President Trump: Making America Great Again...

[Commando]

I think this is true. However, the #resistance may be stunned to discover that "border security" has been a Democratic priority for years.

I think everybody would be stunned if Donald Trump could formulate a nexus between building the Great Wall of China and actual border security.

[Walter Sobchak]

why would they be stunned? you think you can't oppose a border wall without valuing border security?

Ha, yes. As far as I understand, it can't be a fence for many of Trump's most deranged supporters but it must be a WALL! I think this is true even for President Trump himself (but not totally sure, apologies).

I'm totally fine with President Trump expending his political effort and capital on this. If it keeps him occupied and he eventually succeeds, at the end of the day we essentially have a big 'ol chain link fence that maybe we can see from space. Not much downside and is preferred over having him meddle elsewhere.

[BlueK]

Making America great through dumb trade wars.

[BlueK]

withdraw from NAFTA? What an idiot.

[Walter Sobchak]

Here is some raw meat for UT and also some stuff for BlueK (in bold):

Trump is Ruling a Post-Truth World, But He Didn't Create It
By Wayne Gladstone | April 26, 2017

Sean Spicer offended millions by comparing Hitler favorably to Syria’s President Bashar Al-Assad. After all, unlike Assad, Spicer explained, Hitler never gassed his own people. Aside from conveniently forgetting all those systematically murdered in Hitler’s gas chambers, many found it understandably distasteful of Spicer to build a case for war by normalizing and minimizing Hitler’s atrocities. But just a day earlier, liberals including David Simon, creator of one of television’s best shows—The Wire—and some of Twitter’s worst neoliberal tweets had essentially said the same thing.

Obviously, the words of a White House Press Secretary are more important than the tweets of people who will still be making “but her emails” jokes well after Chelsea Clinton loses the 2024 Presidential election. But this is just the latest example of the double standard employed by the mainstream media and proud Democrats who remain silent despite the sins of their allies. It’s the kind of hypocrisy and selective outrage that enabled a liar like Donald Trump to come to power in the first place. Make no mistake: while Trump is ruling in a post-truth world, he didn’t create it.

Not too long ago, the press and mainstream liberals were outraged by George W. Bush and the PATRIOT Act. The expansion of the NSA’s activities and the increase of executive power was understandably terrifying to all who were in interested in living in a democracy after 9/11. Yet fears gave way to silence when Barack Obama signed NDAA, including Sections 1021 and 1022, which should’ve been disturbing to any American, let alone a former Constitutional Law professor That’s probably why President Obama said he had “serious reservations with certain provisions [of the bill] that regulate the detention, interrogation and prosecution of suspected terrorists.” It still didn’t stop him from signing it into law.

NDAA allows the Federal government to jail American citizens indefinitely without the right to counsel if suspected of supporting al-Qaida, but doesn’t do a great job of defining what constitutes support. That’s why a group of journalists sought an injunction fearing they could be imprisoned under its vague provisions for merely interviewing Al Qaeda. Justice Katherine Forrest granted that injunction and held the legislation more constitutionally egregious than the PATRIOT Act. For clarity, Judge Forrest is no Fox News legal correspondent—she’s a Federal Court Judge who was appointed by Barack Obama. And even though President Obama purportedly had issues with this bill that suspends basic due process protections as part of the war on terror, his administration’s Justice Department appealed the ruling, getting a panel to set it aside by a three to two margin.

Where was the outrage in the media and the electorate? Where were all the 1984 think pieces? Where were the references to third world dictatorships where journalists live in fear of indefinite detention from the government? Where were editorials explaining how the Federal government was dangerously close to an autocracy? There were none, because the consensus of major media and proud Democrats was that Barack Obama was a pretty chill dude. It seemed fears of unbridled executive power were only warranted when Republicans were in office.

[...]

And that’s how someone like Trump comes to power. When an unqualified narcissist can proclaim everything in Washington is a lie and he’s going to burn the place to the ground it resonates. It resonates because we’re already living in a world where the press and party loyalists only take offense at their enemies’ transgressions. Where outrage is chosen based on the speaker of words instead of the words themselves. But such selective indignation destroys the value of speech and reduces truth to a commodity whose worth fluctuates with personal bias. It creates a world without absolutes, where there is no right or wrong, where progressives can be mocked for their purity. We can blame Trump for fostering hate through a series of lies, but we can’t credit him with creating a post-truth world. It was the post-truth world that made his presidency possible.

