Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

mcmoustache

Eric Cartman wrote: »

fair, if somebody wants to drill into the hard data there are links to the USSC government source that it was taken from, so they present raw data without bias. Heres a table that just puts it together https://cis.org/sites/default/files/2018-01/USSC%20Data%20on%20Federal%20Convictions-1%2810%29.pdf which while somebody mightent like the outcome, if somebody can prove falsification im all ears. Seems pretty robust to me.

Thanks for those. The doc shows that non citizens are successfully prosecuted at a federal level at a rate that is higher than the general population. It is definitely a useful indicator but it doesn't show the full picture. For example, it reports 227 burglaries over a 6 year period, all by US citizens. I don't believe for a second that no illegal immigrant committed burglary in that time so this isn't a complete picture.


I wouldn't mind actually knowing this because i have seen the claim many times that illegala commit fewer crimes than citizens and i find it hard to believe.

Rjd2

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/ruth-bader-ginsburg-working-supreme-court-lung-cancer-surgery-health-rbg-a8698326.html

Not Trump related, but this is grim not heroic. Their needs to be term limits on the supreme court or you just get people working until they are dead and over 80. Its one of the things about American politics that is wild, how old the big hitters in it, Mitch and Nancy close to 80 ffs. Grassley and Feinstein the mid 80s. :eek:

Ruth probably won't step down until the Dems regain the senate which best case scenario is 2020, but if not is she planning to die on the job?

Eric Cartman

Rjd2 wrote: »

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/ruth-bader-ginsburg-working-supreme-court-lung-cancer-surgery-health-rbg-a8698326.html

Not Trump related, but this is grim not heroic. Their needs to be term limits on the supreme court or you just get people working until they are dead and over 80. Its one of the things about American politics that is wild, how old the big hitters in it, Mitch and Nancy close to 80 ffs. Grassley and Feinstein the mid 80s. :eek:

Ruth probably won't step down until the Dems regain the senate which best case scenario is 2020, but if not is she planning to die on the job?

to be fair its a pretty cushy job a lot of the time, the work to get there is insane but once youre in its not something you'd want to leave. I think most would rather keep it than going for full on retirement.

However id imagine that there is a lot of pressure on her as the idea of trump having another SCJ pick would send the dem's into meltdown.

prawnsambo

Rjd2 wrote: »

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/ruth-bader-ginsburg-working-supreme-court-lung-cancer-surgery-health-rbg-a8698326.html

Not Trump related, but this is grim not heroic. Their needs to be term limits on the supreme court or you just get people working until they are dead and over 80. Its one of the things about American politics that is wild, how old the big hitters in it, Mitch and Nancy close to 80 ffs. Grassley and Feinstein the mid 80s. :eek:

Ruth probably won't step down until the Dems regain the senate which best case scenario is 2020, but if not is she planning to die on the job?

Yeah, it should be age limited and independently appointed. It's a nonsense that a court could be even deemed to be partisan.

Rjd2

Eric Cartman wrote: »

to be fair its a pretty cushy job a lot of the time, the work to get there is insane but once youre in its not something you'd want to leave. I think most would rather keep it than going for full on retirement.

However id imagine that there is a lot of pressure on her as the idea of trump having another SCJ pick would send the dem's into meltdown.

Had she not a chance to step down in the Obama years? Surely she would have known their was a chance of a Republican majority sooner rather than later.

But aye, she can't retire now, the Republicans are desperate to replace her with Barrett, and if that was to happen, the fight would be twice as bad as the Kavanaugh fiasco.

On that issue, I wonder will Mitch be telling Thomas to step down next year so they don't have the same scenario with him whenever the Dems regain the senate.

Eric Cartman

Rjd2 wrote: »

Had she not a chance to step down in the Obama years? Surely she would have known their was a chance of a Republican majority sooner rather than later.

But aye, she can't retire now, the Republicans are desperate to replace her with Barrett, and if that was to happen, the fight would be twice as bad as the Kavanaugh fiasco.

On that issue, I wonder will Mitch be telling Thomas to step down next year so they don't have the same scenario with him whenever the Dems regain the senate.

I'd say the arrogance of the hillary campaign got to her and she thought she could mop up the cash and benefits for another 4 years without risk. Or just a personal decision to keep going without any political thought, its all crystal ball stuff really.

If I was barrett id be getting the talking points ready for everything now, theyll bring up everyone he ever even said a bad word to from birth till now to try stop that.

I'd imagine anyone with even a bad cough in 2019 will be told to step down by the party, just to ensure replacement.

Could this be the first presidency where we have a majority of the SC flipped in one term ?

