Trump presidency

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

Mutex
Posts: 1366
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:32 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Mutex » Wed Feb 01, 2017 12:40 am UTC

It's that stuff that frankly scares me more than the immigration ban. The immigration ban is really shitty, but it doesn't make me worried the US is falling apart. I honestly can't even imagine what's going to happen next. At all. Is a military coup completely out of the question?

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6449
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Wed Feb 01, 2017 12:44 am UTC

Mutex wrote:It's that stuff that frankly scares me more than the immigration ban. The immigration ban is really shitty, but it doesn't make me worried the US is falling apart. I honestly can't even imagine what's going to happen next. At all. Is a military coup completely out of the question?

The last thing you want is the military to take charge. The answer here is for Congress and the Courts to take back what a gridlocked government has given to the executive branch.

User avatar
Quantized
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 4:38 pm UTC
Location: Unable to be measured accurately

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Quantized » Wed Feb 01, 2017 1:08 am UTC

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/316853-"President"%20trump-taps-neil-gorsuch-for-supreme-court
Neil Gorsuch picked for SCOTUS nomination. Could be worse.

Edit: Hopefully it could be worse. This guy might be pretty bad anyways. Looks like he stands for some ugly things here and there...

User avatar
pogrmman
Posts: 529
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 10:53 pm UTC
Location: Probably outside

Re: Trump presidency

Postby pogrmman » Wed Feb 01, 2017 1:35 am UTC

Quantized wrote:http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/316853-"President"%20trump-taps-neil-gorsuch-for-supreme-court
Neil Gorsuch picked for SCOTUS nomination. Could be worse.

Edit: Hopefully it could be worse. This guy might be pretty bad anyways. Looks like he stands for some ugly things here and there...



I still think it's redicilous that Obama's nomination was blocked -- it was almost a year ago now!

I think the nominee could've been worse than the guy Trump picked, but he's certainly less moderate than I would've liked.

User avatar
Quantized
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 4:38 pm UTC
Location: Unable to be measured accurately

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Quantized » Wed Feb 01, 2017 1:37 am UTC

pogrmman wrote:I still think it's redicilous that Obama's nomination was blocked -- it was almost a year ago now!

I think the nominee could've been worse than the guy Drumpf picked, but he's certainly less moderate than I would've liked.

I am still more than a bit salty about the blocking of Obama's nominee, who was a fairly moderate fellow himself. Gorsuch is pretty far to the right, now that I look at him more, and he was probably the least extreme of the options Drumpf put forwards.

User avatar
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
As the Arbiter of Everything, Everything Sucks
Posts: 8314
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:17 pm UTC
Location: I FUCKING MOVED TO THE WOODS

Re: Trump presidency

Postby (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ » Wed Feb 01, 2017 1:42 am UTC

The last thing we need is another far-right SCOTUS judge. I hope he gets fully blocked by the Democrats. Not so much because I think 45 doesn't deserve a nominee, but he'd probably have gotten one anyway since the age of a couple of the judges is advanced. Rather because fuck the Republicans in Congress. They're a bunch of shits. And also we don't need another pro-life justice, it was my least favorite of 45's campaign promises.
Heyyy baby wanna kill all humans?

User avatar
Quantized
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 4:38 pm UTC
Location: Unable to be measured accurately

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Quantized » Wed Feb 01, 2017 1:46 am UTC

Fantastic Idea wrote:The last thing we need is another far-right SCOTUS judge. I hope he gets fully blocked by the Democrats. Not so much because I think 45 doesn't deserve a nominee, but he'd probably have gotten one anyway since the age of a couple of the judges is advanced. Rather because fuck the Republicans in Congress. They're a bunch of shits. And also we don't need another pro-life justice, it was my least favorite of 45's campaign promises.


I think it's possible that either the Democrats will completely block him, unanimously, or some will think "this is the best we will get" and vote for him. If the Democrats can try and force Drumpf to nominate a more moderate SCOTUS judge, that would be a good route... so long as it works. If this guy is rejected, I just hope the next nominee is not even further to the right.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby morriswalters » Wed Feb 01, 2017 1:49 am UTC

Fantastic Idea wrote:Rather because fuck the Republicans in Congress. They're a bunch of shits. And also we don't need another pro-life justice, it was my least favorite of 45's campaign promises.
Remember when Harry Reid changed the rules a while back?

