Page 204 of 218

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:35 pm UTC
by ijuin
You guys do remember that Congress can overrule a Presidential veto, right? If Trump remains intransigent, then a sufficient number of Republicans must vote in favor of passing the funding bill to make a two-thirds majority. Goven that the content of the bill is literally the same as one that they have already passed, all that is necessary is for enough Republicans to decide that they want to stop Trump’s temper tantrum.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 11:14 pm UTC
by sardia
ijuin wrote:You guys do remember that Congress can overrule a Presidential veto, right? If Trump remains intransigent, then a sufficient number of Republicans must vote in favor of passing the funding bill to make a two-thirds majority. Goven that the content of the bill is literally the same as one that they have already passed, all that is necessary is for enough Republicans to decide that they want to stop Trump’s temper tantrum.

First of all, 1/3 of Republicans means you're scraping the bottom 3rd of the barrel ideologically speaking. In that zone, you get people who think Trump is too liberal and he should genocide the scapegoats now. So, no it's less likely compared to Trump or the Democrats caving. What can happens is one or both sides compromises, but they each get to crow about their win. Maybe Trump gets another billion, maybe Democrats stick to their 1.2 billion offer. Either way, Trump will redefine or ignore the weakness and hope Fox News (Ingraham or Hannity) doesn't harass him too much. Remember, Fox pundits can push Trump, but they can't push him too far or else the whole house of cards collapses, and they don't get any more goodies from Senate + Presidency control (aka judges + deregulations).
TLDR anything can happen, but some form of compromise between the 2 main groups is the most likely.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 11:37 pm UTC
by gd1
Is there really no mechanism that will force them to compromise eventually? Like their own paychecks? They can't keep this up forever.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 11:43 pm UTC
by The Great Hippo
gd1 wrote:Is there really no mechanism that will force them to compromise eventually? Like their own paychecks? They can't keep this up forever.
Oh, no. They get paid during a shutdown. It's everyone else who doesn't.

America!

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 11:46 pm UTC
by Pfhorrest
Even if their own paychecks were on the line, which I don't think they are, they can always pass a special bill to address just that, and not address anything else.

Though I guess by that reasoning they could also just piecemeal pass special bills to fund specific things as those specific things get urgent enough, and never get around to actually passing a general budget, but end up with the same thing in the end anyway.

Honestly that kinda seems like a more reasonable way to do funding in the first place. Instead of an omnibus general budget for the entire government that can then be held hostage if it doesn't contain someone's pet provisions, just fund each thing by itself, so general things that everyone agrees need funding get funded right away, and if there are big fights to be had over controversial things, only those things get hung up because of it.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2019 12:04 am UTC
by Thesh
Even then, for the most part our Senators have enough money to not notice whether they are getting paid.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2019 12:14 am UTC
by gd1
Okay, but there's no way they could keep this up for 2 years though right?

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2019 12:35 am UTC
by Sableagle
Dauric wrote:
Angua wrote:To be honest, I don't see how this government shutdown is going to end. Trump is never going to be one to backdown, and the democrats certainly shouldn't give into his ridiculous demands, especially as they've all been elected to stand up to him (at least in part).

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46818218


I have a suspicion that the best case scenario is Trump declares a national emergency to redirect military funds for the wall, and then it forces a crisis of conscience among Republican legislators, which , again best case scenario results in impeachment proceedings, but second-best-case results in legislation that narrows the emergency powers of the Presidency.

Note these are all best-case. Worst case: partial shutdown (or some variation thereof, like rolling blackouts or somesuch) continues for the next two years (no -WORST- case: six years), or until we can finally elect adults to government.


Where on that scale does "300-metre-wide chunk of iron comes vertically down on the White House south lawn at 14 km/s" fall?

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2019 12:38 am UTC
by sardia
gd1 wrote:Okay, but there's no way they could keep this up for 2 years though right?

There are plenty of things that would pressure both sides to come to the table like tax refunds being delayed, or parks not being cleaned....
Unless politicians start patching only the squeaky wheels. So tax refunds start flowing, but the art institute for poor people doesn't. If you really want this to end, call your senator.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2019 12:51 am UTC
by Dauric
Sableagle wrote:Where on that scale does "300-metre-wide chunk of iron comes vertically down on the White House south lawn at 14 km/s" fall?

The part of the scale where we no longer give a damn about politics because we're dealing with an extinction level event...

And at this point I'm not sure if that's an improvement or not.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2019 2:43 am UTC
by bbluewi
Dauric wrote:
Sableagle wrote:Where on that scale does "300-metre-wide chunk of iron comes vertically down on the White House south lawn at 14 km/s" fall?

The part of the scale where we no longer give a damn about politics because we're dealing with an extinction level event...

