The Trump Presidency 2.0

[amlove21]

Update on the SC ruling re: Trump and USAID payments. I'll summarize.

1. Trump freezes $2B in USAID funding, alleging the payments aren't valid.
2. An unelected judge from a lower district court (Amir Ali) directs the federal government to continue the payment, completely absent proper legal standing (no one is named as the harmed individual in the case, the judge just unilaterally said "USAID good, Trump bad, pay the $2B).
3. Trump pushes back and heads to the SC.
4. SC rules 5-4 not on the validity of the payments themselves or their legality, but that a lower district court can order the Executive Branch (headed by the only person in American politics voted for by the entire American body, mind you) to do a thing.
5. Part of Alito's dissent- “Does a single district-court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the government of the United States to pay out (and probably lose forever) 2 billion taxpayer dollars?” Alito wrote. “The answer to that question should be an emphatic ‘No,’ but a majority of this court apparently thinks otherwise.”
6. At time of this post, we don't know (or I can't find it) what's actually being funded.

If the outrage squad wanted to focus on this egregious display of checks and balances, government fraud/waste/abuse, lawfare and the like, that would be great, but it's not happening because people don't actually care about standards, norms, the constitution or any of that if they can't use it as a cudgel to call Orange Man Bad.

ETA- ACB turned out to be a super shitty appointment for SC.

 

[amlove21]

I support Ukraine in their fight to defend themselves and believe in aiding them with equipment. The Ukrainians should have extended their draft, but kicking out men, women, and children after granting them asylum is nothing more than a bully tactic from Trump. To me, it’s a terrible act with no justification.

Let's focus on the fighting age males. I will meet you at your appeal to emotion on the women and kids, because I am a benevolent shit poster. Should the fighting-age males stay? Why is it a "terrible act", in your opinion?

 

[Marauder06]

Is "temporary legal status" the same as "permanent asylum?" Because it seems to me that the "temporary" part means that their status is... well.. "temporary."

 

[Jaknight]

I want peace not war

Let's focus on the fighting age males. I will meet you at your appeal to emotion on the women and kids, because I am a benevolent shit poster. Should the fighting-age males stay? Why is it a "terrible act", in your opinion?

I think it’s terrible to grant them status and then revoke it as a negotiation tactic, which is exactly what I believe Trump is doing. As for the fighting-age males who fled despite being healthy and able to defend their country—I don’t think they should have left in the first place. Should we send them back? If we’re going to continue backing Ukraine in this war until a better deal is reached, then yes, send the able-bodied men home to fight. But if we’re not, then let them stay.

 

[Topkick]

Send people back who support a war but don't want to fight in it, maybe their opinion of that war shifts a bit.

 

[amlove21]

I want peace not war

I think it’s terrible to grant them status and then revoke it as a negotiation tactic, which is exactly what I believe Trump is doing. As for the fighting-age males who fled despite being healthy and able to defend their country—I don’t think they should have left in the first place. Should we send them back? If we’re going to continue backing Ukraine in this war until a better deal is reached, then yes, send the able-bodied men home to fight. But if we’re not, then let them stay.

First bolded- ok, that's helpful.

Second bolded- Trump didn't grant them status; Mayorkas and Biden did. Each administration is not beholden to the promises (non-legislatively binding of course) of the previous admin. I agree they shouldn't have been granted status by the prior admin in the TPS function, but that's has far as I will go on that issue. Saying that we have "sunk to a new low" and calling Trump's decision "terrible" is pretty bold. The majority of Americans voted for a complete and total re-evaluation of immigration in the United States. Every swing state. Every county moved right. Popular vote. Electoral college. This is an 80/20 issue, so I am not sure I understand how (once again) Ukraine gets a pass when this applies broadly to all immigrants on TPS and those here illegally.

