All Things Trump

[laklak]

High crimes and misdemeanors, whatever that means.

[Brian Peacock]

you know, it's been about 40 years since the USA stopped being a truly civilized country (I'd say, since they elected reagan, more or less)

But if a prez could pardon himself when in impeachment situation, why didn't nixon and clinton the hubby do it?

Because Nixon and The Great Philanderer didn't have purple-haired yoghurt-knitters and a rabidly Marxist #FAKENEWS media biting at their heels.

[Svartalf]

[Seabass]

ref: the undocumented aliens taking shelter in a church.

I have a great deal of sympathy, but that certainly isn't a Trump issue. Plenty of people were deported under Obama, and under every prior President. The DREAM act was first proposed in 2001, but never passed. I truly hope they sort it out with ICE, who are not the most sympathetic bunch I've dealt with.

While I am sympathetic and wish them the best, I'm also married to a legal immigrant. It was a long, difficult process for her to legally enter the U.S., as she didn't want to get married to gain residency. In fact we didn't get married until she had her green card. We did it legally and above board, and I see no reason others should not have to do the same.

I also lived and worked overseas, in a variety of countries, for many years. In each and every case I complied fully with their immigration laws, and each and every country would certainly have deported me had I not done so. The most difficult process was getting permanent "leave to remain" status in the UK. The company I was working for had to jump through many, many hoops, and tailor the job description in such a way that there was no one, literally, in the entire UK who matched the requirements. I did once inadvertently overstay a business visa in Swaziland, and it was a real mess to sort out. Eventually they ruled in my favor and I wasn't deported, but it cost me quite a bundle in fines and lawyers because of a 3 week overstay. No excuses, I just wasn't paying attention. You pays your money and you takes your choice. If that choice is to violate clearly stated and enforced immigration laws then you've no one to blame but yourself when it goes tits up.

Whether our immigration policies are "fair" or not is a different issue. And a contentious one at that.

But this IS a Trump issue. This family tried to do it legally, but their lawyer botched their paperwork, and they didn't know about the error until they had already been given illegal status. In 2014, the Obama administration gave temporary reprieve to parents of US citizens, so long as they check in with ICE periodically. Of course, that all changed when Trump took office. This family is suffering under Trump specifically.

And by the way, the fact that some countries have harsh immigration policies doesn't mean that all countries should have harsh immigration policies. How about we try to do better instead of falling back on rationalizations for cruel behavior?

[Seabass]

I find the hysteria of the U.S. (and worldwide) left utterly absurd. People actually say, with a straight face, that so many are 'suffering' under Trump. Suffering? Where? Point them out.

Here's more people suffering under Trump. Specifically Trump.

Hundreds of migrant kids separated from parents are stuck at border stations
HHS officials will tour three bases in Texas to see if they are suitable to house unaccompanied migrant children, who now number more than 11,000.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/hu ... ns-n878696

WASHINGTON — Border agents and child welfare workers are running out of space to shelter children who have been separated from their parents at the U.S. border as part of the Trump administration's new "zero tolerance" policy, according to two U.S. officials and a document obtained by NBC News.

As of Sunday, nearly 300 of the 550 children currently in custody at U.S. border stations had spent more than 72 hours there, the time limit for immigrants of any age to be held in the government's temporary facilities. Almost half of those 300 children are younger than 12, according to the document, meaning they are classified by the Department of Homeland Security as "tender age children."

The stations, run by the Border Patrol and meant only as the first stop for children detained at the border, often lack adequate bedding or separate sleeping rooms for children.

"It would be highly inappropriate and even unsafe to hold children for extended periods in these short-term border facilities because they often lack the adequate medical and nutritional resources for these young people," said Greg Chen, director of government relations for the American Immigration Lawyers Association. "It would place these children at risk of harm if they are housed with adults without the proper privacy that children should have."

A spokesman for DHS did not respond to a request for comment.

