Trump has claimed he "wouldn't be surprised" if George Soros was funding the "invading" immigrant caravan which was the manufactured story leading up to the mid-term election - The idea that non-whites are "replacing" whites is a key component of white nationalism ideology. — Maw

Yep. And Trump loves conspiracy theories.

Yet the vast majority of people thinking that borders shouldn't be totally open aren't white nationalists.

James Comey’s May Day OP is a must read.

Regarding the Border Wall: let’s remember the H.L. Mencken saying - ‘for every complex problem there is a solution that is clear, simple, and wrong.’

Definately a must read. And those who won't read it, the most important part:

Yet you are silent. Because, after all, what are you supposed to say? He’s the president of the United States.

You feel this happening. It bothers you, at least to some extent. But his outrageous conduct convinces you that you simply must stay, to preserve and protect the people and institutions and values you hold dear. Along with Republican members of Congress, you tell yourself you are too important for this nation to lose, especially now.

You can’t say this out loud — maybe not even to your family — but in a time of emergency, with the nation led by a deeply unethical person, this will be your contribution, your personal sacrifice for America. You are smarter than Donald Trump, and you are playing a long game for your country, so you can pull it off where lesser leaders have failed and gotten fired by tweet.

Of course, to stay, you must be seen as on his team, so you make further compromises. You use his language, praise his leadership, tout his commitment to values.

And then you are lost. He has eaten your soul.

Now that's the kind testimony the US needs.

Regarding the Border Wall: let’s remember the H.L. Mencken saying - ‘for every complex problem there is a solution that is clear, simple, and wrong.’ — Wayfarer

:up:

Now, imagine if, when those Russians reached out to Donnie, if they'd reported it straightaway to the FBI. — Wayfarer

Remember, it was about thirty years ago when DT first started meeting with Russians, and he threw out into the media the possibility that he might run for president some time, not long after that. At this point he probably thought it was all pie in the sky, even a joke, so the FBI, at that point in time, probably would have taken it as a joke too. But if the Russians groomed him for the position, when does it change from a joke to a crime?

So basically Relativist agree's that there are problems at the border, but then comes the Freudian slip: Trump's border wall doesn't work, Trump's rhetoric is bad. — ssu

If you're going to criticize what I said, you should read me more carefully. What I said is that a border wall does not solve *all* important problems (e.g. it does not reduce asylum seeking), and I also said that his rhetoric MIGHT have contributed to the current influx of asylum seekers ("better come now before the wall goes up or the border is closed"). I'm not claiming to know this for a fact, but it is certainly a possibility.

Personally, I think there probably are places that border barriers would probably be helpful - but it address only a subset of the problems, and doesn't even actually completely solve that subset (shut off one mode of entry will likely result in pursuing others). If I had my way, I'd leave it on the table, but I wouldn't make it the prime objective. Most importantly, I don't claim to be an expert - and I think the complex nature of the situation screams out for analysis BY experts to identify the problem and propose remedies.

James Comey’s May Day OP is a must read. — Wayfarer

Thanks for the link - it's a very interesting read, even though it's extremely depressing.

Trump preached that the wall would solve all important problems, ignoring credible criticism. — Relativist

No Sir. President Trump did not preach that the wall would solve all important problems. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Trump said in December:
" Our request will add another 230 miles this year in the areas our border agents most urgently need. It will have an unbelievable impact. If we build a powerful and fully-designed see-through steel barrier on our southern border, the crime rate and drug problem in our country would be quickly and greatly reduced. Some say it could be cut in half because these criminals, drug smugglers, gangs and traffickers do not stop at our border. They permeate throughout our country, and they end up in some places where you’d least expect they go all over our country. A steel barrier will help us stop illegal immigration while safely directing commerce to our lawful ports of entry."

No, that is not directly saying that a will "solve all important problems" - but he claimed it would have an "unbelievable impact" on the problems that he's been bringing up since the campaign. He obviously considered it important enough to shut down the government and to declare a national emergency, so I can't see how you could deny that he considers these to be the most important problems.

Yet the vast majority of people thinking that borders shouldn't be totally open aren't white nationalists. — ssu

ok

Probably one of the more terrifying articles I've read in the last two years

The community, the meso level of society is who is being impacted by this influx. Nothing from the national level will solve the people who are now being essentially abandoned at Phoenix Greyhound bus station, Phoenix Sky Harbor airport, wherever there is a hope of transportation. If our ngo can come up with it, they take in the refugees off the street, treat their many times severe medical conditions and then purchase tickets for them to move further into the country to a 'family' member or a sponsor. If the ngo is unable to help or if the refugee decides on their own accord to depart until their court date which is currently 3 year out, where do they go? Our communities cannot nor should they be put in the position to have their lives overrun simply because our elected officials, ALL OF THEM, can get their heads out of the sand and recognize that we cannot handle it. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

I accept there is a border and immigration crisis in the US, but I don't understand why anyone would think that this most inept and mendacious of presidents is the one to fix it. To me it seems his sole motivation is to exploit it for political ends.

this most inept and mendacious of presidents — Wayfarer

Well, I don't think anyone expects this most inept and mendacious of presidents to solve the problem. On the other hand, the presumably less inept and mendacious presidents that preceded this one, and their party leaders in the House and Senate, didn't do anything about the problem either.