And at this point I'm not sure if that's an improvement or not.

At 300 meters? Nah, we lose DC (and probably a sizable chunk of the East Coast), but probably not too much else. Assuming the government survives on its less than barebones continuity, we get a complete do-over, so it would actually fall onto the part of the scale where we've quite possibly improved the political situation (obviously ignoring the fact that several million people get killed).

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2019 2:56 am UTC
by Thesh
I wouldn't be surprised if the long term effects of Trump's Presidency is ultimately millions of deaths worldwide. It might be a net win.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2019 3:28 am UTC
by ucim
Another pretty bad case - a hostile power attacks the US (for real, an actual shooting war on US soil), Trump declares his emergency, Congress does not disagree, we go to war, and Trump suspends the 2020 elections because of the war.

Can he do this? Yes, of course, if Congress lets him.

Jose

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2019 3:56 am UTC
by gd1
Well, personally, I'm just waiting for the end of the world sometimes. But that's probably not for a while.

There'd have to be a Sufiyani guy (really bad guy, does terrible stuff, gathers the worst of the worst to him, no it's not Trump, he's not from Damascus) from Damascus, but I haven't heard anything about Damascus in the news. The Euphrates having gold or treasure or something in it (lots of ppl die over it), but haven't heard anything about that either. And other stuff. So, I think we'll probably recover by the 2020 elections because people won't vote for Trump after this. Then we can start rebuilding after that. I'm optimistic, but it's good to be optimistic.

EDIT: Added a link because we're supposed to do that. It's from wikipedia so it should be fine.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2019 7:17 pm UTC
by CorruptUser
sardia wrote:Well CU is cheating because he's combining Bush, Reagan with Clinton and Obama. Was Bush worse than Trump? No, but he had an awful reign with torture (Guantanamo, extraordinary rendition, Iraq death toll), and the corruption symbolized by Cheney. Reagan had all sorts of problems, despite how he's deified today by Republicans. Clinton was a rapist and lied a lot about it. Oh and the super predator thing. Maybe Bush senior was comparable to Obama?


Bush Sr is mostly remembered for his "read my lips" moment, and technically he didn't lie because increased taxes are technically distinct from new taxes, but that's not a distinction the average voter cares about. Obama's administration has been one of the least transparent presidencies, and while he might not technically lie, that's not the same thing as telling the truth.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2019 9:29 pm UTC
by freezeblade
Calling The Obama presidency "one of the least transparent presidencies" and citing an article from 2016 is pretty rich if you ask me. Trump's presidency is practically opaque.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2019 9:41 pm UTC
by CorruptUser
Look, I know Trump is far worse than Obama. But the difference is that the media doesn't have the metaphorical hardon for the president the way they did with Obama. The public knows Trump is a lying anus who's been hiding as much as he can from us, or at least has been constantly told by the media. We don't have puff piece after puff piece of mainstream coverage for the President the way we did a few years ago (Faux News notwithstanding).

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2019 11:18 pm UTC
by ObsessoMom
Trump proves, once again, that he's dumber than a sack of hammers

President Donald Trump drew a bizarre analogy during his trip to the border in McAllen, Texas, on Thursday, likening a border wall to the ancient invention of the wheel and noting that wheels are effective and still commonly used in modern times.

"They say a wall is medieval. Well, a wheel is older than a wall," Trump said, though the earliest known border wall is actually thousands of years older than the wheel. "And I looked, and every single car out there, even the really expensive ones that the Secret Service uses — and believe me they are expensive — I said, 'Do they all have wheels?' 'Yes.' 'Oh. I thought it was medieval.'"

He continued: "The wheel is older than the wall. You know that? There are some things that work. A wheel works and a wall works."

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2019 11:49 pm UTC
by Pfhorrest
I think that comparison is insulting to hammers. I know some very smart hammers. At least, they sure smart if you miss the nail and hit your thumb instead.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 1:51 am UTC
by CorruptUser
I dont know, I'd prefer to use Trump's head to smash into nails repeatedly...

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 2:27 am UTC
by gd1
CorruptUser wrote:I dont know, I'd prefer to use Trump's head to smash into nails repeatedly...


goosfraba... just goosfraba.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 10:13 am UTC
by ijuin
CorruptUser wrote:I dont know, I'd prefer to use Trump's head to smash into nails repeatedly...

We’d never get the bloodstains out afterward.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 12:07 pm UTC
by Mutex
So, it turns out that anyone wanting to get over Trump's wall needn't even bring a ladder, a simple saw will do.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigr ... ed-n956856
President Donald Trump has repeatedly advocated for a steel slat design for his border wall, which he described as "absolutely critical to border security" in his Oval Office address to the nation Tuesday. But Department of Homeland Security testing of a steel slat prototype proved it could be cut through with a saw, according to a report by DHS.

