Open Mic for the week of 1/20/2025
It’s inauguration day.
There’s a phenomenon where someone writes an essay about this or that but someone else wants to discuss something that has not yet made it to the front page.
This is unfair to everybody involved. It’s unfair to the guy who wrote the original essay because, presumably, he wants to talk about his original essay. It’s unfair to the guy who wants to talk about his link because it looks like he’s trying to change the subject. It’s unfair to the people who go to the comments to read up on the thoughts of the commentariat for the original essay and now we’re talking about some other guy’s links.
So!
The intention is to have a new one of these every week. If you want to talk about a link, post it here! Or, heck, use it as an open thread.
And, if it rolls off, we’ll make a new one. With a preamble just like this one.
People who were worried that Fauci might not get pardoned can relax. Biden pardoned Fauci last night.Report
A laugh-out-loud zinger: “I guess the covid vaccines *DO* provide immunity.”Report
Holy cow, Kinzinger, Cheney, Schiff *ALL* got pardoned.
Nice.Report
Mark Milley too. And hey, more pardons incoming.
“Trump, who takes office at noon, has promised to grant swift clemency to many of those involved in the violent and bloody Jan. 6, 2021, attack, which injured roughly 140 law enforcement officers. “Everybody in this very large arena will be very happy with my decision,” he said at a Sunday rally. ”
https://apnews.com/article/biden-trump-fauci-milley-pardons-january-6-3cba287f89051513fb48d7ae700ae747Report
Rachel Vindman is on Bluesky giving her take on the pardons:
Report
Question for the lawyers here:
Besides Nixon being pardoned by Ford, has a POTUS ever issued a preemptive pardon to an individual not actually charged with a federal crime?Report
Ooooh! The pardon for Fauci goes back to 2014!!!
Is that when the wet market opened?Report
Let me just ask a curious question to Perplexity:
What year was EcoHealth Alliance first grant in wuhan?
EcoHealth Alliance’s first grant involving research in Wuhan, China, was awarded in 2014. The U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) provided a grant to EcoHealth Alliance to study possible coronaviruses from bats, and $600,000 of this grant was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology[5]. This grant was part of a larger $3.7 million award from the NIH to EcoHealth Alliance[5]. The project was initially set to run for five years and was renewed in 2019 for another five-year period, but it was subsequently terminated by the Trump administration in April 2020 following the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic[5].
Can add citations in separate post if folks are interested…Report
He’s pardoned his entire family!
James Biden, Sara Jones Biden, Valerie Biden Owens, John Owens, and Francis Biden!!! Dating back to 2014!!!
Oh, wow.Report
The only curious thing about the pardon is that it seems to imply that they needed 6-yrs to get the first operation monetized.Report
Oh, good. He got Leonard Peltier.Report
The twitter accounts for POTUS and VP have changed hands. If you were holding out hope that Trump would be arrested at the podium, it looks like that has not, in fact, happened.
Trust the plan.Report
If you’re wondering if we ever discussed Birthright Citizenship in the past, we did! Back in 2018.
Some of the arguments that we were able to dismiss because they were racist back then may bubble up again.Report
Let’s look at what Elon is up to:
https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:4llrhdclvdlmmynkwsmg5tdc/post/3lg74qw7q5x2n?ref_src=embed&ref_url=https%253A%252F%252Fwww.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com%252F2025%252F01%252Fspringtime-for-elon
Before anyone tries to defend him:
“Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.”
― Jean-Paul SartreReport
He threw his heart out to the crowd and then said “my heart goes out to you”.
Maybe you have to have Asperger’s.Report
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/5f1206254c85b77932267ab65a3fa2de9af33ad7c25c93b1a9dba5eb2c273449.pngReport
Oh, I have no doubt that there are media companies out there covering this as a Roman Salute!
You don’t have to convince me of that!
I believe you!
I’m sure that there are plenty of people who will be screaming “THIS IS A NAZI SALUTE!” at the top of their lungs, in as high of a register as they can accomplish.
On one level, I imagine it’s probably a relief to scream “NAZI!” at Musk after the last few months of Democrats being in power.Report
Okay you want to defend Apatheid Boy. Thanks for showing us who you are.Report
“Defend Apatheid Boy” (sic)?
I’d rather show a 19-second clip than a 9-second one.
Wait.
Is this because of the last year and a quarter due to what the left has required of you because of Gaza? Is that what this is?Report
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/2c58d114cec6e7a06c61726ceaad66e16bddfc6de554db8803218efa7911909d.pngReport
Holy crap. It *IS* the Gaza thing.
That must suck, dude.
Holy crap, that must suck. You have my sympathies.Report
Are you suggesting that Elon Musk was personally responsible for South African Apartheid, or is that just an ethnic slur?Report
He’s stating openly that a white South African raised in an apartheid supporting household is more likely then not to still support similar such causes.Report
“Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.”
― Jean-Paul SartreReport
You have never had an original thought in your life, have you?Report
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/elon-goes-full-seig-heil-in-clarifying-moment
“Back in the first Trump presidency Trump’s critics spent an inordinate amount of time trying to get Trumpers to admit they’d done this or that, to apologize, whatever. This was always a mistake. I don’t need anyone to validate what I saw. I saw it. I don’t care what the explanation is. These are just twisted anti-American degenerates. We know this. Just what level of exuberant disinhibition led Musk to this moment or why this unmistakable gesture came so naturally to him … well, that’s really not my problem. Everyone knows what they saw here.”
I know what I saw and I know who Musk is, what he has said in the past and who he supports like the AfD in Germany.
Why are you so eager to defend him? Is it because you hate the libs so much?
“We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be.”-Kurt VonnegutReport
I can say “my heart goes out to you” without making a famous fascist gesture…twice. We’ve all seen Raiders of the Lost Ark and know what a Sieg Heil looks like.
This is what dogwhistling and plausible (to dimwits and rubes) deniability looks like, Jaybird, and faced with the choice of who to believe here, I’ll go with “my lying eyes”. I suppose Trump was also miming adjusting a mic stand.
The most charitable explanation is Musk is a 15 year old edgelord at heart and just wants to fish with people and get people talking about him. And let’s say that’s all that happened here.
This is no way to run a country. Not this one, anyway. Don’t defend the indefensible.Report
I mean there is probably a part of these tech broligarchs that never grew up from being 15 year old edgelords but Musk has a long history of supporting far right parties here and abroad and has been in trouble for making anti-Semitic statements before.
A big problem of it can’t happen here is that a lot of people just going looking for plausible deniability because they want to keep their head down and not get in trouble if trouble comes knocking or you get the edgelords defending hence my use of the Sartre quote. So the story here is apparently the Roman Saltute which is the origin of the Sieg Heil and was used here until it became associated with fascism.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/8e3cc8a8d59c5c9a877a7ff495085be16593799c3d07e66438dbe0cc842fdde3.jpgReport
Here’s the ADL and their take on it:
Report
The political party that Musk supports in Germany has this ad: https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/99c030c61d139ada69ad4511372ce5720c805197879637118c876d8e70b99846.jpgReport
Why is the ADL defending the AFD? Is it that both have As in the first spot and Ds somewhere else in the acronym?
I’ve gotta say, there are better reasons to appeal to someone/find someone appealing.Report
The ADL is wrong and Asperberger’s is not a perpetual get out of free card.Report
That’s the explanation that makes the most sense to you? The ADL is wrong and theater kids are Nazis?
Lots of luck over the next four years.
(Holy crap. What did the last four years feel like?!?)Report
Why do you keep associating Asperger’s and theatre kids?Report
Remind me again, where does the word “fascism” come from?
Also, there’s no historical evidence it was a Roman salute. No Roman texts describe it, nor does any Roman art display it; it started appearing in paintings in the 1700s-1800s.
And then of course some bad 20th Century people co-opted it, just like they did with the swastika.
When you try to tell people now that a swastika flag really means auspiciousness and good fortune, they tend to be skeptical.
My heart goes out to them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_saluteReport
I’m not defensing the indefensible. I’m defending a theater kid with Aspergers.
Look at the footage! I linked to it! Watch it!
Put on your “I am a Democrat who supports Israel over Palestine!” hat and watch it!
Then put on your “I was in two high school musicals!” hat and watch it!
And then ask “which of these two hats is more representative of what is likely?”
Those two different hats are all you need to hammer out Occom’s Hammer. (Not Razor.)Report
I’ve seen the footage.
Elon Musk gave a Nazi salute, onstage, to applause.Report
“I’m not defensing the indefensible. I’m defending a theater kid with Aspergers.”
“We tell ourselves stories in order to live.”-Joan DidionReport
What the hell do you know about theater kids, Saul? Were you anywhere *NEAR* theater kids when you were studying to be a lawyer?!?!?
Until you demonstrate that you understand what it’s like to be under those lights, maybe you should just go back to accusing people of being Nazis.Report
What’s this “theater kid” business? Musk claims that in high school he excelled in physics and computer science. I’m not intimately familiar with his biography, so what is it to which you refer?
Also, another comment in mod.Report
I freed it.
I’m speaking to the thing that Musk did in the footage that I linked to.
He put his hand over his heart and then threw it out to the faceless horde in front of him and then said “my heart goes out to you”.
Even the ADL said “Yeah, this was awkward but it wasn’t a Nazi salute”.Report
But you seem to be claiming this is a reasonable error for a “theater kid” to make.
Is Musk now, or was he ever, a “theater kid”?
Or is he the world’s richest man, who’s seen Raiders of the Lost Ark like we all have, and knows exactly how that gesture reads?Report
I’m measuring as a person of Asperger who sees another person of Asperger.
I acknowledge that he is the world’s richest man and take into account how crappy his competitors must have been to fall so far behind.
Like, this isn’t a playthrough of Mario Party where I think “Holy crap! Player One is Awesome!” as much as I’m saying “Jesus Christ! Players 2-7 are drunk, stoned, and/or urinating.”
As for how that gesture reads, I see it two ways:
1. From the camera out in the crowd. “Holy crap! That looks like a Nazi salute!”
2. From inside. “I am throwing my heart out to the faceless audience after a successful musical!”
So… yes. I know exactly how that gesture reads.Report
He is a 53 year old man, the richest man in the world, and he self-diagnosed. He is using it as a shield and you fell for it hook, line, and sinker because yeah Seig Heil’s are bad but not as bad as those liberals who you obviously hate so much but cannot admit you hate so muchReport
If you want to ask how many Aspergers people are self-diagnosed, you’d probably end up with a percentage of north of 50.
Seriously.Report
Abraham Foxman, former director of the ADL says it was a Seig Heil
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/0fe4233514806352ae83c90a98574a2d665539fd9d310a0d47ba9862781bffb7.jpgReport
My gosh!
Why did they fire such a principled leader?!?Report
You have to be exceptionally dumb to think to ADL is not part of the Republican party at this point.
You know who _hasn’t_ said it wasn’t a Na.zi salute?
ELON MUSK.Report
“Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.”
― Jean-Paul SartreReport
Saul, you are always the guy who says that the time for argument is past.
In any case, I think that you really need to keep your powder dry on the whole “crying wolf” thing. You may need the townspeople to show up someday and screaming “NAZI NAZI NAZI” before the first full day of Trump’s presidency is not helping any cause you may have.Report
It appears that too many townspeople have become comfortable frogs to go anywhere, since an onstage Sieg Heil (two of them, in case you missed the first one!) from the world’s wealthiest man and intimate influencer of the new Admin seems to move them not at all from their toasty warm-water pot.Report
If you want to argue that the country is obviously in a bad place, that’s an argument that can easily be made! Hell, I may help you make it!
But you shouldn’t base it on Musk giving a Nazi salute to the crowd when there is footage of him saying that he’s throwing his heart out to them.
There are *SO* very many things to criticize Trump (and Musk!) about. So very many!
Focusing on the awkward gesture made at the rally distracts from legitimate criticisms!Report
Elon says a lot of things.
I calls ’em like I sees ’em.
For example, I don’t write “awkward gesture” when what I see is “fascist salute”.Report
If that’s what you see, then that’s what you see. Fair enough.
Do you see how someone else (like the ADL!) *MIGHT* see something else? Or is there only one possible interpretation of what he did?Report
Sure. Someone else might be duped. That is certainly a way to arrive at an alternate interpretation of a widely-known gesture indelibly associated with white supremacy.
In fact, getting your marks to believe in an alternate interpretation of your words or actions is exactly the goal and function of “deception”, of which “plausible deniability” and “trolling” and “dogwhistling” are sub-concepts.Report
So then we have to explore stuff like “all of the people who have been duped” and explain why the ADL, who you think would be good at this, was also duped.
We can also look at the history of “anybody who doesn’t agree with me has been duped” and see if there are any patterns.Report
It is more about how the nature of trolls was detected very well 80 years ago.
You are not arguing in good-faith, Jaybird. Your arguments reek of “the card says moops.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMabpBvtXr4Report
Saul, I *LOVE* to argue in good faith with people who are arguing in good faith.
It’s when people establish that they’re not interested in doing the same that I’m willing to shrug and say “okay, we’ll play by your rules then”.
You wanna engage in ideas? Let’s engage in ideas!
You wanna yell “NAZI NAZI NAZI!”, well, feel free to wonder where all the townspeople are and I’ll be more than happy enough to explain the difference between Type I Errors and Type II Errors and how the former can result in the latter in an iterated game.Report
I’m open to the possibility that it was an awkward gesture, but let’s not pretend it isn’t pretty much exactly like a Nazi salute. All it would take from Musk to confirm the awkward gesture would be something like, “Yeah, I see it too. I will try not to make that gesture in the future.” Without that, he’s just inviting both the people who don’t like him, and the people who are very excited he just gave their salute, to misinterpret him.
I mean, if he were just some random billionaire, and didn’t mind a bunch of people, including actual Nazis, thinking he’s a Nazi, that’d be fine, but he’s not: he has bought his way into an administration, and he did it at the friggin’ inauguration.Report
I can absolutely see how someone would say “that’s pretty much a Nazi salute!” if they watched the 9 second clip.
I just think that if they watch the 19 second clip, they might say “oh, wait, there’s another interpretation…”
But I agree that Musk should say something about it.
I checked his timeline for whether or not he had and the closest I found was this (and it’s pretty oblique).Report
I’ve watched the whole clip. It still looks like a Nazi salute. Again, I’m open to other interpretations, but there’s only one person who can set the record straight, and so far he’s just thanked the ADL.Report
Why would he say anything about it? Is there anyone whose opinion he has reason to care about is also concerned about it?
If anything, the brouhaha serves Team Trump’s interests, as Saul’s TPM quote suggested.Report
Then we’re back in a place where Team Trump can point at Team Trump’s critics and say “look at how silly and unserious our critics are”.
Just like 2017-2020.
Maybe we just need to start prepping for 2026’s elections (arguably the most important of our lifetime’s).Report
I may be silly and unserious, but I refuse to make excuses for the man that even he himself has not made. He has not claimed to be an overexcited socially-awkward “theater kid” with Asperger’s who got caught up in the moment and had a regrettable lapse in judgment.
He doesn’t need to: he has people doing that for him already.Report
If he didn’t do it, it doesn’t need to be excused.
That’s the fundamental problem.
If you see a Nazi salute, then we’re in one place.
If you see a guy throwing his heart out to the crowd, we’re in another.
And if Elon thinks “of course it wasn’t a Nazi salute!”, we’re in a place where he not only doesn’t think he did anything wrong, we’re in a place where he’s thinking “I’m not going to apologize for something I didn’t do”.Report
And if he did do it, he wouldn’t apologize anyway. So let’s stop handling defense for him, and call a spade a spade.
Unrelated, but related:
https://www.pcgamer.com/games/elon-musk-admits-account-boosting-on-poe2-and-diablo-4-but-says-deal-with-it-what-would-i-be-apologizing-for/Report
See?!? Now *THAT* is a withering criticism of Musk!
He pretends to be something that he’s not: an elite-level gamer. He lies about it!
The criticism that he doesn’t have any friends, just sycophants is one that strikes me as probably being accurate. He doesn’t have anyone in his life to tell him to reel it in a little.