It's a complicated problem. We have a very long border. There are a lot of people who would like to live here rather than in some shithole further south. So, they walk right in. It isn't that they are bad people (most of them are not bad people), but the fact is it isn't up to the restless people around the world to decide the immigration policies for everybody else.

Sovereign Nations, in one of which everyone on this board lives, have the responsibility of defining how to manage population and resources. No nation has to accept all comers. No nation has to believe that everyone who shows up on their doorstep is oppressed and is entitled to asylum. What every nation has to decide is how many people does it want to have? Which age? Which skill level? Which ethnicity? Which x, y, and z. Maybe it determines that the need for low skilled Central Americans, is simply not very high, and they can't come in. Or maybe they decide that average true Scotsman is likely to have chronic health problems and bad teeth. So no to them, too. (Ok, so Andrew Carnegie was an exception.)

Maybe they will decide that very clever, young, healthy, educated Chinese are what we need many more of. Or more French. I'd vote for that. We need more French people in the United States, especially French good at le fine cuisine. More French, more Finns, and more Fuji Islanders.

Unfortunately, inept governments in Washington have not evaluated the problem of resources and population very carefully, if at all.

If you're going to criticize what I said, you should read me more carefully. What I said is that a border wall does not solve *all* important problems — Relativist

What I was criticizing was that Tiff wasn't talking about Trump's wall, she was talking about what was happening in Arizona. It's actually a good thing sometimes to put these things into some kind of context. Sure, Trump uses scare tactics as often as he can and in the way only Trump can. Yet immigration is an issue, especially when you look at this from the perspective of US policy and take into account the near history with the Obama and Bush administrations. Deportations increased in each of the first four years President Obama was in office, topping 400,000 in fiscal year 2012. Obama oversaw more deportations than George W. Bush did, just as Bush oversaw more than Bill Clinton did. Just for comparison, Trump deported last year 256 000 people.

The situation obviously isn't good in Central America and is very bad with the situation in Venezuela. Mexico still is muddling through, but if it would go downhill from the present, the situation would be very bad quite easily.

I also said that his rhetoric MIGHT have contributed to the current influx of asylum seekers ("better come now before the wall goes up or the border is closed"). I'm not claiming to know this for a fact, but it is certainly a possibility. — Relativist

Well, I think we had the similar idea/meme going viral in Europe in 2015-2016 that the borders would be closed without any rhetoric similar to Trump, and indeed that did happen. The EU did tighten it's border security and the mass migration at the scale that we saw earlier did end.

What this thread needs is more psychobabble.

https://thegrayzone.com/2019/05/07/gabor-mate-russiagate-interview-transcript/

What this thread needs is more psychobabble.

https://thegrayzone.com/2019/05/07/gabor-mate-russiagate-interview-transcript/ — unenlightened

FWIW: Anyone who "expected" Mueller to develop a prosecutable case for criminal conspiracy by Trump was misguided. On the other hand:

- anyone who suggests there was a "Russian Hoax" is ignoring the facts; there was a great deal of suspicious behavior that showed an investigation was warranted:
-- numerous interactions between members of the campaign and Russians
-- Trump's lying to the public about his (and his campaign's) interactions with Russia
-- Trump's instructing subordinates to mislead, lie and fabricate evidence
-- Trump's activities that (per Mueller) may have constituted obstruction

- Trump tried to impede the investigation and have MAY have actually succeeded in this (read about his dangling of a pardon to Manafort, who subsequently lied and may have continued to not be forthcoming).

- It is reasonable to consider whether or not Trump's behavior constitutes criminal obstruction of justice. This is not "moving the goalposts" (as Trump apologists assert) because there were no goals regarding "getting Trump on criminal conspiracy with Russia" (regardless of whether or not there were individuals who hoped for, or expected that). It is absurd to suggest that an investigator of possible criminality should ignore other criminal behavior that is uncovered during the course of the investigation.

Gabor quite literally preaching to the converted there.

What about the multiple secretive meetings between Trump and Putin over the last few years? They certainly weren't a projection of my supposed trauma.

Nothing's really happening. Some people are moving from South and Central America to North America, Trump is making a lot of noise but otherwise isn't doing anything to stop it.

Don't understand what the big deal is.

What about the multiple secretive meetings between Trump and Putin over the last few years? They certainly weren't a projection of my supposed trauma. — Evil

The argument isn't that Trump is alright really, it's that nearly half of Americans are so fucked up that they think he might be, and most of the rest are so fucked up they think he is literally destroying everything.

