Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)

[Karl Henning]

Ann Coulter wakes up and smells the coffee

[zamyrabyrd]

And again, haven't heard a peep from anyone about President Kushner... seems to me, Karl, that you're running interference for President Kushner by paying sooooooooooo much attention to the man IN FRONT OF THE CURTAIN, instead of wondering who might be BEHIND the orange curtain.

No mystery now why Chris Christie became a non-entity, the guy who put Daddy Kushner in jail for two years.
But honestly, do you think Trump is a lackey for the Kushner's? Are they more powerful than him?

[Karl Henning]

This is not a happy scenario and I hope to be wrong about it. [El Tupé] has promised to make America great again, but his hostility to freedom, to the rule of law, and to disciplined thought suggest that his conception of greatness is very different from any that I can share.

[Pat B]

I take your point, but she lost, and IMO she should fade into the background for a good while.

Preferably forever.

[Pat B]

The filibuster is a tradition, one that McConnell said he wanted to protect when he was in his man of principle phase.

Preserving the filibuster is politically convenient for the Rs. Not so much because they care about the semblance of bipartisanship, but because it allows them to continue to blame Ds for blocking bills that don't exist.

The House put them in something of a bind by sending over a bill that could be passed via reconciliation, but that nobody really likes.

[Karl Henning]

Preferably forever.

Oh, I quite agree.

[Karl Henning]

Will [El Tupé] Confront Renewed Religious Repression in Russia? (Pro Tip: Don't hold your breath)

How did we get here? Religious discrimination and persecution have been on the rise under Vladimir Putin's rule [...] And yet Washington does nothing. Two weeks have passed and the only response is an acting State Department spokesman expressing "extreme concern" in an e-mail to U.S. News & World Report. Contrast that with the response of the independent U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, which has denounced the ban as a "politicized assault on a religious group," or of Angela Merkel, who has spoken to Putin directly on the issue. By not speaking out personally on the worst post-Soviet religious persecution, [El Presidente Tupé] and Vice President Pence feed speculation about their ties to Russia and fail those who value freedom of religion and speech. Trump can demonstrate that he is not beholden to Russia only by mobilizing on behalf of the Jehovah's Witnesses the same pressure that he used to obtain the release of the aid worker Aya Hijazi.

[Karl Henning]

Raise your hand if you thought he was not all flash and zero substance!

Fresh on the heels of a budget deal that fully funds Planned Parenthood, [El Tupé] has signed a religious-liberty executive order that — if reports are correct — is constitutionally dubious, dangerously misleading, and ultimately harmful to the very cause that it purports to protect. In fact, he should tear it up, not start over, and do the actual real statutory and regulatory work that truly protects religious liberty [...] the order has three main components: 1) a promise to "protect and vigorously promote religious liberty," 2) a directive to "ease restrictions on political activity by churches and charities," and 3) an order to "federal agencies to exempt some religious organizations from Affordable Care Act requirements that provide employees with health coverage for contraception." Those directives are respectively 1) meaningless, 2) dangerous, and 3) meaningless.

[Karl Henning]

The resort to out-and-out lies (e.g. insisting that everyone with a preexisting condition would be protected) and insistence that something had to be done underscored how indefensible was the bill on its merits.

[Karl Henning]

Raise your hand if you thought he was not all flash and zero substance!

Fresh on the heels of a budget deal that fully funds Planned Parenthood, [El Tupé] has signed a religious-liberty executive order that — if reports are correct — is constitutionally dubious, dangerously misleading, and ultimately harmful to the very cause that it purports to protect. In fact, he should tear it up, not start over, and do the actual real statutory and regulatory work that truly protects religious liberty [...] the order has three main components: 1) a promise to "protect and vigorously promote religious liberty," 2) a directive to "ease restrictions on political activity by churches and charities," and 3) an order to "federal agencies to exempt some religious organizations from Affordable Care Act requirements that provide employees with health coverage for contraception." Those directives are respectively 1) meaningless, 2) dangerous, and 3) meaningless.

The skepticism is bipartisan:

President Trump is a man who knows the value of a good public performance to make something seem like a bigger deal than it really is. But a Rose Garden ceremony he conducted yesterday — not the one you're thinking of, but another one — raises an interesting question: How long can he convince Republican constituency groups that they're getting more from this administration than they actually are?

The ceremony in question was for the signing of a new executive order on "religious liberty," which is code for "special privileges for conservative Christians." But the order doesn't do much of anything. In that, it's much like most of the executive orders Trump has signed: a big show about how he's giving a generous gift to some part of the Republican coalition, with almost nothing behind it.

[Karl Henning]

"[A] big show about how he's giving a generous gift to some part of the Republican coalition, with almost nothing behind it."  Rather like that "donation" to the Veterans, eh?

[Pat B]

"[A] big show about how he's giving a generous gift to some part of the Republican coalition, with almost nothing behind it."  Rather like that "donation" to the Veterans, eh?

The ACLU's response was great.

But keep an eye on Trinity Lutheran v. Comer.