And so he’s always off to find new sycophants once people get close enough to him to see him warts and all.Report
Well then here’s another, Jaybird. Here’s Musk ACTUALLY performing the gesture which is being claimed as cover. It’s almost as though he knows these are two separate gestures, with two separate meanings.
Elon Musk performed a SIeg Heil twice at the inauguration.
https://www.reddit.com/r/gifs/comments/1i7bxzb/if_he_really_meant_my_heart_goes_to_you_why_didnt/
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.Report
Unfortunately the .gif has been removed from that post. Here it is again:
https://media1.tenor.com/m/cMOyNR_tnB8AAAAC/elonmusk-elon-musk.gifReport
In my own life, I want to say that the biggest audience I performed in front of was my high school musical. House was packed. 500 people or thereabouts.
Most recently, the largest group of people I spoke in front of was 30-40 people in the big conference room.
The large venue had our mentors explain that we had to play big to the cheap seats all the way in the back.
When I was giving the demo, the guy furthest from me was about five or six yards away. I changed from my head voice to my chest voice and that’s it.Report
Sorry to keep on this, JB, but I confess that this particular debate has made me feel a bit like a befuddled bird-owner, being maddeningly told that his clearly-expired parrot was merely resting, or pining for the fjords.
Here’s a longtime (14 years) former friend and peer of Elon’s, explaining who and what he is, and why he did what he did.
https://archive.ph/6WHLPReport
And the interpretation that he’s a rival trying to take his former friend and peer down strikes me as being an equally valid interpretation.
The specific mention of Reid Hoffman in there doesn’t make me think that there’s less of a chance that this is ideological.Report
Ah, so now I shouldn’t JUST disbelieve my lying eyes: I should also disbelieve those who best know the man on a personal level too. Got it.Report
Elon and his ilk on Twitter are spreading a rumor that Reid Hoffman is one of the Epstein Island people.
Do you now believe that Reid Hoffman had a relationship with Epstein?
If you say something like “No, Elon is an awful person who hates his enemies and will slander them!”, I will nod and say “that position makes 100% sense to me”.Report
Let me answer that question, with a question: Do they also have video evidence of Reid Hoffman on Epstein Island…twice?Report
Just Wikipedia.
But, it should be pointed out, that Hoffman apologized for visiting Epstein Island rather than denying that it happened.Report
Yes, that does indeed seem like a move more likely to quell suspicion, in contrast to then appearing on video for AfD and making puns.
“It’s good to be proud of German culture, German values, and not to lose that in some sort of multiculturalism that dilutes everything…There is too much focus on past guilt, and we need to move beyond that”
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/elon-musk-appears-video-german-far-right-campaign-event-2025-01-25/Report
And this is another thing where if you see the AfD as Nazis then Elon was in Germany supporting Nazis.
If, instead, you see the AfD as yet another anti-immigration party that keeps showing up in Europe, then the AfD presents as merely Trumpy.
But if you see Trump as a Hitler figure, we’re back to where we started.Report
Even Hitler himself wasn’t a Hitler Figure, once upon a time.
But things change and our viewpoints change with them, as new information comes in.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/elon-musk-biographer-calls-him-191242794.html?guccounter=1Report
What would make you believe it was a Nazi salute? Not people who know him saying that’s what it was, not him going straight to Germany to hang out with AfD and speak in support of their nationalist message, not the groypers thinking that’s what it was. What, then? Would Musk have to tell you himself?Report
Would the ADL be enough to get you to say that it was an awkward gesture?
I perfectly understand *WHY* people are screaming “Elon did a Nazi salute!”
That interpretation makes sense to me.
But I also can’t help but notice that he’s being attacked by his ideological enemies who are doing things like pointing out that maybe Elon is *WORSE* than a Nazi. (“Much worse”, even.)Report
If you think I have any respect for the ADL, it’s time to recalibrate where you think I fall on the political spectrum.Report
And, um, what’s your opinion on my opinion of the Groypers?Report
Not technically a groyper, but same diff. https://images.app.goo.gl/sNSZQ7TXqgexLj7b8Report
[googles “Groyper”]
Oh wow, you say these are the alt-right white nationalist guys using a “Pepe The Frog” avatar, like [checks notes] Elon changed to recently?
https://u.today/elon-musk-adopts-new-x-name-and-pepe-themed-avatar-setting-community-abuzzReport
They’re alt-right white nationalists who follow Nick Fuentes who seems to be a Fed. It’s not a Pepe avatar but a Groyper avatar (the drawings are cousins, of course but they are distinct entities. See also, Apu).Report
I was familiar with Fuentes but not the term. I am also unaware of him being a Fed. What’s the source of that claim?
Still, even *I* am not unaware of the way Pepe has been repurposed as a symbol of alt-right white nationalists, so all in all this is an odd tack to take as part of some sort of defense for the idea that Elon – AKA “Kekius Maximus”, per the linked article above – was not signalling exactly those people when he – all together now, class – performed 2 Sieg Heils at the inauguration of a US President.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pepe_the_Frog#KekReport
What’s the source? It’s theorized on the twitters. He called for his guys to storm the Capitol on J6, for example, and he didn’t get arrested for it. Proof? Nah.
The fact that he is an alt-right guy who keeps saying stuff like “don’t vote for Trump, he’s going to sell you out” and “Trump is half-assing it on deportations, you should be upset that he tricked you” and such things screams “fed asset” to folks.
Oh, I know that Pepe is a symbol of the alt-right! There was a funny moment when Hillary was running and mentioned the alt-right and a guy in the back yelled “PEPE!!!” (and he then promptly got kicked out).
So if you want to call Elon a member of the alt-right, hey. There’s *ZERO* disagreement from me. (Though if you want to call him a poser, I wouldn’t disagree with that either.)Report
Appreciate that the left and the far right have this in common: believing everyone is a fed.Report
There will always be that part of the response, but my sense so far is that unlike in 2017 (when basically my entire social circle was freaking out about everything), now it’s limited to the most partisan & vocal folks I know, while for the rest it merits an eyeroll or resigned shrug. The J6 pardons and immigration changes are getting more attention so far.Report
I saw that “Nazis” was trending on twitter and it’s a lot more eyerolling than anything else.
I’m still waiting for the “this used to work” realization to kick in.Report
You know that, unless you’re looking at the “Latest” tab, what you see when you click on a trending topic is curated for you, and is not, say, what I see? Which is all people like “Even the Germans think it was a Nazi salute,” and “Don’t trust me, trust the actual Nazis,” with screenshots of self-professed Nazis saying, “I can’t believe he actually did it at the inauguration” or something to that effect.Report
I look at the “Latest” tab. I am rarely interested in what got dozens of likes years ago.Report
Yes, Jaybird, everyone is aware how the fascists deny they are doing things, or that they mean them, until those things become too obvious, at which point it becomes ‘Those things have always been fine’.
It really is interesting watching you carry water for them, though.
I’ve asked before: When do you actually start admitting fascism is happening? What is the actual line that they cannot cross?
The line doesn’t seem to be ‘threaten to invade other countries’.
And doesn’t seem to be what is, at best interpretation, ‘refusing to _reject_ Na.zi imagery’. Even if we take someone who is a) known for liking a _lot_ of antisemitic tweets and has been repeatedly criticized for it, b) is a straight-up eugenicist and was raised in that environment, and c) is well known for ‘trolling’ with alt-right Na.zi adjacent stuff…even if we decide to, for some reason, give him the benefit of the doubt…as even you admit, he hasn’t even said ‘Oh, sorry, that was in no way intended.’. He hasn’t even said ‘I am sorry that _you_ read it that way.’, the non-apology apology.
Or to put it another way, and this is a pattern: The right (and even other people) sometime do things that the Na.zis think are supporting them. Including this.
When accused of that, people have an _obligation_ to say ‘No, you’re wrong, I do not support you Na.zis’.(1) Otherwise, they not only are courting Na.zi support, but it’s impossible to tell if they have started doing those ‘accidents’ _deliberately_. And the correct assumption is, at that point, that they have.
In fact, that tweet makes it _worse_. A Na.zi reading that xhit, who thinks he _did_ ‘cleverly’ pull off doing a Na.zi salute in front of everyone, will read that xhit as _confirmation_. (Note I have not said whether it is or not, my point is it literally the opposite of rebuking their support.)
1) And you’re about to start yammering about ‘bad faith accusations’, but there’s a difference between nonsense out-of-context things that people try to make an issue about and the solution is to ignore them, and pretty overt gestures that people do during actual speeches to the nation. Especially, as I said, from someone who actually has no benefit of the doubt at this point because he’s done and said a _lot_ of really bad stuff. This isn’t some random guy.Report
When do you actually start admitting fascism is happening?
It’s happening the same way that Obama’s presidency was Socialism happening.
Define it broadly enough and anything right-wing is “fascism”.
America, being a center-right country, is therefore a fascist country.
Q.E.D.Report
So you don’t think there’s any actual meaning of ‘fascism’ at all, there’s no difference in kind, just degree. That Na.zi Germany and Fascist Italy were examples of the normal right wing going too far. That wanting to murder huge swaths of people based on who they are is just…normal right wing stuff, but normally it should be dialed down a little.
That is an interesting concept.
Anyway, my former congressman (1) has just suggested deporting a reverend (2) for expressing concern about LGBTQ people in a sermon.
Religious freedom, yee-ha.
1) To clarify, he is still a congressman, I just do not live there anymore.
2) Who, to be clear, is a US citizen born in the US. It is unclear where we would deport her to.Report
I do think that it has an actual meaning.
So does “socialism”.
And screaming “fascism!” every fifteen seconds doesn’t work anymore. No more than yelling “socialism” does for the right wingers.
Was the congressman making a joke in poor taste? Because if the congressman was making a joke in poor taste, I’m going to say “the guy made a joke in poor taste”. (I’d agree that he shouldn’t be a congressman anymore, if you’d like.)Report
What frequency do you think people should be screaming ‘fascism’ as fascism happens?
Wow, the right wing has gotten you so well-trained you make justifications _for them_ that they themselves are not making.
No, it was not a ‘joke’. We might have some indication it was a joke if, you know, he _said_ was a joke.
Just like we might have an indication that Elon’s gesture was a not a Na.zi salute if he _said it wasn’t_.
We still might not believe those thing, but the fascism-enablers like you would look less completely ridiculous as you would no longer have to invent justification that they don’t even bother to use.Report
I’m not saying you are an anti-Semite but I do think you argue in bad faith. Let’s look at the evidence:
1. Elon Musk is a product of Apartheid South Africa and has a relatively established if relatively recent history of using his cash and social media propaganda machine to support far-right politicians. He did it here, he did it in the UK, he does it with the AfD in Germany;
2. He made a gesture that was for all practical purposes a Sieg Heil and he did the exact gesture twice.
3. Jewish and non-Jewish commentators here are telling you they say it as the Sieg Heil.
4. Despite all this, you refuse to concede, and wave around the ADL’s press statement like it is pure and infallible statement that cannot be refuted or dissented from.
This is why I think your argument is “the card says moops.”Report
Your definition of “far right” and mine are different.
For one thing, I’m one of the most liberal folks in my circle of right-wing friends. I’m guessing that you’re one of the most conservative folks in your circle of left-wing friends.
So we’re starting from different baselines.
I’ve no doubt that people are interpreting his movement as a Sieg Heil! I am not doubting that they interpret it that way!
I think that they’re wrong. I’m willing to argue that they’re wrong and I’m willing to argue that they’re wrong to their faces.
They’re in a place where they can’t even imagine someone else seeing a guy throwing his heart out to the crowd. They can’t even *IMAGINE* it.
At this point, I’m trying to break their cognitive dissonance and get them to see that there is a possible second interpretation that could possibly be held non-trollishly. The ADL tweet isn’t proof that Musk’s movement wasn’t a Sieg Heil… it’s just evidence that it’s possible to see something other than a Sieg Heil.
There’s more than one interpretation of what happened, Saul.Report
If you went to Germany and repeated Musk’s gesture identically or nearly so in a coffee shop or in public somewhere. What do you think would happen to you?Report
I’d get arrested and thrown in jail. Probably forced to take sensitivity classes.Report
Just enter Germany illegally. Then they have no jurisdiction over you. That’s what I hear.Report
So that should tell you something, shouldn’t it.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/303935072583898cb8f5bcaed40e9e17e8c5dba6ef1f6a02b4f65028845ad651.png
I think you get the gist of this headlineReport
I think you left out 1a) Elon has actually been called out for liking overt antisemitic messages before on Xitter.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/05/elon-musk-george-soros-anti-semites/674072/
Repeatedly.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/17/business/elon-musk-reveals-his-actual-truth/index.html
And again:
https://newrepublic.com/post/189752/elon-musk-far-right-troll-x-profile-change-pepe-frog
This isn’t someone where we start with the benefit of the doubt. This someone who has been repeatedly critized, in just the last year, for flirting with Na.zism.
Notice how troll-ish the last one is. I would explain that Elon didn’t do the Na.zi salute seriously, he did it to troll because he had an audience in front of the world, but I feel that some people would think that means it’s less important. But it was.
Also, note that I do actually understand the difference between Na.zism and fascism. The Republicans are leading us into fascism, American’s own brand of it. (Wrapped in the American flag and carrying a cross) It’s not the same as Na.zism, just it’s not the same as Italy’s or Argentina’s or Greece’s or…any of the other places where fascism has existed. Fascism, like all political ideologies, change and evolves over time and from place to place.
Elon, meanwhile, is flirting with Na.zism. Just…straight out Na.zism.Report
Oh, and let’s not forget the _next_ thing he said, as part of ‘explaining’ that he was throwing his heart to the crowd, was: “It is thanks to you that the future of civilization is assured.”
Now, that sounds like an innocuous statement, and maybe would be if not done immediately after that gesture. In fact, it probably went by a lot of people, the media included, especially if they were still shocked by that gestures.
But when done essentially _as_ part of that gesture, one cannot help but think of the 14 words: We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children.
Did he intend to obliquely reference that? I dunno.
Na.zis would think of ‘white people’ and ‘civilization’ synonymously, but that presumes the end result.
And the future of those things is ‘assured’ vs ‘secured’. Coincidence, or deliberate change to sound very similar while not actually being identical?
It’s not impossible for someone to say that sentence innocently. It feels saying that innocently _as part of doing a thing very similar to a Na.zi salute_ is somewhat more unlikely. Maybe? Hypothetically?
The thing is, again, Elon is a known troll who has no problem trolling white supremancy and Na.zism…because he is, in fact, supporters of those things. Benefit of the doubt is really not something that should be extended to him.Report
That phrase landed a bit funny on my ear – so funny that I counted the words, which do not equal 14.
So, given that the only word shared in common is “future”, it would probably be difficult to convince most it’s a deliberate allusion. If it’s a deliberate reference it would be a “better” dogwhistle than the Sieg Heil was; it’s more ambiguous, more plausibly-deniable.
I think most would (maybe somewhat uneasily) put the phrase down to Musk’s Mars Mania.Report
Oh and now a TV weatherperson has been fired for calling a Sieg Heil a Sieg Heil.
And also using indecorous vulgar language, because God forbid we be uncouth when describing seeing the world’s richest man performing fascist hand gestures at the inauguration of a US President.
Yes, it is the use of foul language here that is shocking and transgressive to our sense of norms. In this, Ordinary Times luckily makes sure that I myself may hopefully be allowed continued employment in this brave new world we find ourselves in.
https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/2025/01/22/cbs-58s-sam-kuffel-is-out-after-criticizing-elon-musk-arm-gesture/77883983007/Report
Yeah, if it wasn’t said literally as an explanation of why he just did that gesture, I wouldn’t even think twice about it.
But, like, it was.
Actually, I would think twice about it, but only in the sense that I would add up another tally to Musk’s inherent bigotry and how he thinks about ‘civilization’. It’s the quiet part, but it’s _not_ being said aloud, so it’s just ‘Yeah, I know what he was implying there, but that’s how he is all the time. And people who understand this, understand it, and people who don’t will just deny it.’.