Dark567
First one to notify the boards of Rick and Morty Season 3
Posts: 3685
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:12 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere(in the US, I don't venture outside it too often, unfortunately)

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Dark567 » Wed Feb 01, 2017 1:51 am UTC

Given the other options on the table Trump if it's not this guy Trump will likely post more of an Alito type or just a straight up GOP stooge that rubber stamps everything. My guess is this guy goes through.
I apologize, 90% of the time I write on the Fora I am intoxicated.


Yakk wrote:The question the thought experiment I posted is aimed at answering: When falling in a black hole, do you see the entire universe's future history train-car into your ass, or not?

User avatar
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
As the Arbiter of Everything, Everything Sucks
Posts: 8314
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:17 pm UTC
Location: I FUCKING MOVED TO THE WOODS

Re: Trump presidency

Postby (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ » Wed Feb 01, 2017 2:15 am UTC

It's a moot point, I guarantee you the Democrats couldn't pull off a block anyway.
Heyyy baby wanna kill all humans?

Mutex
Posts: 1366
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:32 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Mutex » Wed Feb 01, 2017 2:16 am UTC

Fantastic Idea wrote:It's a moot point, I guarantee you the Democrats couldn't pull off a block anyway.


How could they? (Serious question, I don't know how that works. Could they keep blocking every nomination?)

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6449
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Wed Feb 01, 2017 2:41 am UTC

Dark567 wrote:Given the other options on the table Trump if it's not this guy Trump will likely post more of an Alito type or just a straight up GOP stooge that rubber stamps everything. My guess is this guy goes through.

For those of you curious at your options before tonight,
Image
Courtesy of 538.
I was surprised Hardiman was so moderate given how they usually describe him.
Attachments
roeder-scotus-nominee1.png
Last edited by sardia on Wed Feb 01, 2017 2:44 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
As the Arbiter of Everything, Everything Sucks
Posts: 8314
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:17 pm UTC
Location: I FUCKING MOVED TO THE WOODS

Re: Trump presidency

Postby (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ » Wed Feb 01, 2017 2:42 am UTC

Mutex wrote:
Fantastic Idea wrote:It's a moot point, I guarantee you the Democrats couldn't pull off a block anyway.


How could they? (Serious question, I don't know how that works. Could they keep blocking every nomination?)

It's possible they could if 41 Democrats join a fillibuster. It gets really wonky after that and I'm not 100% sure it's even remotely obstruction-proof.
A Democrat could also require a supermajority, but then there's still the chance that the republicans would actually get said supermajority.
I would love if it worked but I have very little faith. We have a lot of Democrats that don't fall in line.

What's happening up there, sardia? All I see is kittens.
Heyyy baby wanna kill all humans?

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6449
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Wed Feb 01, 2017 2:46 am UTC

Fantastic Idea wrote:
Mutex wrote:
Fantastic Idea wrote:It's a moot point, I guarantee you the Democrats couldn't pull off a block anyway.


How could they? (Serious question, I don't know how that works. Could they keep blocking every nomination?)

It's possible they could if 41 Democrats join a fillibuster. It gets really wonky after that and I'm not 100% sure it's even remotely obstruction-proof.
A Democrat could also require a supermajority, but then there's still the chance that the republicans would actually get said supermajority.
I would love if it worked but I have very little faith. We have a lot of Democrats that don't fall in line.

What's happening up there, sardia? All I see is kittens.

McConnell, can and will change the senate rules so that Filibuster as a rule dies. Then everything is majority vote. It depends on what Democrats fight the GOP on, and how hard. Also depends on how aggressive the GOP base feels, and they feel pretty dominant right now.

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6238
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Thesh » Wed Feb 01, 2017 2:47 am UTC

Fantastic Idea wrote:What's happening up there, sardia? All I see is kittens.


Basically, Trump's choice is the most conservative on the list; more conservative than Scalia (but not Thomas, who is basically a conservative p-zombie that somehow moved from thought experiment to reality) according to whoever did the analysis.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

User avatar
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
As the Arbiter of Everything, Everything Sucks
Posts: 8314
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:17 pm UTC
Location: I FUCKING MOVED TO THE WOODS

Re: Trump presidency

Postby (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ » Wed Feb 01, 2017 2:49 am UTC

Democrats who want to start the filibuster would be trying to get a vote on someone more like Merrick Garland. Specifically, Merrick Garland.
Heyyy baby wanna kill all humans?

