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."
That is not what Trump is doing and it is very naive to think it is what he is doing. He is taking a wrecking ball to everything and trying to roll us back to Lochner or further.
As part of this purported anti-DEI push, he is rescinding civil rights era executive orders that no other President has done so, be careful what you wish for. Nothing Trump does is worth all the damage he will also do. Nothing
DEI might be the closest thing the left as to a wingnut grift but it is more tedious than actually harmful and if done right, it could theoretically be beneficial (it will never be done right because that requires time, effort, and money that doesn't produce a profit).
But this order is only limited to the federal government and it is really not worth getting underwear in a twist over DEI considering all the other damage Trump and Co. is going to do.
Coalition building means having to grin and bear some things you dislike sometimes.
After a morning meeting, I sat down to my computer around 11:30 a.m. ET and read two reader emails picked more or less at random out of my inbox. The first was from an American expat. The gist of his email was that American liberals — Blue America, for lack of a better descriptor — are totally unprepared for what’s coming down the pike toward them. The second was from a federal government employee reviewing the executive orders relevant to the federal workforce and explaining to me in so many words, ‘yeah, good luck with that.’ The expat’s email was generally more pessimistic and totalizing than I’m inclined to be. You may differ and you may be right; who knows? But in general the two emails together captured the moment as well or better than any report, essay or interview I might have read — a mix of actions and red flags almost unimaginable by any normal standard (though in virtually every case unsurprising) mixed with an underbrush of the sheer size, inertia and difficulty of whatever changes Trump is trying to make. They’re both true. Both true at once.
The best way to understand most of these executive orders is that they are statements of intent. That’s actually what an “executive order” is, in its origin: even in the much smaller federal government of a century ago, let alone two and a half centuries ago, the federal government was always a big thing — geographically if not in comparison to what we know today. The President can’t talk to everyone who works for him as head of the executive branch. So executive orders are ways of making clear, putting on paper, what his directions are.
At a fundamental level, they are, especially for Trump, performative. They become real when his appointees begin acting on them and they get litigated in courts, and validated or not validated. Pardons and commutations are real. Those things actually happened yesterday. They’re done. People are out of jail. That can’t be reversed. And Trump appears to have pardoned or commuted either every Jan. 6th convict/indictee or almost all of them. (This last marginal difference is unclear; but if a few stragglers weren’t released, he released the most dangerous and the most violent.) It’s important to understand the difference.
One thing I found interesting last night is that as lawyers began reading through the EOs, they noticed something pretty consistent. They were sloppy and contradictory, often doing things the authors hadn’t even intended. Is that a big deal? Well, yes and no. It’s the President’s will. So he can — mostly — express his will again or kind of as many times as he wants to. Fundamentally if President Trump wants to do X he’s not going to be stopped because an executive order was a sloppy cut and paste job, which many of these were. Success or failure is going to come down to three variables: 1) court action, 2) how much focus and determination his appointees have in putting them into effect and 3) public opinion. But it’s an indication that the belief that Trump’s team is more tried, tested and expert this time around may simply not be true. And that’s an important fact to know.
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?
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."
“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 Sartre
“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 Sartre
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.
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.
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:
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.
On “Open Mic for the week of 1/20/2025”
https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/23/politics/birthright-citizenship-lawsuit-hearing-seattle/index.html
Reagan appointee blocks Trump's birthright citizenship EO
"
Now with the addition of "If only you could speak to the czar!!!"
"
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."
"
More leopards eating faces: https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/660828845b06e5ef31b8a332f1d88495cc7e48cfaaf21b2b19208133386a0bc8.jpg
"
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.jpg
On “Trump Term Two, Day One, Executive Orders”
That is not what Trump is doing and it is very naive to think it is what he is doing. He is taking a wrecking ball to everything and trying to roll us back to Lochner or further.
