America

[Mikey Brown]

So... Guantanamo eh?

[Puja]

So... Guantanamo eh?

People before the election: "Stop being alarmist - Trump won't set up actual concentration camps if he wins. You just compare everything you don't like to the Nazis."

Although, I suppose in fairness, he's not setting a concentration camp up, just expanding the one that the US already had in case of emergencies/suspicious foreigners, so technically speaking they're still correct.

Puja

[Son of Mathonwy]

So... Guantanamo eh?

People before the election: "Stop being alarmist - Trump won't set up actual concentration camps if he wins. You just compare everything you don't like to the Nazis."

Although, I suppose in fairness, he's not setting a concentration camp up, just expanding the one that the US already had in case of emergencies/suspicious foreigners, so technically speaking they're still correct.

Puja

I'm sure the detainees will have nothing to worry about, America always respects international law.

Obama should have shut the place down.

[Puja]

So... Guantanamo eh?

People before the election: "Stop being alarmist - Trump won't set up actual concentration camps if he wins. You just compare everything you don't like to the Nazis."

Although, I suppose in fairness, he's not setting a concentration camp up, just expanding the one that the US already had in case of emergencies/suspicious foreigners, so technically speaking they're still correct.

Puja

I'm sure the detainees will have nothing to worry about, America always respects international law.

Obama should have shut the place down.

Obama should've done a lot of things more ethically, but that one is pretty high on the list.

In retrospect, he should've used his incredibly short time (24 working days between illnesses, death, appeals over elections, special elections, etc) with a supermajority to fix US democracy rather than pass the Affordable Care Act. The latter was hugely more important in terms of the impact it had on American lives and his legacy, so I understand why he made the choices that he did, but with 20:20 hindsight, over the long-term, life would've been a fuck of a lot easier for Democrats if he'd used that time to get rid of the electoral college, and get DC and Puerto Rico in as states. An additional 4 votes in the Senate would've made it easier to pass legislation later (not to mention preventing the Mitch McConnell fuckery over judge confirmations) and Trump could not have won 2016 without the electoral college.

Puja

[Son of Mathonwy]

People before the election: "Stop being alarmist - Trump won't set up actual concentration camps if he wins. You just compare everything you don't like to the Nazis."

Although, I suppose in fairness, he's not setting a concentration camp up, just expanding the one that the US already had in case of emergencies/suspicious foreigners, so technically speaking they're still correct.

Puja

I'm sure the detainees will have nothing to worry about, America always respects international law.

Obama should have shut the place down.

Obama should've done a lot of things more ethically, but that one is pretty high on the list.

In retrospect, he should've used his incredibly short time (24 working days between illnesses, death, appeals over elections, special elections, etc) with a supermajority to fix US democracy rather than pass the Affordable Care Act. The latter was hugely more important in terms of the impact it had on American lives and his legacy, so I understand why he made the choices that he did, but with 20:20 hindsight, over the long-term, life would've been a fuck of a lot easier for Democrats if he'd used that time to get rid of the electoral college, and get DC and Puerto Rico in as states. An additional 4 votes in the Senate would've made it easier to pass legislation later (not to mention preventing the Mitch McConnell fuckery over judge confirmations) and Trump could not have won 2016 without the electoral college.

Puja

Agreed there are more important things (fixing the Supreme Court too, in addition to your list), and more difficult things. Getting rid of Guantanamo would have been far easier (as far as I'm aware), as it wouldn't have required a supermajority, not even sure it would have needed a vote in the houses at all? Isn't it like declaring war, just a decision for the President?

Of course, closing Guantanamo as a detention centre/gulag wouldn't stop a future Trump or Bush from reopening it or building one elsewhere (Greenland, perhaps?) but it would have made it more difficult, it would have pushed back the excesses of the far-right, which is, kind-of, one of the jobs of the left (or what passes for it in the states).

[Puja]

I'm sure the detainees will have nothing to worry about, America always respects international law.

Obama should have shut the place down.

Obama should've done a lot of things more ethically, but that one is pretty high on the list.