User avatar
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
As the Arbiter of Everything, Everything Sucks
Posts: 8314
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:17 pm UTC
Location: I FUCKING MOVED TO THE WOODS

Re: Trump presidency

Postby (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ » Wed Feb 01, 2017 2:51 am UTC

sardia wrote:
Fantastic Idea wrote:
Mutex wrote:
Fantastic Idea wrote:It's a moot point, I guarantee you the Democrats couldn't pull off a block anyway.


How could they? (Serious question, I don't know how that works. Could they keep blocking every nomination?)

It's possible they could if 41 Democrats join a fillibuster. It gets really wonky after that and I'm not 100% sure it's even remotely obstruction-proof.
A Democrat could also require a supermajority, but then there's still the chance that the republicans would actually get said supermajority.
I would love if it worked but I have very little faith. We have a lot of Democrats that don't fall in line.

What's happening up there, sardia? All I see is kittens.

McConnell, can and will change the senate rules so that Filibuster as a rule dies. Then everything is majority vote. It depends on what Democrats fight the GOP on, and how hard. Also depends on how aggressive the GOP base feels, and they feel pretty dominant right now.

Yeah McConnell totally will. He loves shit like that.
I hate that motherfucker.
Heyyy baby wanna kill all humans?

Dark567
First one to notify the boards of Rick and Morty Season 3
Posts: 3685
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:12 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere(in the US, I don't venture outside it too often, unfortunately)

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Dark567 » Wed Feb 01, 2017 2:55 am UTC

Although, that is true. Pryor is actually much scarier than the others. Pryor doesn't really even view the court as a judicial system, but another political body. Putting him on the court is just putting a stooge that votes the GOP line on everything. Say what you will about originalism, it at least tended to force Scalia into be fervent about free speech etc. and if Gorsuch is in that mold that will serve much better than just putting a GOP voters on SCOTUS.
I apologize, 90% of the time I write on the Fora I am intoxicated.


Yakk wrote:The question the thought experiment I posted is aimed at answering: When falling in a black hole, do you see the entire universe's future history train-car into your ass, or not?

Sheikh al-Majaneen
Name Checks Out On Time, Tips Chambermaid
Posts: 1075
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:17 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Sheikh al-Majaneen » Wed Feb 01, 2017 2:57 am UTC

Fantastic Idea wrote:Democrats who want to start the filibuster would be trying to get a vote on someone more like Merrick Garland. Specifically, Merrick Garland.

I did not like Obama's choice of Merrick Garland. The impression of him I got at the time was of a hardcore law-and-order prosecution-fuck-yeah type. What little I know of Neil Gorsuch does not make him look like an improvement though.

User avatar
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
As the Arbiter of Everything, Everything Sucks
Posts: 8314
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:17 pm UTC
Location: I FUCKING MOVED TO THE WOODS

Re: Trump presidency

Postby (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ » Wed Feb 01, 2017 11:17 am UTC

News reports lead me to believe that this is actually 45 failing at selecting a 'very pro-life' judge. Unless you think corporations are people and you mean those lives. So is this his first breaking of a campaign promise?
Of course there could be wayyyy worse picks for this, but the person barely matters at this point. The Democrats are still furious that this seat was stolen from President Obama and if they could they would try to hold the seat open indefinitely.
cause baby now we got baaaad blooood
Heyyy baby wanna kill all humans?

elasto
Posts: 3553
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby elasto » Wed Feb 01, 2017 11:25 am UTC

The manner of Trump's administration should worry even his staunchest supporters. He's president not monarch:

Ryan’s backing of Trump came as many Republicans criticized the new administration for failing to consult Congress on an action that produced chaos and uncertainty across the US government. Ryan said he only learned of the executive order as it was being issued, while characterizing the confusion stemming from its abrupt rollout as “regrettable”.

...

Top Republicans said they were neither consulted nor briefed before the issuance of the new policy, which was signed by the president on Friday afternoon but not publicly disclosed until later that evening. Some said they were still struggling to get answers three days later, underscoring the chasm that has yet to be bridged between Trump and the Republicans who control both chambers of Congress.