Third bolded- Why is their stay in America dependent on the continued support of this administration? What moral obligation does America hold to these folks? If we suppose it's a moral wrong to send them back at all, which is where we started- how are you squaring that circle by saying "It's not morally wrong if we continue to support this war, making the war longer, where these fighting age males will be put in a position to be slaughtered by an overwhelming invading force?"

If you want peace (which I 100% believe and take you at your word), I would assume your position would be, "Get Zelensky to the table right now, make peace, and let's find a path to citizenship for these asylum seekers." Instead, it looks as if you're saying, "If America prolongs this war, send the fighting-age males back to fight for their country, they shouldn't have left in the first place."

...which isn't peace- it's providing Zelensky with more folks to send to the front. Put plainly- you want peace, but if there isn't going to be peace, then you agree that fighting age males should be expelled to go to war for their country.

Am I misreading this?

 

[BloodStripe]

Here's what they released.

Jeffrey Epstein

The reason we aren’t ever going to see this stuff is because Epstein was a Mossad asset. You can’t turn people like Bill Clinton, but you can buy those who had direct access to those like him. So that’s what they did. And they let him and others have sex with underage girls and became compromised at that moment.

You release the Epstein stuff, Mossad unleashes all the dirt they have on our “leaders.” You will never be able to convince me of anything else.

I’m also not worried Trump is a Russian asset. I’d be less shocked if he was also compromised by Mossad.

 

[AWP]

The reason we aren’t ever going to see this stuff is because Epstein was a Mossad asset.

If that hoppity-hop furry bigot is looking down on us from Internet heaven, he can rest easy knowing he was right on this one.

He can also eat a bag of dicks and fuck off to the sun, but I think he nailed Epstein as you described above.

 

[amlove21]

If that hoppity-hop furry bigot is looking down on us from Internet heaven, he can rest easy knowing he was right on this one.

He can also eat a bag of dicks and fuck off to the sun, but I think he nailed Epstein as you described above.

Post. Of. The. Year.

 

[amlove21]

The reason we aren’t ever going to see this stuff is because Epstein was a Mossad asset. You can’t turn people like Bill Clinton, but you can buy those who had direct access to those like him. So that’s what they did. And they let him and others have sex with underage girls and became compromised at that moment.

You release the Epstein stuff, Mossad unleashes all the dirt they have on our “leaders.” You will never be able to convince me of anything else.

I’m also not worried Trump is a Russian asset. I’d be less shocked if he was also compromised by Mossad.

Makes you wonder what "national security information" Pam Bondi has said she's protecting.

Also, I am going to say a thing now that goes against my overall feelings of "Just give them time, it's been 50 days, you can't boil the ocean" for this admin and people's short attention span.

I am getting impatient with Pam Bondi. It's either a gross miscalculation(s) on her part, or she's obfuscating for any number of reasons. Either way, I need outputs from DOJ.

 

[Topkick]

Makes you wonder what "national security information" Pam Bondi has said she's protecting.

Also, I am going to say a thing now that goes against my overall feelings of "Just give them time, it's been 50 days, you can't boil the ocean" for this admin and people's short attention span.

I am getting impatient with Pam Bondi. It's either a gross miscalculation(s) on her part, or she's obfuscating for any number of reasons. Either way, I need outputs from DOJ.

TBH, this is what I've come to expect. Nothing burgers from windbags on both sides. I hope I'm wrong.

 

[amlove21]

TBH, this is what I've come to expect. Nothing burgers from windbags on both sides. I hope I'm wrong.

While I am not firmly in the "nothing ever happens camp", I agree with you as far as the Epstein release is concerned. The problem there is the big claims that were made prior- those require very big outputs and there are none as of now. There is a ton of progress on a lot of other issues, and considering the very short timeline (it's been 45 days since Trump took office), and it's not even arguable to put this admin at the top of the list for action taken in the first 100 days. But...

Even I am growing impatient with Bondi/Kash on the Epstein issue, I am just not quite to "WTF guys let's make good here" quite yet. I am definitely trending that way.

