Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Doomcookie]

Sometimes, you see a thought just perfectly expressed by another, and there's no reason to change a thing! Yes, I share his opinion. But if you don't have a response, that's fine.

Actions speak louder than words. I've seen plenty of people that pay lip service against antisemitism, but when it comes to college campuses, they suddenly fill up on excuses. Very frail excuses.

Like classifying "content-discriminatory policies, intimidation, harassment, property destruction, and assault" as "rhetoric" which you oppose. Columbia had their chance, now comes the consequences.

https://x.com/SenFettermanPA/status/1898080811301454149

I guess if you missed all the hubbub, maybe this is the proper response: we're just setting right all the stuff you ignored or missed, no need to reconsider the historical record.

Were you tracing a swastika with your finger as you typed this with the other hand?

[Shadowferal]

Hmm...seems Jerome Powell is giving a clear warning to Trump that cutting interest rates will be decided on how volatile the economy gets...which means fuck off with the tariffs already.

Jerome Powell says the ‘net effect’ of the Trump administration’s policies on trade, immigration, fiscal policy, and regulation will determine interest rates in the future

[Draco-Onis]

Hmm...seems Jerome Powell is giving a clear warning to Trump that cutting interest rates will be decided on how volatile the economy gets...which means fuck off with the tariffs already.

Jerome Powell says the ‘net effect’ of the Trump administration’s policies on trade, immigration, fiscal policy, and regulation will determine interest rates in the future

Let's hope he doesn't leave, if President Musk and VP Trump get complete control of the Fed though we are fucked now we would be beyond fucked.

- - - Updated - - -

"Re-elect us because we're only 4 years into our 20-year plan!"

They are still using trickle down economics propaganda so...

- - - Updated - - -

So Mrs. President Trump is rambling about "globalists" while aligning the US even closer with Israel?

Deciphering all the shit that's going on is exhausting.

That part makes perfect sense Neo Nazis love Israel, no one is more pro Israel in Germany than the AFD. Israel has always been a great way to spread anti semitism since it only cares about itself now the Jewish diaspora abroad.

[Teriz]

Apparently not too thrilled.

"It's like, what did you think? What did you think he was going to do?" Ali told NPR. "What did you think he was going to say? And now people have to live with the consequences of their decision to vote for him."

I will never understand why they actually believed that Trump would be better for them. The guy was using Palestinian as a slur during the campaign, and actively said that Biden wasn't doing enough carnage in Gaza. Harris was at least paying lip service towards a two-state solution, but instead they lazily lumped her with Biden as if as vice president she had any control over policy.

[Breccia]

Trump admits Rubio and Musk are clashing over policy.

Trump was asked about a reported fiery meeting held by some of his Cabinet secretaries and billionaire Elon Musk, saying accounts of a "clash" involving the world's richest man and Secretary of State Marco Rubio were not true.

"But that's the opposite of what you said!"

Yep. Like I said, Trump admits it.

The New York Times reported that during an "abruptly" scheduled meeting on Thursday involving Trump, some Cabinet members and Musk, Rubio and Musk tangled in a heated back-and-forth.

Musk reportedly accused Rubio of not firing enough of his staff, to which the secretary of state responded by pointing to the more than 1,500 staffers who accepted buyouts. Musk said that Rubio is "good on TV," the Times reports, largely insinuating that Rubio is just a figure for the department.

The reported sparring took place in front of the president for some time before Trump came to Rubio's defense, saying that he was doing a "great job."

Trump was asked about the Times report on Friday in the Oval Office. "No clash. I was there. You're just a troublemaker," Trump replied to a reporter. "And you're not supposed to be asking that question because we're talking about the World Cup."

No clash. No clash. You're the clash.

"But that's still the opp-"

If the NYTimes and Trump say things that can't possibly both be true at once, which one has proven over 80 years they're more credible? Trump is lying.