[zamyrabyrd]

Raise your hand if you thought he was not all flash and zero substance!

Fresh on the heels of a budget deal that fully funds Planned Parenthood, [El Tupé] has signed a religious-liberty executive order that — if reports are correct — is constitutionally dubious, dangerously misleading, and ultimately harmful to the very cause that it purports to protect. In fact, he should tear it up, not start over, and do the actual real statutory and regulatory work that truly protects religious liberty [...] the order has three main components: 1) a promise to "protect and vigorously promote religious liberty," 2) a directive to "ease restrictions on political activity by churches and charities," and 3) an order to "federal agencies to exempt some religious organizations from Affordable Care Act requirements that provide employees with health coverage for contraception." Those directives are respectively 1) meaningless, 2) dangerous, and 3) meaningless.

If the screed originally came from the New York Times, it must be Holy Writ. The National Observer all of a sudden has become a self-righteous crusader for true religious freedom. Yeah, right! Whatever floats their boat!

If Trump had come out with a direct order, he would have been denounced as a dictator to be impeached. Instead, he had written up a declaration of intent, which as the saying goes, a a journey of a thousand miles begins with one step.

Judging by the pervasive anti-religious sentiment in politics, it is a cautious gesture to pushback some of the more rabid instrusions on religious expression. Hopefully as they peaked in the Obama years, they will never be as aggressive again.

[snyprrr]

the pervasive anti-religious sentiment in politics,

it's only Our Risen Lord and Saviour that they hate... they loooove the rest of the pantheon... especially the Muzz, which they see as a useful tool in attempting to eradicate Old School Christianity. Talmudists gonna talmud...

Only Jesus the King Eternal is their Enemy, and the Old School Christian (not Churchianity)...

HAIL JESUS THE LIVING GOD IN FLESH!! YEE HAAAW


Who is this who comes from Bozrah, his white robes drenched in the blood of his enemies?...

[kishnevi]

If the screed originally came from the New York Times, it must be Holy Writ. The National Observer all of a sudden has become a self-righteous crusader for true religious freedom. Yeah, right! Whatever floats their boat!

If Trump had come out with a direct order, he would have been denounced as a dictator to be impeached. Instead, he had written up a declaration of intent, which as the saying goes, a a journey of a thousand miles begins with one step.

Judging by the pervasive anti-religious sentiment in politics, it is a cautious gesture to pushback some of the more rabid instrusions on religious expression. Hopefully as they peaked in the Obama years, they will never be as aggressive again.

It is interesting to see how the same people who claim to be afraid of Muslims imposing Sharia seem to see no contradiction in demanding that Catholics and other Christians have the right to impose their beliefs on others (which is what most current claims of religious freedom turn out to be).

[zamyrabyrd]

It is interesting to see how the same people who claim to be afraid of Muslims imposing Sharia seem to see no contradiction in demanding that Catholics and other Christians have the right to impose their beliefs on others (which is what most current claims of religious freedom turn out to be).

Sharia is incompatible with freedom and so is politically correct fascism. Christianity doesn't force people to bake cakes to support their views or be penalized $100K. In fact, Judeo-Christian values were the soil in which equality of all took root, upending entrenched caste systems. It was a long process with blips along the way, but ultimately the most beneficial movement in human history.

[amw]

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/06/obamacare-repeal-house-2018-238064

One of many thinkpieces about what AHCA could possibly mean for the midterms. (probably the most balanced one.)

I haven't so far seen any evidence of Republicans losing political capital from pushing through AHCA. It may be energising Democrats, but Republican voters seem to be sticking by their party so far; no equivalent to the Democratic defection wave we saw in 2010. Obviously, it hasn't been passed yet, and I guess we'll see in 2018.

[Todd]

One of many thinkpieces about what AHCA could possibly mean for the midterms. (probably the most balanced one.)

I'm beginning to think Republicans lose one, and possibly both houses in 2018, before Trump pulls a Carter and loses reelection.  The New Yorker had a long piece about how to get rid of Trump, trumpeting the 25th Amendment again, though they did find one academic sort who pointed out the similarities between the Donald and the Peanut Farmer in Chief.  Don't get me wrong, Carter is my favorite type of President: a one-termer.

Something I've seen get almost no coverage is the specter of recession.  April was the 79th month of job growth, the longest on record using modern tabulation techniques.  The U3 rate is very low, U6 has dropped to near the same levels as before the last recession (and its trough is ratcheting up during each expansionary cycle), and the Fed is now raising rates.  Good times don't last forever, and the timing for a recession looks tailor-made for 2020 if you're anti-Trump, even if a bastardized infrastructure plan (the only type that can pass) makes it through.  Take heart Dems, the tide may yet turn!  All you need to do is root for recession.

[Karl Henning]

I don't see how a recession could happen. I mean, the President is a business genius....

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[amw]

All you need to do is root for recession.

Hey, if the Financial Choice Act gutting Dodd-Frank ever gets through Congress, we might get a do-over of the 2008 global financial crisis within the next year or two. Yay!