|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On June 20 2018 07:29 Introvert wrote:"We want to keep the focus on Trump" is precisely the Dem strategy, nice to see them say it. He just rejects everything out of hand, amazing. Show nested quote +Schumer rejects GOP proposal to address border crisis
Senate Democratic Leader Charles Schumer (N.Y.) on Tuesday dismissed a legislative proposal backed by Republican leaders to keep immigrant families together at the border, arguing that President Trump could fix the problem more easily with a flick of his pen.
"There are so many obstacles to legislation and when the president can do it with his own pen, it makes no sense," Schumer told reporters. "Legislation is not the way to go here when it's so easy for the president to sign it."
Asked if that meant Democrats would not support a bill backed by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to keep immigrant families together while seeking asylum on the U.S. border, Schumer said they want to keep the focus on Trump.
"Again, the president can change it with his pen," he said, warning that Republicans would likely try to add poison-pill provisions to any immigration bill that came to the floor. rest here (in a hurry) http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/393069-schumer-rejects-gop-proposal-to-address-border-crisis
Schumer's position here is shameful. Trump is holding the children hostage to get policy concessions, but it sounds like Schumer is willing to do the same for political gain.
In the unlikely event Senate Republicans manage to put together a bill to address the situation without adding any poison pills the Democrats should support it.
If Trump wants to veto a bipartisan bill which ends family separations let him. Democrats have a responsibility to do whatever they can to stop this, even if this means holding their noses and supporting a Republican bill.
|
I do like how all the tariffs are set to hit right before the holiday, so we can have maximum confusion and poor staffing. I remember when governments used to at least look at when their major policy changes would go into effect and try to make sure they were not excessively disruptive.
@Mercy13 - From all report this morning, there is no Republican bill or even a framework at this time. The Repubicans were asking the democrats to sign on to something that didn't exist. Schumer's position is that legislation is slow and subject to a veto, the president should deal with this directly. The Republicans are trying to make it like they have some quick fix ready to go, but they do not.
|
On June 20 2018 22:54 Plansix wrote:
I do like how all the tariffs are set to hit right before the holiday, so we can have maximum confusion and poor staffing. I remember when governments used to at least look at when their major policy changes would go into effect and try to make sure they were not excessively disruptive.
@Mercy13 - From all report this morning, there is no Republican bill or even a framework at this time. The Repubicans were asking the democrats to sign on to something that didn't exist. Schumer's position is that legislation is slow and subject to a veto, the president should deal with this directly. The Republicans are trying to make it like they have some quick fix ready to go, but they do not.
So say that. He's no better than McConnell if he says they won't support anything, full stop.
|
On June 20 2018 23:02 Mercy13 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2018 22:54 Plansix wrote:
I do like how all the tariffs are set to hit right before the holiday, so we can have maximum confusion and poor staffing. I remember when governments used to at least look at when their major policy changes would go into effect and try to make sure they were not excessively disruptive.
@Mercy13 - From all report this morning, there is no Republican bill or even a framework at this time. The Repubicans were asking the democrats to sign on to something that didn't exist. Schumer's position is that legislation is slow and subject to a veto, the president should deal with this directly. The Republicans are trying to make it like they have some quick fix ready to go, but they do not. So say that. He's no better than McConnell if he says they won't support anything, full stop.
He didn’t say he wouldn’t support anything. He specifically said that legislation is not the way to go at this time. That it would take to long. McConnell doesn’t have a bill for the Democrats to agree to, but he wants them to be asked if they will support the Republican’s solution. If Schumer says yes, the Republicans can put anything they want in that bill and blame the Democrats when don’t back it. If he puts qualification on what the Democrats will support, the Republicans will roast them for being difficult.
It is very important to understand what the Republicans are asking. They are asking the democrats to support a bill that does not exist, with unsure terms and that the Democrats will have no hand in making. Schumer has responded that he believes legislation is the wrong way to go. Because he cannot say yes or no to something that doesn’t exist. And he doesn’t want the focus to be on the what the bill will be, he wants the focus to be on the man who created the problem in the first place.
|
“Virtue-signaling” is a snide little phrase that people vaguely of the “right” invented to tease people vaguely of the “left.” Like “limousine liberal” or “champagne socialist,” it implies insincerity and self-righteousness. Those who brag about doing something good — say, riding their bicycle to work every day — are said to be “virtue-signaling” their desire to fight climate change. Politicians who join Twitter campaigns in support of worthy causes are said to be “virtue-signaling” their belief in their own superiority.
More recently the British journalist Nick Cohen has identified another way of sending social messages. This is something he called “vice-signaling,” and it is precisely the opposite tactic. It applies to politicians who do something evil — deliberately — with the aim of proving they really are very sincere indeed. Cohen invented it in the context of an immigration scandal in Britain which had led not to the deportation of illegal immigrants, but to the deportation of actual British citizens, albeit with poor documentation. When uncovered, the policy led to a scandal and the resignation of the home secretary, Amber Rudd. Cohen argued, nevertheless, that the policy had never been a mistake or an accident: The Conservative Party had decided to pursue cruel and unfair tactics on immigration, precisely in order to “signal” to their base their seriousness about fighting immigration.