Here's the NYTimes article by the way:

Marco Rubio was incensed. Here he was in the Cabinet Room of the White House, the secretary of state, seated beside the president and listening to a litany of attacks from the richest man in the world.

Seated diagonally opposite, across the elliptical mahogany table, Elon Musk was letting Mr. Rubio have it, accusing him of failing to slash his staff.

You have fired “nobody,” Mr. Musk told Mr. Rubio, then scornfully added that perhaps the only person he had fired was a staff member from Mr. Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency.

Mr. Rubio had been privately furious with Mr. Musk for weeks, ever since his team effectively shuttered an entire agency that was supposedly under Mr. Rubio’s control: the United States Agency for International Development. But, in the extraordinary cabinet meeting on Thursday in front of President Trump and around 20 others — details of which have not been reported before — Mr. Rubio got his grievances off his chest.

Mr. Musk was not being truthful, Mr. Rubio said. What about the more than 1,500 State Department officials who took early retirement in buyouts? Didn’t they count as layoffs? He asked, sarcastically, whether Mr. Musk wanted him to rehire all those people just so he could make a show of firing them again. Then he laid out his detailed plans for reorganizing the State Department.

I mean, to be fair, rehiring a bunch of people he fired does 100% fit the established pattern.

Mr. Musk was unimpressed. He told Mr. Rubio he was “good on TV,” with the clear subtext being that he was not good for much else. Throughout all of this, the president sat back in his chair, arms folded, as if he were watching a tennis match.

After the argument dragged on for an uncomfortable time, Mr. Trump finally intervened to defend Mr. Rubio as doing a “great job.” Mr. Rubio has a lot to deal with, the president said. He is very busy, he is always traveling and on TV, and he has an agency to run. So everyone just needs to work together.

The meeting was a potential turning point after the frenetic first weeks of Mr. Trump’s second term. It yielded the first significant indication that Mr. Trump was willing to put some limits on Mr. Musk, whose efforts have become the subject of several lawsuits and prompted concerns from Republican lawmakers, some of whom have complained directly to the president.

We're a month in, President Musk and the Cabinet are at each other's throats, and Trump is admitting it in public.

EDIT: The NYTimes story is exceedingly specific with details. Trump just said "no". And let's be honest, if it was false, Trump would have sued for $10 billion for defamation by now.

[Muzjhath]

I will never understand why they actually believed that Trump would be better for them. The guy was using Palestinian as a slur during the campaign, and actively said that Biden wasn't doing enough carnage in Gaza. Harris was at least paying lip service towards a two-state solution, but instead they lazily lumped her with Biden as if as vice president she had any control over policy.

To understand this you need to look into why so few black men vote.
Is it self-destructive? Yes.

Yet it's the same underlying reasons.

Same as i think Trump's campaigning did more to just suppress voting numbers than actually sway them.

[Teriz]

Can anyone make an educated guess who "the globalists" are? Because if we go by richest people on the planet, which would make sense, then 7 out of 10 are US citizens plus elom murks who is Canadian?

It's shorthand for Jews. It's a not-so subtle dog whistle.

- - - Updated - - -

To understand this you need to look into why so few black men vote.
Is it self-destructive? Yes.

Yet it's the same underlying reasons.

Same as i think Trump's campaigning did more to just suppress voting numbers than actually sway them.

To be fair, the majority of black male voters voted for Harris.

Trump won the Palestinian vote in Dearborn by a solid margin.

[Rasulis]

Remember Trump released 2.2 billion gallons from California reservoirs? Pure photo ops.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/clima...ifornia-fires/

The idea that Southern California’s overall water supply hindered firefighting efforts during the Palisades and Eaton fires has been roundly rejected by experts. And vitally, the outlets of Lake Kaweah and Lake Success, which are just west of the Sierra Nevada and manage water for farms in the eastern San Joaquin Valley, are not set up for sending water far south.

It’s now clear that Army Corps officials knew that the sudden dam releases wouldn’t help Southern California, per the Post’s Friday piece, which featured information from an internal memo. But they dumped the water anyway.