But putting it next to a salute that was incredibly performative, so much so it was done twice, something clearly rehearsed with a explanation at the ready so as to claim people are _imagining_ things, and claiming that’s why he was doing it…makes it somewhat obvious what he was doing.Report
That is not the normal gesture for that intention.Report
If you have a public speaker giving the normal gesture, I’d love to see it.Report
Too many songs with that title. When I do it, it’s hand out parallel to the floor with my palm up. Like any other person trying not to through a National Socialist salute would do. Let’s not give grace where none is due.Report
For whatever reason Jaybird sees Elon as a kindred spirit and thus grants grace.Report
He’s an aspy engineer who, magically, knows how to manage other engineers.
I wouldn’t call him a kindred spirit. I’m far, far, faaaar too lazy. But I’ve worked with guys who are kindred spirits to Elon in the past. I’ve liked each and every one of them.Report
So yes, a kindred spirit. Whom you like because he manages in a way you like.Report
Dude, have _you_ tried making that gesture?
No one in the universe gestures ‘throwing to an audience’ as ‘overarm extended rapidly upward at an angle’. That gesture is ‘grab imaginary heart, pivot arm forward, palm up’. This allows you to ‘spray’ the audience with what are throwing, like you’re throwing confetti.
There is a slight variation where your palm is down, making throw more solid, but even that doesn’t have the hand go _up_. Or you could literally pretend to be baseball or softball pitcher, make an underhand or overhand throw. Again, motions that don’t end up vaguely near where he got.
Also, a reminder that the audience is _down_ when you’re on the stage. (Unless you’re in a stadium…which he was not.) You do not gesture _up_ at people _below_ you to give them things.
If you were to make the throw he pretended to make, the heart would go way way off almost directly to the right and way too high. It’s nowhere near the audience. (I mean, the audience is all around him, but you make gestures to people you are looking at at the moment, not the people off to the side.)
Also…throwing things don’t end with with a flat hand. The end result of a metaphoric throw is ‘halfway curved hand’, just like…well, just like you’ve just thrown a baseball. It’s not even an analogy, we know how _hands_ work, we can all pretend to throw a baseball or a baseball-size heart and see how it ends up. Every gesture is going to end that way, with a half open hand.
Do you know something you move your hand upward for and usually keep it open? Acknowledging someone. Saluting them, waving at them, etc. (The hand sometimes isn’t fully open for a wave, we’re lazy, but it is mostly open.) It’s basic human movement, possible even one of the actual ‘evolutionary psychology’ things that actually exists, instead of what people pretend exists under that ‘science’. (Maybe we’re showing our hand is empty and away from any weapons? I dunno.)
It’s why that salute, which the Na.zi did not invent, exists, it’s why all salutes exist.
Salutes are also fast, like what he did. Snappy things you repeat by rote. Metaphoric gestures are a _lot_ slower, even slower than normal movement, so people can follow them. Do literally any metaphorical movement, mime anything, you’ll notice that you do it slowly and deliberately.
What he is doing is _way_ too fast, and he notable explains it _afterward_. Or, to put it in the obvious way: He’s trying to get away with something, so he does it quickly, twice, to make sure people see it. And then rushes out the explanation he’s sure will let him get away with it. He is, again, a known troll, it’s basic troll behavior.
We are at the point where a good chunk of people are now allowing the GOP to troll with Na.zi symbolism. (A reminder: There is no difference between trolling as a Na.zi and being a Na.zi, because Na.zis are, themselves, trolls.)Report
Just did it now in the basement and my hand was sideways rather than palm down.
Tried it two or three more times and each time my hands were diagonal instead of palm down.
That’s a good point!Report
Thank you!Report
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-administration-canceling-flights-nearly-1660-afghan-refugees-say-us-2025-01-20/
“Nearly 1,660 Afghans cleared by the U.S. government to resettle in the U.S., including family members of active duty U.S. military personnel, are having their flights canceled under President Donald Trump’s order suspending U.S. refugee programs, a U.S. official and a leading refugee resettlement advocate said on Monday.
The group includes unaccompanied minors awaiting reunification with their families in the U.S. as well as Afghans at risk of Taliban retribution because they fought for the former U.S.-backed Afghan government, said Shawn VanDiver, head of the #AfghanEvac coalition of U.S. veterans and advocacy groups and the U.S. official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.”
We aren’t waiting long to get to the Find Out part of FAFOReport
The National Security administration: https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/01e023f9a6600881688a52ab760b0a3691cc72f311ca83f9a56c3f17793bee30.pngReport
Trump comes out swinging against birthright citizenship. This is going to cause a lot of chaos because there are plenty of people born to undocumented immigrants who latter get status in the United States.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/immigration/2025/01/20/trump-immigration-executive-orders/Report
I pointed to the Birthright Citizenship argument we had back in 2018 above.
It’s all about whether undocumented visitors are considered to be “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”.
There are arguments for it and arguments against it.
Are they more complicated than the arguments about whether an Amendment can be said to have been passed via twitter?
Experts disagree.Report
No, it isn’t. It’s about whether the native-born children of undocumented visitors are. And whatever else one can say about that, an executive order has about the same legal effect as a tweet.Report
“an executive order has about the same legal effect as a tweet”
Would you trade the ERA for Birthright Citizenship?
Some would.Report
More JAQing off. Are opponents of birthright citizenship claiming that American born children of illegal immigrants are not subject to American law? Preposterous.Report
I guess it depends on whether folks sneaking across the border qualify as being “subject”.
Because, seriously, I see that as potentially being up in the air.Report
How? Does American law not apply to them?Report
HEY! CJ!!!! WE NEED YOU OVER HERE!!!!
You’re the guy who explains that things are complicated!!!
Can you explain that this thing is complicated to Slade?
Or do you agree with him that it’s not particularly complicated?
Thanks!Report
I’d rather read your analysis.Report
You know, this isn’t the first time that I’ve heard that my take was preferred over that over the so-called “experts”.
Okay. Heh.
So here’s mine.
The argument is that people who pass over the argument illegally (or unknown to the government) aren’t covered.
Like, “if you sneak in, this doesn’t apply to you”.
Do you understand how something that only applies to people who “officially” pass through would apply or do you want me to link to the people who talked about this sort of thing when we officially passed the 14th Amendment way back when?Report
I suspect this’ll end up in court. You and I arguing as laymen is pretty silly, so let’s just stick to things we actually know something about.Report
Fair enough.
Until then, know that the argument is between:
1. People who say that the only important thing is whether you cross the line.
2. People who say whether it was officially okay for you to cross apart that line.
We can argue for #1 and we can argue for #2 until the cows come home. We can argue about why it’s important for Democrats to be in charge of interpreting things or whether it’s important for Republicans to do so until the cows come home.
What do words mean, anyway? What are taxes? Since nobody can explain what they are, let’s press restart!Report
It usually doesn’t end well when leadership declares it’s Year Zero.Report
Yes, people who are extremely ignorant of what jurisdiction means do argue that. It is a nonsense argument.
Fun fact: If the US does not have jurisdiction over people in this country, the people arresting them or deporting them or detaining them in any manner are kidnapping them. It’s literally kidnapping, it’s detaining and moving someone without any legal authority. (Possibly even over international borders, which is _especially_ a crime.)
To lawfully detain someone, you have to have jurisdiction over them. (Well, a political entity that has jurisdiction over them must have granted you authority to do arrests, for that specific set of crimes. But let’s simplify a bit.)
In fact, those people can commit any crime and no one can stop them…I guess self-defense and defense-of-others still applies, but not beyond that.
If this sounds vaguely familiar, it is, because there is already a situation where governments do not have jurisdiction over people within their borders: Diplomatic immunity. You are literally arguing that people in this country without permission have diplomatic immunity, but it’s somehow worse because real diplomatic immunity is a thing we grant and can order their host county to remove them and then revoke it, whereas here you’re arguing it exists _naturally_.
Before you ask, no, this does not work in reverse. You cannot do things to people merely because the country you are in does not have jurisdiction over them, jurisdiction over victims is not required for crimes. (Try killing a diplomat, or defrauding someone in another country.)Report
Yeah to a layman it seems absurd on its face to argue that a country does NOT have jurisdiction over someone who entered it illegally. The basic definition of a country is that it has the authority to say who enters and who does not, and the reason it has this authority is because once you’re inside its borders, *it has jurisdiction over you*. Its jurisdiction begins at its border, and once you enter that border it can arrest you, deport you, etc. Not before, because it does not have jurisdiction over you until you enter.
It has now become responsible for you in some sense…which is why it tries to keep you outside the border, so it need not be.
But if I’m wrong about all this, I’m sneaking into Canada and stealing all their maple syrup, and they can’t stop me. They’ll let me do it because I’m famou…I mean American.Report
Then I guess they can all breathe easy now because that means immigration laws don’t apply either.Report
Already did. See above.Report
The only thing I see above is where you say, and this is your quote in its entirety:
And that’s it!
Anyway, it wouldn’t surprise me if people saw my layman opinion as just as interesting as your expert one if you kept giving opinions about as detailed as that one.
Tomorrow is Day Two! I look forward to you explaining that you shouldn’t be expected to give your opinion then! (I’ll give mine, for the record.)Report
Lack of detail versus outright wrong. You pays your money and you takes your choice.Report
I look forward to having what I should have cut/pasted instead maybe tomorrow.Report
The Fourteenth Amendment states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
As I note below, since it is *not* retroactive I think there’s a decent chance that this will gain in popular support across both sides.Report
We can either be a nation of laws or men. Take your pick. If the Republican Party wants to end birthright citizenship, they out to pass a law to that effect.Report
Let me state that I don’t think an EO is the right way necessarily to tackle this; but I think it is well within the realm of Law.
Congress should probably write a proper law defining a policy in line with a statutory interpretation of the amendment. SCOTUS would undoubtedly review and I could see it going either way.
But that’s why I say I could see this becoming democratically popular and well within the law or, if needed an amended clarification.Report
I’m going to go out on a limb and assert that normally the United States Constitution is already the law of the land. The party that on day one of a new administration sought to clarify the definition of man and woman ought not have any trouble with “subject to the jurisdiction”.Report
I was born in the US and have always assumed that made me subject to the jurisdiction there of. Was there some additional requirement i needed to pass to achieve that increasingly hollow victory?Report
No, there wasn’t. Even before the 14th Amendment, citizenship under Anglo-American common law was based on jus solis rather than jus sanguinis, i.e., place of birth rather than parentage. There were certain recognized exceptions. If the French Ambassador (or, more likely, his wife) gave birth to a child while posted in England or the United States, that child did not become a citizen of Great Britain or the United States and France would have stoutly objected to any such pretensions on the host nation’s part. The Ambassador’s kid was not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the home country for the same reason the Ambassador wasn’t, so didn’t become a citizen. Things would be different for a civilian French family living in Cleveland. Their kid, like the civilian French couple, is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. If the French father mugs a Clevelander, he can be prosecuted for assault. If he fails to pay taxes on the income he earns, the IRS can come after him. He lacks certain privileges or duties of citizenship; he can’t vote or be drafted, for example, but in most other respects he is no different from an American citizen.
The 14th Amendment establishes on a constitutional level birthright citizenship, jus solis. To be eligible for birthright citizenship, you need only to be born in the United States, which is a fairly easily ascertained matter, and be subject to its jurisdiction. Obviously, people who enter the United State after they are born do not qualify for birthright citizenship because they weren’t born here. Whether they came here legally or illegally is irrelevant; the Constitution makes no such distinction. And once they are here, whether legally or illegally, they are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States — unless they are the French Ambassador. But they can’t become citizens unless naturalized.
If you are born in the United States, nothing in the 14th Amendment makes your citizenship turn on the status, legal or otherwise, of your parents. You’re born here, full stop. Like your parents, whatever their status (unless they are the French Ambassador), you are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. See what happens if you mug someone or don’t pay your taxes. So you’re a citizen.
That is the plain English meaning of the 14th Amendment. The Supreme Court has ruled more than once that it means what it says. That is the dominant view among legal experts of various political stripes, even some who don’t like birthright citizenship as policy.
To be sure, there are a few outliers. There always are. And to be fair, the cases in which the Supreme Court said that the 14th Amendment means what it says did not squarely involve citizenship claims by children of illegal immigrants. They merely laid out principles from which that is the only reasonable conclusion. That leaves an opening for “creative” arguments. Pro tip: whenever an argument starts out: “I know that Smith v. Jones and Brown v. Green laid out rules that, fairly applied, go against us, but those cases weren’t exactly the same as this one, so here’s some lawyerly-sounding noises about why I should win” is unlikely to be very good. That said, a sufficiently motivated and unprincipled Supreme Court can do what it damn pleases and might buy it. They’ve done it before.
If someone paid me to do it, I could probably come up with some such lawyerly-sounding noises myself — possibly a strained analogy to the children of soldiers from invading armies — but though I am a whore, I would insist on being paid to do this. I don’t do bad arguments for free.
Now Jaybird may wonder why I have an opinion on this (informed, if not exactly expert) and not on the 28th Amendment. The answer is simple: in one case I know what I’m talking about and in the other I don’t. Birthright citizenship comes up in standard law school Con Law classes (I won the law school prize for Con Law back when people thought it was really law) and I have had work-a-day reasons to learn more in my practice. Neither is true of the 28th Amendment question, though if the question gets litigated that may change. I’m not sure why such an explanation should be necessary, but there it is.Report
Yes, this.
The 14th amendment did not generally change who became citizen. The situation under US law is that almost all of them were citizens anyway.
Except for children of slaves, who were explicitly barred by law from being citizens. Along with a few other specific groups of immigrants. (1)
The 14th did not do anything laws could not have, and it didn’t really change how we understood citizenship. It was written so we could never _exclude_ people from citizenship via the law.
1) Along with, interestingly, Native Americans, which the 14th did _not_ include because it said ‘the United States’ and that was understood to mean ‘The group of actual States’, and Indian reservations were not, and still are not to some extent, part of the jurisdiction of the states they are inside. And even moreso back then, where reservations were treated, in a sense, as sovereign nations that we had treaties with that was not under US jurisdiction but just happened to be inside the US.
This is much less true now, and it’s an interesting question if the 14th would cover them _now_, but we passed a law in 1924 saying they were all citizens from birth anyway. (Which does, indeed, allow them to become president, although we’ve never had one.)Report
It’s often overlooked that, with rare exceptions, there was no such thing as an illegal alien back then. The issue of the status of native-born children of this largely non-existent class would not have been front of mind.Report
Heh, y’all are going to lose the public opinion battle sooo hard.Report
because we expect the Constitution to “trump” the idiotic needs of a few Americans to feel superior to others?
OK Boomer.Report
I would have put something about “racism” or “antisemitism” in there, but well done!Report
Republic, democracy, etc.Report
I’m going to be contrary and say that I suspect that “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” is going to end up being similar to the phrase” A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State” in the second amendment but for the right instead of the left. Though we’ll have to see what the Supreme Court says on the matter. Certainly Trumps executive order is about as wise or lawful as Bidens’ silly gestures towards the ERA- though with far more potential impact,Report
Good point. Truly, who among us can determine penumbras formed by emanations while not wearing the black robes of wisdom.Report
Certainly not me. It’ll be interesting to see if the liberals on the court suddenly discover a newfound respect for and the conservatives on the court suddenly discover a complete reversal on textual reading or originalism.Report
With whom would I make such a trade, if I were so inclined?Report
Trump has done a pardon of all 1,600 people convicted for participation in January 6 on live TV. This is going to end bad. All constraints have been removed from Trump and he is going full on the further right extremism.Report
Oh my gosh! I certainly hope that the pardoning power wasn’t trivialized earlier in the day!!!Report
Oh, we’re being sarcastic, are we?
Then yes, Biden’s pardons and Trump’s are exactly the same in purpose, scope, and effect. Fauci, Milley, Cheney, et al are exactly the same as 1600 rioters who injured 140 police officers and sent lawmakers into hiding while attempting to prevent the peaceful transfer of power, incited and encouraged by the man now in charge of the USG.