Personally I think he's skirting around an important geopolitical issue by psychologising it and by doing so is himself denying reality.

Relativist
569

What this thread needs is more psychobabble.

https://thegrayzone.com/2019/05/07/gabor-mate-russiagate-interview-transcript/ — unenlightened

FWIW: Anyone who "expected" Mueller to develop a prosecutable case for criminal conspiracy by Trump was misguided. On the other hand:

- anyone who suggests there was a "Russian Hoax" is ignoring the facts; there was a great deal of suspicious behavior that showed an investigation was warranted:
-- numerous interactions between members of the campaign and Russians
-- Trump's lying to the public about his (and his campaign's) interactions with Russia
-- Trump's instructing subordinates to mislead, lie and fabricate evidence
-- Trump's activities that (per Mueller) may have constituted obstruction

- Trump tried to impede the investigation and have MAY have actually succeeded in this (read about his dangling of a pardon to Manafort, who subsequently lied and may have continued to not be forthcoming).

- It is reasonable to consider whether or not Trump's behavior constitutes criminal obstruction of justice. This is not "moving the goalposts" (as Trump apologists assert) because there were no goals regarding "getting Trump on criminal conspiracy with Russia" (regardless of whether or not there were individuals who hoped for, or expected that). It is absurd to suggest that an investigator of possible criminality should ignore other criminal behavior that is uncovered during the course of the investigation. — Relativist

We certainly agree on this, Relativist!

The emperor has no dough.

In some years it's reported that Trump lost more money than any other tax payer.

At a Trump rally today, Trump states that we have "thousands of people marching up" and "hundreds and hundreds" immigrants trying to come in, with only "two or three border security patrol" and that we "don't let them use weapons...other countries do...we can't" and asks "how do we stop these people?" to which, an attendee shouts "shoot them!" Trump, along with other attendees laugh.

This is several days after it was reported that member of a border militia who were stopping and rounding up immigrants asked a fellow militia member, "why are we just apprehending them and not lining them up and shooting them?" and that "We have to go back to Hitler days and put them all in a gas chamber."

Yet the vast majority of people thinking that borders shouldn't be totally open aren't white nationalists. — ssu

It's interesting to put this in a historic context. We've been issuing passports since about 1912 (taking the Brits) and the rest of Europe a bit later. We didn't really start enforcing immigration control until after WWII. The whole idea of closing borders for people is rather new.

In some years it's reported that Trump lost more money than any other tax payer. — praxis

And a lot of it, other people's money.

Also remember the NYT expose last Sept that he was given, not one million by his father, but more than 400 million.

We've been issuing passports since about 1912 (taking the Brits) and the rest of Europe a bit later. — Benkei

I think official documents equivalent to passports have been used since Ancient Egypt. The Chinese used them extensively. Passports have been used here since the time of Finland being the Grand Dutchy of Russia and Finns traveling to Russia and Russians traveling to Finland needed a passport starting from 1819. During that year a bureau for Passports was established in St. Petersburg for Finland.

A French passport from 1602:

Were those national passports or documents guaranteeing safe passage? Precursors to national passports have existed even in Eqypt before the Roman empire. And the second step is to use such passports to enforce immigration policy.

Trump just repeated his assertion that "there was a crime on the other side" - referring to the Democrats and or Clinton. Someone please explain what crime he is alleging?

My impression is that he's referring to the "Steele dossier," but what's the actual crime? Conspiracy? Whatever the crime is supposed to have been, what evidence establishes (or is suggestive of) guilt - and which individuals are implicated?

Random noise.

Probably, but I'm baffled as to how his supporters could consider this a credible charge. Worst case the Dems did something similar to Trump: engaged in opposition research that included soliciting and utilizing information that came from foreign sources. How can he consider DEMS doing it as a crime if he doesn't consider it a crime when HIS folks do it?

I'm hoping I'm overlooking something, because otherwise - it's a sad indication of the quality of rational, critical thinking among the population of this country.

@ArguingWAristotleTiff

I wanted to ask you about how the 2020 presidential election will impact Roe-v-Wade. Multiple states (now including Alabama) are spoiling for a Supreme Court challenge to it while Ginsburg is expected to retire soon.

Is this issue big enough to give conservative women pause? How do you look at it?

If this would be a conversation best had by PM instead of here, let me know.

At a Trump rally today, Trump states that we have "thousands of people marching up" and "hundreds and hundreds" immigrants trying to come in, with only "two or three border security patrol" and that we "don't let them use weapons...other countries do...we can't" and asks "how do we stop these people?" to which, an attendee shouts "shoot them!" Trump, along with other attendees laugh.

This is several days after it was reported that member of a border militia who were stopping and rounding up immigrants asked a fellow militia member, "why are we just apprehending them and not lining them up and shooting them?" and that "We have to go back to Hitler days and put them all in a gas chamber." — Maw

"Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest?!"