The memo was written four days after the releases by Col. Chad W. Caldwell, commander of the Army Corps’ Sacramento District, the Post reported. According to the outlet, he wrote that on the afternoon before releases began, federal and state water officials told him, “It would take more time for them to activate their systems and they likely could not utilize the additional water with such short notice.”

Per the Post, he also wrote in the memo that the water from the two reservoirs “could not be delivered to Southern California directly,” but that the releases were aimed at following Trump’s executive order.

Caldwell also told a California water official that he had been told to take photos of the water being released and send them to Washington, D.C., the Post reported, citing an anonymous official. Sure enough, on Jan. 31, Trump claimed his political win with an image of water flowing from Lake Kaweah.

“Photo of beautiful water flow that I just opened in California,” he wrote in an X post that has amassed tens of millions of views. “Today, 1.6 billion gallons and, in 3 days, it will be 5.2 billion gallons. Everybody should be happy about this long fought Victory! I only wish they listened to me six years ago – There would have been no fire!”

Rather than actually assist Los Angeles County with firefighting, the water was used downstream of the reservoirs for “limited irrigation demand” and “groundwater recharge,” according to a joint statement from local water agencies. Caldwell’s memo said 2.5 billion gallons were released, per the Post’s report; that number conflicts with the local water agencies’ calculation of 6,700 acre-feet, or 2.2 billion gallons.

Rep. Jim Costa, a Democrat who represents a chunk of the San Joaquin Valley, wrote in a Feb. 1 letter to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth that the releases — coming as they did when there’s little demand for irrigation, as well as a low snowpack — pose “grave threats to a reliable water supply this year.”

He added: “This could increase the cost of water for farmers for this crop year exponentially due to dry conditions anticipated.”

Fortunately, March has been a good month with series of storms in California. The snowpack was at 88% of normal two days ago before the start of the current series of storms. Basically, we got lucky. It could have easily gone the other way.

[Edge-]

Remember Trump released 2.2 billion gallons from California reservoirs? Pure photo ops.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/clima...ifornia-fires/





Fortunately, March has been a good month with series of storms in California. The snowpack was at 88% of normal two days ago before the start of the current series of storms. Basically, we got lucky. It could have easily gone the other way.

Everything is performative. It's all about creating the illusion of a successful administration accomplishing a lot of things, when in reality it's a bunch of very dumb things happening very quickly that are being dishonestly reframed as positives.

The very textbook definition of propaganda.

[Breccia]

Newsweek gives a quick summary of the Insurrection Act of 1807 for what I'm sure is no reason at all, just a big coincidence.

The Insurrection Act of 1807 is a federal law that allows the president to deploy the military and National Guard to quell unrest, such as an insurrection or rebellion, or to enforce the law in certain situations.

The law is used only in extreme circumstances and has been invoked only a few times in the past century, most recently by President George H.W. Bush to quell the Los Angeles riots in 1992 after the police beating of Rodney King.

That followed mass unrest by tens of thousands of people that left 63 dead, around 2,300 injured and more than 12,000 arrested.

Other times the Act was invoked include when President Dwight D. Eisenhower ordered federal troops to escort Black students into Little Rock Central High School after Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus refused to comply with a federal desegregation order and during the 1967 Detroit Riot, which left 43 dead.

"Okay, why bring it up now?"

No idea. Probably just a coincidence. Well, I guess it could be because Day One he signed an Executive Order telling his Cabinet (he didn't have one yet) to give him a report on the southern border. And to recommend any actions necessary for National Security Lol. And, I guess it did contain the exact phrase "including whether to invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807."

"How much violence is happening on the border right now?"

Nearly none. To quote Trump's own Homeland Security Noem:

In February, there were just 8,326 apprehensions at the U.S. Mexico border. That is lowest number in recorded history. President @realDonaldTrump has delivered a powerful message and the world is taking notice: America's borders are CLOSED to lawbreakers.

