General Trump hilarity free-for-all thread

[Cain]

Trump's considering bringing back CIA black-sites.

[Cain]

For those who want a link https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/25/us/politics/cia-detainee-prisons.html

The Trump administration is preparing a sweeping executive order that would clear the way for the C.I.A. to reopen overseas "black site" prisons, like those where it detained and tortured terrorism suspects before former President Barack Obama shut them down.

President Trump's three-page draft order, titled "Detention and Interrogation of Enemy Combatants" and obtained by The New York Times, would also undo many of the other restrictions on handling detainees that Mr. Obama put in place in response to policies of the George W. Bush administration.

If Mr. Trump signs the draft order, he would also revoke Mr. Obama's directive to give the International Committee of the Red Cross access to all detainees in American custody. That would be another step toward reopening secret prisons outside of the normal wartime rules established by the Geneva Conventions, although statutory obstacles would remain.

[Cain]

OK, so some real talk for a minute here.

The attempts to make protest illegal and investigation into so-called voter fraud, while worrying on their own, are all about voter suppression.  The GOP is demographically fucked.  I know it, you know it, they know it, even Trump (probably knows it).  White men and the rich are not a winning coalition in a multicultural state with vast wealth disparities.

However, you slap everyone determined to go against you with felony charges, then rig the system to "prevent voter fraud", you can wipe out huge chunks of opposing votes.  That's what this is about.

[Salty]

OK, so some real talk for a minute here.

The attempts to make protest illegal and investigation into so-called voter fraud, while worrying on their own, are all about voter suppression.  The GOP is demographically fucked.  I know it, you know it, they know it, even Trump (probably knows it).  White men and the rich are not a winning coalition in a multicultural state with vast wealth disparities.

However, you slap everyone determined to go against you with felony charges, then rig the system to "prevent voter fraud", you can wipe out huge chunks of opposing votes.  That's what this is about.

Right. If protesting is taken away or severely punished, the only method of action left is the vote. By the time 2018 rolls around, will left votes matter? My guess would be no.

[Cain]

Extreme gerrymandering since 2010 helped to make sure they didn't matter this time around.  I think the aim is to now ensure that the vote disparity isn't so big...losing by over 3 million votes and still getting the Presidency is a bad look. It raises questions about democratic legitimacy (the EIU yesterday downgraded the USA to a "flawed democracy"). If I'm correct, we will see the disparity drop in 2020, assuming Trump lasts that long, but in terms of absolute numbers Trump won't be winning any more people over.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Yay, secret prisons and voter disenfranchisement!

Yep, totally exactly like $hillary would have done, no difference at all.

No difference.

[Cain]

One of our PD friends is currently arguing with someone who thinks Hillary is literal fascist and that if Trump does anything illegal the courts will overrule it.

I may have laughed at him.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

One of our PD friends is currently arguing with someone who thinks Hillary is literal fascist and that if Trump does anything illegal the courts will overrule it.

I may have laughed at him.

Wowwwww

Oh wow

I mean, in some ways I have to admire that he doesn't let mere reality hold him from embracing his convictions.

[hooplala]

So Trump is basically going through the list of whatever Obama changed and reversing it out of spite. FMW.

[P3nT4gR4m]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELD2AwFN9Nc 

[The Good Reverend Roger]

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/01/25/511572169/epa-scientists-work-may-face-case-by-case-review-by-trump-team-official-says?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20170125

And

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/jan/24/journalists-charged-felonies-trump-inauguration-unrest

And maybe a little bit of this

http://www.npr.org/2017/01/25/511469982/hiring-freeze-and-obamacare-repeal-could-clobber-veterans-affairs?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20170125

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Just to emphasize that first one, scientists at the EPA will need to pass any work they do through censors before it can be distributed in any way.

To include peer review.

[Cain]

With regards to "voter fraud", just to prove my point...

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/trumps-punitive-voter-fraud-investigation/514424/

Spicer's answer was stunning.

"There's a lot of states that we didn't compete in where that's not necessarily the case," he said. You look at California and New York, I'm not sure that those statements were—we didn't look at those two states in particular ... I think when you look at where a lot of places where a lot of these issues could have occurred in bigger states, that's where I think we're going to look."

Here's a shorter way to put that: Spicer is saying that Trump will target only states that voted Democratic for his investigation of fraud.

As my colleague Emma Green laid out yesterday in detail, there's simply no basis for the claim of massive fraud. Activists who push the claim like to say that the absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence, but repeated investigations, over the course of years, have failed to produce any proof. When the George W. Bush administration spent five years looking for fraud in the 2000s, they came back with effectively nothing. This makes progressives look at warnings about voter fraud as just a pretext for voter suppression: Once the public is made to believe there's widespread fraud, it will support strict voting laws that require photo ID to vote, restrict early voting, and more. Those laws happen to disproportionately affect minorities, students, the poor, and other demographics that vote overwhelmingly Democratic.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

With regards to "voter fraud", just to prove my point...

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/trumps-punitive-voter-fraud-investigation/514424/

Spicer's answer was stunning.

"There's a lot of states that we didn't compete in where that's not necessarily the case," he said. You look at California and New York, I'm not sure that those statements were—we didn't look at those two states in particular ... I think when you look at where a lot of places where a lot of these issues could have occurred in bigger states, that's where I think we're going to look."

Here's a shorter way to put that: Spicer is saying that Trump will target only states that voted Democratic for his investigation of fraud.

As my colleague Emma Green laid out yesterday in detail, there's simply no basis for the claim of massive fraud. Activists who push the claim like to say that the absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence, but repeated investigations, over the course of years, have failed to produce any proof. When the George W. Bush administration spent five years looking for fraud in the 2000s, they came back with effectively nothing. This makes progressives look at warnings about voter fraud as just a pretext for voter suppression: Once the public is made to believe there's widespread fraud, it will support strict voting laws that require photo ID to vote, restrict early voting, and more. Those laws happen to disproportionately affect minorities, students, the poor, and other demographics that vote overwhelmingly Democratic.

This, on a smaller scale, is what got Trump into office. Well, that and the Shillary criminal emails exactly the same as Trump monkeyscreeching.

[Salty]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/sanctuary-cities/

This is interesting because it shows:
1. An executive order can be wholly stupid and impractical and just sort of peter out.
2. This one doesn't exactly do what the label might have you believe.

"I'm curious to see exactly what he does in terms of this defunding of sanctuary cities because it doesn't make sense from a legal standpoint or a political standpoint," Torrey said.

It seems more for show than anything else.

As for the wall, I find it incredibly hard to imagine the GOP passing $15+ billion dollar legislation. Even with the most ardent, fervent right-wing whako base, this party must balk at such a huge price tag.

I could definitely be wrong about that.