Bob Corker, the Republican who chairs the Senate foreign relations committee, warned that lawmakers might step in and take legislative action to circumvent the order if the Trump administration did not address its shortcomings in the coming days.

...

Senator Marco Rubio said his office had sought clarity from the state department but was told the agency “was ordered not to talk to Congress about this issue”.

“I suppose it’s because [they’re] not clear what to tell us yet, but that cannot be a permanent position. We expect answers here fairly soon because we have constituents calling,” said Rubio, whose home state of Florida relies heavily on tourism.

An aide to Rubio confirmed the senator’s office had been denied a briefing by the state department on Monday when seeking answers to specific questions about the travel ban.

...

Isakson said it was particularly troubling that the Department of Homeland Security had not been provided guidance in advance, deeming it “a slip-up” for the administration to not even brief the agency that would be tasked with executing the order.”


link

User avatar
ObsessoMom
Nespresso Bomb
Posts: 736
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 5:28 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby ObsessoMom » Wed Feb 01, 2017 10:17 pm UTC

Why is no one talking about this? I realize it wasn't exactly a slow news day yesterday, but still.

SEAL, American Girl Die in First Trump-Era U.S. Military Raid

In what an official said was the first military raid carried out under President Donald Trump, two Americans were killed in Yemen on Sunday — one a member of SEAL Team 6 and the other the 8-year-old daughter of Anwar al-Awlaki, the New Mexico-born al Qaeda leader who himself was killed in a U.S. strike five years ago.

The raid in southern Yemen, conducted by the supersecret Joint Special Operations Command, was intended to capture valuable intelligence, specifically computer equipment, according to a senior U.S. military official. Three al Qaeda leaders were killed, according to U.S. officials.

Contrary to earlier reporting, the senior military official said, the raid was Trump's first clandestine strike — not a holdover mission approved by President Barack Obama. The mission involved "boots on the ground" at an al Qaeda camp near al Bayda in south central Yemen, the official said.

"Almost everything went wrong," the official said.

An MV-22 Osprey experienced a hard landing near the site, injuring several SEALs, one severely. The tilt-rotor aircraft had to be destroyed. A SEAL was killed during the firefight on the ground, as were some noncombatants, including females.

* * *

"They [the SEALs] entered another house and killed everybody in it, including all the women. They burned the house. There is an assumption there was a woman [in the house] from Saudi Arabia who was with al Qaeda. All we know is that she was a children's teacher."

* * *

The death toll varies according to the sourcing, with the Pentagon saying 14 militants died, along with "numerous" civilians. Nasser al-Awlaki said Yemenis were circulating a body count of combatants and civilians as high as 59.


ISIS must be delighted for the propaganda gift.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Wed Feb 01, 2017 10:20 pm UTC

Koa wrote:
cphite wrote:The point a lot of people keep missing is that he would actually have to commit a crime to be impeached. You can't just impeach the President (much less move on to removing him) because you don't like him, or his policies, or the overall job that he is doing. It doesn't work that way.

I'm aware of this and yet I will still mention impeachment because I think there are probably investigations going on which the public doesn't know about, if even from NATO. It's holding out hope that there is a stop button before seeing a full term or even a larger and smarter coup than North Carolina. When government checks are neutered and an administration is hand picked to work with someone who is morally bankrupt, it's the last hope there is right now.


Not really.

There were plenty of presidents that existed before our modern system of checks-and-balances. Nixon for example, used the office of the Presidency to spy on his political opponents. (Indeed, a lot of checks and balances were put in explicitly because of Nixon). FDR basically packed the Supreme Court with individuals he liked, gained sweeping executive power that has never been seen since. Before FDR, there were other assholes, like Andrew Jackson... who was primarily responsible for... a lot of things actually.

So based on history, our hope is the same hope as usual. Wait four years, and elect another guy. Or wait 8 years, and the President will be forced out. (Remember FDR was in for 12 years). I'm not promising that Trump will be a good president or whatever... but we've had some awful presidents before Trump and the country survived.

ObsessoMom wrote:Why is no one talking about this?