The overstays at border stations are a result of a backlog at U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS), the agency responsible for sheltering migrant children longer term and matching them with relatives or foster parents in the U.S. The agency's Administration for Children and Families has 11,200 unaccompanied children in its care and takes 45 days on average to place a child with a sponsor, according to a spokesperson.

HHS officials will soon tour military installations near the border in Texas as they search for more space to house children while they wait for placement. The officials will tour Dyess Air Force Base, Goodfellow Air Force Base, and Fort Bliss, the spokesperson said.

"HHS will make the determination if they will use any of the three sites for UAC (unaccompanied alien children) operations," the spokesperson said.

A Defense Department spokesperson said HHS was the lead agency and referred NBC News to HHS.

Military bases have been used to house migrant children in the past, but only as a last resort, according to an Obama administration official.

In May, the Trump administration began enforcing a "zero tolerance" policy on the southern border, prosecuting any adult who entered the country illegally in order to crack down on the surge in the number of immigrants crossing the border.

Parents traveling with children are separated from their kids while they face legal proceedings. Two U.S. officials said HHS was not given proper warning of the new policy and was caught unprepared at the influx of children.

"What's happening now is a broad indication of a total lack of planning or forethought for the policy they enacted," said Peter Boogaard, a former DHS and White House official in the Obama administration who is now a spokesman for the immigration reform group FWD.us. "They didn't think this through at all — what it would mean for kids, for their parents and for the operational challenges."

"Instead of having Border Patrol agents at the border, you have them taking care of kids at border stations."

The Trump administration recently started requiring HHS to fingerprint people claiming to be parents of unaccompanied children, a move the previous administration said would delay children from being reunited with their families and scare undocumented parents away from coming forward.

[Forty Two]

mmmmh, would his crimes be federal by nature or 50 sets of state crimes?

It depends what he did. State crimes are crimes under state law occurring within the jurisdiction of a given state. Federal crimes are crimes under federal law. So, if he conspired to hack Hillary's servers, that is a federal crime (and likely it's a state crime, depending on where he was when he was doing the wrongful acts).

A sitting President cannot be indicted for a crime. The process is that if the House of Representatives think that he has done something amounting to a "Treason, Bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors," then they can vote to "impeach." If the House votes for impeachment, then there will be a trial in the Senate, and he can be acquitted or convicted. Once out of office, if he robbed a liquor store, or got into a bar fight or something, then then the cops can arrest him on state law criminal charges. He can't pardon anybody for state law charges. If he hacked Hillary's servers as President, he can pardon himself for the federal criminal charges if he does so before leaving office.

[Seabass]

"All the best people."

Scott Pruitt Sought ‘Business Opportunity’ With Chick-fil-A While Leading E.P.A.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/05/clim ... fil-a.html

Scott Pruitt, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, gave a political aide the task of helping him seek a “business opportunity” for his wife with the fast-food chain Chick-fil-A.

Emails released to the Sierra Club under the Freedom of Information Act show that Sydney Hupp, a former scheduler for Mr. Pruitt, contacted Chick-fil-A’s chief executive, Dan T. Cathy, in May 2017 at Mr. Pruitt’s behest to set up a meeting.

After a back-and-forth in which Ms. Hupp initially said the administrator “didn’t mention a specific topic” of discussion, she told the company’s director of regulatory affairs that Mr. Pruitt’s request was of a personal nature. “The Administrator would like to talk about a potential business opportunity with Mr. Cathy. Nothing very pressing, just hoping to connect sometime in the next month or so,” Ms. Hupp wrote.

Mr. Pruitt ultimately spoke by phone with Chick-fil-A representatives.

Mr. Cathy, reached by phone, referred questions to a company spokeswoman, Carrie Kurlander. Ms. Kurlander said she would not comment further. In an email to The Washington Post, which first reported Mr. Pruitt’s effort to seek a business deal with Chick-fil-A, Ms. Kurlander had said the call was about the possibility of Mr. Pruitt’s wife, Marlyn, opening a franchise of the fast food chain. Ms. Kurlander told the Post that Mrs. Pruitt never completed the franchisee application.