In retrospect, he should've used his incredibly short time (24 working days between illnesses, death, appeals over elections, special elections, etc) with a supermajority to fix US democracy rather than pass the Affordable Care Act. The latter was hugely more important in terms of the impact it had on American lives and his legacy, so I understand why he made the choices that he did, but with 20:20 hindsight, over the long-term, life would've been a fuck of a lot easier for Democrats if he'd used that time to get rid of the electoral college, and get DC and Puerto Rico in as states. An additional 4 votes in the Senate would've made it easier to pass legislation later (not to mention preventing the Mitch McConnell fuckery over judge confirmations) and Trump could not have won 2016 without the electoral college.

Puja

Agreed there are more important things (fixing the Supreme Court too, in addition to your list), and more difficult things. Getting rid of Guantanamo would have been far easier (as far as I'm aware), as it wouldn't have required a supermajority, not even sure it would have needed a vote in the houses at all? Isn't it like declaring war, just a decision for the President?

Of course, closing Guantanamo as a detention centre/gulag wouldn't stop a future Trump or Bush from reopening it or building one elsewhere (Greenland, perhaps?) but it would have made it more difficult, it would have pushed back the excesses of the far-right, which is, kind-of, one of the jobs of the left (or what passes for it in the states).

I think the issue was partly the political capital it would've cost him (in a post 9/11 America, being "soft on terrorism" loses you votes in Congress, even Democratic ones), and partly the actual logistics of doing it, because closing it would mean finding a place for all the people who are there, a lot of whom have not been through any kind of legal process that could result in them being imprisoned anywhere else (not to mention that, if they tried to go through the legal process, they don't have the evidence for them).

Easier to promise that you're going to close Guantanamo when you're running for re-election than it is to actually get into the 100s of small, difficult decisions that would acutally be required for it to happen.

Puja

[Son of Mathonwy]

Obama should've done a lot of things more ethically, but that one is pretty high on the list.

In retrospect, he should've used his incredibly short time (24 working days between illnesses, death, appeals over elections, special elections, etc) with a supermajority to fix US democracy rather than pass the Affordable Care Act. The latter was hugely more important in terms of the impact it had on American lives and his legacy, so I understand why he made the choices that he did, but with 20:20 hindsight, over the long-term, life would've been a fuck of a lot easier for Democrats if he'd used that time to get rid of the electoral college, and get DC and Puerto Rico in as states. An additional 4 votes in the Senate would've made it easier to pass legislation later (not to mention preventing the Mitch McConnell fuckery over judge confirmations) and Trump could not have won 2016 without the electoral college.

Puja

Agreed there are more important things (fixing the Supreme Court too, in addition to your list), and more difficult things. Getting rid of Guantanamo would have been far easier (as far as I'm aware), as it wouldn't have required a supermajority, not even sure it would have needed a vote in the houses at all? Isn't it like declaring war, just a decision for the President?

Of course, closing Guantanamo as a detention centre/gulag wouldn't stop a future Trump or Bush from reopening it or building one elsewhere (Greenland, perhaps?) but it would have made it more difficult, it would have pushed back the excesses of the far-right, which is, kind-of, one of the jobs of the left (or what passes for it in the states).

I think the issue was partly the political capital it would've cost him (in a post 9/11 America, being "soft on terrorism" loses you votes in Congress, even Democratic ones), and partly the actual logistics of doing it, because closing it would mean finding a place for all the people who are there, a lot of whom have not been through any kind of legal process that could result in them being imprisoned anywhere else (not to mention that, if they tried to go through the legal process, they don't have the evidence for them).

Easier to promise that you're going to close Guantanamo when you're running for re-election than it is to actually get into the 100s of small, difficult decisions that would acutally be required for it to happen.

Puja

Not a simple thing but entirely doable. Shameful that it was still in place after 8 years.
Similarly shameful for Trump l and Biden, not to mention Bush, obviously.

[J Dory]

And now we have a trade war between the USA and Canada, all to solve a non existent trade deficit. Four years of wasted time as countries negotiate this buffoons ego.