This is a useful context in which to understand the reasoning behind the Trump administration’s horrific policy on family separation at the border — a policy that, if it were enacted in another country, would be described by American officials as state-sponsored child abuse. It’s incomprehensibly cruel, separating small children from their parents and sending them to institutions that resemble jails. Worse, the confusion around the policy is such that some of the children may eventually be lost — or worse. It’s a policy unprecedented in recent American history; Laura Bush, the former first lady, had to reach back to the 1940s, to internment camps for U.S. citizens and noncitizens of Japanese descent during World War II, for a comparison. Another parallel might be the removal of children from black slaves before the Civil War.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/global-opinions/wp/2018/06/20/in-trumps-world-morality-is-for-losers/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6b653e751fd4
I think this is reasonable. Its similar to the tactics used by Israel. You can convince your base that you are really on their side by being so completely cruel and brutal to anyone they dislike that they will support you unconditionally. Its the evolution of 'dead cat' political campaign strategy into policy.
Vice signalling is certainly more of a tangible phenomenon than virtue signalling anyway.
|
Considering they were selling shirts that said “Fuck your feelings” at Trump rallies, I think the theory is sound. Championing cruelty can be successful political platform.
|
A lot of attacks from the rightwing are designed to get ahead of something that they could be criticized for and divert your attention. Feelings over facts, virtue-signaling, censorship, political correctness, identity politics, elitism...
|
I mean, should Schumer amplify Trump and the administration's lies that the situation is somehow the consequence of legislation rather than the direct consequence of the administration's changing of prosecutorial policies? Because that's Trump et al's #1 priority now-they would rather blame the Democrats than help these children, which we know because they could instantly help the children but would rather tweet at Democrats.
The fact that the administration is so mind-numbingly dumb that they didn't consider the consequences of these changes (and rest assured, they didn't, just as the Republicans in Congress never considered what it would mean to remove tax forgiveness for tuition or whether some of their potential healthcare changes would have resulted in 60-65 year olds making under 50 grand spending tens of thousands of dollars on insurance premiums or what their initial "totally-not-a-Muslim-ban" would do to green card holders) is no defense for the admin to not reverse the changes.
|
There are a couple reports from that the ports of entry that the asylum seekers are supposed to be using are turning them away without good reason. Border patrol claims they are full, but reporters are finding little evidence to support that.
|
On June 20 2018 23:02 Mercy13 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2018 22:54 Plansix wrote:
I do like how all the tariffs are set to hit right before the holiday, so we can have maximum confusion and poor staffing. I remember when governments used to at least look at when their major policy changes would go into effect and try to make sure they were not excessively disruptive.
@Mercy13 - From all report this morning, there is no Republican bill or even a framework at this time. The Repubicans were asking the democrats to sign on to something that didn't exist. Schumer's position is that legislation is slow and subject to a veto, the president should deal with this directly. The Republicans are trying to make it like they have some quick fix ready to go, but they do not. So say that. He's no better than McConnell if he says they won't support anything, full stop.
He said that. If you prefer your biases and motivated reasoning because it makes you feel good, just stick with it. But don't pretend like reality didn't happen.
As Republicans flailed for the solution the President has requested, Democrats scoffed at the dysfunction. “Speaker Ryan wants to pass a massive bill that may not even pass the House and couldn’t pass the Senate, the Senate Republicans are supposedly eyeing a bill that the President wouldn’t sign even if it made it to his desk, and the President continues to try to use these separated families as hostages in the legislative process,” Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, the chamber’s top Democrat, said late Tuesday. “Anyone who believes this Republican Congress is capable of addressing this issue is kidding themselves.”
http://time.com/5316742/donald-trump-immigration-bill-family-separation/
Here are the actual remarks in the poorly headlined article.
“There are so many obstacles to legislation and when the president can do it with his own pen, it makes no sense,” Schumer told reporters. “Legislation is not the way to go here when it’s so easy for the president to sign it.”
“Again, the president can change it with his pen,” he said, warning that Republicans would likely try to add poison-pill provisions to any immigration bill that came to the floor.
“Unacceptable additions have bogged down every piece of legislation we’ve done,” he said.
“Let’s hope we never get to that. Let’s hope the president does the right thing and solves the problem, which he can do. That’s the simple, easiest and most likely way this will happen,” Schumer said.
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/393069-schumer-rejects-gop-proposal-to-address-border-crisis
hey, what do you know, Chuck Schumer was right and the shitslinging against him was wrong. Who knew that this was an executive branch policy issue and not a legsilative issue and certainly not a legsilative issue that could be addressed in the time scale required by the crises that Jeff/DJT created?
Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen is drafting an executive action for President Donald Trump that would direct her department to keep families together in detention after they are detained crossing the border illegally, according to two people familiar with her thinking. They spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the effort before its official announcement.