"Sounds like things are under control. Why would he need the Insurrection Act?"

Eh, it's probably a coincidence. Although, I suppose the Act does let Trump order armed military force on American protestors. People upset that he took their Social Security, for example, or people in completely legal and Constitutionally protected protests on college campuses, or people he fired without cause. Or, you know, just random Americans.

The Act allows the use of armed military troops against American citiizens if

Whenever there is an insurrection in any State against its government, the President may, upon the request of its legislature or of its governor if the legislature cannot be convened, call into Federal service such of the militia of the other States, in the number requested by that State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to suppress the insurrection.

"So, a legislature would need to vote to allow federal troops to be used against that state's residents. That's not so bad."

Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he may call into Federal service such of the militia of any State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to enforce those laws or to suppress the rebellion.

"Oh...that's a little vague."

It is. "Whenever the President considers" really sounds like he gets to decide on a whim. Pretty dangerous if he's senile or retarded.

"Well at least it says the militia. Not just the entire armed forces."

We're not done.

The President, by using the militia or the armed forces, or both, or by any other means, shall take such measures as he considers necessary to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy, if it—

(1) so hinders the execution of the laws of that State, and of the United States within the State, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or

(2) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.

"There's that use of the word consider again."

Indeed. And this one doesn't say the militia of that state, does not need a state to ask for help, and adds the word "conspiracy" which, as we all know, is one of Trump's favorite things to make up.

When Trump demanded that report, he gave his as-yet-unnamed Cabinet 90 days to tell him what to do. We're at halftime. And everyone here already knows they'll tell Trump what Trump told them to tell Trump.

"When was the last time this was invoked?"

The last two Presidents to bring this up were the Bushes. Bush Sr. used it during the Rodney King riots in 1992. W considered using it to let troops help patrol the post-Katrina streets, but was talked down. By contrast, JFK ordered the Alabama National Guard to stand down and permit children who happened to be of African heritage to attend the same public schools as the children of whiny little KKK bitches. So it does come up time to time.

The difference seems to be, this time, that previous Presidents didn't say "I don't know if there's an emergency or not, tell me in 90 days". That's...not what "emergency" means. And again, even Team Trump admits things there are not really all that bad, because the numbers they swear are real now that they're in charge are the most bigly and the most yuge in human history.

"Okay, so why is this even being brought up?"

Hey, remember all those posts I made that Trump's surge of evictions wasn't, you know, working? As much as the text of the law makes it seem like Trump could order Marines to just fire on protestors, I don't think most Marines would do that, and Trump would rather not be seen as a leader whose orders are refused. I do think that Texas will ask for help defending their border from Mexican rapists, and Trump will shrug and say "well gosh, hands tied" and completely subvert the intent of the law to send thousands of troops to defend a border that even he says isn't that bad.

"Okay, but why?"

Because literally everything else he's doing is failing. The courts overrule him being able to fire his own employees. The House and Senate's budget doesn't have $5,000 checks for every American, but it does have cuts to Social Security and Medicare. He can't keep a consistent tariff and can't keep the DOW Jones above water. He reversed GDP growth in one month. A black guy held up a sign at his speech, how dare he? Neither Ukraine nor Putin are listening to him, no matter how much he threatens them. Also, where are his family? Where are his wife and children? Trump's been trapped in a box with nothing but his own failures and President Elon "my second rocket also exploded" Musk.

And that's why his poll numbers are plunging.

Trump is desperate to change the narrative away from "I am a failure and a loser". He's a bully, he idolizes violence, and he likes playing with his toys. I think there is a greater than 50% chance he orders the Army to stand in the Texas sun, not doing anything, just to keep the cultists who voted for him from yelling about their cut benefits and their measles deaths.

[Tech614]

Sometimes, you see a thought just perfectly expressed by another, and there's no reason to change a thing! Yes, I share his opinion. But if you don't have a response, that's fine.

