What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[CountDeMoney]

Poppy Harlow needs a spanking. 

And she's very rape-friendly.

[Ed Anger]

Lol wut

[garbon]

and then pretend that there's a normal life outside of Languish?

Okay, as long as we all recognize that there isn't.

[Razgovory]

To see people on facebook defend Trump's Putin remarks is sickening.  I guess we are working up to it though.  If the media is the enemy it makes sense to shoot them.

[alfred russel]

So far a Trump presidency looks like a scoreless first quarter in the super bowl and very mediocre commercials. I'm really disappointed--aren't fascists supposed to at least provide good bread and circuses?

[garbon]

To see people on facebook defend Trump's Putin remarks is sickening.  I guess we are working up to it though.  If the media is the enemy it makes sense to shoot them.

At least that was finally something Trump said that forced McConnell to deny that sentiment head on rather than pivot to some sort of tepid agreement with the President.

[LaCroix]

So far a Trump presidency looks like a scoreless first quarter in the super bowl and very mediocre commercials. I'm really disappointed--aren't fascists supposed to at least provide good bread and circuses?

are you serious? trump's no huddle offense has been very entertaining

[CountDeMoney]

To see people on facebook defend Trump's Putin remarks is sickening.  I guess we are working up to it though. 

Hey, he was elected too, you know.

[Ideologue]

Whataboutism is a typical defense mechanism for Russiapologists, but I didn't think we'd hear it from a U.S. president.

Teabagger types and America Fisters Firsters have been using this argument for years.

Yeah, it's apparently a big Russian thing, but I'm a lot more familiar with it from the American right.  Like, the only time that Republicans and their ilk give the first shit about women etc. is when they're bashing Muslim dictatorships, apparently mostly out of professional jealousy.

[CountDeMoney]

"Börder Wåll": IKEA offers Trump an affordable solution






Washington (dpo) - "Too expensive!" "Too complicated!" "Unrealistic!" – This is the sort of criticism US President Donald Trump is currently facing over plans to build a wall along the border with Mexico. An offer from home furnishings brand, IKEA, could solve all of these problems with a single blow.
The Scandinavian furniture maker has offered the USA a practical, ready-made solution with "Börder Wåll". All they need to do is pick it up in a van from the nearest IKEA branch and put it up where they want it to go. Totalling US $9,999,999,999.99, "Börder Wåll" is significantly cheaper than a conventional wall. Estimates suggest that a conventional wall would cost between US $15 and $25 billion.

The simple, Scandinavian designed border wall (with a 5 year guarantee) is primarily made of pressboard with a birch effect and can be assembled with the help of a hex key. A 12,000 page instruction manual with easy-to-understand pictures makes construction child's play – as long as there is not a single screw missing.
"However, assembly requires two people: one person can hold the wall while the second screws it together", it states in IKEA's offer.
The basic model of the wall is 33ft (10 m) tall and 1,954 miles (3,144 km) long, although the height and length can be extended as desired.
IKEA has already announced that it will design other products in the next few weeks that will be compatible with "Börder Wåll". According to inside sources, this includes products such as the "Gåwk" watchtower and the "Råtåtåtåtåtå" spring-gun.

[Valmy]

"There are a lot of killers. You think our country's so innocent?" Trump replied.

Yes...and? Are we killing our own people for political reasons? I do not understand how people can make this kind of argument. Even if our country was doing bad things or had done bad things or will do bad things in the future that excuses Putin of nothing.

It kind of makes it sound like Trump is saying he could machine gun down American citizens for no reason but it would be ok because somebody in the Sudan also does it. I mean...really? Everybody has to be innocent for killing people to be bad?

[The Minsky Moment]

[this was a case in part about individual shareholders with controlling interests who were directly impacted.

We're talking past each other.  You just keep asserting the same premise over and over.  I've already explained why it doesn't hold.

have you ever worked in an appeals court? cases are distinguished or not distinguished whenever the court wants.

You're making my point.  Yes appellate judges sometimes concoct bogus distinctions or apply cases improperly to get to the preferred result.   I agree that happens, and it happened here.

it doesn't break down the fundamental distinction between shareholder and entity any more than allowing shareholders to directly sue because of, for example, that amish scenario in lee. (as an aside, I remember you made a big deal about how the amish dude eventually lost -- that doesn't matter re: the argument about standing; the court found he had standing -- he personally could sue because of the burden on his corporation).

There's a big glaring problem with this argument: the Amish farmer in Lee employed the workers directly.  No corporation involved. 

[The Minsky Moment]

Due to Languish's slowness in responding to my questions I had to go read the judge's ruling myself. It looks the judge didn't elaborate in his ruling why he thinks the plaintiffs are likely to win their case (one of the requirements of issuing a TRO), but he did suggest in court that the ban isn't rational since no one from the seven countries mentioned has been arrested for a terrorism offense since 9/11. So it would seem at least part of the trouble Trump will face is he didn't establish any real rational basis for his actions, and my perusing of the laws that allow for suspensions of visas and what not suggest that while high officials do have discretionary powers, those discretionary powers are specified as requiring some thin veneer of justification. While the judge obviously isn't required to rule on the merits verbosely to issue a TRO, this does at least suggest Trump could outright lose the case because he has no rational basis for his actions..

It is interesting that he didn't really give a merits rationale.  The uniformity language was not really a merits point, it was raised to justify why the order should be applied nationally and not just to the states bringing the application.  But I agree that there is a rational basis angle being implied here: i.e. the gov't is going to have to find a way to justify this as something else other than religious discrimination but is going to be hard pressed to come up with something else that fits what was done and makes any sense.  They are also going to have a tough time getting an emergency stay from the 9th circuit because there doesn't appear to be any facts showing immediate risk.

What will be interesting is to see what happens if these cases play out.  If Plaintiffs seek discovery into the motives and thinking behind the ban and the White House will presumably invoke executive privilege.  But that could help the plaintiffs as the Rudy statement is public domain and if the WH uses executive privilege as a shield, that won't leave much factually for them to counter with.

[Syt]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/05/us/politics/trump-white-house-aides-strategy.html

[...]

Mr. Priebus bristles at the perception that he occupies a diminished perch in the West Wing pecking order compared with previous chiefs. But for the moment, Mr. Bannon remains the president's dominant adviser, despite Mr. Trump's anger that he was not fully briefed on details of the executive order he signed giving his chief strategist a seat on the National Security Council, a greater source of frustration to the president than the fallout from the travel ban.

[...]

[celedhring]

The "he's just a Bannon puppet" got the first bite:

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump  1 hhace 1 hora
Más
I call my own shots, largely based on an accumulation of data, and everyone knows it. Some FAKE NEWS media, in order to marginalize, lies!