Rjd2

I think Thomas is the most likely Republican to step down next year, although the Republicans will be wary of replacing one of the few prominent Republicans with a white person. Their was an Indian American Kentucky chap whose name escapes me that Mitch likes they will go for. Easy win for them that.

I dread to think how bad the spectacle would be if Barrett is nominated though, The Dems have been preparing for her since last year, while many on the right feel she could play a crucial role in overturning Roe v Wade.

The amusing thing about that is we may be spared of that spectacle as when Trump met her he thought she was an oddball.

Pence would be gagging to get on the SC though.:p

Igotadose

mcmoustache wrote: »

Thanks for those. The doc shows that non citizens are successfully prosecuted at a federal level at a rate that is higher than the general population. It is definitely a useful indicator but it doesn't show the full picture. For example, it reports 227 burglaries over a 6 year period, all by US citizens. I don't believe for a second that no illegal immigrant committed burglary in that time so this isn't a complete picture.


I wouldn't mind actually knowing this because i have seen the claim many times that illegal commit fewer crimes than citizens and i find it hard to believe.

The USSC distinguish 'non citizen' from 'undocumented'. The CIS report doesn't.So, green card holders who commit crimes are lumped in under 'non-citizen' in the CIS report as far as I can tell.

I took a look at one years worth of numbers - drug crimes, 2017 (latest that was there). Showed a drop in percentage from 25% by 'non citizens' to 19% by 'non citizens' (I used anything other than resident alien as non-citizen.)

Another interesting data point might be 'arrests' versus 'convictions.' Are citizens likely to get better defense than non-citizens for non-immigration crimes (most of which are illegal reentry btw, per the USSC.) My theory is that this is the case - non-citizens being less wealthy, means less chance of a good defense in the US hence more convictions. That seems borne out by another statistic in the 2017 data: simple possession had non-citizens at 60% of convictions (at the federal level, even. One wonders what they're being convicted of to make it all the way to federal court yet be a simple possession conviction.)

Non-citizens are more likely to commit immigration 'crimes' (whatever those happen to mean in the report) than citizens. I can believe that - Melania Trump overstayed her H1 or whatever the model-industry equivalent was. Had she been arrested and prosecuted, that would have been an immigration 'crime.'

everlast75

Inghram now banging on about another caravan and asking the question "What will Pelosi and Schumer do about it?"

Ffs - the Republicans have had the House, Senate and White House for two f'n years and they haven't built their f'n wall. Why is it the Democrats' fault?

MadYaker

What happened to the last caravan?

dr.fuzzenstein

everlast75 wrote: »

Inghram now banging on about another caravan and asking the question "What will Pelosi and Schumer do about it?"

Ffs - the Republicans have had the House, Senate and White House for two f'n years and they haven't built their f'n wall. Why is it the Democrats' fault?

I think you could take a Trump supporter, collar him, shake him, scream this in his face whilst slapping him and he would still say "But! But! The Dems! Libtards!"
Their mind is ROM, not RAM.

MadYaker

Does anyone know why literally nobody is talking about a clampdown on American business hiring illegals? If they couldn’t get jobs in America they wouldn’t come. Seems like a fairly common sense solution to me and much cheaper than a wall.

Igotadose

MadYaker wrote: »

Does anyone know why literally nobody is talking about a clampdown on American business hiring illegals? If they couldn’t get jobs in America they wouldn’t come. Seems like a fairly common sense solution to me and much cheaper than a wall.

Because America is wholly owned by corporations these days. American's wouldn't want to pay food prices that include minimum wage paid to pickers and processors. You won't hear a peep out of a tGOP administration about this. But, qualify more medicaid eligible for healthcare? Disaster! Chaos! Dogs and cats living together!

Keep the mentally deranged from owning firearms (notice not a peep yet about that undocumented alien that shot that cop having a gun, eh?) Communists in the wife's Jam! Lenin and Stalin under the Bed! Mao-Tse Tung pumping gas at the gas station!

FrostyJack

MadYaker wrote: »

Does anyone know why literally nobody is talking about a clampdown on American business hiring illegals? If they couldn’t get jobs in America they wouldn’t come. Seems like a fairly common sense solution to me and much cheaper than a wall.

Because the guy leading the charge against them, has them working construction for him and at golf resorts he owns.

everlast75

MadYaker wrote: »

Does anyone know why literally nobody is talking about a clampdown on American business hiring illegals?

Because Trump was recently caught hiring illegal immigrants

MadYaker

Well I know why trump isn’t suggesting it it’s more his supporters and right wing Americans in general. I did some googling and despite illegal immigration being one of the hottest topics I can’t find evidence of any politician dem or rep suggesting it. Kind of amazing.

dudara

MadYaker wrote: »

Does anyone know why literally nobody is talking about a clampdown on American business hiring illegals? If they couldn’t get jobs in America they wouldn’t come. Seems like a fairly common sense solution to me and much cheaper than a wall.