[Which Tyler]

No, no, it's not "to solve the trade deficit" it's "to solve the national emergency of Fentanyl smuggling"


Elsewhere in USA, in Tennessee, it's now "illegal for lawmakers to vote for policies perceived as opposing President Donald Trump's agenda."
Because nothing says "healthy democracy" like imprisoning people who vote against you
https://www.newsweek.com/tennessee-bill ... es-2023749

[Son of Mathonwy]

No, no, it's not "to solve the trade deficit" it's "to solve the national emergency of Fentanyl smuggling"


Elsewhere in USA, in Tennessee, it's now "illegal for lawmakers to vote for policies perceived as opposing President Donald Trump's agenda."
Because nothing says "healthy democracy" like imprisoning people who vote against you
https://www.newsweek.com/tennessee-bill ... es-2023749

Yep, Russia used to be a democracy too. Americans don't believe it could happen to them.

[Puja]

Elon Musk and his highly amusingly meme-named department have been given complete and unfettered access to the US Bureau of Fiscal Service, which is the US Treasury's financial payment system. This has happened through several long-standing and well-respected civil servants standing up to Trump and refusing to hand over the keys to the kingdom, and then being forcibly removed from their positions by security and being forced to resign, until there was no-one left in the way.

To confirm, DOGE is not an official government department, Musk has not been confirmed by Congress as any formal agent of the government, and he has no legal authority other than Trump's ear. And he now has access to a system which controls nearly 90% of all government payments (including social security, the wages of civil servants, and grants and tax credits that go to Musk's companies and to his competitors), $5.47 TRILLION of government income, and which contains the confidential financial information of hundreds of millions of Americans. He has the capability to stop payments on pretty much anything he likes (or doesn't like, probably more accurately), including the wages of government employees who disagree with him, funding for departments he disagrees with, and his business competitors.

To say that again, because I can't take it all in with just one repetition, Musk has literally no authority and now has power to decide what the US government spends money on, regardless of Congress's wishes.

Even if we require no malevolence to the man who spent $44billion buying a tech empire because he was upset that people insulted him on it (and who has now declared that criticising the Trump administration will be a bannable offence going forwards on said tech empire) and assume that he has no ill intentions at all, this is also the same dude that tried to make Twitter "more efficient" by firing a bunch of people based on facile assumptions that he knew what he was doing and caused massive outages. That kind of "I don't understand what that's for, so therefore we can get rid of it" attitude is not something that should be interacting with the US Government's ability to make financial transactions.

And, while we're at it, let's not bother with assuming that he has no ill intentions at all. He's a paper billionaire, with Twitter being bought on credit and losing money hand over fist and Tesla massively overvalued and trading on his reputation, and he is absolutely planning on looting the fuck out of the USA to bolster his fortune and "win" the prize of becoming the first trillionaire.

Puja

[Son of Mathonwy]

Elon Musk and his highly amusingly meme-named department have been given complete and unfettered access to the US Bureau of Fiscal Service, which is the US Treasury's financial payment system. This has happened through several long-standing and well-respected civil servants standing up to Trump and refusing to hand over the keys to the kingdom, and then being forcibly removed from their positions by security and being forced to resign, until there was no-one left in the way.

To confirm, DOGE is not an official government department, Musk has not been confirmed by Congress as any formal agent of the government, and he has no legal authority other than Trump's ear. And he now has access to a system which controls nearly 90% of all government payments (including social security, the wages of civil servants, and grants and tax credits that go to Musk's companies and to his competitors), $5.47 TRILLION of government income, and which contains the confidential financial information of hundreds of millions of Americans. He has the capability to stop payments on pretty much anything he likes (or doesn't like, probably more accurately), including the wages of government employees who disagree with him, funding for departments he disagrees with, and his business competitors.

To say that again, because I can't take it all in with just one repetition, Musk has literally no authority and now has power to decide what the US government spends money on, regardless of Congress's wishes.

Even if we require no malevolence to the man who spent $44billion buying a tech empire because he was upset that people insulted him on it (and who has now declared that criticising the Trump administration will be a bannable offence going forwards on said tech empire) and assume that he has no ill intentions at all, this is also the same dude that tried to make Twitter "more efficient" by firing a bunch of people based on facile assumptions that he knew what he was doing and caused massive outages. That kind of "I don't understand what that's for, so therefore we can get rid of it" attitude is not something that should be interacting with the US Government's ability to make financial transactions.

And, while we're at it, let's not bother with assuming that he has no ill intentions at all. He's a paper billionaire, with Twitter being bought on credit and losing money hand over fist and Tesla massively overvalued and trading on his reputation, and he is absolutely planning on looting the fuck out of the USA to bolster his fortune and "win" the prize of becoming the first trillionaire.