"
Executive Order Blitzkreig
"
As part of this purported anti-DEI push, he is rescinding civil rights era executive orders that no other President has done so, be careful what you wish for. Nothing Trump does is worth all the damage he will also do. Nothing
https://bsky.app/profile/chrisgeidner.bsky.social/post/3lgcivsavps2h
"
DEI might be the closest thing the left as to a wingnut grift but it is more tedious than actually harmful and if done right, it could theoretically be beneficial (it will never be done right because that requires time, effort, and money that doesn't produce a profit).
But this order is only limited to the federal government and it is really not worth getting underwear in a twist over DEI considering all the other damage Trump and Co. is going to do.
Coalition building means having to grin and bear some things you dislike sometimes.
How long before JB trolls on the sentence above?
"
And fascism took hold of the land because lo, the centerist declare the woke was worse
"
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/day-two
After a morning meeting, I sat down to my computer around 11:30 a.m. ET and read two reader emails picked more or less at random out of my inbox. The first was from an American expat. The gist of his email was that American liberals — Blue America, for lack of a better descriptor — are totally unprepared for what’s coming down the pike toward them. The second was from a federal government employee reviewing the executive orders relevant to the federal workforce and explaining to me in so many words, ‘yeah, good luck with that.’ The expat’s email was generally more pessimistic and totalizing than I’m inclined to be. You may differ and you may be right; who knows? But in general the two emails together captured the moment as well or better than any report, essay or interview I might have read — a mix of actions and red flags almost unimaginable by any normal standard (though in virtually every case unsurprising) mixed with an underbrush of the sheer size, inertia and difficulty of whatever changes Trump is trying to make. They’re both true. Both true at once.
The best way to understand most of these executive orders is that they are statements of intent. That’s actually what an “executive order” is, in its origin: even in the much smaller federal government of a century ago, let alone two and a half centuries ago, the federal government was always a big thing — geographically if not in comparison to what we know today. The President can’t talk to everyone who works for him as head of the executive branch. So executive orders are ways of making clear, putting on paper, what his directions are.
At a fundamental level, they are, especially for Trump, performative. They become real when his appointees begin acting on them and they get litigated in courts, and validated or not validated. Pardons and commutations are real. Those things actually happened yesterday. They’re done. People are out of jail. That can’t be reversed. And Trump appears to have pardoned or commuted either every Jan. 6th convict/indictee or almost all of them. (This last marginal difference is unclear; but if a few stragglers weren’t released, he released the most dangerous and the most violent.) It’s important to understand the difference.
One thing I found interesting last night is that as lawyers began reading through the EOs, they noticed something pretty consistent. They were sloppy and contradictory, often doing things the authors hadn’t even intended. Is that a big deal? Well, yes and no. It’s the President’s will. So he can — mostly — express his will again or kind of as many times as he wants to. Fundamentally if President Trump wants to do X he’s not going to be stopped because an executive order was a sloppy cut and paste job, which many of these were. Success or failure is going to come down to three variables: 1) court action, 2) how much focus and determination his appointees have in putting them into effect and 3) public opinion. But it’s an indication that the belief that Trump’s team is more tried, tested and expert this time around may simply not be true. And that’s an important fact to know.
On “Open Mic for the week of 1/20/2025”
So that should tell you something, shouldn't it.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/303935072583898cb8f5bcaed40e9e17e8c5dba6ef1f6a02b4f65028845ad651.png
I think you get the gist of this headline
"
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?
"
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."
"
Newsom's simple statement on the executive order on birthright citizenship:
"This is unconstitutional."
"
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-00199472
"
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=xMabpBvtXr4
"
“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 Sartre
"
“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 Sartre
"
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.
"
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.
On “The Shakedown”
His parents made it to their nineties and a lot of this is genetic
On “Open Mic for the week of 1/20/2025”
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.
"
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.
On “Ordinary Times Watchalong: The Inauguration of Donald Trump”
The ADL are friggin morons says this Jewish guy.
Abraham Foxman, their former chief called it a Sieg Heil
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.