Actions speak louder than words. I've seen plenty of people that pay lip service against antisemitism, but when it comes to college campuses, they suddenly fill up on excuses. Very frail excuses.

Like classifying "content-discriminatory policies, intimidation, harassment, property destruction, and assault" as "rhetoric" which you oppose. Columbia had their chance, now comes the consequences.

https://x.com/SenFettermanPA/status/1898080811301454149

I guess if you missed all the hubbub, maybe this is the proper response: we're just setting right all the stuff you ignored or missed, no need to reconsider the historical record.

Let's be very clear, Drump gives 0 fucks about any anti-Semitism.

He only gives a fuck about trying to silence students from protesting a genocide committed by Israel and their universities continuing to maintain contracts with Israel.

Don't let the facts get in the way of you standing on your soap box and trying to claim other people are the bigots though. You ain't fooling anybody.

[tehdang]

Dude, you wanna talk antisemitism? YOU? Are you for real?

Do I have to remind you that you voted 3 times for a guy, who cheered on actual Nazis running around with tiki torches chanting 'Jews will not replace us'. You voted for a guy, who called them very fine people.

You are an antisemite. You are a fascist. Stop wasting precious oxygen.

Nah people just projected their insecurities onto me. But people enjoy telling me they know more about who I voted for than I do.

It's your side that sees violence, intimidation, and property destruction of Jews on campus and whistles past it spewing platitudes about protest. Well, those of you that deign to even notice it do that. Some just deflect to Trump or Republicans. Gondrin does the platitudes on protest, you pretend to not even notice antisemitism from the left.

Let's be very clear, Drump gives 0 fucks about any anti-Semitism.

He only gives a fuck about trying to silence students from protesting a genocide committed by Israel and their universities continuing to maintain contracts with Israel.

Don't let the facts get in the way of you standing on your soap box and trying to claim other people are the bigots though. You ain't fooling anybody.

Again, nice little slide and pivot. Antisemitism on campus is finally getting a belated civil rights and antidiscrimination pushback? Better talk about who the president cares about and Israeli genocide.

The issue is starting to be addressed. You can circle back around in 6 months when there's some NYT deep-dive on how Republicans made inroads among Jewish minority groups, and what the cause of that was. It doesn't actually *need* to have the opposition being clued-in to the issues to address it at this time. That's one of the benefits of being out of power.

[Xath]

https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/...p-20201819.php

This is what I'm worried and have been since that EO because he has the yes men in charge now who will order soldiers to shoot he tried to do it last time which people have forgotten about but the people in charge refused to do it.

[Breccia]

Nah people just projected their insecurities onto me.

You support a rapist felon king. There's no reason to project insecurities when you're broadcasting your own.

[Corvus]

I'm not sure Trump can afford to fall out with president Musk. Musk is just a big a narcissistic sociopath and by now knows way too much and has backdoors in too many places - if Trump tries to burn Musk, I'd hate to see the damage Musk would cause in return.

[Fugus]

I'm not sure Trump can afford to fall out with president Musk. Musk is just a big a narcissistic sociopath and by now knows way too much and has backdoors in too many places - if Trump tries to burn Musk, I'd hate to see the damage Musk would cause in return.

The big question is, would the damage Musk did burning Trump and showing all the stuff Trump and him did be more or less damaging than Trump and Musk continuing on the road they are going down.

There is no good option in this, just which is the "Least bad".

Edit: And also, if they are willing to do that because they both seem to have a certain "affinity" for Putin and Russia. If they feud and it hurts Russia's plans, they both might be in trouble from their boss.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Nah people just projected their insecurities onto me. But people enjoy telling me they know more about who I voted for than I do.

It's your side that sees violence, intimidation, and property destruction of Jews on campus and whistles past it spewing platitudes about protest. Well, those of you that deign to even notice it do that. Some just deflect to Trump or Republicans. Gondrin does the platitudes on protest, you pretend to not even notice antisemitism from the left.