Mostly because mistakes were made even under Obama. While what happened yesterday was a tragedy for sure, I'm not entirely sure if we can exclusively blame it on Trump.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

JudeMorrigan
Posts: 1251
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 1:26 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby JudeMorrigan » Wed Feb 01, 2017 10:25 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:FDR basically packed the Supreme Court with individuals he liked, gained sweeping executive power that has never been seen since.

FDR *tried* to pack the Court. He failed miserably, squandering the political capital he gained with his huge victory in '36.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Wed Feb 01, 2017 10:30 pm UTC

JudeMorrigan wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:FDR basically packed the Supreme Court with individuals he liked, gained sweeping executive power that has never been seen since.

FDR *tried* to pack the Court. He failed miserably, squandering the political capital he gained with his huge victory in '36.


That was FDR trying to pack it harder.

FDR picked 8 of the Supreme Court Justices by the time he died. The man had unprecedented power, only George Washington picked more justices than FDR (and that's only because George started the process)
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3571
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Soupspoon » Wed Feb 01, 2017 11:11 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:
ObsessoMom wrote:Why is no one talking about this?


Mostly because mistakes were made even under Obama. While what happened yesterday was a tragedy for sure, I'm not entirely sure if we can exclusively blame it on Trump.

That depends on whether it was an operation that would have happened under Obama, or Clinton even, or just happens to be the result of Trump sitting down at the desk in the oval office, asking for a military operation to be whipped out of the pending tray (doesn't matter what, or how well planned it is) and made to happen so he can play with yet another of his Presidential toys and see what it does...

I don't see any militarily useful outcome from that op, so who knows which pile it came from. Perhaps it was just one of the hundreds of generic operations that doubtless get thought up just to keep as a basis for a contingency operation in the region. And then it got rushed into happening because Executive Order writing was starting to get boring and tedious, and they wouldn't let him juggle with the Nuclear Football...

(Maybe I speak out of turn, but it seemed more important to announce "an op has happened" than any actual detail about what the op was supposed to achieve. Loss of materielle/life doesn't seem to have been a sufficient counter-factor to that, yet there's not even a dead-Bin-Laden, or equivalent, attached to the tale. Unless they know something about the women and children that we don't.)

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby morriswalters » Wed Feb 01, 2017 11:24 pm UTC

ObsessoMom wrote:Why is no one talking about this? I realize it wasn't exactly a slow news day yesterday, but still.

People appear to be in the midst of an existential meltdown.
LaserGuy wrote:I'm not. I used to be pro-life.
I understand. I personally find it harder to be prochoice every year on the other hand.

No Tweets today from the Supreme Leader?

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Wed Feb 01, 2017 11:27 pm UTC

Soupspoon wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:
ObsessoMom wrote:Why is no one talking about this?


Mostly because mistakes were made even under Obama. While what happened yesterday was a tragedy for sure, I'm not entirely sure if we can exclusively blame it on Trump.

That depends on whether it was an operation that would have happened under Obama, or Clinton even, or just happens to be the result of Trump sitting down at the desk in the oval office, asking for a military operation to be whipped out of the pending tray (doesn't matter what, or how well planned it is) and made to happen so he can play with yet another of his Presidential toys and see what it does...

I don't see any militarily useful outcome from that op, so who knows which pile it came from. Perhaps it was just one of the hundreds of generic operations that doubtless get thought up just to keep as a basis for a contingency operation in the region. And then it got rushed into happening because Executive Order writing was starting to get boring and tedious, and they wouldn't let him juggle with the Nuclear Football...

(Maybe I speak out of turn, but it seemed more important to announce "an op has happened" than any actual detail about what the op was supposed to achieve. Loss of materielle/life doesn't seem to have been a sufficient counter-factor to that, yet there's not even a dead-Bin-Laden, or equivalent, attached to the tale. Unless they know something about the women and children that we don't.)


The article linked suggests that there were some computers with potential information about Al-Qaeda cells on them. In any case, the military wouldn't propose a mission to Trump unless there was some potential advantage to the fight. Its not like Trump made the decision "attack here". He has no expertise and probably couldn't even point out that city on a map. The military probably had a list of targets, and at best Trump chose one of the targets that was on the list.

In any case, capturing the computers of Al-Qaeda on a regular basis is fundamental to the strategy of stopping terror attacks in the West. We need to know what they are planning at all times. Al-Qaeda ain't going to post their plans on Facebook, you gotta fight them for it.

