of the population. When this is the case, the experts are mostly respected. For example, there aren't too many people who argue that they know more about building microprocessors than the big chip companies (they exist and are truly weird, but there are very few of them and they have practically no influence).

On the other hand, when the experts insist that a bailout is necessary for people who were directly responsible for an economic collapse and these people recover much faster than everyone else... well, don't expect a high opinion of this type of expert among the general population from that point on.

Let's start with the fact that the bolded is absolutely not true. In the social sciences, experts do not get to use any significant resources. Best case scenario some of them become advisers to someone actually having the resources at their disposal. But extremely few experts have any direct influence on policy-making (a few counter-examples notwithstanding).

As to the specific example you take... Well, what were the experts supposed to say? They warned that letting some organizations go bankrupt would worsen the crisis and delay the recovery. As far as we know, they were correct, the alternative wasn't exactly attractive, and the idea that it would have turned out better is still highly hypothetical. That the bailouts came with no strings attached and thus benefited the very people responsible for the crisis in the first place, or that the common joe was largely left to fend for himself, can hardly be blamed on the experts.

It seems to me this kind of pub-chat talk is kinda what the article I referred to was alluding to: the eagerness to prove experts wrong and blame them for shit they were never in any way responsible for, using rudimental knowledge and appreciation. Not to mention the fact that it is based on a rather unfounded faith in the market and all that. Certainly the aftermath of the crisis could have been handled better in many ways and Obama missed his Roosevelt moment. But then, even FDR eventually had a major war to help with his recovery, something that I won't blame Obama for not counting on.
All in all, it's a rather poor example of experts screwing up. And I'm sure there were many who proposed complementary plans that didn't make the news. Let's bear in mind that the "experts" we see on tv are not necessarily the best in the first place, eh?

[Larry of the Lawn]

46 minutes ago, Simon Steele said:

Maybe a few years after Trump's presidency ends, he'll take up painting sad dog faces and everyone will say, "Oh, he's okay."

Yeah he'll see Michelle Obama in public without murdering her and he'll instantly be the darling of the press.

[Gone and Quite Forgotten]

2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Homeboy has a tattoo of Nixon on his back. A person who does that isn’t likely to flip on people he’s loyal to.

Homeboy also doesn't wanna wind up in prison with the architect of the drug war on his back.

[Gone and Quite Forgotten]

You guys know I was joking about Bush...right? I mean, yes, having an actual Joe McCarthy/George Wallace type demagogue in the White House puts many of those I found otherwise abhorrent into perspective. But having more integrity than Donald Trump does not alone a president make.

[Martell Spy]

43 minutes ago, Let's Get Kraken said:

You guys know I was joking about Bush...right? I mean, yes, having an actual Joe McCarthy/George Wallace type demagogue in the White House puts many of those I found otherwise abhorrent into perspective. But having more integrity than Donald Trump does not alone a president make.

Well, Republicans have elected 2 Presidents in a row that are torture-loving scumbags. If someone tells you they are a Republican, you should assume they are Chaotic Evil Nazi cannibals. It really does not matter if they are just in it for the tax cuts, or tell you they are a pot-loving Libertarian. Fuck them, seriously.

[Martell Spy]

4 hours ago, Triskele said:

A few wild thoughts just came to me on the Trump / Roberts spat.  I was thinking how idiotic it seems for Trump to pick this fight with a lifetime appointment judge who could rule against him big time down the road.  But then I got to thinking...will someone eventually tell Trump to pack the court beyond 9 if he doesn't get what he wants?  There'd been that renewed talk of the left doing this down the road to claw back some of what's been lost, but what's to stop Trump the great norms recognizer from doing it?

Republicans would have to reclaim the House to do that. It is done through Congress. Also, both Senate and House would have to support it. It is certainly not going to happen before 2021,

[Martell Spy]

EU and China break ultimate trade taboo to hit back at Trump
Brussels and Beijing want to stop the US justifying tariffs as security measures, but the move carries high risks.

https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-and-china-break-ultimate-trade-taboo-to-hit-back-at-trump/

Quote

 

Whichever way the WTO rules, Pandora’s box has been opened. If it rules that national security can justify tariffs, the decision could inspire other countries to play the security card. On the other hand, if Washington finds itself backed into a corner, it could simply quit the WTO.

“Permitting an unlimited national security exception is a fundamental risk to the trading system, but so is stringent judicial control over national security. To force a panel to decide risks opening Pandora’s box,” said Holger Hestermeyer, an expert in trade law at King’s College London.