In theory, it makes sense. In reality, migrant labour is cheap and allows producers, restaurant owners, hotel owners etc to keep costs down. Hiring only legal American workers would increase costs, thus increasing costs to the consumer. Also it’s much easier to keep an illegal workforce in check, as they are less likely to turn to officials for help

Christy42

Igotadose wrote: »

mcmoustache wrote: »

Thanks for those. The doc shows that non citizens are successfully prosecuted at a federal level at a rate that is higher than the general population. It is definitely a useful indicator but it doesn't show the full picture. For example, it reports 227 burglaries over a 6 year period, all by US citizens. I don't believe for a second that no illegal immigrant committed burglary in that time so this isn't a complete picture.


I wouldn't mind actually knowing this because i have seen the claim many times that illegal commit fewer crimes than citizens and i find it hard to believe.

The USSC distinguish 'non citizen' from 'undocumented'. The CIS report doesn't.So, green card holders who commit crimes are lumped in under 'non-citizen' in the CIS report as far as I can tell.

I took a look at one years worth of numbers - drug crimes, 2017 (latest that was there). Showed a drop in percentage from 25% by 'non citizens' to 19% by 'non citizens' (I used anything other than resident alien as non-citizen.)

Another interesting data point might be 'arrests' versus 'convictions.' Are citizens likely to get better defense than non-citizens for non-immigration crimes (most of which are illegal reentry btw, per the USSC.) My theory is that this is the case - non-citizens being less wealthy, means less chance of a good defense in the US hence more convictions. That seems borne out by another statistic in the 2017 data: simple possession had non-citizens at 60% of convictions (at the federal level, even. One wonders what they're being convicted of to make it all the way to federal court yet be a simple possession conviction.)

Non-citizens are more likely to commit immigration 'crimes' (whatever those happen to mean in the report) than citizens. I can believe that - Melania Trump overstayed her H1 or whatever the model-industry equivalent was. Had she been arrested and prosecuted, that would have been an immigration 'crime.'

Yeah that is obvious enough. Pretty hard for citizens to commit immigration crimes by themselves. They need to be helping someone overstay.

For other, more serious crimes, immigrants are not such a big deal.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/wonk/wp/2018/06/19/two-charts-demolish-the-notion-that-immigrants-here-illegally-commit-more-crime/

Trump and many in the right have made a specific point of highlighting crimes from illegal immigrants to try and push this notion of dangerous immigrants but it is just a lie.

amandstu

MadYaker wrote: »

Does anyone know why literally nobody is talking about a clampdown on American business hiring illegals? If they couldn’t get jobs in America they wouldn’t come. Seems like a fairly common sense solution to me and much cheaper than a wall.

Beats me too . Why is no one calling them out for their hypocrisy?

This is classic white collar crime isn't it?

A few high profile arrests (eg Trump?) might cause people to really address the issue and deflect from accusations of being "soft on immigration

That might be monumentally unfair on migratory workers (using them as a political football) but these hirers are really mobsters aren't they?

By the way ,am I being a leftist to characterize Trump and his cronies as "capitalist pigs"? The description seems to trip off the tongue....


I know we are all capitalists ,willingly or not.

Itssoeasy

amandstu wrote: »

Beats me too . Why is no one calling them out for their hypocrisy?

This is classic white collar crime isn't it?

A few high profile arrests (eg Trump?) might cause people to really address the issue and deflect from accusations of being "soft on immigration

That might be monumentally unfair on migratory workers (using them as a political football) but these hirers are really mobsters aren't they?

By the way ,am I being a leftist to characterize Trump and his cronies as "capitalist pigs"? The description seems to trip off the tongue....


I know we are all capitalists ,willingly or not.

Chris cuomo on his show on CNN has been asking that question for months. Any GOP person he asks it of, there is a silence and no answer or a poor effort at an answer.

prawnsambo

amandstu wrote: »

Beats me too . Why is no one calling them out for their hypocrisy?

This is classic white collar crime isn't it?

A few high profile arrests (eg Trump?) might cause people to really address the issue and deflect from accusations of being "soft on immigration

That might be monumentally unfair on migratory workers (using them as a political football) but these hirers are really mobsters aren't they?

By the way ,am I being a leftist to characterize Trump and his cronies as "capitalist pigs"? The description seems to trip off the tongue....

I know we are all capitalists ,willingly or not.