Let’s get them out of their prison oranges and blues. Brown shirts are more their color anyway.Report
Worse than sarcastic: Object Level.Report
Sarcastic is an interesting synonym for trollReport
Anybody remember the actual Donald Trump and his own pardon record? Who seriously thinks he needs Biden’s example to abuse the pardon power? Or to do something he would not otherwise have done?Report
In legal terms, is there a significant difference between “setting a precedent” and “following a precedent”?Report
Yes.Report
We have withdrawn from the Paris Accords and WHOReport
Palestinian-American voters the latest to have the leopard eat their faces.
https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-cancels-sanctions-far-right-israeli-settlers-occupied-west-bank-2025-01-21/Report
Meanwhile, American Jews stayed loyal to the Democratic Party despite the antics of the Pro-Hamas people. There are only 250,000 Palestinian-Americans according to Wikipedia. This is really Muslim-Americans who are having their faces being eaten. Many of them were also going back to the Republicans before 10/7 because of the social liberalism of the Democratic Party. It is just considered very impolite to point this out and we have to pretend it is all about Israel and Palestine.Report
On the one hand, this was eminently predictable. On the other hand, if there aren’t electoral consequences for candidates who are materially supporting the genocide of your people, what’s the point of even participating in elections?
If I were a Palestinian American right now, I’d see that Israel finally accepted a deal that Hamas had accepted 8 months ago, and that it took the intervention of Trump to get Israel to accept it, suggesting that in addition to continuing to supply Israel with the tools of genocide, the Biden administration had been one of the reasons Israel has not accepted Biden’s own ceasefire proposal. So yes, from the perspective of a Palestinian looking only at the Middle East, Trump is bad, but is he worse than the guy who made sure that Palestinian children kept dying for 15 months?Report
Trump issues his executive order to try and end birthright citizenship:
Sec. 2. Policy. (a) It is the policy of the United States that no department or agency of the United States government shall issue documents recognizing United States citizenship, or accept documents issued by State, local, or other governments or authorities purporting to recognize United States citizenship, to persons: (1) when that person’s mother was unlawfully present in the United States and the person’s father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth, or (2) when that person’s mother’s presence in the United States was lawful but temporary, and the person’s father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth.Report
Having now seen the text, my counter-intuitive take is that this will become broadly popular.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/protecting-the-meaning-and-value-of-american-citizenship/Report
It may be popular but if it stands (which is an open question) I think it will exacerbate the problems with illegal immigration. One thing birthright citizenship has spared us is the jus sanguinis situation in Europe, where they have large numbers of people born in the country to foreign guest workers and similar people who are all or more or less acculturated but aren’t citizens of the country they reside in and have no relationship to their ostensible country of origin. It’s the ‘Dreamers’ issue but on steroids. Even if we decide we don’t care about the ethical issues odds are high no other country would accept deportees with that sort of status. Meanwhile we’re creating a new class of stateless people posing novel legal questions, and in a worst case scenario failing to assimilate or nursing grudges against the country that wouldn’t have them. And to what end? There are better ways to discourage illegal immigrants.
I’m all for putting a stop to illegal crossings and getting serious about visa overstays but this seems more like half baked Fox News punditry than a solution.Report
Possible, but that’s not how the EO reads.
If you apply for immigration and migrate, you can have a child born in the US who will be a US citizen.
It specifically calls out people who are illegally in the country, or clearly visiting and not immigrating legally.
I think you are overinterpreting a permanent Guest Worker underclass like Germany and the Turks… in fact *if* we had something like that it would be closer to the original interpretation of the 14th amendment as it applied to the newly freed slaves.
That would be a reasonable thing to guard against… but so is unregulated illegal immigration a thing to guard against.Report
Maybe I’m misunderstanding, but if we’re creating the conditions parallel to those that I would think we all agree the clause of the 14th Amendment in question was written to prevent, aren’t we just taking a roundabout path to the place we are today? Or maybe even conceding that it can’t be constitutional in the first instance?
On pure policy grounds maybe there’s a case for trying something of this nature once you’ve established a system of interdiction that’s functioning. Prove you can stop the influx and actually repatriat the people in the country illegally. I still don’t think I’d agree with it but I would understand how it fit in to a larger preventative set of policies. Under the status quo it seems likely to me to only make things worse.Report
I don’t think it’s recreating the same conditions.
At the baseline, if the Father is a citizen, then so is the child… if the Mother is a citizen, so is the child. It only obtains for the circumstances where neither mother nor father are citizens *and* they have entered the country illegally, or are here on temporary visiting visas. That will cover a lot of future folks, even if (especially if) there’s no proper border interdiction.
The conditions for Slavery (and, say, the Turks in Germany) is that they were a class that had permanent status, but no real path to citizenship. As written, the EO allows for children of immigrants who have permanent status to become citizens.
I’m completely open to evaluating how it gets applied in practice… and, as I noted above, I don’t think an idea like this should be an EO at all for the reasons you raise. It needs to be part of a complete immigration package.
Lastly, I agree that a functioning regime of interdiction, border management and immigration policies should be the goal.
Specifying how birthright citizen requires legal immigration is the correct rhetorical way to frame it… it doesn’t end birthright citizenship, it clarifies how it applies through laws. It acts as both deterrent and incentive for a proper functioning immigration regime.
The reason why I say I can see this becoming more popular in the future is that it will likely be part of an overarching settlement.Report
I suppose we will see what the courts do with it. To the extent we’re just spitballing I think I’d find it less of a problem if it was specific to ‘asylum’ seekers. I believe both domestic and international law says that they are supposed to go home eventually. I don’t think that would raise the same bigger picture questions, constitutional or otherwise or necessarily have the same potential to lay the seeds for long term problems. It also might even be distinguishable from the controlling federal case law which IIRC involved the child of legally domiciled Chinese residents. Channeling CJ Roberts it seems to me that there are some important facts that could result in a different outcome without upending the core holdings. It also takes the influx if asylum claims at face value, even if we all know most of them are without merit.
Anyway we probably aren’t all that far apart. I agree that this situation is crying out for action by Congress and that’s where the nuts and bolts need to be worked out.Report
Sure We can agree that there are multiple categories of entrant seekers: Temp Visa Workers, Asylum, Immigrants, and lots of niche sub-categories. This is putting stress on a system that is already stressed to the point of broken.
My original point isn’t that this solves everything (or anything), just that I think it will come across as more popular than people expect — owing, in part, to how broken the immigration system is.
Like you, I prefer to grapple with the actual ideas and not simply spin-off into unreliable narratives based on team identity.Report
If I wanted to create a backlash to the Asylum law, I can’t imagine doing a better job than was done in the last four years.Report
It may be the single hardest to understand unforced error by the Biden admin.Report
If applied retroactively, Trump’s proposal would strip a lot of people of their citizenship including Kamala Harris. Are they doing that currently? I don’t think so. Will they try if they get away with this executive order? I don’t trust them to restrain themselves one bit. And I think we are far past the point of being casual or downplaying their extremism.Report
It says the order goes into effect in 30 days. We can debate retroactive application if and when it’s attempted.Report
The order also unilaterally declares the 14th Amendment never confirmed birthright citizenship in a very Orwellian move. I’m fairly optimistic that the Roberts Court will not endorse the Trump view but I also think we will be in a “Justice Roberts made his order, now let him enforce it situation” and Russell Vought, Trump’s nominated OMB director pretty much believes that the President can redirect any Congressional appropriation as he pleases. As long as the President is a Republican of course. Philosophy not valid for Democrats.Report
Saul, please do not make me defend this guy. The order says the below, which states it applies only to those born 30 days after the order (and therefore presumably not to those born before) and excludes children born to legal residents. I don’t agree with the policy either but let’s deal with it as it is. It’s disconcerting enough that we’re already hunting for ‘ok’ symbols again and we aren’t even 24 hours into the administration.
(b) Subsection (a) of this section shall apply only to persons who are born within the United States after 30 days from the date of this order.
(c) Nothing in this order shall be construed to affect the entitlement of other individuals, including children of lawful permanent residents, to obtain documentation of their United States citizenship. Report
The text of the 14th Amendment is plain and clear:
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
The Supreme Court stated that this applied to people born to non-citizens, including undocumented people over a hundred years ago:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark
The court that decided Wong Kim Ark was not exactly filled with bleeding hearts.
And I am pretty sure I can find plenty of policies which poll well which go against what conservatives want and conservatives will think it is fine to ignore or smash the will of the voters because of…reasons. See abortion and the minimum wage and soaking the rich.Report
Sure, the court could re-affirm the broad interpretation of ‘subject to the jurisdiction’ or it could correct itself and affirm a narrower interpretation.
I think it is higher probability that it knocks down an EO than an Immigration Act that clarifies the term.
I don’t think the question of ‘dual loyalties’ or ‘dual sovereign jurisdictions’ will the fulcrum of the argument… it will be weather the act of ignoring the immigration laws puts one outside the jurisdiction for citizenship requirements — even if one is still subject to the speed limit.
And, as I note above, it’s best that proponents of the idea grapple with the ‘edge’ cases and put together an immigration policy via Congress.Report
children born to undocumented migrants within the US weren’t brought here in violation of immigration laws. This is Dreamers – whom I still believe deserve a path to citizenship since they have assimilated and are, by all accounts, highly productive contributing residents.
But that’s not this – if you are born here you didn’t enter the country illegally.Report
According the the EO, children born prior to the EO are subject to the broad interpretation and therefore citizens.
I think the issue with dreamers isn’t that they were born here, it’s that they were brought here as children and therefore occupy an ambiguous legal status that’s made worse by the fact that their cultural country is the US — so deporting them to their ‘country of origin’ introduces new issues.
This EO doesn’t actually do anything for or against the dreamers… what we do with the dreamers would require something like the Dreamer Act.Report
Unfortunately for you ( and Jaybird) what you have written thus far claiming to defend this – “it will become popular” – very much comingles the Dreamers with everyone else. It also doesn’t pass the straight face test that children born here prior to the EO would be birthright citizens and those born after are not. That’s not how any of this works.Report
I can see where you may want to rhetorically co-mingle it for dramatic effect. But it’s a separate matter.
It’s pretty simple that Dreamers who are *not* born in the US are not a problem solvable by birthright claims.Report
Birthright citizenship is not a “problem” that needs solving. The 24th Amendment was and remains quite clear.Report
To clarify, my position is “it’s already popular”.Report
I also dispute this will be highly popular. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/18/us/politics/trump-policies-immigration-tariffs-economy.html
55 percent of the nation opposes ending birthright citizenship according to this poll.Report
Only 55%? Seriously, that’s a jump ball on an issue that in my childhood didn’t exist and would’ve seen 90% opposition.
I didn’t say that is *was* popular, I said I can see it becoming popular — and that poll suggests to me it’s becoming popular.Report
Yeah, way back in 2018, I made my argument on how to interpret the 14th Amendment as an intellectual exercise on how the argument *MIGHT* be made.
Now, here we are, it’s actually being made.
And the arguments against it all seem to take the form of “that’s silly, are you saying that laws don’t apply to illegal immigrants? HEY LOOK THIS GUY IS SAYING THAT LAWS DON’T APPLY TO ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS!”
The author of the 14th Amendment, Jacob M. Howard, said the following:
Like you say: We’ve gone from “nobody disagrees on this issue” to 55/45 on it in a couple of decades or so.
And the pro-immigrant people are still arguing the maximalist position despite the last three elections…Report
When the current regime gets installed by 31% of voters we will continue to argue the morally correct, legally bolstered position.Report
Hey, Jaybird, have you ever, like, Googled anything? Instead of just sorta repeating right-wing talking points?
https://www.mediamatters.org/ann-coulter/did-author-citizenship-clause-really-say-it-would-exclude-children-foreigners
We have _tons_ of records about passing this bill, and absolutely no one, not even him, agreed with how you are interpreting that _single sentence_ said in a middle of a discussion about whether or not the amendment was a good idea because it made the children of foreigners into citizen.
Here is another quote from that debate:
The entire discussion over that bill, which was debated for months, literally due to the fact _it would include the children of foreigners. Both here legally and illegally.
The worry about then was about the Chinese (Who had a tendency to just sorta…get off the boat in California and start working.) and, pardon the slur, ‘gypsies’.
—
And let’s just look at how weird that sentence is if you try to parse it that way. It doesn’t say that the _children_ of foreigners born in the US wouldn’t be citizens, it says _foreigners_ born in the US wouldn’t be citizens. What sort of gibberish is that? That doesn’t mean anything. Also, how are foreigners born in the US? To be a foreigner, you have to be from somewhere else. (Foreigner, unlike ‘alien’, is not a legal terms. It just means ‘someone who isn’t from here’.)
Also that sentence, uh, is not a list. Firstly, a list has an ‘or’ in it or some other conjugation, and also you don’t make a list that is ‘All foreigners, all foreigners except stated differently, and some specific foreigners who are diplomats’. Does that sound like someone making a list?
It very obviously is not a list, it almost certainly is a correction or clarification, where he first starts with ‘foreigner’, realizes that is not really the correct word in a legal sense, and corrects to ‘aliens who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States’, which would be the correct way to say that.
But again, we don’t need to guess the meaning, because it’s a single sentence in a discussion that everyone operated as if the amendment meant that the children of foreigners would be citizens and had a huge discussion about it. You, or rather whoever fed you this, tried to cut a single awkward sentence out a discussion, pretended it’s clearly a list despite it clearly not being a list, and basically just made a whole pack of lies.Report
Jaybird, don’t you remember Gruber and the ACA? We can’t go by what the people who wrote these laws thought they meant, we can only go by what the people who implemented these laws thought they meant. Like when the lady said “we have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it”, that’s what she meant.Report
We can’t go by what the people who wrote these laws thought they meant
I’m Antonin Scalia.
And I’m Neil Gorsuch.
And we approve this message.Report
Heh, if you hated the Conservative Originalist Jurists, wait till you get the Conservative Living Constitution Jurists.Report
Oh, you’re just reading the Amendment incorrectly.
The people who wrote it couldn’t have imagined modern immigration.Report
They probably didn’t since it was written to give formerly enslaved African Americans citizenship.Report
They have always been around, though often sailing under a false flag.Report
Trump goes against congress:
Seriously, is there any precedent for this?
TikTok ought to be shut *DOWN*!Report
He certainly is NOT faithfully executing the law. Problem is Congress proved they will not call him to account in his two prior impeachments.Report
Speaking of clearances! The following 50 people have had theirs yanked:
(1) James R. Clapper Jr.
(2) Michael V. Hayden
(3) Leon E. Panetta
(4) John O. Brennan
(5) C. Thomas Fingar
(6) Richard H. Ledgett Jr.
(7) John E. McLaughlin
(8) Michael J. Morell
(9) Michael G. Vickers
(10) Douglas H. Wise
(11) Nicholas J. Rasmussen
(12) Russell E. Travers
(13) Andrew Liepman
(14) John H. Moseman
(15) Larry Pfeiffer
(16) Jeremy B. Bash
(17) Rodney Snyder
(18) Glenn S. Gerstell
(19) David B. Buckley
(20) Nada G. Bakos
(21) James B. Bruce
(22) David S. Cariens
(23) Janice Cariens
(24) Paul R. Kolbe
(25) Peter L. Corsell
(26) Roger Z. George
(27) Steven L. Hall
(28) Kent Harrington
(29) Don Hepburn
(30) Timothy D. Kilbourn
(31) Ronald A. Marks
(32) Jonna H. Mendez
(33) Emile Nakhleh
(34) Gerald A. O’Shea
(35) David Priess
(36) Pamela Purcilly
(37) Marc Polymeropoulos
(38) Chris Savos
(39) Nick Shapiro
(40) John Sipher
(41) Stephen B. Slick
(42) Cynthia Strand
(43) Greg Tarbell
(44) David Terry
(45) Gregory F. Treverton
(46) John D. Tullius
(47) David A. Vanell
(48) Winston P. Wiley
(49) Kristin Wood
(50) John R. BoltonReport
Can somebody please explain to me how so many people on the Western further left can take clear statements like “we want “Arab Muslim Palestine” and scramble it around to “we want multicultural secular Palestine” in their headspace? Every Muslim majority country on this planet puts Islam front and center in their national identity complete with blasphemy and apostasy laws and an official international oreganization of Muslim majority countries but Diaspora Jews are supposed ot just ignore all of this and pretend that they are a bunch of secular multicultural liberals despite it all and betray over half the world’s Jews while two billion Muslims get their Grand Muslim Union?Report
Pritzker launches his attack against Trump’s Executive Order on birthright citizenship:
https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2025/01/20/donald-trump-inauguration-day-news-updates-analysis/pritzker-trump-birthright-citizenship-00199472Report
Newsom’s simple statement on the executive order on birthright citizenship:
“This is unconstitutional.”Report
One question that strikes me as pretty important for the next couple of years: Who is in charge of the Democrats?