[BlueK]

Here is some raw meat for UT and also some stuff for BlueK (in bold):

Trump is Ruling a Post-Truth World, But He Didn't Create It
By Wayne Gladstone | April 26, 2017

I complained loudly about NDAA, which was passed by BOTH parties in congress. There was no large scale opposition to it there. Like Ted, I am also a libertarian. I will speak out against authoritarianism and bad policy regardless of who is in power.

[Northwestcoug]

withdraw from NAFTA? What an idiot.

Soooo much winning.

I assume this is a threat from Trump, hoping to extract some goodies from Canada and Mexico. I wonder who will blink first.

[BlueK]

Soooo much winning.

I assume this is a threat from Trump, hoping to extract some goodies from Canada and Mexico. I wonder who will blink first.

some nonsense going around today about an executive order to pull out. I'm pretty sure he doesn't have the authority to un-do an act of Congress, which joining NAFTA was. His anti-trade ideas if they come to fruition would be extremely bad for the economy. The building industry is already extremely worried about the tariff on Canadian lumber announced yesterday. But at least 100 lumberjacks in upper Minnesota are happy.

[frank ryan]

Trump wants to break up the 9th circuit because they are liberal and have put checks on his power. I don't remember any other POTUS in my lifetime, from either party, considering some thing like this. It's creepy.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...t-that-blocked

[Walter Sobchak]

Trump wants to break up the 9th circuit because they are liberal and have put checks on his power. I don't remember any other POTUS in my lifetime, from either party, considering some thing like this. It's creepy.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...t-that-blocked

lolz. Splitting the ninth has been considered probably a dozen times since the 70s.

[frank ryan]

lolz. Splitting the ninth has been considered probably a dozen times since the 70s.

By which presidents? What was the context?

[falafel]

By which presidents? What was the context?

I don't know which presidents considered it, but there have been numerous bills in Congress over the years proposing to break up the 9th circuit. It should probably happen (it's by far the largest), but no one can agree on a good place to split it.

Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk

[Walter Sobchak]

By which presidents? What was the context?

I don't have the exact count, but I would be surprised if Sen. Flake's bill to split the 9th (submitted back in February) isn't at least the 20th such bill introduced to split the 9th in the last 40 years. The one before that was submitted in 2015, or (you guessed it) during the last session of Congress.

Now would President Trump sign a bill if it were passed? Yeah, I guess he would.

Shall we be outraged at all the theoretical bills that President Trump might sign?

Frank sez: ABSOFUCKINGLUTELY!

[Walter Sobchak]

I don't know which presidents considered it, but there have been numerous bills in Congress over the years proposing to break up the 9th circuit. It should probably happen (it's by far the largest), but no one can agree on a good place to split it.

Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk

Alphabet Inc yielded this (somewhat) helpful link (published in 2003) that has this:

Efforts to split the Ninth Circuit are not new. Indeed, Congress has visited the issue with some regularity over the past thirty years.(10) Beginning with the Hruska Commission in 1972, Ninth Circuit Reorganization Acts have been studied or introduced in the House or Senate (or both) in 1972-73, 1983, 1989, 1991, 1993, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1999, and 2001.(11) Almost all sponsors and co-sponsors have come from states in the Pacific Northwest, principally but not exclusively, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, or Alaska.(12)

[...]

10. For an informative summary of reorganization history, please see Sanford Svetcov and Janelle Kellman, "The 'No Split' Split of the Ninth Circuit–The End of the World as We Know it?," 15 J. L. & Pol. 495 (1999).
11. For brief but comprehensive summaries of Congressional action, please see Jennifer E. Spreng, "The Icebox Cometh: A Former Clerk's View of the Proposed Ninth Circuit Split," 73 Wash. L. Rev. 875, 876-79, 885-93 (1998); Senator Conrad Burns, "Dividing the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals: A Proposition Long Overdue," 57 Mont. L. Rev. 245, 247-50 (1996).
12. See Jennifer E. Spreng, "Three Divisions in One Circuit? A Critique of the Recommendations from the Commission on Structural Alternatives for the Federal Courts of Appeals," 35 Idaho L. Rev. 553, 559-60 (1999).

So ten times from 1973-2003 and two since 2015. Maybe Frank can help us fill in the gap (2004-2014)?

[Topper]

By which presidents? What was the context?

Nixon, Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Obama.