A photo exclusively obtained by NBC News shows the results of the test after military and Border Patrol personnel were instructed to attempt to destroy the barriers with common tools.

The Trump administration directed the construction of eight steel and concrete prototype walls that were built in Otay Mesa, California, just across the border from Tijuana, Mexico. Trump inspected the prototypes in March 2018. He has now settled on a steel slat, or steel bollard, design for the proposed border barrier additions. Steel bollard fencing has been used under previous administrations.

However, testing by DHS in late 2017 showed all eight prototypes, including the steel slats, were vulnerable to breaching, according to an internal February 2018 U.S. Customs and Border Protection report.

(...)

In a statement, DHS Spokeswoman Katie Waldman said, "The steel bollard construction is based on the operational requirements of the United States Border Patrol and is a design that has been honed over more than a decade of use. It is an important part of Border Patrol's impedance and denial capability."

"While the design currently being constructed was informed by what we learned in the prototypes, it does not replicate those designs," said Waldman. "The steel bollard design is internally reinforced with materials that require time and multiple industrial tools to breach, thereby providing U.S. Border Patrol agents additional response time to affect a successful law enforcement resolution. In the event that one of the steel bollards becomes damaged, it is quick and cost-effective to repair.

"The professionals on the border know that a wall system is intended not only to prevent entry, it is intended to defer and to increase the amount of time and effort it takes for one to enter so that we can respond with limited border patrol agents. Even a wall that is being breached is a valuable tool in that it allows us to respond to the attempted illegal entry."

In response to KPBS, CBP spokesman Ralph DeSio said the prototypes "were not and cannot be designed to be indestructible," but were designed to "impede or deny efforts to scale, breach, or dig under such a barrier, giving agents time to respond."

Maybe if you didn't spend $5,700,000,000 on a wall, there'd be money for more agents / patrolling of the border?

Also, since this came up earlier, this is an archived page of Trump's official position during the election campaign.
https://web.archive.org/web/20160721080 ... r-the-wall

It's an easy decision for Mexico: make a one-time payment of $5-10 billion to ensure that $24 billion continues to flow into their country year after year.

And the rest of the document lists the ways of pressuring Mexico to do this. It's really clear he was literally talking about a direct payment from Mexico. This is not a man who speaks in cryptic riddles.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 2:15 pm UTC
by idonno
If you put a large quantity of what will be mostly undefended steel that is easy to remove in close proximity to a large number of poor people, I'm not sure people will even need saws to cross the border. They might just be able to go through all the gaps that have been created by people making money off of scrap metal. It isn't like most Mexicans are going to view the wall as something they are morally obliged to leave up.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 2:21 pm UTC
by Mutex
Simple solution, increase patrolling ten-fold to stop people stealing bits of the wall.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 2:30 pm UTC
by CorruptUser
Wait, how much of the current walls get stolen each year?

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 2:45 pm UTC
by sardia
CorruptUser wrote:Wait, how much of the current walls get stolen each year?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/foreignpol ... fence/amp/
There are reports, but no indication on how prevalent it is. Part of it there isn't very much fencing, and the mileage that is fenced is either guarded, in the Middle of nowhere, or rusted to junk.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 2:55 pm UTC
by CorruptUser
sardia wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Wait, how much of the current walls get stolen each year?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/foreignpol ... fence/amp/
There are reports, but no indication on how prevalent it is. Part of it there isn't very much fencing, and the mileage that is fenced is either guarded, in the Middle of nowhere, or rusted to junk.


The border wall is going to also be built in the middle of nowhere. You can't just walk up to the wall in the middle of the desert and take 100 pounds of steel, you need transportation. Cars and such are going to be highly visible, especially at night (no, you absolutely can not drive at night without headlights), so there really isn't a way to transport the stolen steel. They might cut through the wall to get through, but the articles don't say how long that'd take. I'd imagine that someone spending half an hour to cut through would easily be spotted by drones and such, but I also imagine that climbing over the wall would take much less time...

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 3:33 pm UTC
by Leovan
CorruptUser wrote:The border wall is going to also be built in the middle of nowhere. You can't just walk up to the wall in the middle of the desert and take 100 pounds of steel, you need transportation. Cars and such are going to be highly visible, especially at night (no, you absolutely can not drive at night without headlights), so there really isn't a way to transport the stolen steel. They might cut through the wall to get through, but the articles don't say how long that'd take. I'd imagine that someone spending half an hour to cut through would easily be spotted by drones and such, but I also imagine that climbing over the wall would take much less time...