Like, who is running the show? Every name I come up with doesn’t seem right… Pelosi, Schumer, Obama, Clinton… Harris…Report
Hakeem Jeffries has the House and seems well in charge of his caucus. The DNC is working toward an internal election, and Schumer is still “leading the Senate.”
Personally I’d put my money on Jeffries.Report
So Jeffries? I suppose I can see that. Let’s hope that Katherine Clark knows how to count.Report
She seems to have done well so far.Report
Here’s an immigration policy problem. The US and Israel have a fairly liberal visa setup. If you’re a resident of the US, sure, come on over and visit. No problem.
Well, a recipient of the “Diversity Visa” (seriously, that’s its name) just went over to Israel and went on a stabbing spree. (The spree ended when he got shot by an off-duty police officer.)
We’re going to see calls for increased vetting, above and beyond the increased calls we’re already seeing.Report
John Bolton just had his secret service protection revoked by Trump.
You may be wondering why John Bolton, previous National Security advisor 2018-2019, had secret service protection, which is obviously not standard.
It is because Iran is trying to kill him. He was given that protection by Trump, and then Biden extended it, because even though John Bolton is, of course, a Republican, we probably should let Iran assassinate former US officials.
Anyway, then John Bolton wrote a book about how incompetent and criminal Trump was.
And then Trump because president.Report
Let’s have some concrete predictions. What are some distinctively N-zi things that these N-zis are going to do?Report
His executive order on ending DEI in the federal government contains language encouraging people to rat on each other.
Beyond that one can be a fascist authoritarian without being a Na.zi. So your better questions would be about that.Report
Wait, “encouraging people to rat on each other”?
Surely they framed it differently! Like “if people aren’t following this policy, there is a process to officially address this”?
Hey, I just googled “waste fraud and abuse hotline” and got this:
Does *THIS* count as encouraging people to rat on each other?Report
That’s for citizens to report on government, not for government to report on government.Report
Does that make it not ratting?Report
government employees being required to report instances of failure to fully embrace the preferred policies of the leader is a classic authoritarian/fascist move designed to force compliance in the civil servant workforce.
Hotlines allowing individual citizens to hold government accountable for public actions and decision is not at all the same thing.Report
If one works in a non-public-facing government job and one’s coworker is engaging in WFA, is there any way to address this that is *NOT* ratting?Report
There are a number of existing whistleblower statutes. Every Executive Branch Agency has an internal hotline like the one you describe to every IG.
This isn’t that. This is saying you are required to report even if there’s no actual legal violation (which is the standard now) because we have to know who isn’t doing the President’s policies 1000% at all times.
It’s a command designed to chill people who, say see an EO, look at the relevant statutes and conclude they can’t follow the EO because they are breaking the law. Every authoritarian regime does this.Report
Is not following an EO a big deal?
I mean, imagine not following Johnson’s Affirmative Action one in 1977.
Should that have been reported up or is that considered ratting too?Report
I have yet to see a prior EO requiring reporting of conduct going back to November 5th, and informing civil servants that failure to report within 10 days will result in consequences.Report
There have been various efforts to get rid of DEI before at various levels, and it’s like trying to get people to get rid of their religion. (Maybe exactly like that).
For example when Michigan voters outlawed Affirmative Action, the Universities’ still ended up with the same student bodies. The process got a lot harder to understand but they magically found a way to make the Black “C” equal to a White “A” or Asian “A+”.
I’m hard pressed to see why giving up DEI would be “breaking the law” when it’s already breaking the law to discriminate based on race and a lot of this DEI stuff is clearly doing that.
One of the issues is DEI does a lot of mount bailey. We’re all against discrimination but the definition of “discrimination” is changed to “outcomes that aren’t perfectly equal”.
So you need to engage in discrimination in order to end discrimination.
An order to end DEI is going to need teeth because it will encounter push back from people who really do believe in their religion.Report
Do you actually have a problem with the meta-policy here, or just the underlying policy? So, for example, if the executive branch were rife with the kind of racism and pseudoscience that you don’t like, would you object to an incoming Democratic President issuing an EO to cut that crap out, and encouraging employees to report any attempts to subvert that EO and continue promoting racism and pseudoscience within the executive branch?
If you would have an objection, how specifically would you recommend dealing with this issue?
Again, in this hypothetical, the EO is an attempt to stop the promotion of the kind of racism and pseudoscience that you don’t like.Report
We have laws to stop the racism I don’t like. Those supercede EO’s. Those laws lay out clear reporting pathways not subject to EO direction. I’ve been required to have training on those laws every year of my 24-ish years of federal service.
That isn’t this. This is an assumption of pernicious action by federal civil servants. This assumes that everyone can and will refuse to follow this directive and thus must be threatened to comply. As with many things, it betrays the utter contempt for and lack of trust of the civil service by the Administration. This is further reinforcement of the notion that we are enemies because our loyalty is to the Constitution and not the President personally. This is “Comrade must report”
And it won’t end here.Report
I mean, I know I’m late to the game, but ‘threaten to invade other countries under no justification but They Should Be Part Of Our Great Nation’ seems pretty Na.zi-like.Report
Interesting praise from Politico.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/politico-editor-in-chief-calls-trump-greatest-american-figure-his-era-due-his-influenceReport
Tom Edsall has a sober opinion piece in the NYT: The Right Is Winning the Battle for Hearts and Minds.
Icarus flew too close to the sun.
The dogs didn’t eat the dog food.
My take is that seeing this as a right/left thing continues to be a mistake. It’s a populist/elitist thing.
But this is still one hell of a column.Report
A nice little one-two punch:
Jason Willick:
Peter Spiliakos:
Report
You know what we don’t have?
An executive order ending DST.Report
He blinked.Report
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/01/trump-inauguration-executive-orders/681403/?gift=za6IpfpSRd2K7Rt19fdsXJufotjwKkD30wQzc3Eq-hY&utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=shareReport
“Trump’s Second Term Might Have Already Peaked”
Pack it up, we’re already done.
Whew! Good game, guys.Report
Chait has spoken, sir.Report
Well, I kinda agree, in that it’s all downhill from here and each succeeding day will only be the worst day of his term so far.
The peak of his term *for America* was the several minutes after he was sworn in, but before he was handed a Sharpie.Report
There are a lot of things that are going to go down-hill because Trump is Trump.
What I’m watching for is what things, if any, go up in unexpected ways like Milei.Report
Heh, I was actually going to write that… but Chait beat me to it.Report
Chait may be forgetting that he has both houses of Congress and the Supreme Court, plus a bunch of industries, on his side, in a way that simply wasn’t true in his first term. Granted, these may have been all of his ideas, but if he has ideas that have to go through Congress — and this is just a bit of Project 2025 stuff plus DOGE, so there are definitely more ideas — he’s in much better shape now than in his first term.
Obviously the filibuster is an obstacle, but don’t be surprised of conservatives suddenly think getting rid of the filibuster is a good idea, and unlike the Feckless Party, actually do it.Report
Once we’re done talking about the EO’s — which have a 4-yr expiration date — what do we think the One Legislative Push for his term will be?
Could be an Immigration Package that will be more Right than Left … and will see a lot of Left crossover votes to just stop the bleeding.
But, and this is my genuine question, don’t we kinda think he’s going to do some sort of Tax/Finance bill that will benefit him and the Tech Sector? Surely extending the Trump Tax bill which was set to expire this year (which he assumed would be after his Presidency) plus whatever else his Libertarian, sorry Team Grey advisors want?
Where his heart lies, there his treasure.Report
I wouldn’t be surprised to see multiple pushes. I think he’ll probably try to do immigration mostly through the Executive Branch, so he gets all the credit for it, so the tax stuff seems like a real possibility. I wouldn’t be surprised to see a health care “plan” that’s mostly a dismantling of the ACA, some culture war stuff around universities and federal grant money (though maybe he can do that through the Executive Branch as well?), energy sector stuff aimed at encouraging fossil fuel use, budget cuts to everything but defense, increased defense spending, and probably a lot more.
It sounds like Congressional Republicans want to do it all, or at least a bunch of it, in a giant spending or budget reconciliation bill. I’m sure the people who were upset about the giant continuing resolution will be upset about a giant bill doing a million things for the debt ceiling or budget reconciliation or whatever, as well.Report
Good point… never underestimate Trump’s complete ambivalence about legislating for the future.
But, there’s only so far the administration can go with EO’s and Reconciliation. But yeah, extending Trump’s tax cuts and a few other financial goodies will likely just be some sort of omnibus reconciliation.
However, if they want transformative Immigration Policy, they are going to have to legislate it.
Given the right odds, I’d take the bet that they are willing to Nuke the filibuster.Report
A morality tale:
1. Guy and his wife vote for Trump;
2. Wife gets job as VA nurse and couple packs up everything;
3. Trump institutes across the board hiring freezes including for the wife and her nursing job;
4. Guy blames leftists for this and not giving special dispensation and states “if only I could speak to the czar!!””
https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/bafkreicfrqdqqte5yocvlf6mci6fxjt5frbzh4h6xusxcthkk6gqu6ygey.jpgReport
Something, something, leopards, something something eating faces, something something.Report
More leopards eating faces: https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/660828845b06e5ef31b8a332f1d88495cc7e48cfaaf21b2b19208133386a0bc8.jpgReport
At what point do we get to start the I told you so chorus?Report
Now with the addition of “If only you could speak to the czar!!!”Report
The President as would be Mafia Don: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/01/23/trump-presidency-news/?pwapi_token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJyZWFzb24iOiJnaWZ0IiwibmJmIjoxNzM3NjA4NDAwLCJpc3MiOiJzdWJzY3JpcHRpb25zIiwiZXhwIjoxNzM4OTkwNzk5LCJpYXQiOjE3Mzc2MDg0MDAsImp0aSI6IjFjMGMxYjliLWNkMzEtNGYzMS04ZDdmLWRlZGI3NGJhOGMxNiIsInVybCI6Imh0dHBzOi8vd3d3Lndhc2hpbmd0b25wb3N0LmNvbS9wb2xpdGljcy8yMDI1LzAxLzIzL3RydW1wLXByZXNpZGVuY3ktbmV3cy8ifQ.7ppjMBywVYildlLLwJ6ZlyuNjRTNTi-YQerF-CwWzVA
“President Donald Trump said the United States will begin “demanding respect from other nations” and immediately took a shot at Canada as one of the countries that has been “very tough to deal with.”
Trump said Canada could “become a state” in the United States as a way of eliminating America’s trade deficit with Canada, adding the United States does not need their cars, lumber, or oil and gas.”Report
https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/23/politics/birthright-citizenship-lawsuit-hearing-seattle/index.html
Reagan appointee blocks Trump’s birthright citizenship EOReport
Murkowski is a no against HegsethReport
If Collins and Ernst defected that would be something.Report
Collins has announced her no vote.Report
Ernst has previously said she would vote yes. So theoretically Murkowski and Collins are being allowed to vote no as sacrificial lambsReport
Ernst is a yes alreadyReport
I was aware – just maudlinly hopeful she might change her mind when the other women did.Report
He passed a test vote 51-49. He is likely going to get it. Sigh.Report
For the record this is one that I think really is worth being pissed off about. They’ve put a drunken Fox News personality with no experience running anything but a small charity (which he seems to have done poorly) in charge of the biggest, arguably most important government agency. That is crazy, dangerous, and begging for disaster.Report
Wow. McConnell voted no on Hegseth.Report
Hegseth is the most dangerous Cabinet Secretary… not because of his sexual past or drinking (I have bad news about our War Machine leaders) … but because he is a ‘Ride or Die’ man who lacks prudence (or, more specifically, Phronesis).
That sort of man at DoD is bad for the republic… McConnel’s comments about him having no idea or plan for geo-political concerns is absolutely the tell and disqualifying.
May his tenure be uneventful; but I hope we don’t look back and wonder why the primary line of attack was womanizing and boozing. McConnel (heaven help me) may have cast the only correct and internally consistent vote in the entire Senate.Report
I only bring up the alcohol because of the multiple reports of being drunk on the job. I have no illusions about the personalities in that ecosystem but I’d think even they appreciate that you can’t be down a few (or more) when the missiles start hitting.
Otherwise I agree. The main question I have is why would you put someone who has never been in charge of anything in charge of this. The seemingly Strangelovian personality is as you note a (potentially quite serious) exacerbating factor but whatever his deal with women is it barely registers. I assume the strategy was to try and guilt trip pivotal female GOP Senators but if this election should be understood as anything it’s the total repudiation of that type of politics. It’s worse than bad, it’s ineffective.Report
Yeah, I wasn’t calling out your comment specifically with regards alcohol… was trying to be polite about the opposition thinking these were good vectors.Report
If Trump tells him to park a carrier strike group off the capital of Greenland, Hegseth won’t ask questions.Report
Heck, he’s driving the big boat.
But technically, he’s supposed to do that (send the fleet, not drive the boat)… anytime Congress wants to review the War Powers Act and act like a big boy part of the government it’s open to them.Report
Patel, Gabbard, RFK Jr., Oz, Huckabee, Bondi, Brendon Carr, and the WWE lady are al trolling choices.
His choices for Treasury, State, Commerce, U.N., Interior, and Labor are all within normal parameters for a Republican. Labor might even be above averageReport
Trump just declassified the JFK, RFK, and MLK Jr. files.
As a fan of conspiracy theories, I am *SALIVATING*.Report
Here’s the order itself.
It’s actually kinda interesting because it talks about why this wasn’t done in 2017 for a bit before getting to the good part:
Report
New conspiracy theory… it’s just the Warren Commission report and supporting documents. The good stuff was obviously not used for the Warren report and is still hidden in a secret location.Report
I have a friend who was in the military in a vaguely-nuke-adjacent job back when Broken Arrow (1996) came out and he told me that he and his buddies whispered “has that been declassified?” a handful of times during the flick.
I asked “what was the info?” and he told me “I CAN’T TELL YOU THAT” and so I watched it again and have some guesses.
I think, but I don’t know, that it’s probably not the stuff that is particularly sexy but is, instead, stuff like when John Travolta talks about how long it takes a satellite to get in place to take a picture (as well as the specific protocols of what gets done as well as how long it takes).
So I’m guessing that a lot of what was classified was boring logistics stuff. “When X happens, it takes about Y seconds to respond. When P happens, we need to respond with Q and our guys instead did R.”
And probably some of the stuff from the In The Line of Fire movie. “Secret Service agents *WERE* hung over. They had been partying with Texas women with large hair and they got drunk and two of them smoked reefer.”
And, while salacious, it won’t be *INTERESTING*. Just confirming stuff we knew anyway or could have guessed, had we put effort into it.
But the RFK and MLK Jr. stuff may have some seriously juicy stuff in there.Report
As I’ve always pointed out about the JFK assassination, moronic conspiracies about the actual physical events of the shooting that try to make it somehow involving anyone but Oswald have obscured the fact that Oswald was likely working for _someone_, either the Russians or the mob. (Or, yes, even hypothetically the CIA.) Like, that’s the actual thing we need to know, not gibberish about bullet trajectories.
I don’t know to what extent that was even investigated. The Warren Commission concluded he ‘acted entirely alone’, which means, in theory, they investigated that. It will be interesting to see how much.Report
Heh. Too bad it wasn’t in the john at Mar-a-Lago.Report
I’d be less upset about the boxes of top-secret documents in the Mar-A-Lago can if I at least thought that it meant Trump was reading in there.Report
Melania reads them to him.Report
You need to emotionally prepare yourself for disapppointmentReport
I’m interested in finding out the degree of overclassification that went on, then.