Jahan Wilcox, a spokesman for the E.P.A., did not respond to a request for comment.

Michael Brune, the Sierra Club’s executive director, said in a statement that Mr. Pruitt had been engaged in “unethically and illegally seeking personal benefits because of the job Donald Trump has entrusted him with.”

The revelation that Mr. Pruitt asked an E.P.A. employee to help coordinate efforts to seek a personal business opportunity comes amid a wave of investigations into the administrator’s spending and management decisions including his first-class travel and spending on security, as well as his decision last year to accept a $50-a-night lease on a condominium from the wife of a lobbyist with business before his agency. Currently Mr. Pruitt faces 12 federal investigations.

full article:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/05/clim ... fil-a.html

[Tero]

The Trump administration is preparing to release a sweeping plan for reorganizing the federal government that includes:
1 a major consolidation of welfare programs — and a renaming of the Health and Human Services Department.
2 getting rid of government

[pErvinalia]

What data do they gather in the Netherlands that they don't gather in the US?

Oh dear, don't go there..

[JimC]

What data do they gather in the Netherlands that they don't gather in the US?

Oh dear, don't go there..

One's inside leg measurement is just the beginning!

[L'Emmerdeur]

A sitting President cannot be indicted for a crime.

So Giuliani and others have said. They are expressing opinions, not describing a fact.

The US Supreme Court has not ruled on this precise question, but has twice rejected presidents' attempts to claim immunity from personal legal liability while in office. In United States v. Nixon it rejected Nixon's assertion that the president had 'absolute, unqualified Presidential privilege of immunity from judicial process under all circumstances.' In Clinton v. Jones it rejected Clinton's claim of presidential immunity from private legal actions.

It's not hard to envisage a future case before the US Supreme Court in which Trump asserts that as sitting president he's above the law--cannot be indicted for a crime. At that point the issue will be decided, but not before.

[rainbow]

Only in shithole countries, where some people are above the law. This does not apply to the civilised world.

Not sure what you're so upset about, but lots of countries afford legal protections for their government officials and leaders.

I'm not upset as I don't live in a country that protects its corrupt, incompetent leaders.
You are the one that has to learn to cope.

For example, the UK Prime Minister and other Queen's men have "Crown Immunity," which means that criminal proceedings are generally prohibited from being brought against The Queen and Her Majesty's Government. Is that uncivilizsed?

Yes, and use proper English.

[Scot Dutchy]

What data do they gather in the Netherlands that they don't gather in the US?

Oh dear, don't go there..

I have him on ignore so I missed that bit of ignorance. Absolute data. The American census does not even do that. It is all guestimates.

[Forty Two]

Only in shithole countries, where some people are above the law. This does not apply to the civilised world.

Not sure what you're so upset about, but lots of countries afford legal protections for their government officials and leaders.

I'm not upset as I don't live in a country that protects its corrupt, incompetent leaders.
You are the one that has to learn to cope.

It's no big deal. What country do you live in?

For example, the UK Prime Minister and other Queen's men have "Crown Immunity," which means that criminal proceedings are generally prohibited from being brought against The Queen and Her Majesty's Government. Is that uncivilizsed?

Yes, and use proper English.

-ize is etymologically correct.
https://jeremybutterfield.wordpress.com ... merican-2/

As with most things in language, there’s no simple yes/no answer.

Some do, some don’t. (See the table later on for organize, which also shows that that the -ise spelling, though rather rare, is also used on the far side (from me) of the pond.)

Sure enough, the OED uses the -ize spelling, and its (chiefly etymological) reasons for doing so are set out in a note at the entry for –ize,

Cambridge English Dictionary uses "civilize" and "civilization."
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dic ... vilization

[Forty Two]

What data do they gather in the Netherlands that they don't gather in the US?

Oh dear, don't go there..

I have him on ignore so I missed that bit of ignorance. Absolute data. The American census does not even do that. It is all guestimates.

Can you give a couple of examples of data accumulated by the Netherlands which you say is "absolute data?"