I think the big problem is that other than migrant workers, nobody actually wants to do the work they do. You look at agricultural work like strawberry picking, grapes for wine alone and you have a huge issue getting crops in without the migrant labour. The real issue is getting people to accept that they either pay a lot more for their produce or allow migrant labour in. But that's an awkward question they won't answer.

amandstu

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Chris cuomo on his show on CNN has been asking that question for months. Any GOP person he asks it of, there is a silence and no answer or a poor effort at an answer.

What about the politicians ? Is there no political capital to be made from this.Seems like an open goal.

Or is the hypocrisy evenly spread throughout society -from top to bottom and from left to right and anywhere else?

Igotadose

prawnsambo wrote: »

I think the big problem is that other than migrant workers, nobody actually wants to do the work they do. You look at agricultural work like strawberry picking, grapes for wine alone and you have a huge issue getting crops in without the migrant labour. The real issue is getting people to accept that they either pay a lot more for their produce or allow migrant labour in. But that's an awkward question they won't answer.

I had many friends in my college days (1970's-early '80s) that worked as 'migrant workers' in the summers, because it paid o.k.. The problem with the work, is it doesn't pay o.k. so you don't do it. If you were offered $15/hour to pick grapes, and your choice was unemployment in the US, or ever dwindling TARP and TANF, you'd do the work.

It's because it doesn't pay a living wage, doesn't provide health care, benefits, etc. . that the work is foisted onto whoever'll take it, legal or not. Automation is the white-bread answer to some of this, but not everything agricultural can be automated. Various news outlets have documented life for migrant workers in agriculture and food processing (chicken processing's a horror story). Until the jobs pay better, this won't improve.

Itssoeasy

amandstu wrote: »

What about the politicians ? Is there no political capital to be made from this.Seems like an open goal.

Or is the hypocrisy evenly spread throughout society -from top to bottom and from left to right and anywhere else?

Well maybe they have said it but I'm saying that I know he's asked it constantly and has called out the hypocrisy of it.

Eric Cartman

everlast75 wrote: »

Because Trump was recently caught hiring illegal immigrants

Where ?

Why is it the same people that clap for a $15 an hour 'living wage' are also the ones that want to allow cheap illegal labour into the country

Igotadose

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Where ?

Why is it the same people that clap for a $15 an hour 'living wage' are also the ones that want to allow cheap illegal labour into the country

You've got that backwards. The pro-$15 minimum wage types, want *legal* immigration. It's the anti-minimum wage so-called libertarians and "conservatives" that want the illegals working on the farms and factories.

volchitsa

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Where ?

Bedminster and Trump Tower, for a start: [Donald Trump pays out over undocumented Polish Trump tower employee/



http://time.com/5039109/donald-trump-undocumented-polish-trump-tower-bonwit-teller/

He has also requested in increase in the number of immigration working visas for Mar A Lago, so while not illegals, it goes against his claims that immigrants are taking American jobs. Presumably pay and conditions are so sh1tty there that nobody except immigrants wants those jobs. Bit like marrying Donald, come to that.

Why is it the same people that clap for a $15 an hour 'living wage' are also the ones that want to allow cheap illegal labour into the country

Don't know what you mean here. Could you explain?

amandstu

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Chris cuomo on his show on CNN has been asking that question for months. Any GOP person he asks it of, there is a silence and no answer or a poor effort at an answer.

Is it fairly easy to search for clips of his shows where he brings this up? (with other contributors?)

Or have you one or two to hand?

I have seen him once or twice on CNN.

Eric Cartman

volchitsa wrote: »

Bedminster and Trump Tower, for a start: [Donald Trump pays out over undocumented Polish Trump tower employee/



http://time.com/5039109/donald-trump-undocumented-polish-trump-tower-bonwit-teller/

He has also requested in increase in the number of immigration working visas for Mar A Lago, so while not illegals, it goes against his claims that immigrants are taking American jobs. Presumably pay and conditions are so sh1tty there that nobody except immigrants wants those jobs. Bit like marrying Donald, come to that.

Don't know what you mean here. Could you explain?

Ok firstly thats a story about 1998 , if were going to take everyones views from 1998 as their record for actions today then youd have a lot more to give out about than trump.

And the same people who often champion the living wage / $15 minimum wage are those who also campaign against border restrictions or campaign for allowing illegal immigrants to stay, which ofcourse is whats hurting wages in the service sector in the US. Anyone for a 'living wage' should be staunchly anti illegal immigrant .

As a poster correctly stated above, it is often liberatrian types who are for no mimimum wage and keeping illegal immigrants too.

As you said he requested visas. Nobody has complained about legal migrants who went through the process at all.

joseywhales

Is there an imf for countries that become educationally bankrupt? Like a team of headmasters for the naughty Americans, they'll have to attend summer school to make up for their decline in grades and their joke of a class president.