 

 

[Gone and Quite Forgotten]

3 hours ago, Martell Spy said:

Well, Republicans have elected 2 Presidents in a row that are torture-loving scumbags. If someone tells you they are a Republican, you should assume they are Chaotic Evil Nazi cannibals. It really does not matter if they are just in it for the tax cuts, or tell you they are a pot-loving Libertarian. Fuck them, seriously.

Mmmm, let's take a little perspective on this. Bill Clinton blew up the last pharmacutical plant in Sudan to distract from the Lewinsky hearings, and Obama (who was not above a bit of torture himself) is more associated in the Mid East with killing Muslims than Bush and Clinton put together. Hell, LBJ, who I otherwise admire more than any  other modern President sans FDR, kept us in Vietnam after he knew it was a losing war because he didn't want to have to tell the American people that he fucked up. Of course Richard Nixon topped them all when he undermined peace talks in that same war so he could use it as a candidate when he was running for President, which is probably more evil than anything any President has done in my lifetime, including Agent Orange in the White House atm. So I while I agree with the sentiment that the Republican party has been on the wrong side of history for some time, calling them all Nazi Scumbags is obtuse, and really just makes me see you as much the child as those drooling idiots in the red ballcaps. Not a moral equivalency, but your point is equally misguided when you paint with a broad brush.

Also worth noting, most of the people who have been standing up to Trump, from the FBI, to the Special Counsel, to the judiciary, have been Republicans as well.

[Jace, Extat]

9 minutes ago, Let's Get Kraken said:

Mmmm, let's take a little perspective on this. Bill Clinton blew up the last pharmacutical plant in Sudan to distract from the Lewinsky hearings, and Obama is more associated in the Mid East with killing Muslims than Bush and Clinton put together. Hell, LBJ, who I otherwise admire more than any  other modern President, kept us in Vietnam after he knew it was a losing war because he didn't want to have to tell the American people that he fucked up. Of course Richard Nixon topped them all when he undermined peace talks in that same war so he could use it as a candidate when he was running for President, which is probably more evil than anything any President has done in my lifetime, including Agent Orange in the White House atm. So I while I agree with the sentiment that the Republican party has been on the wrong side of history for some time, calling them all Nazi Scumbags is moronic, and really just makes me see you as much the child as those drooling idiots in the red ballcaps. Not a moral equivalency, but your point is equally obtuse when you paint with a broad brush.

Also worth noting, most of the people who have been standing up to Trump, from the FBI, to the Special Counsel, to the judiciary, have been Republicans as well.

This defense of the Republican as blatant a disrespect to the spirit of democracy as I have ever witnessed. To so casually suggest that not every Republican deserves their end to come with a short drop and a sudden drop is the height of treason. 

Remember sir that with such enablist rhetoric you dishonor not only yourself, but the very name of the revolution. For is not every son and daughter who has borne the desire to live equally compelled to resist the fascist in all means? And at what point does the ally become collaborator? Are we to assume innocence or even ignorance? 

No, better that seventy million should perish to prevent a single fascist from spreading their diseased ideology. 

And after the final Nazi or ally has been dispatched we may finally confront the Bolsheviks to the East. For far too long the Oligarchs who have warped Democracy have allowed the perversions of the Soviet to stand, for the leaches of that failed party to continue their extortion of the subjugated Russian peoples, and tens of millions in Eastern Europe.

Soon the second American Revolution will sweep away the shackles of the past, a definitive resolution to the longstanding challenges that have faced Democracy in the wake of treacherous Capitalist Influence, and woe to he who ignores the plight of the worker in favor of inexcusable ideology.

[Gone and Quite Forgotten]

34 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

This defense of the Republican

I stopped reading here, because once again it seems to have flown over your head that denying something being the moral equivalent of a Nazi, does not necessarily constitute a defense of that thing. Read my post again, read very fucking carefully what I actually say about Republicans, and tell me if it's not factually accurate, or even really very flattering.

Fuck it, I don't have the energy for this shit tonight. Y'all want to go on with the notion that anything to the right of you constitutes the epitome of human evil, enjoy your exercise in mutual masturbation. But do remember, nothing will ramp up the conservative base faster than open rivalry with "the libtard cuckocrats" or whatever the latest name is. We really can't afford six more years of this...

[Jace, Extat]

27 minutes ago, Let's Get Kraken said:

I stopped reading here, because once again it seems to have flown over your head that denying something being the moral equivalent of a Nazi, does not necessarily constitute a defense of that thing. Read my post again, read very fucking carefully what I actually say about Republicans, and tell me if it's not factually accurate, or even really very flattering.

Fuck it, I don't have the energy for this shit tonight. Y'all want to go on with the notion that anything to the right of you constitutes the epitome of human evil, enjoy your exercise in mutual masturbation. But do remember, nothing will ramp up the conservative base faster than open rivalry with "the libtard cuckocrats" or whatever the latest name is. We really can't afford six more years of this...