Again, nice little slide and pivot. Antisemitism on campus is finally getting a belated civil rights and antidiscrimination pushback? Better talk about who the president cares about and Israeli genocide.

The issue is starting to be addressed. You can circle back around in 6 months when there's some NYT deep-dive on how Republicans made inroads among Jewish minority groups, and what the cause of that was. It doesn't actually *need* to have the opposition being clued-in to the issues to address it at this time. That's one of the benefits of being out of power.

Equivocating Zionists to Jews is itself antisemitic. Most Jews separate themselves from the violent zionist ideology, it's the horrible and cruel MAGA conservatives who continue to try and say that Zionists and Jews are the same thing to try and smear people protesting against the genocide of a population that includes babies women and children. But you love that baby murder as long as it's Palestinians because even Zionists have said that babies are guilty of terrorism by association.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm not sure Trump can afford to fall out with president Musk. Musk is just a big a narcissistic sociopath and by now knows way too much and has backdoors in too many places - if Trump tries to burn Musk, I'd hate to see the damage Musk would cause in return.

I keep saying this, Trump wont he election explicitly because of Musk. Musk running Trump propaganda on X, Musk donating 350 million directly to Trump, and very likely tampering with the votes. MAGA needs Musk for future elections so they're doing their best to give Musk full control of government operation without actually admitting that he is.

[Breccia]

So what does the new House budget look like?

We have to remain UNITED — NO DISSENT — Fight for another day when the timing is right. VERY IMPORTANT. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!

Well, from Trump's tone, you might assume it was a CR. And you'd be mostly correct.

More details about the bill include that it doesn't have a trillion dollars handed to Americans, as President Musk asked. It does also call for looking into defunding the IRS, which I admit, is a bold move to put into a budget based on money brought in by the IRS.

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (Conn.), the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, voiced strong criticism of the funding plan on Saturday, dubbing the measure as a “power grab for the White House and further allows unchecked billionaire Elon Musk and President Trump to steal from the American people.”

“Reading the CR bill text now,” she wrote on the social platform X. “Republicans are zeroing out the Toxic Exposures Fund (to care for veterans exposed to burn pits, Agent Orange, and other toxic substances) on October 1. They cut $23 billion from their own bill they passed last year. You can’t make this stuff up.”

At the same time, their Republican counterparts have sought to pin blame on Democrats over the stopgap, citing their push for assurances that the administration will spend the money as directed – which GOP leaders have panned as a nonstarter.

You read that correctly. Democrats said "We, as Congress, should say the money we itemized in the budget be spent as itemized" and Republicans said "No, we're going to let Trump spend it however he wants."

Some hardline conservatives had warned ahead of the release that their support for the stopgap plan could be in jeopardy depending on the price tag, while pressing for offsets for any potential add-ons, including in areas like defense.

At the same time, defense hawks have sounded the alarm over how defense programs would fare under the plan in recent weeks.

“The costs of deterring war pale in comparison to the costs of fighting one. If Congress is unwilling to make deterrent investments today, then discussions about urgency of looming threats — particularly the ‘pacing threat’ of China — carries little weight,” Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) wrote in an op-ed published by The Washington Post days back.

Trump is begging for NO DISSENT because there's no wiggle room. This is likely why it'll remain a CR. Multiple facets of the GOP have conflicting demands that can't possibly both be in there at once. So, CR.

[NED funded]

I dont think there is disagreement that Columbia protests were antisemitic. Thats not the issue, Columbia is infamous for being obsessed about the issue and being very antisemitic aboutt it. The issue people have is whether that justifies cutting funding. Its literally a retaliation over speech you dont like. Would you be okay with presidents going over colleges that dont immediately support BLM and accuse them of racism or something like that?

[Polgara]

Columbia is infamous for being obsessed about the issue and being very antisemitic about it.

Did you just make this shit up on the spot for fun?