The difference is pretty stark in any case. I know that Obama made protecting women and children a priority in his attacks. Notice how Bin Laden's (3rd) wife and kids are still alive, despite being in the same house during the infamous raid. Trump may have given different commands to the Seals with regards to who to shoot.

At the same time, the Seal Team in the Bin Laden raid suffered absolutely no casualties. Once your teammates start getting shot up, hell breaks loose and your teammates are more likely to accidentally shoot up a non-combatant. Considering that the Helicopter in the Bin Laden raid went down and there STILL weren't any casualties shows that the Bin-laden mission was just more successful on all fronts. In contrast, this team was hit with heavy fire as soon as they landed. So the entire raid was a shitfest from the start.

Its hard to say or make a judgement yet. We'll know in a few months in any case... what the Seal's standard orders are under Trump. I mean, Obama did order the drone strike on Anwar Al-awlaki in the first place. Its the President's job to handle life-or-death decisions. Their overarching policy however is going to be overridden by the realities on the ground. And the reality of this case: the Seals were ambushed on entry. So casualties are likely going to be higher.

As such, we won't really know Trump's commanding style until several of these kinds of raids get reported on.

EDIT: https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-pays-r ... 44570.html

The U.S. officials said the extremists’ base had been identified as a target before the Obama administration left office on Jan. 20, but then-President Barack Obama held off approving a raid, in part because officials said they were not certain the available intelligence was sufficiently reliable. Also, on-the-ground surveillance of the compound was “minimal, at best,” one of the officials said.


Well, there's that then. Obama wasn't confident in the intelligence on the ground and was holding off on this particular raid. Trump becomes President, and then approves the raid.

So that's about as clear cut as it could get.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6449
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Thu Feb 02, 2017 6:15 am UTC

It looks like the Democrats are going to be unable to block the SCOTUS pick. Either they'll lose the filibuster rule, or they'll cave to pressure to cloture to end debate. Either way, Democrats lose, and don't really have a plan beyond halfheartedly pretending to be tea party hardliners.

In other news, the fuckup in Yemen turns out was much worse than expected. American troops knowingly ran into an ambush, so an entire village was destroyed in the ensuing firefight. I'm curious if this is tied to Trump's predisposition, but it's tenuous. Maybe someone ordered the go ahead anyway just to score a victory, or the lower level military brass were really dumb/under pressure.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/01/worl ... tions.html

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Diadem » Thu Feb 02, 2017 8:50 am UTC

Of course the democrats won't be able to block the appointment. When have democrats ever been able to form a fist? Democrats are ridiculously inefficient when it comes to stuff like that, and always have been. Say what you want about the Republicans, but they are really, really good at obstructionism.

Anyway, the only question I'm interested in regarding Trump's SCOTUS nominee: When (not if) Trump tries to suspend or subvert the next election, will Gorsuch side with Trump?


[edit]
So apparently Trump yesterday had phone calls with the president of Mexico and the PM of Australia. If Dutch news is to be believed, he insulted and then hung up on the latter, and threatened the former with invasion.

Just a normal day in America under Trump.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
PeteP
What the peck?
Posts: 1451
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2011 4:51 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby PeteP » Thu Feb 02, 2017 11:06 am UTC

The Editor in chief of reuters told the staff how to treat reporting the US presidency [url]reuters.com/article/idUSKBN15F276[/url]

speising
Posts: 2272
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:54 pm UTC
Location: wien

Re: Trump presidency

Postby speising » Thu Feb 02, 2017 12:30 pm UTC

PeteP wrote:The Editor in chief of reuters told the staff how to treat reporting the US presidency

So, in short, treat the US like any other hostile environment.

User avatar
zmic
Posts: 419
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:38 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby zmic » Thu Feb 02, 2017 12:44 pm UTC

ObsessoMom wrote:Why is no one talking about this? I realize it wasn't exactly a slow news day yesterday, but still.

SEAL, American Girl Die in First Trump-Era U.S. Military Raid



Brainwashing boys into killing machines and sending them to foreign countries is not something that Trump invented. At some point I had hope that our big President of Hope and Change would put an end to this and level up the USA, but it did not happen.

We should send wise people to these countries so that we can talk, not confused boys with guns.