It's unclear whether the president is supportive of the measure. But Nielsen was on her way to the White House to discuss it with the president's team, according to one of the people.
The person said the secretary believes there is little certainty that Congress will act to fix the separation issue that has been dominating news coverage and she is trying to find a solution. The order would ask the Department of Defense to help house the detained families.
http://www.wilx.com/content/news/House-GOP-gets-little-direction-from-President-Trump-on-immigration-486019931.html
EDIT: for what it is worth, the Democrats drafted legislation to address this crisis on June 12, before any Republicans scrambled to do something for purely political reasons in response to the bad headlines.
+ Show Spoiler +
The effort, led by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., would prohibit border patrol agents and all other officers from removing a child from his or her parent or legal guardian anywhere within 100 miles of the U.S. border, except for a few narrow exceptions dealing with court orders and suspicions of child trafficking.
The bill is a response to a Department of Homeland Security policy, announced by Attorney General Jeff Sessions on May 8,
http://www.wilx.com/content/news/House-GOP-gets-little-direction-from-President-Trump-on-immigration-486019931.html
EDIT2: for the record, DJT is correct in opposing the Cruz bill. It is vicious and expensive trash that would punish asylum seekers with an unfulfillable 14 day window in rocket dockets to deportation.
+ Show Spoiler +
The practical effect of Cruz’s bill would be a system where families are detained, held in deplorable conditions that cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars per year to maintain, and deported after they are unable to develop robust asylum cases in a mere 14 days. Of course, his 14-day processing deadline doesn’t account for the nearly 300,000 pending asylum cases that have yet to be adjudicated. Cruz’s bill does propose doubling the number of immigration judges to 750 but fails to explain how these new positions would be filled. If the administration were able to find hundreds of new judges, they likely wouldn’t be impartial; the Department of Justice has been accused of discriminating on the basis of political or ideological affiliation in hiring new immigration judges.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/06/ted-cruzs-protect-kids-and-parents-act-is-a-cynical-ploy.html
|
United States43866 Posts
On June 20 2018 07:31 Danglars wrote:
In fact, I’m listening to John Bolton give a live radio interview on the HRC. They’re pulling our share of funding too. I’m sure it will get reposted on YouTube or something later.
Used by human rights abusers against US and Israel, check. Then he addresses the larger trend of supranational organizations and what they do and how they interact with autonomy and the constitution in general. I haven’t read Haley’s statement yet, but it’s probably in the same vein.
The UN HRC can only be used against you if you’re violating human rights. If you’re more concerned that it’s being used against you than the fact that you’re violating human rights then something has gone wrong. You don’t solve the issue of people complaining about your human rights abuses by putting your fingers in your ears and insisting that they’re the ones to blame for never talking about the weather.
|
Someone at ICE released this information to the press. It turns out the old “catch and release”(which is a phrase used for fishing, aka animals) was very good at assuring asylum seekers att need their hearings. So this policy change had no real merit behind it beyond spite and to inflict suffering.
|
Reports are that Trump will sign an order to end the policy later today.
|
It would be hilarious if after all the blame he laid onto the democrats, he just signs it away like he always could have. If only the sign was followed by a resign.
|
On June 21 2018 01:29 Excludos wrote:It would be hilarious if after all the blame he laid onto the democrats, he just signs it away like he always could have. If only the sign was followed by a resign.
He is going to blame the Democrats and claim he fixed the problem. He is going to play the hero and act like it wasn’t his fault all along.
|
There will be so many future theses written about whether Trump was a liar who recognized the power of lies or just had no grasp whatsoever on reality and stumbled upon their power instinctively. Maybe I'll try to read some of them.
|
On June 21 2018 00:49 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2018 07:31 Danglars wrote:
In fact, I’m listening to John Bolton give a live radio interview on the HRC. They’re pulling our share of funding too. I’m sure it will get reposted on YouTube or something later.
Used by human rights abusers against US and Israel, check. Then he addresses the larger trend of supranational organizations and what they do and how they interact with autonomy and the constitution in general. I haven’t read Haley’s statement yet, but it’s probably in the same vein. The UN HRC can only be used against you if you’re violating human rights. If you’re more concerned that it’s being used against you than the fact that you’re violating human rights then something has gone wrong. You don’t solve the issue of people complaining about your human rights abuses by putting your fingers in your ears and insisting that they’re the ones to blame for never talking about the weather.
Works for Danglars.
User was warned for this post
|
Cant see the tweet, this is the policy that is separating young children from their families correct?
|
On June 21 2018 01:48 Aveng3r wrote:Cant see the tweet, this is the policy that is separating young children from their families correct?
That is what people believe will happen. We will have to see if that takes shape.
|
On June 21 2018 01:52 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2018 01:48 Aveng3r wrote:Cant see the tweet, this is the policy that is separating young children from their families correct? That is what people believe will happen. We will have to see if that takes shape.
I hope so. This is one of those things that actually makes me embarrassed to be american, and transcends politics for me such that I think the people responsible for this are despicable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