It was a joking over the top speech meant to draw a chuckle, sorry.

[Gone and Quite Forgotten]

3 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

It was a joking over the top speech meant to draw a chuckle, sorry.

Jesus now I feel like an asshole, I'm sorry. I really did stop reading after that first line, so I completely missed it. Stuck both feet in my mouth there. Ironic given what I accused you of... I bit a coworker's head off today too when they kept accusing me of overloading a dishwasher. Now suddenly I think maybe I did come back at him aggressively. I gotta give the internet a break through the holidays. I'm sorry again.

[Jace, Extat]

24 minutes ago, Let's Get Kraken said:

Jesus now I feel like an asshole, I'm sorry. I really did stop reading after that first line, so I completely missed it. Stuck both feet in my mouth there. Ironic given what I accused you of... I bit a coworker's head off today too when they kept accusing me of overloading a dishwasher. Now suddenly I think maybe I did come back at him aggressively. I gotta give the internet a break through the holidays. I'm sorry again.

It's alright bud. I provoke a lot so I can understand not giving much leash. Just do what I do, smoke a shitload of weed.

[Centrist Simon Steele]

15 hours ago, larrytheimp said:

Yeah he'll see Michelle Obama in public without murdering her and he'll instantly be the darling of the press.

Sadly, that's about all it will take. People have terribly short memories. The number of liberals who are sympathetic to Bush now (and they always cite his paintings) is astounding. He was a war criminal--that was the narrative, and I think that's an honest narrative.

[Centrist Simon Steele]

15 hours ago, Let's Get Kraken said:

You guys know I was joking about Bush...right? I mean, yes, having an actual Joe McCarthy/George Wallace type demagogue in the White House puts many of those I found otherwise abhorrent into perspective. But having more integrity than Donald Trump does not alone a president make.

I'm sorry--I didn't mean you specifically. This is just something I've noticed in general over the years. Even before Trump.

[Zorral]

11 hours ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

This defense of the Republican as blatant a disrespect to the spirit of democracy as I have ever witnessed. To so casually suggest that not every Republican deserves their end to come with a short drop and a sudden drop is the height of treason. 

Remember sir that with such enablist rhetoric you dishonor not only yourself, but the very name of the revolution. For is not every son and daughter who has borne the desire to live equally compelled to resist the fascist in all means? And at what point does the ally become collaborator? Are we to assume innocence or even ignorance? 

No, better that seventy million should perish to prevent a single fascist from spreading their diseased ideology. 

And after the final Nazi or ally has been dispatched we may finally confront the Bolsheviks to the East. For far too long the Oligarchs who have warped Democracy have allowed the perversions of the Soviet to stand, for the leaches of that failed party to continue their extortion of the subjugated Russian peoples, and tens of millions in Eastern Europe.

Soon the second American Revolution will sweep away the shackles of the past, a definitive resolution to the longstanding challenges that have faced Democracy in the wake of treacherous Capitalist Influence, and woe to he who ignores the plight of the worker in favor of inexcusable ideology.

But you left out, among other evils executed blatantly or attempted secretly by R potuses: such as Reagan going along with the selling of drugs by US agencies to secretly buy weapons to give to a Central American torture-'non-commie' and thereby allowing not only freedom fighters but US anti-drug forces to be tortured and killed; also making the deal behind everyone's backs with the Iranian Revolution to keep the US embassy prisoners non-released until he took office, etc.  The R's really are scumbaq killers of our own people and have been for a long time. 

[ThinkerX]

Kind of surreal, given the often harsh Trump/Mexico dialogue.

 

But, also a victory of sorts for Team Trump - and one that might avoid a major legal challenge.

 

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/exclusive-deal-with-mexico-paves-way-for-asylum-overhaul-at-u-s-border/ar-BBQ2WME?ocid=ob-fb-enus-580&fbclid=IwAR1Bvfg5I168CilqxwHaSsFIdyIyRwkoqJC01wiDLBHRkAClkC224G5KYZI

 

MEXICO CITY —The Trump administration has won the support of Mexico’s incoming government for a plan to remake U.S. border policy by requiring asylum seekers to wait in Mexico while their claims move through U.S. courts, according to Mexican officials and senior members of president-elect Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s transition team.

The agreement would break with long-standing asylum rules and place a formidable barrier in the path of Central American migrants attempting to reach the United States and escape poverty and violence. By reaching the accord, the Trump administration has also overcome Mexico’s historic reticence to deepen cooperation with the United States on an issue widely seen here as America’s problem.

 

The White House had no immediate comment.

[Jace, Extat]

Fucking spineless