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1744
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Quercus » Thu Feb 02, 2017 12:50 pm UTC

speising wrote:
PeteP wrote:The Editor in chief of reuters told the staff how to treat reporting the US presidency

So, in short, treat the US like any other hostile environment.

Yep. I guess it's important to emphasise that the Trump White House is on the road to becoming a hostile environment for reporters though, because otherwise it's very easy not to make that mental shift, and continue to operate like it's "business as usual", which is likely to lead to ineffectual journalism.

User avatar
Liri
Healthy non-floating pooper reporting for doodie.
Posts: 1113
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2014 8:11 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Liri » Thu Feb 02, 2017 1:40 pm UTC

Quercus wrote:
speising wrote:
PeteP wrote:The Editor in chief of reuters told the staff how to treat reporting the US presidency

So, in short, treat the US like any other hostile environment.

Yep. I guess it's important to emphasise that the Trump White House is on the road to becoming a hostile environment for reporters though, because otherwise it's very easy not to make that mental shift, and continue to operate like it's "business as usual", which is likely to lead to ineffectual journalism.

I think it was the Washington Post that said, after the crowd size incident, that they would treat the White House like the subject of investigative journalism.

The rise of Facebook-based liberal "news" outlets like NowThis that dramatically oversimplify everything is distressing. All those videos with bolded words that make sure you see what the important information is.
There's a certain amount of freedom involved in cycling: you're self-propelled and decide exactly where to go. If you see something that catches your eye to the left, you can veer off there, which isn't so easy in a car, and you can't cover as much ground walking.

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1744
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Quercus » Thu Feb 02, 2017 1:54 pm UTC

Liri wrote:The rise of Facebook-based liberal "news" outlets like NowThis that dramatically oversimplify everything is distressing. All those videos with bolded words that make sure you see what the important information is.

Shades of Farenheit 451...

RCT Bob
Posts: 75
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2015 2:05 pm UTC
Location: Netherlands

Re: Trump presidency

Postby RCT Bob » Thu Feb 02, 2017 1:56 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:
[edit]
So apparently Trump yesterday had phone calls with the president of Mexico and the PM of Australia. If Dutch news is to be believed, he insulted and then hung up on the latter, and threatened the former with invasion.

Just a normal day in America under Trump.


I saw that too. NOS is basing their story on the Washington Post and the Sydney Morning Herald, and Washington Post seems to have some insider leaks from White House officials that know what went down. Turnbull is not really confirming or denying anything, just refusing to comment. It's clear that Turnbull does not want this thing blowing up, but the Sydney Morning Herald states that anonymous sources from within the Australian cabinet that basically confirm the Washington Post story to Fairfax Media. I'm pretty sure that it's true, given that there are apparently sources both from Australian side and from US side.

Whether or not the Washington Post story about Trump trying to increase his credibility by talking about the size of his inauguration crowd or the 'electoral landslide victory' he had in said phone call with Turnbull is true, I don't know. That part is only cited from US sources in the Washington Post, Australian side doesn't have that. I don't think it's inconceivable that that part is conjured up by some rebellious guys within the White House to make Trump look bad. I'm not saying that that's the case, but I think that the last two weeks or so have shown us that there is a lot of chaos within the government under Trump when it comes to communication, and in such a chaotic environment such political stabbing is commonplace. The fact that it took the US this long to actually figure out whether green card holders with multiple nationalities, one of which was from the seven banned countries, would actually be allowed entry is very telling in regards to the chaotic environment.

User avatar
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
As the Arbiter of Everything, Everything Sucks
Posts: 8314
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:17 pm UTC
Location: I FUCKING MOVED TO THE WOODS

Re: Trump presidency

Postby (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ » Thu Feb 02, 2017 6:10 pm UTC

ObsessoMom wrote:Why is no one talking about this? I realize it wasn't exactly a slow news day yesterday, but still.

SEAL, American Girl Die in First Trump-Era U.S. Military Raid

In what an official said was the first military raid carried out under President Donald Trump, two Americans were killed in Yemen on Sunday — one a member of SEAL Team 6 and the other the 8-year-old daughter of Anwar al-Awlaki, the New Mexico-born al Qaeda leader who himself was killed in a U.S. strike five years ago.