“Why did you feel the need to keep the fact that the Secret Service guys were partying with floozies secret for decades?”
“Two of them are still alive.”
“I repeat the question.”Report
Nah, this is Jaybird. He will find something to think it is all a deep state plot. He mention his addiction to conspiracy theories so he will find them to taunt liberals.Report
There is more to life than your s++ts and giggles you know. But I guess untold damage doesn’t matter if you get some lulz or trolls in.
Pathetic.Report
What untold damage might be done by releasing this information?
Seriously, this is my area of interest. Anything you have to offer will be welcome.Report
His overall damage. Nothing good comes from Trump. Nothing.Report
Oh, so you don’t think that releasing this particular info will do anything particularly bad?Report
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/01/23/president-donald-trump-says-hell-demand-that-interest-rates-drop-immediately.html
Trump Demands Interest Rates be Dropped Immediately!!!Report
Setting up his first big loss. Though he’ll declare himself the winner regardless.Report
Yesterday South Carolina’s state-owned electric utility announced it is seeking to sell two partially built nuclear power reactors. The reactor project was abandoned several years ago because, with cost overruns and delays, it was cheaper to buy power from almost any other source rather than finishing the project. The utility is now seeking bids from consortiums of companies that include someone who can handle the construction, someone who can handle the operations, someone who can handle the finances, and tech companies with data centers to consume the generated power 24/7.
The utility has indicated that it has no interest in owning or operating the reactors.Report
Here’s the main thing I’ve noticed about these countless EOs: How many of them were leaked to the press first? (And by how long?)
I heard rumors about the JFK/RFK/MLK one yesterday.
But the other ones?
There is an amazing amount of discipline so far. Certainly a surprising one!Report
We have been telling you for quite some time that he learned anew lessons last time – not the least of which is to hire people who know how to be more loyal. This doesn’t surprise us. You might try believing us sometimes.Report
Quite honestly, I thought he was going to be about as haphazard as last time. Maybe a little less but not a lot less.
I guess having four years to think about it and then getting shot will clarify stuff. Or, you know, having a teleprompter shatter close to you.Report
Here’s my current take on this. Unlike 2016 he has a team that has (let’s say) a 100-day plan… a little bit like the scripted plays a football team can use to open a game.
Continuing the football analogy, the real question is how he reacts if a) the scripted plays stop working, and b) what does he do when they are over. And, unlike football, what happens when some outside event intrudes.
I joke that Suzie Wiles is the chewing gum, baling twine and duct tape of the administration… but I’ll also add that while I’ve seen a lot on the conservative side go cynical on Trump, they figured out how his game is played and are currently trying to further their agenda ‘as if’ it were a Trump agenda. Here I’m not talking about Performative Congress critters, but donors and policy lobbyists.
In that sense 2024 is different from 2016, the question in my mind is how 2026 will differ from 2018.
Ultimately Trump is unreliable and untrustworthy… so it will end badly for some of those folks; but, some will get what they wanted.Report
Looking at it from my “Three Groups of Voters” perspective, I see it like this:
Group 1 is demoralized. Like, they are being hit with a firehose of outrageous Executive Orders, soundbites, and nominations. There is not time to get together to coordinate to oppose this one before something else happens and then you take a deep breath and you hear that Trump declassified the JFK files? You pretty much have to say something about that too but what can you say? “They won’t be good!” Wait, he’s having *ANOTHER* press conference? Like you can just walk into the room while he’s signing stuff and ask him a question? Can presidents do that? Just answer questions while they’re signing stuff? What if they sign the wrong thing?!? The President needs to be hidden from the press and the press should ask questions of a flunky who lies to them!!! This is unfair!!!!!
Group 2 is jaw-on-the-floor. “Holy crap. The Republican Party has spent the last 30 years being a controlled opposition party. I have been lied to. I was told that I would get sick of winning… I’m not sick of it. I’m more confused by it. This was possible? I just finish reading one EO and I don’t have time to smile before another one drops. And did you see that ICE has started arresting people and getting footage of them screaming made-for-2026 ads into the camera? The only downside is that the Group 1s can’t catch their breath long enough to do a full-throated scream!!!”
And group 3 is watching ICE deport criminals and they’re saying “I knew it. I knew that it’d be possible to just deport them” and “I *KNEW* Trump would pardon the J6ers… let’s face it, about 1500 of those prosecutions were BS anyway…” and “what happened to that ERA thing?” and “What’s this about the 14th Amendment?” and “oh, good… we don’t have to go to those BS DEI things at work anymore”.
In a nutshell: Group 1 is on their back foot. Group 2 is being fed. They’re not even energized. They’re mostly surprised. Group 3 is not outraged but bemused.
Which means that Group 1 needs to come up with a gameplan *FAST*.
One is not organically arising.Report
Sort of… but it’s Day 4. Let’s assess at days 50 and 100.
At this point on the Football analogy, they are moving the ball against a defense that isn’t prepared, but no points on the board. These are the easy yards. And we’ve yet to see what happens when a third team crashes the game.Report
I mean everyone on your side is happy when you’re feasting on your moral seed corn. The regrets and downsides come in the future and the future isn’t now. I’d submit the right is scraping the floor of the granary when comes to that so far it’s quite logical that it’s a party on the right, I mean we’re on day, what four of the “restoration” now?Report
The Right isn’t saying “well, you have to understand, it’s rather silly of you to think that Trump would have passed an Executive Order saying that it’s okay to not bake a cake quite yet”, they are instead saying “HOLY CRAPOLA” (in a good way).
And, as far as I can tell about the #3s, they’re not crying out in outrage but something closer to surprise that as much was possible as seems to have been.
They’re arresting the people that were conspiracy theories half a year ago.Report
The right launched the Iraqi war starting with Shock and Awe too and that turned out *checks notes* not very well. I am astonished to ever be writing this but Trump and his lackeys make Bush W and his gang look like master planners in contrast.Report
The lesson being, don’t station 100,000 pairs of boots in a country with active shooting. Biden took all the political heat for Afghanistan when he pulled out the last 2,500 troops after 20 years.Report
From what I understand, Trump’s best days as President are already behind him and the Democrats are poised to win in 2028.
You win some, you lose some.Report
“The right launched the Iraqi war starting with Shock and Awe too and that turned out *checks notes* not very well.”
really? because the war part, the “invade a country and depose its ruler” part, that went great!
The occupation afterward turned to a bloody mess, thanks to Iran making sure that happened, but the part that everybody voted for worked out just how it was supposed to.Report
I have no idea how you can think we are misreading JB as being anything but a Trumpist considering everything he has written on this thread.
He has done nothing in this thread but soft-peddle for Trump and Elon and troll.Report
Jay’s just a contrarian. If this was the Right Wing Times instead of the Ordinary Times former Islamic now converted to social conservative Catholic Daul Segraw would be snarling to South that Jay is obviously a “libtard socialist troll” based on everything Jaybird was writing and that Jay would be waxing endlessly and convolutedly on about all the manifest errors Trump has made and how, long term, he’s undermining everything the right wing once professed to hold dear. But his co-conversationalists here are liberal to very liberal so he goes the other way.Report
That’s a personality deficiencyReport
That’s your opinion which is fine but it ain’t a Trumpist.Report
We become what we pretend to be-Kurt Vonnegut Mother Night.
There is a whole effect/intent angleReport
THAT’S NOT EVEN THE RIGHT QUOTE YOU HAVE GOOGLE RIGHT FREAKIN THEREReport
One of the things I remembered yesterday is that we keep trying to jam this argument into “left vs. right” when IT’S NOT!!! IT IS SO VERY MUCH NOT!!!!Report
You keep saying that, Jay me lad, and yet the current right appears to be a program of definitely tax cuts and maybe spending cuts on the poor all tarted up in populist drag with border militarism and Trumps unique brand of incoherent gabble on top of it. This is a change, assuredly, from the old right program of definitely tax cuts and maybe spending cuts on the poor all tarted up in neocon drag with Bush’s compassionate Christian gabble on top of it but it’s not that hugely different at its core.Report
Border militarism is one of the main things that the not-right/not-left wanted. Seriously, that was huge.
And in the last few days, we’ve found that Trump began with deporting violent felons who were released from custody.
Trying to crowbar this as a “right” thing is probably the stupidest thing that the “left” could possibly do. Why in the hell would you say “this is *NOT* something that the left wants!” as even a majority of registered democrats approve?
You know, as I look back on this last week, I look at the stuff that has made the biggest splashes:
Immigration, DEI, various nominees, Israel/Palestine’s ceasefire, and Trump’s pardons.
You know what I haven’t heard a word of (until right now)?
Tax cuts. Not a word.Report
To that point, JD Vance was just on Face the Nation and… well, watch the footage for yourself.
Two things about this interview:
1. It happened.
2. JD Vance got a *LOT* of pushback from the reporter.
Seriously, watch it. And then note how much of it was spent on tax cuts.Report
He’s as good a wordcel as the journalists.Report
“He’s so oily! He lies so effortlessly! Did one of the producers give him the questions before the interview?”Report
Yeah, it’s also interesting that the Media team is prepped with notes, have gamed out responses and have follow-ups and ‘gotchas’ based on expected answers.
The interviewee? No notes (this is for everyone, not just Vance).
Still… I go back to my football scripted opening — he’s clearly ready for the first round of projects, policies and objectives.
We’ll see what happens when Trump starts to audible or assumptions go awry.Report
A comment I’ve seen more than once:
“I know how off-balance I was when I went back to work after taking a week off for Christmas. I can’t imagine what it’d be like if I was on vacation for four years!”Report
Of course not. Tax cuts aren’t something Trump needs to blather about because he’s going to actually do them- as much as he and his party possibly can.Report
Also, in 2016 it was Just A Fluke, it was “people didn’t like Clinton and stayed home rather than voting”. In 2024 it was pretty clear that people actually did want Donald Trump as President.Report
36 million Americans didn’t vote. More Americans voted for someone else then Trump if you add the third party vanity votes to the democratic votes. Seems to me that claims of America wanting this ring hollow.Report
How many people voted for Biden but didn’t show up for Harris?
Is this an indictment of Harris? An indictment of Biden?Report
The 36 million who stayed home are an indictment of two parties offering them no reason to participate and an election system hell bent on making voting harder not easier. The million or so who voted third party is proof too many Americans take ideological purity too seriously and don’t actually believe bad things will happen to them or people they claim to care about as a result.Report
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Both sides. Uh-huh.
That wasn’t an answer to the question I asked.Report
You are infamous around here for not answering the questions asked and you want to police me? That’s the funniest things I’ve heard all day.
I did answer your question. You don’t have to like it or agree with it but I answered your question.Report
Not sure where you’re going with this. This is true of every election in my lifetime… there’s nothing new to infer about ‘missing voters’ that isn’t also an event of similar or greater magnitude in every other election.
Perplexity AI:
Here are the voter turnout statistics for each presidential election since 2000, including the most recent 2024 election:
2000: 105,594,024 votes cast, 52.1% of voting-age population (VAP) turnout4
2004: 122,349,480 votes cast, 56.7% of VAP turnout4
2008: 131,406,895 votes cast, 58.3% of VAP turnout4
2012: 129,139,997 votes cast, 54.9% of VAP turnout4
2016: 136,787,187 votes cast, 55.7% of VAP turnout4
2020: 158,481,688 votes cast, 62.8% of VAP turnout4
2024: 156,302,318 votes cast, 63.9% of VEP turnout1*
*VEP for 2020 was 65.3%
And, as far as I can tell, it’s about 84M eligible population didn’t vote – which is surprisingly consistent raw number since the 80s.
Supporting docs: https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/voter-turnout-in-presidential-elections
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_United_States_presidential_elections?Report
Where I’m going with all this is – has been and will remain – my utter disgust at the Biden and Harris screwed up framing when a massively consistent part of the electorate doesn’t, didn’t, and probably won’t vote. Those people deserve public shaming but instead we get spectacular theatre about how Biden handicapped Harris who then underperformed and so now we get authoritarianism. I’m so,so,so tired of looking at specs in eyes and not logs.Report
“36 million Americans didn’t vote.”
I’m not sure, is this the Bargaining or the Depression?Report
You can’t beat something with nothing. Harris ran as an empty suit and Clinton ran on “it’s my turn”.
Get a charismatic governor.Report
HE UNDID THE MENTHOL CIGARETTES ONE!!!
Great job, guys!Report
Boom! Easy 15 yds with linebacker mismatch on slot receiver.
Next, quick slant to Will Truman for 10 and and new set of downs as they remove the restrictions around vaping so people smoke less.Report
cause vaping is so much healthier for you . . . SMDHReport
Compared to smoking? And as a transition out of smoking? Huge win.Report
This thread is making me miss smoking.Report
compromise: only flavor for vapes is Menthol.Report
It’s a message from the administration that we are all going to need some cigs for the ride we are about to go on.Report
Callooh! Callay! O frabjous day! The head of WB Games is *EXITING*!!!
Let’s get down into the meat…
NO!!! NO!!!!!! NO!!!!!!!!!!!!
THAT IS EXACTLY THE WRONG LESSON TO LEARN HERE GUYS WHAT THE HELLReport
“our strategic plan is to pivot to media-tie-in exploitation shovelware”Report
JUST MAKE ANOTHER SHADOW OF MORDOR GAMEReport
That’s what I said about POE2… just make a better POE1. But no, we have a VISION ™
Plus, I thought everyone had already realized that Mobile gaming is dead and solely the preserve of gacha crack games.
All those hours wasted on AAA mobile titles… Diablo! On your phone! crickets.Report
DEI and related stuff puts liberal and center-left politicians between a rock and a hard place because they need one of two things to happen and neither of them is going to happen. They need the activists who love the DEI stuff to tone it down because they are pissing people off at best and providing a lot of nut picking ammo to the Right. The activists either think that they are doing important work or that being ridiculous is part of the point and they wont’ quit. Alternatively, we need the people who are pissed off at various DEI stuff to develop thicker skin but politicians telling Latinos and Latinas not to get annoyed at activists using the term Latinx when most Latinos and Latinas despise the term isn’t going to work.Report
Yup, it’s a quandary but one that is somewhat self fixing. The more the Dems lose when they’re sympathetic or supportive of DEI stuff the less sympathetic and supportive they’re going to get until, eventually, what is both worthy and popular gets winnowed out and separated from the worthy unpopular and the unworth unpopular stuff.Report
All that’s really lacking is balls. The Democrats are at their strongest when they’re standing on things like not balancing the federal budget on the backs of Medicaid recipients or preaching a kind of live and let live vision of fairness, but a laid back fairness that takes into account the complexities of life, including individual agency.
It isn’t that hard to look at the mostly white, highly educated, dare I say ‘privileged’ people to whom this stuff is important and say this isn’t a workable vision for America. If you need to turn this stuff on someone turn it on yourselves (which truthfully is more often than not what they do). We need ideas that work and a big tent to implement them so either get on board or at least shut up and save it for your ivy alum group texts.Report
TL:DR – stop bringing charts and graphs to bazooka fights.Report
The same thing is happening with the Hitlerism.
The choice is between:
1. Double down on the whole Hitler thing.
2. Sigh and give up on the whole Hitler thing and treat Trump like an actual politician.
If they do 1, they look dumb.
If they do 2, they look like they spent the last few months lying about the whole Hitler thing.
I suppose the best play is to run with the whole “NOBODY COMPARED TRUMP TO HITLER!!!” thing and pretend that nobody notices…
So, too, here. “Let’s just stop using LatinX. I’m not saying we should apologize! Oh no! I’m just saying that we quietly *STOP* using it.”
“Oh, so the Spanish language isn’t a problem anymore? Sexism isn’t a problem? Treating Women like second class citizens isn’t a problem? Are you seriously suggesting that we abandon our LatinX sisters?”
And so you’ve got a bunch of people just quietly stopping using LatinX and an ever smaller group of people just barely keeping it in the zeitgeist.