So what if they detect you? You have like 45 minutes to cut your piece of steel with a flex, put it on a truck bed, and drive back home. Because it is in the middle of nowhere, they can't cover the whole border. And it's not like the US border patrol can follow you very far.

Not sure how Mexican police will react to US complaints. Probably by sending you some tequila.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 3:45 pm UTC
by CorruptUser
Technically it's destruction of federal property, and if it's a defensive/military structure the US could (legally or not) use a drone strike on the thieves.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 3:58 pm UTC
by Leovan
But is destruction of federal property an offense Mexico will extradite you for?
And is the US allowed to execute you without a trial on US soil? Can't even claim you were resisting arrest... How about Mexican soil? Plus, at that point you're bombing your own wall

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 4:15 pm UTC
by Dauric
Leovan wrote:But is destruction of federal property an offense Mexico will extradite you for?
And is the US allowed to execute you without a trial on US soil? Can't even claim you were resisting arrest... How about Mexican soil? Plus, at that point you're bombing your own wall


The most recent case about a border patrol officer shooting a boy in Mexico for 'throwing rocks' resulted in an acquittal. This is probably the closest example of the outcome you'd see from border drone strikes.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 4:44 pm UTC
by Leovan
Dauric wrote:
Leovan wrote:But is destruction of federal property an offense Mexico will extradite you for?
And is the US allowed to execute you without a trial on US soil? Can't even claim you were resisting arrest... How about Mexican soil? Plus, at that point you're bombing your own wall


The most recent case about a border patrol officer shooting a boy in Mexico for 'throwing rocks' resulted in an acquittal. This is probably the closest example of the outcome you'd see from border drone strikes.


As much as the verdict is a farce, the argument is border control was being attacked with a lethal weapon (rocks are deadly if you're unlucky). Not sure you can claim that a drone operator is forced to defend himself from a guy a thousand miles away with a saw. Therefore it's no longer self defense, but rather a calculated execution. That's quite different.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 5:10 pm UTC
by Dauric
Leovan wrote:
Dauric wrote:
Leovan wrote:But is destruction of federal property an offense Mexico will extradite you for?
And is the US allowed to execute you without a trial on US soil? Can't even claim you were resisting arrest... How about Mexican soil? Plus, at that point you're bombing your own wall


The most recent case about a border patrol officer shooting a boy in Mexico for 'throwing rocks' resulted in an acquittal. This is probably the closest example of the outcome you'd see from border drone strikes.


As much as the verdict is a farce, the argument is border control was being attacked with a lethal weapon (rocks are deadly if you're unlucky). Not sure you can claim that a drone operator is forced to defend himself from a guy a thousand miles away with a saw. Therefore it's no longer self defense, but rather a calculated execution. That's quite different.


I have no doubt that the response for the drone operator would be equally as farcical, something along the lines of "The wall was built to ensure national security, destroying the wall is a direct threat to national security, therefore the people scavenging it are terrorists engaged in acts of terrorism, therefore we get to launch high explosive projectiles at them for damaging U.S. national security."

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 10:27 pm UTC
by idonno
If they cut through it with ordinary power tools in testing, properly planned out theft is probably not going to take anywhere near 30 mins to cut through it. That is a lot of steel. If people are trying it for current fencing, they are going to try it for that much steel. As soon as it has a hole in it, anyone can go through. Detecting the thief and blowing them up with a drone strike isn't going to change that.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 11:17 pm UTC
by gd1
idonno wrote:If they cut through it with ordinary power tools in testing, properly planned out theft is probably not going to take anywhere near 30 mins to cut through it. That is a lot of steel. If people are trying it for current fencing, they are going to try it for that much steel. As soon as it has a hole in it, anyone can go through. Detecting the thief and blowing them up with a drone strike isn't going to change that.


How much does a drone strike cost as well?

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 11:33 pm UTC
by CorruptUser
About 2 college scholarships?

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2019 12:25 am UTC
by Thesh
Apparently Trump actually rejected funding for the wall, because he believes the federal workers are Democrats.
https://mobile.twitter.com/funder/statu ... 1841214466

So he would prefer to keep government closed purely because he wants to harm Democrats. His supporters will overlook it though, because they are absolutely fucking terrible people.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2019 4:48 am UTC
by gd1
A stone wall is subject to acid. A steel wall can be cut through with a saw. Why not an imaginary wall? It's impossible to damage it. Much cheaper. Congress would approve of it. It's see through just as requested. Never rusts. Construction time is very short. No issues with land property rights. It can be protected by intellectual property rights. So many advantages...

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2019 5:56 am UTC
by Soupspoon
Heck, even with no-one attacking the wall, it's probably going to stop being an effective wall for various other reasons.