 

[Topkick]

The problem there is the big claims that were made prior- those require very big outputs and there are none

Campaign tactics. You wanna win? Tell them what they want to hear and then some. We'll deal with the truth later. In this case, I'd gladly eat crow. But I don't think we'll ever get the full story, even if they do release something.

 

[AWP]

Releasing info is easy unless you're hiding something.

 

[amlove21]

Releasing info is easy unless you're hiding something.

Man, I really wish we had free speech on this one. Let's see if I can get super-crafty without making myself rabbit-adjacent.

Listen to the Ian Carrol podcast with Joe Rogan from yesterday. They address some themes.

Releasing info IS easy, unless you're hiding something.

To quote Voltaire (and NOT Kevin Alfred Strom, because, you know, problematic and the quote you're familiar with wasn't Voltaire but anyway)- “The more a society drifts from truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”

 

[Marauder06]

Releasing info is easy unless you're hiding something.

There's got to be something in there that is so embarrassing to the current administration that it outweighs the embarrassment to the past, and potentially future, ones on the (D) side.

 

[RackMaster]

Man, I really wish we had free speech on this one. Let's see if I can get super-crafty without making myself rabbit-adjacent.

Listen to the Ian Carrol podcast with Joe Rogan from yesterday. They address some themes.

Releasing info IS easy, unless you're hiding something.

To quote Voltaire (and NOT Kevin Alfred Strom, because, you know, problematic and the quote you're familiar with wasn't Voltaire but anyway)- “The more a society drifts from truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”

Getting close to the end now. So awesome to see Joe embrace his conspiracy theory side, have the next generation of voices bring rabbit hole mainstream.

 

[amlove21]

Getting close to the end now. So awesome to see Joe embrace his conspiracy theory side, have the next generation of voices bring rabbit hole mainstream.

We are *so* close.

 

[Jaknight]

First bolded- ok, that's helpful.

Second bolded- Trump didn't grant them status; Mayorkas and Biden did. Each administration is not beholden to the promises (non-legislatively binding of course) of the previous admin. I agree they shouldn't have been granted status by the prior admin in the TPS function, but that's has far as I will go on that issue. Saying that we have "sunk to a new low" and calling Trump's decision "terrible" is pretty bold. The majority of Americans voted for a complete and total re-evaluation of immigration in the United States. Every swing state. Every county moved right. Popular vote. Electoral college. This is an 80/20 issue, so I am not sure I understand how (once again) Ukraine gets a pass when this applies broadly to all immigrants on TPS and those here illegally.

Third bolded- Why is their stay in America dependent on the continued support of this administration? What moral obligation does America hold to these folks? If we suppose it's a moral wrong to send them back at all, which is where we started- how are you squaring that circle by saying "It's not morally wrong if we continue to support this war, making the war longer, where these fighting age males will be put in a position to be slaughtered by an overwhelming invading force?"

If you want peace (which I 100% believe and take you at your word), I would assume your position would be, "Get Zelensky to the table right now, make peace, and let's find a path to citizenship for these asylum seekers." Instead, it looks as if you're saying, "If America prolongs this war, send the fighting-age males back to fight for their country, they shouldn't have left in the first place."

...which isn't peace- it's providing Zelensky with more folks to send to the front. Put plainly- you want peace, but if there isn't going to be peace, then you agree that fighting age males should be expelled to go to war for their country.

Am I misreading this?

I was speaking of Trump sinking to a new low, and I don’t think Ukraine should be the only one. In reality, we have no moral obligation to them, but I believe it’s wrong, and Trump should be better than that—not everyone has to agree.

And you’re correct—if there’s no peace and Ukraine is desperate for bodies, then they should mobilize those men, and they should go back.

 

[Marauder06]

I don't want to fight Russia over Ukraine either. If someone doesn't want to fight for their own country, I'm not going to try to compel them to do so.

But that doesn't mean I have to welcome them into the country I *would* fight for.