And a SistX SouljX moment could have avoided a lot of harm that will take longer to heal than it took to cause in the first place.Report
Andrew Sullivan’s substack post today made the point that Donald Trump’s positions on these kinds of issues are the much more mainstream ones. He argued that Trump doing this, much like SCOTUS’s holding in Students for Fair Admissions is in a way a gift to the Democrats. If the left of center coalition can’t bring itself to knife the unpopular abominations of a small but highly visible and influential subset then we can at least let the GOP do it then start the pivot. Unsurprisingly I think he’s right.Report
If you’re headed in the wrong direction, turning around and going back *IS* progress.
The main question is whether Trump will prove to be progressive enough or whether another 4 years of Vance will be necessary.
I guess that that kinda makes 2028 the most important election of our lifetimes…Report
The problem with DEI is the criticism of the mainstream DEI seem to be correct. That’s not an “activist” problem, that’s a “the fish is rotten” problem.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity,_equity,_and_inclusion#Criticism_and_controversy
The core idea that all differences are a result of discrimination is simply wrong. The antisemitism it encourages is a symptom of that problem but there are lots of others. Trump is correct in trying to get rid of it.Report
Anyone who hasn’t needs to look at the farcical changes at https://www.whitehouse.gov/
I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.Report
Both?Report
I think cry.Report
Cry, cry loud and hard.Report
LOL. Idiocracy wasn’t supposed to happen for another 500 years.Report
I’ve said this before, but: President Camacho was truly trying to improve things, and accordingly deputized the smartest man he could find to that end.
In this, we are immeasurably worse off than we would be with a President Camacho, whose heart remained in the right place, even if his head was a bit lacking.Report
True though IIRC the smartest man alive was threatened with rehabilitation if he failed to solve their problems in a single week.Report
Let’s look at Trump today:
1. He is discussing ending FEMA which is basically telling states “you are on your own.” He did this in North Carolina a state that voted for him.
2. He is still going on and on about Canada, Panama and Denmark/Greendland.
3. He basically demanded Denmark, a NATO ally cede Greenland to us: https://bsky.app/profile/tomcoates.bsky.social/post/3lgiyyv4okc2v
And probably stuff I am missing,.
At this point I expect he is going to order the U.S. military to do something very stupid, very destructive, and very “are we the baddies?” that the U.S. military is not going to want to do and we are going to see how they respond.
But the too cool for school crowd will still insist that showing worry about these things is worse than them actually happening because the worst thing in their minds is not appearing calm and collected and showing a sense of dread.Report
He’s already got military plains flying deported migrants to who knows where.Report
Yep.Report
5 current and former senior European officials briefed on the call said the conversation had gone very badly. “It was horrendous. He was very firm. It was a cold shower. Before, it was hard to take it seriously. But I do think it is serious, and potentially very dangerous”
https://www.semafor.com/article/01/24/2025/donald-trumps-call-with-danish-pm-went-very-badly-financial-timesReport
Everything that Trump wanted to do but could not do because of COVID along with four years of boiling and pent up rage are coming out now. He is also in the clear state of degeneration. Everything is degenerating at once.Report
And as long as they get their tax cuts and an end to the regulatory state the GOP will happily ride the crashing wave down.Report
I’m very angry at the normies in deep blue San Francisco going out and about like everything is normal. It is not normal.Report
Speaking of San Francisco: San Francisco loses second triple-A rating.
A million years ago, I wrote an essay talking about the whole importance of keeping the trains running on time if you’re going to engage in some serious social engineering.
Welp. San Francisco done effed up. They screwed up with the homeless, they screwed up with low-level crime, they screwed up with covid. Businesses are in exodus and the city has the highest office vacancy rate in the freakin’ country.
What would acting “normal” look like? I think that if the normies in deep blue ‘Frisco were capable of acting normal, we wouldn’t be in this situation in the first place.Report
The last time Trump was president, didn’t at least one of the rating companies drop Treasuries to less than AAA? To screw with the credit rating of a city is one thing. To screw with the credit rating of the richest country in the world, that can literally print dollars to pay off the bonds, is another thing entirely.Report
Sure. I would say that Treasuries going down is a fine measure of whether leadership is effing up.
As a matter of fact, the last time you pointed out that San Francisco’s bond rating was still good, I took it to heart and said to myself “I won’t post any ‘San Francisco is doing poorly’ stories until/unless the bond rating gets dinged.”
And here we are.Report
And my at-this-moment impression is that Trump is insisting interest rates go down below where they price in the risk that Congressional Republicans will default.
Detroit went through bankruptcy and survived. May have done better than survived.Report
The funny thing would be an American Stand-off between the non-partisan Fed and Trump.
And then Trump can threaten to audit the Fed and things can get *REALLY* funny.Report
When a carrier strike group with a full air wing and nukes shows up offshore from Greenland’s capital, and Trump declares Greenland is a US territory, the implied challenge to the other NATO members is, “What are you going to do about it, militarily?”Report
Are we the baddies?
And the trillion dollar question is what does the military do when it receives such an order because I know they might not be liberals but surely they would know that such an order is lunatic. One hopes at least.Report
Are we the baddies?
What’s your world view? When I’m depressed, mine is that we’re headed towards regional empires. In that case, Denmark (nor the EU) can protect Greenland and it’s resources. Canada’s not big enough to do that job. Greenland needs to be part of a US North American empire.
I dislike when I’m that depressed.Report
No, we won’t give you time. We don’t get to recover. You don’t get to recover.
https://www.semafor.com/article/01/23/2025/give-us-a-little-time-democrats-search-for-a-guiding-principle-against-trumpReport
Welp. Better find a leader who will announce what the lesson was and then boldly move forward.
May I suggest someone populist?
(Hey, have you seen Shoe’s breakdown of the election? It’s a treat. I think that everybody will find something to enjoy in this one.)
Report
Don’t make me pull out the quote Jaybird….Report
I think you should, Saul.
I think you should habituate everybody to say “Jesus Christ, Saul’s pulling out that freakin’ Sartre quote again… did he even read Sartre other than copying and pasting that one quote? Does he not freaking realize that arguing doing nothing other than pasting a quote is doing the exact same freakin’ thing that Sartre is actually criticizing in that quote? DID HE EVEN READ IT? Does he just want to subtly accuse other people of being anti-semites during a period when, seriously, leftists in general are calling Israel an apartheid state and calling Musk a Nazi not because he did a Sieg Heil but because he met with Netanyahu? What the hell is Saul freakin’ thinking, smashing his hand on that pellet bar like it still hands out pellets like it did 10 years ago when there hasn’t been a pellet seen since 2018 or 2019?”
So… yeah.
Pull it out.
The only way out is through.Report
Well, at least you’re calling it a Sieg Heil now. I’ll take that as progress.Report
I was actually referencing something real:
Report
Oh, it was real.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1i7xka3/elons_evolution_of_giving_out_his_heart/Report
Can you stop trolling on this or are you pathologically incapable of resisting an opportunity to troll?Report
I am hoping to get the Democrats to change, lest Vance gets reelected in 2032.
Part of that involves saying stuff like “what went wrong” and pointing out the specific mistakes that were made and, more importantly to me, which mistakes are currently being made.
“I can’t hear you la la la la” is an understandable response to being put in a situation where you may have to make unpleasant changes. I get that.
But.Report
There are people whose business it is to do that, and every reason to believe they’re working on it. The key is to find things that are net vote gainers, not pet peeves that, if indulged, almost certainly will not gain more votes from people not inclined to vote for Democrats than lose votes from current voters.Report
every reason to believe they’re working on it
There’s more evidence for a lab leak for Covid than there is for Democratic leadership hammering out how they should have done things differently than Joe Biden.Report
Curious. Can we think of any of the various areas where right wingers went crazily wrong and lost and then backed off where they did so by overtly saying “what went wrong” and then admitting they needed to change course? Looking down the list it seems to me they did the same thing- just stopped talking about it and deemphasized it. I submit that’s how most political movements get off a subject. Quietly sidling away while trying to change the subject.Report
You mean like when Trump, of all people, called Iraq a mistake?
I mean, that was the moment back in 2015 or 2016 that made me say “holy crap”.Report
(Flashback to February 2016.)Report
But Trump wasn’t in the picture during Iraq. He was an outsider who came in and denounced Iraq and drove the folks associated with Iraq (further) out of power. That wasn’t him reversing course.Report
No, he wasn’t. But that’s a case of someone coming out and saying what went wrong. He came out and said it!
Now if you want to argue that Trump isn’t a right-winger, I’d smile wryly and say “you got me”.
One of the biggest Iraq people, of course, jumped to Harris. She bragged about it during the debates.
You know who is probably the best example of a guy dropping SistX SouljX moments on the Democrats?
Fetterman.Report
Yes, so he’s probably not an example of right wingers reversing themselves and saying “no we were wrong, we fished up.” I mean if you want examples of outsiders saying “you were wrong, you fished up.” that’s common as sand on the beach. More common. Probably as common as hydrogen.Report
And then the right-wingers who refused to say “we effed up” were replaced or absorbed. Or sat next to Kamala on the stage and helped her campaign.
Go back and look at the 2016 Republican Primary contestants again. Not all of them are gone because of the passage of a decade.Report
Sure. But not a one of them overtly said the stuff you are saying the Dems/left have to say about DEI/Latinx. I submit that’s because it’s not how mass movements change course. Heck, look at SSM. W campaigned and won in ’04 against it and, to this day, getting rid of it is a plank in the GOP platform but they’ve generally stopped talking about it; heck, a handful of them even signed on to legislation backstopping it. But you won’t find any of them saying “yeah we were wrong about SSM.”Report
And I suppose that I could show that picture of Trump holding up the white supremacist version of the pride flag which doubles down on Trump being the guy who replaces the old in my view and just makes your point that much stronger in yours.Report
I’m not familiar with the white supremacist version of the pride flag to be honest.Report
Not sure they pivoted quite that transparently but the big one I think you have to give them (or at least MAGA) is Trump saying he would veto a national abortion ban.
Otherwise I think you’re right, they just don’t really talk about their other big liabilities (i.e. entitlements).Report
For sure, but I think in this context what Trump was talking about would qualify as triangulating not reversing. The pro-life right is out to the right, the pro-choice left is out to the left. Trump didn’t objectively go left, he just went “less right” and he didn’t say the pro-life position was wrong, just that he wouldn’t go as far as they did. Moderation rather than reversal.Report
Damn, that chick was ON FIRE.Report
Yeah, I dig her. I don’t agree with everything she has to say but… eh. She’s someone that I am delighted to disagree with. She’s *LEGIBLE*.Report
Well that was depressing read. There are some good ones out there like AOC, Raskin, Van Hollen, and Murphy but there is a lot of ruderlessness right nowReport
Right-wing Christians think empathy is a sin now: https://www.reddit.com/r/GetNoted/comments/1i8o7gg/the_sin_of_empathy/?rdt=53184Report
Trump suspends disbursements to Program Supplying H.I.V. Treatment Worldwide: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/24/us/politics/trump-hiv-aids-pepfar.htmlReport
News from the DEI bans from Josh Marshall:
1. “Another detail out of FDA. The agency has removed pages which provide guidance to medical researchers on conducting medical trials with representative numbers of men and women and ethnic and/or racial minority groups. I think most people know this: but this isn’t a matter of symbolic diversity. Many medications and/or diseases or conditions present differently in men and woman and in people with different genetic backgrounds.”
2. “In order to combat the scourge of “DEI,” the DOJ yesterday indefinitely suspended observance of events like Black History Month, Women’s History Month and other long observed (and one would imagine fairly innocuous) commemorations.”Report
As someone who works with Life Science companies… testing their drugs on different populations isn’t a DEI thing… they will do it for simple $$ reasons. What they won’t do is check boxes on populations where the science doesn’t indicate a good fit.Report
Secret Service was outside a Chicago elementary school because, check notes, an 11 year old made an anti-Trump video. Trump is an extraordinarily fragile man.
https://blockclubchicago.org/2025/01/24/ice-agents-denied-entry-at-cps-school-in-back-of-the-yards/?fbclid=IwY2xjawIBNMZleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHWoy2dYMNCCZS1VHGyvujRR9H0Q8RSA1wQrm1oYRTofKwr931luVUvAY9g_aem_5rMT2wKVF1w2HvphpDLthQReport
In the 1990s, I had an acquaintance who had an “exploding head” webpage based on that one scene, you know the one, in Scanners. He’d put different heads on the guy and that was the joke.
Ah, the 90s.
Anyway, he put Clinton’s head on there and the Secret Service showed up at his house.
All that to say… what kind of anti-Trump video?Report
America’s praetorian guard.Report
Without knowing more about the contents of the video, I’ll just say that I believe the SS is more or less obligated to visit anyone who makes a “threat” and IIRC have visited comedians etc. before. The guy that took a shot at Trump from a rooftop was only 20, and some 11-year-olds look older than 11. So while I agree DJT is extraordinarily thin-skinned, this might well have been more or less SOP for the SS.
This will likely be the only time this week I cut him any slack whatsoever, so I hope it’s appreciated.Report
Good on the school for denying entryReport
Get your “Come Back With A Warrant” doormat here for $18.99!Report
Since Jaybird cares so much about the release of information:
“And on Thursday, the CDC failed to release the agency’s weekly publication, the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, marking the first time in decades the agency has not published the highly regarded mainstay of public health communication.”
https://www.npr.org/sections/shots-health-news/2025/01/24/g-s1-44613/cdc-nih-hhs-health-data-mmwrReport
I guess the HHS doesn’t believe that this is mission critical.Report
Trump fires at least 12 Inspector Generals illegally in Friday night purge: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/24/us/politics/trump-fires-inspectors-general.htmlReport
The CIA has reassessed its evidence and has officially come out and said that they believe (with low confidence) in the Lab Leak theory. The reassessment was initiated under Bill Burns, but John Ratcliffe ordered declassification and release of the decision.Report
Everyone already knows this; I don’t see why people keep bringing it up.Report
Here’s a post from 2021 where we discussed the Lab Leak Theory.
Here’s a post from 2022 where we discussed the Lab Leak Theory.
Here’s a post from 2023 where we discussed the Lab Leak Theory.Report
Almost enough to make one disbelieve in the possibility of progress.Report
Maybe we’ll eventually get to “okay, maybe things should have been done differently, I don’t see why we should talk about what they are though.”Report
If you want the “why,” the three referenced threads provide it.Report
I think it’s like the LatinX thing.
The shift was to “we’ll just stop using it” rather than “it was stupid and we shouldn’t have done it” and resorting to “why do you keep bringing that up?”
Well, it’s because of the various speeches about why it was so important back when it was so important.
Anyway, back to the lab leak. It was racist, remember? It was risible and social media was censoring people who wanted to talk about a lab origin (and that censorship was happening at the behest of the government).
And now we’re in a place where there’s more and more movement from “it was the wet market” to “we’ll never know! which means that you’ll never know!” and then to “leans lab leak” and, much like with LatinX, the problem is the people who want to actually talk about it this time.
“Why are you still talking about that? We stopped doing it!”
Maybe crowbar in a “why do you care?” in there.Report
Does the low confidence qualifier not mean anything here?Report
Only if the previous qualifier also meant something.Report
Which is what?Report
This is from the New York Times: C.I.A. Now Favors Lab Leak Theory to Explain Covid’s Origins.
In a nutshell, they went from “we don’t know enough to make a guess” to “okay, maybe we know enough to make a low confidence guess” after looking at the evidence again.Report
Right. That’s not a qualifier, but a straight statement of belief.
Without the Chinese government’s cooperation, which is likely never to be forthcoming, all we’ll ever have is a guess.Report
They get into that in the story.
There’s also a sentence devoted to people asking “why does this even matter?”Report
You’re going to have to share a non-paywalled version.Report
Here’s a free story from the New York Post.Report
Heh. I completely forgot about the change in administration.Report
Maybe we’ll eventually get to “okay, maybe things should have been done differently, I don’t see why we should talk about what they are though.”