The raid in southern Yemen, conducted by the supersecret Joint Special Operations Command, was intended to capture valuable intelligence, specifically computer equipment, according to a senior U.S. military official. Three al Qaeda leaders were killed, according to U.S. officials.

Contrary to earlier reporting, the senior military official said, the raid was Trump's first clandestine strike — not a holdover mission approved by President Barack Obama. The mission involved "boots on the ground" at an al Qaeda camp near al Bayda in south central Yemen, the official said.

"Almost everything went wrong," the official said.

An MV-22 Osprey experienced a hard landing near the site, injuring several SEALs, one severely. The tilt-rotor aircraft had to be destroyed. A SEAL was killed during the firefight on the ground, as were some noncombatants, including females.

* * *

"They [the SEALs] entered another house and killed everybody in it, including all the women. They burned the house. There is an assumption there was a woman [in the house] from Saudi Arabia who was with al Qaeda. All we know is that she was a children's teacher."

* * *

The death toll varies according to the sourcing, with the Pentagon saying 14 militants died, along with "numerous" civilians. Nasser al-Awlaki said Yemenis were circulating a body count of combatants and civilians as high as 59.


ISIS must be delighted for the propaganda gift.


For those of you who aren't American, at the moment if we miss a news story it's mostly because we don't know where the fuck to look and are getting whiplash from every new fucking disaster coming out.

I had seen this and I'm not talking about it yet much ( I mean sure I posted on FB about it) because I don't know how the aftermath will affect us but I get the feeling things are only going to get worse, and who wants to write about what might happen nowadays, when the next day 'worse than you expected' tends to turn up?
This was 45's first raid. He was in charge of it. They were supposed to get computers, they ended up killing women and children. Immediately afterward, wasn't that about when he instituted the Muslim Ban, and included people from Yemen? Usually presidents do things like the Muslim Ban to react to an international incident, but all he was doing was fulfilling his campaign promise- and also keeping Yemeni people out, just in case they were interested in retaliating on our turf (which is uh, unlikely, duh) so I wanted to sit back a day and see if these things were any more connected than at first glance.
Maybe not, maybe our president is just an idiot and his puppet master is a depressed cartoon frog.

Also, people of Mexico and Australia, I am sorry our idiot in chief was very rude to your President/Prime Minister. We still love you and hope you can forgive us someday.
Heyyy baby wanna kill all humans?

User avatar
Quantized
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 4:38 pm UTC
Location: Unable to be measured accurately

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Quantized » Thu Feb 02, 2017 6:32 pm UTC

Fantastic Idea wrote:Also, people of Mexico and Australia, I am sorry our idiot in chief was very rude to your President/Prime Minister. We still love you and hope you can forgive us someday.

Dear Australia: not all Americans are Drumpf. Please remember that. Please buy us plane tickets so we can leave. It's scary here.

In other news,
-The UC Berkeley riots: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/pro ... nt-n715711
Sounds like a peaceful riot was turned violent by "masked agitators" which sounds like a very convenient excuse for Drumpf to cry out about violence and start and crackdown.
-Rex Tillerson was voted in as Secretary of state: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/01/us/p ... .html?_r=0
For those that don't know/forget: Tillerson is an Exxon Mobil exec with close ties to Russia and Putin. That is who is now basically in charge of foreign policy for our country. Bad? I think so.
-Plenty of other things. There's too much happening, because Drumpf is doing what dictators do; pumping out outrage after outrage to keep people distracted and confused while things get worse.
If I made I mistake/said something incorrect in here, please let me know.

User avatar
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
As the Arbiter of Everything, Everything Sucks
Posts: 8314
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:17 pm UTC
Location: I FUCKING MOVED TO THE WOODS

Re: Trump presidency

Postby (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ » Thu Feb 02, 2017 6:38 pm UTC

Rex Tillerson really, really SEEMS like the devil, having worked for Exxon Mobil and embraced the whole 'who cares about the planet' theme that conservatives love so much, but I will give him one thing.
I guarantee he's a better negotiator than 45. Maybe Rex will spend the first few months of his time in the State Department on a new and different apology tour! Where he goes around to our long-time allies and promises we'll never invade, something like that.
Heyyy baby wanna kill all humans?


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: eran_rathan, ijuin and 14 guests