“What difference, at this point, does it make?”Report
It’s interesting that political, and now I guess intelligence groups keep saying, “We think (with low confidence) it was a lab leak,” but pretty much all of the scientists are like, “There’s pretty much no chance it was a lab leak.” Not only that, but they keep saying the political pressure from lab leake obsessives is actually making the science more difficult.
Whomst are we to believe, then, a Republican House committee and the CIA, who of course never lies, or the actual virologists and epidemiologists studying the virus and its origins? It’s a real dilemma.Report
I am 100% down with arguing that the intelligence services are easily politicized and thus should not be part of the discussion of what we do and do not know.
However. Given that they seem to be part of what policies we do and do not establish, we’re kinda stuck.
(Is Kristian Andersen one of the scientists in the sample or can we exclude him because he’s obviously politically biased?)Report
I’m not excluding any scientists. I’m talking about the scientific consensus, based on scientific arguments, which you can easily find on your computer and/or hand-held computing device.Report
Ah, “the consensus”. I’m less thrilled with the consensus in the current year than I would have been a decade ago, I tell you what.
The fact that there is so very little wiggle room when it comes to disagreeing with the consensus and the response to scientists *NOT* agreeing with it is a hell of a lot more like “media response” than “scientific response” adds to my skepticism.Report
Remember how they concluded with high confidence that Sadam Hussein had WMD? Pepperidge farm remembers.Report
Oh, yeah! That’s one hell of a reason to believe that their findings cannot be trusted and follow the way the wind is blowing.Report
The CIA should put out a real Galaxy-Brain Conspiracy Theory – COVID is a WMD that was smuggled from Fallujah to Wuhan. Kill a couple birds with one stone thenReport
The CIA might have ways of knowing what’s going on in Chinese labs that do not depend on scientific inferences from physical evidence — spycraft. If their opinion is based on spycraft rather than science, it is worth taking seriously even in the face of more scientific evidence that seems to point the other way. But if it is a scientific assessment, rather than spycraft, there is no reason to take the CIA’s assessment over that of the science agencies.Report
It is absolutely not worth taking seriously.Report
We’ll never know, which is why no ought to be taking any of this seriously.Report
Unfortunately, there was enough certainty in recent memory to censor discussion of the topic.Report
You can stick with your Kung Flu theory for as long as you want. As for me, I’ll remain firmly in the camp of absent any concrete evidence, the plague may or may not have arisen as the result of a lab leak but we’ll never know because we’re dealing with a repressive government that tightly controls information, and would definitely not be cooperative with an American administration that’s desperately seeking to pin the spread on anyone other than the guy in charge of it.
Anyone even attempting to make a definitive statement is spewing BS.Report
What fun is being sensible and not talking about things when you don’t know what you’re talking about? Don’t you see the value in JAQ-ing off or claiming censorship every time somebody publicly raises a non-standard view that, somehow, we’ve all managed to hear about?Report
I’m certainly not saying it might not be true. Hell’s bells, it probably was. But to definitively say so is something we’ll never be able to do. Anyone doing so is just playing politics.Report
Would something like “we have moved to having low confidence in this finding” be a respectable position to take?Report
Why even say that? It’s utterly meaningless. If you’re not confident, you’re just spitballing.Report
We live in a performative politics world. This is performative/Report
It’s not utterly meaningless if your starting point prior to this was “it’s 100% the wet market, anything else is a conspiracy theory”.Report
I think the root of our disagreement lies in timing. Who knew anything in Feb. 2020, which is when the lab leak accusation was beginning to take hold? People who originally did so have never allowed for another explanation, even in the fact of great uncertainty.Report
The good news, I guess, is that Fauci has a pre-emptive pardon. So they won’t be able to pin it on him.Report
Andy Warhol had it wrong about everyone getting 15 minutes of fame. It turned out to be a presidential pardon.Report
It’s science, so proving without a doubt is unlikely, but we can have a great deal of evidence for and against hypotheses, and right now, we have a great deal of evidence, in the form of cultures from the market and region, and in the actual makeup of the virus itself, that tell us it was almost certainly spillover from the wet market. The CIA releasing its assessment (“with low confidence”) as though it outweighed the scientific evidence is ridiculous, but we’re in an age when ridiculous is perfectly fine, so long as it confirms my preexisting beliefs.Report
I’m just more irked that people, some of whom hold high elective office in this country, have been running with this lab leak thing since Feb. of 2020. Who the hell knew anything about COVID back then?
Now we’re supposed to take them seriously because the CIA issues a “well they might be right but we can’t say for sure, and we probably shouldn’t even be saying this” mealy-mouthed statement. What a bunch of hogwash.Report
Members of the Navajo nation fail Trump’s brown paper bag test
https://oregoncapitalchronicle.com/2025/01/24/reports-of-navajo-people-being-detained-in-immigration-sweeps-sparks-concern-from-tribal-leaders/Report
Hakeem Jeffries explains it to us:
Report
Trump calls for the relocation of Palestinians from Gaza: https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/637e320209200186ee22a6dc5c3d50476e0a5e39bccd32c038a5763a5b7ffedd.jpgReport
Ah yes, I will show my resolute and impeccable moral character by reading about Native Americans being detained and harassed by ICE by mocking a statement from a Democrat. That is how I will show my belief in decency and dignity of all people.
Is there anything Trump can do that would get you to respond with something that is not trolling?Report
Would you prefer that I wrote a short essay explaining that this is not likely to pick up more votes than it loses?
I could link to the demographic votes again and show which groups went red and which went blue and by how much, if you’d like.
This is sort of like back when we were saying whether Biden should step down and you accused people who said that he should step down of “trolling”.
Holy cow, are you using “trolling” the way that I would use “disagreeing”? That would explain a *LOT*.Report
I suppose the most obvious response is “he did step down! and Harris lost anyway!”
Yeah. She did.
Anyway, I hope you enjoyed Hakeem’s speech. It was written for people who agree with you.Report
Canada is a “country that should be a (US) state,” reiterates President Trump. “They’ll get much better treatment, much better care and much lower taxes, and they’ll be much more secure.”Report
Speaking of denying entry, Columbia told Trump “no, we’re not taking a planeful of Columbians back” (or two, I guess).
So Trump said something to the effect of “fine, we’ll close the embassy’s visa section and we’re cancelling the 1500 immigration visa appointments. On top of that, we’re going to install 25% tariffs on everything from Columbia and, next week, they go up to 50%.”
The Columbian president has since offered to use the Columbian presidential plane to repatriate the undocumented visitors in question.Report
Wait wait wait, Columbian President tweeted this out:
Use the translate button and see that he said this:
So next week might be interesting again.Report
Trade Wars have begun. Colombia refused to let a military plane of deportees land and Trump imposed a 25 percent tariff on goods from Colombia. Colombia responded with a similar tariff.
Colombia supplies 27 percent of our coffee beans. 80 percent of the flowers sold on Valentine’s Day also come from Colombia. The U.S. also buys 19 percent of Colombia’s cacao.
Colombia purchases a lot of corn from the U.S.Report
Oooh, this might be good for Ethiopia.
Nice. I’ve liked them since the 80s.Report
Now I’m genuinely curious to run a real-world tariff experiment on shifting preferences and policy objectives.
More seriously, the American Empire is crumbling… there are good arguments to divest into a multi-polar world (I personally like some of those arguments), but increasingly there are good arguments to ‘own’ the Empire and fix it.
I don’t think Trump is the right person to transform the Empire, but people who don’t understand that the Empire *is* are not serious people. The American Empire was the first ‘post-modern’ financial Empire, so we didn’t fully acknowledge it’s existence in a traditional sense… but the unraveling of it will require skill.Report
Unrelated, but I have some great photos from a stop at Bretton Woods while driving through New England a few years ago. The floors, especially in the basement level, are uneven, it smells of mildew, and walking around, inside and out, you get a real feeling that it is very slowly crumbling.Report
I understand that over in the corner, where the diplomats are still talking, Colombia has pointed out that the US has a formal agreement about how deportees can be transported to Colombia, and that it requires commercial rather than military flights.Report
Yeah, they will accept deportees on civilian flights but Trump decided to use military flights because he needs to show his toughness and things are going down. He did this with Mexico and Brazil too.Report
(This is turning out like that Government Shutdown back in 2018 that Stopped Trump Getting His Border Wall and then a few months later he got the money anyway and the wall he built was expanded by the Biden administration.)Report
Columbis-U.S. trade war called off. Trump appears to have backed down but is treating it as a victoryReport
What a huge loss for Trump! What will happen to the undocumented visitors?Report
Trump backed down? Really?
https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/26/politics/colombia-tariffs-trump-deportation-flights/index.html
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c20p36e62gyo
Wow, that sure look like Columbia is doing what Trump wanted. Normally that IS a victory for Trump. Your TDS is showing.Report
Trump wanted to send shackled deportees on unannounced military flights. It’s not clear that he got that. Will future deportees be shackled? Will Colombia be informed in advance about future flights?Report
They are literally not doing what he wanted. The Trump administration lied to CNN, and CNN further lied.
The demand by Colombia was ”Stop using military planes and chaining our citizens as you deport them, or we will no longer accept them’.
Trump Administration threatened tariffs.
Colombia, which understand tariffs and the trade imbalance, fell down laughing as they promised to do it back.
The Trump Administration then agreed to stop using military planes and chaining Colombian citizens to return them to Colombia.
Colombia said ‘Then you have met our demands. I guess we’re done here. We will be waiting for people returned, unchained, on passenger flights, as has always been how it worked before now’.
The Trump Administration then went around telling people that Colombia has agreed to ‘accept more deportees from the US’. Just straight up lying about what the issue was and what happened.
There is no universe where that is ‘Colombia is doing what Trump wanted’. Colombia did not move or concede the _slightest inch_.
The fact the headline is claiming that really should give people pause about how they understand the news as presented by the Trump administration.Report
Dave, this is great and all, but the guy who quoted CNN is quoting CNN.
Who are you quoting? What is your source for this here?
I am not asking “Source?!?” like one of those people who learned that asking for a source was a great way to stop a conspiracy theorist in his tracks but as a guy who looked at how you were given a link to CNN and the BBC and you’re saying “that’s not what happened!” and disagreeing and even saying that CNN got its headline wrong without linking to something that will help us determine what you’re saying is accurate.
Did you get that from NPR? The New York Times? MSNBC?Report
I feel the entity that would actually know whether Colombia would accept detainees sent on military planes would be, you know, Colombia.
As such, you may wish to read the quote of the Colombia government in that article, which states, “We will continue to receive Colombians and Colombian women who return as deportees, guaranteeing them decent conditions as citizens subject to rights.”
You see that phrase, ‘Continue to receive’? What do you think that means? That Colombia has _modified_ something? Doesn’t seem to be.
Almost every discussion of this issue is attempting to frame it as ‘Colombia has agreed to accept deported citizens, a thing that was _literally never_ in question. Not even in the slightest. Colombia has always accepted deportation flights. And it quoting Colombia _stating_ ‘we will keep doing that’ as somehow caving. It’s insanely stupid how all the news media is just lying about this.
The objection was over citizens returned, shackled, via military flights. Colombia has said literally nothing about allowing military flights or shackles. The Trump administration has not said anything about those either.
If you want a URL, here it is: https://www.wonkette.com/p/actually-trump-caved-to-colombia
“Given that the Colombian government says the impasse has been resolved, here is what we think is the state of things: the agreement the two nations reached is that Colombia will accept deportees so long as they are not shackled and tossed on military planes, which was their original complaint, and the WH is ignoring the second part so it can spin the first part as a glorious victory.”
But to be clear, regardless of what you feel about Wonkette, the CNN article headline is lying. It says “Colombia backs down on accepting deportees on military planes after Trump’s tariffs threats”, and there is literally nothing in what it wrote that indicated Colombia is willing to accept deportees _on military planes_.Report
This story is almost a textbook example of how bad even non-conservative media gets played by conservatives, because almost no one actually understand the very-clearly-stated issue that Colombia had of ‘You cannot chain our citizens to a metal seat for hours in a military aircraft while you return them to us instead of the normal means of sending them via commercial airline.’, a very basic and somewhat obvious thing for a country to get upset about (We would certainly get very upset if anyone tried to do it a US citizen) and something that would actually sound horrible if the media actually explained that the Trump administration had started doing that.
(Don’t worry, they apparently didn’t chain up the _children_. Forced them to be in a cramped, uncomfortable, and not-at-all-safe-for-children aircraft for hours, but did not actually put chains on them.)
But instead the media just takes their cues entirely from the conservative noisemakers about what the issue is, and gets either states, or at least strongly implies, complete nonsense, like Colombian is fighting deportations in general.
Again, I feel I should point out: The foreign media is _not_ missing them. They are not missing _any_ of this.Report
Oh, Wonkette.
CNN says, and I’m copying and pasting this, “Colombia said Sunday evening it had agreed to “all of President Trump’s terms,” including the “unrestricted acceptance” of immigrants who entered the US illegally, after two US military planes carrying deportees were blocked from entering the country.”
Now whether or not that means that Colombia has agreed to all of President Trump’s terms is very much in the air *INCLUDING* whether Trump is still demanding to use military planes.
And the counter-argument to that is an article that contains the phrase (and I’m copying/pasting this) “tangerine führer”.
Now if you want to argue that CNN is biased and therefore we cannot trust it, I will be 100% down with that.
Do we want to establish that rule?Report
Hey, Jaybird, weird how CNN doesn’t link to anything Colombia said, isn’t it?
This sentence is also interesting: ‘He added that US deportation flights had resumed, and the Colombian presidential plane was being prepared to assist in repatriating citizens.’
That doesn’t sound like military flights to me. Neither the ‘presidential plane’ part nor the ‘US deportation flights’. The word ‘military’ could very easily be in that second thing, and it doesn’t appear to be.
See, there’s three actual questions here: What was demanded by Trump, and what was demanded by Colombia, and what was the end result?
None of these are well explained by the American media, and the first and second have been pretty blatant lies, or at least ‘deliberate misunderstandings created by the media’, implying things that simply are not true about Colombia’s original problem.
The fact they will not actually state the third thing in clear language, and instead vaguely say ‘all of Trump’s demands’ is _incredibly_ suspicious.
(It’s also worth pointing out that there a dozen of different positions that are in between. Perhaps Colombia agreed to military planes _without_ chains. Perhaps Colombia agreed to having criminals returned via military planes and other people via commercial travel. Perhaps Colombia agreed to pick up all their people themselves, or pay for the planes themselves. We simply do not know.)Report
I suppose if I were thirsty for “so what *REALLY* happened?”, I would turn to someone who told me what really happened. Thanks, Gary Legum!Report
One thing I’m looking for is photos of flights of undocumented visitors flying back to Colombia.
Is it a military plane? A passenger one? The Colombian Presidential?
There ain’t one! It’s just people asserting things!Report
How
https://apnews.com/article/colombia-immigration-deportation-flights-petro-trump-us-67870e41556c5d8791d22ec6767049fd
““We have overcome the impasse with the United States government,” said Colombian Foreign Minister Luis Gilberto Murillo. “We will continue to receive Colombians who return as deportees, guaranteeing them decent conditions as citizens subject to rights.”’
Many
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/colombia-deportation-flights-trump-retaliation/
“Colombia’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement the country had “overcome the impasse” with the U.S., and said its foreign minister and ambassador would travel to Washington, D.C., “in the next few hours” to continue discussing the agreement.
“We will continue to receive Colombians who return as deportees, guaranteeing them dignified conditions, as citizens subject to rights,” the Foreign Ministry said. The ministry’s statement made no mention of U.S. military planes, but said Colombia’s presidential plane would be used to return migrants who had been scheduled to be deported Sunday morning.”
sources
https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/colombias-petro-will-not-allow-us-planes-return-migrants-2025-01-26/
‘In a statement late on Sunday, Colombian Foreign Minister Luis Gilberto Murillo said: “We have overcome the impasse with the U.S. government”.’
‘”The government of Colombia … has the presidential plane ready to facilitate the return of Colombians who were going to arrive in the country this morning on deportation flights.”‘
does it take?Report
This is hilarious. The TDS is so bad you cannot even trust a liberal source like CNN or BBC. Get help.Report