Puja

This is the US with its famous checks and balances. The state is crumbling like a banana republic. I thought the UK was bad under Johnson, but this is next level stuff. Trump has no one responsible in his cabinet to tell him no, so he just demands everything. And so far, he seems to be getting it, whether it's legal or not.

I'd say it was a coup but since the Democrats aren't even fighting back it hardly counts as such. It looks (as some have said) like Vichy France, the Dems offering no resistance. What if he just didn't hold elections in 4 years' time. Would anyone resist?

Musk can just pay himself and Trump, and Trump can just pardon the two of them for the theft. Not that anyone would have enough of a spine to make an arrest.

This all seems so chaotic that I can imagine a general installing a 'temporary military government just to stabilize things'.

[Sandydragon]

Elon Musk and his highly amusingly meme-named department have been given complete and unfettered access to the US Bureau of Fiscal Service, which is the US Treasury's financial payment system. This has happened through several long-standing and well-respected civil servants standing up to Trump and refusing to hand over the keys to the kingdom, and then being forcibly removed from their positions by security and being forced to resign, until there was no-one left in the way.

To confirm, DOGE is not an official government department, Musk has not been confirmed by Congress as any formal agent of the government, and he has no legal authority other than Trump's ear. And he now has access to a system which controls nearly 90% of all government payments (including social security, the wages of civil servants, and grants and tax credits that go to Musk's companies and to his competitors), $5.47 TRILLION of government income, and which contains the confidential financial information of hundreds of millions of Americans. He has the capability to stop payments on pretty much anything he likes (or doesn't like, probably more accurately), including the wages of government employees who disagree with him, funding for departments he disagrees with, and his business competitors.

To say that again, because I can't take it all in with just one repetition, Musk has literally no authority and now has power to decide what the US government spends money on, regardless of Congress's wishes.

Even if we require no malevolence to the man who spent $44billion buying a tech empire because he was upset that people insulted him on it (and who has now declared that criticising the Trump administration will be a bannable offence going forwards on said tech empire) and assume that he has no ill intentions at all, this is also the same dude that tried to make Twitter "more efficient" by firing a bunch of people based on facile assumptions that he knew what he was doing and caused massive outages. That kind of "I don't understand what that's for, so therefore we can get rid of it" attitude is not something that should be interacting with the US Government's ability to make financial transactions.

And, while we're at it, let's not bother with assuming that he has no ill intentions at all. He's a paper billionaire, with Twitter being bought on credit and losing money hand over fist and Tesla massively overvalued and trading on his reputation, and he is absolutely planning on looting the fuck out of the USA to bolster his fortune and "win" the prize of becoming the first trillionaire.

Puja

To call this disturbing just doesn’t capture the full gravity. Musk is operating unlawfully. And no one seems to care.

[Which Tyler]

Thank duck that this hunt isn't anything to do with government anymore
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... de-tariffs

If Trumps starts a trade war with the UK, the UK shouldn't start a trade war by standing up for itself, but bend over and take it, because we don't have the economic might of Canada or Mexico

[Mellsblue]

Canada and Mexico did bend over re Trumps demands. Sadly, we don’t have a border to bend over.
Also, from what I’ve read, UK govt policy is to bend over unless Trump gets far too aggressive. Luckily, it sounds like we’re along way down his list.

[Which Tyler]

Define "bend over re Trumps demands"
From what I can tell, Canada continued doing exactly what they were already doing - with maybe a name change.
Mexico sent some troops to sit around in a different barracks.

[Puja]

Define "bend over re Trumps demands"
From what I can tell, Canada continued doing exactly what they were already doing - with maybe a name change.
Mexico sent some troops to sit around in a different barracks.

As I understand it, both of them are taking actions that had already been agreed in a deal with Biden and are allowing Trump to believe that he's forced them into it. Smart play.

Puja

[Which Tyler]

Define "bend over re Trumps demands"
From what I can tell, Canada continued doing exactly what they were already doing - with maybe a name change.
Mexico sent some troops to sit around in a different barracks.

As I understand it, both of them are taking actions that had already been agreed in a deal with Biden and are allowing Trump to believe that he's forced them into it. Smart play.

Puja

Certainly Canada - I can't find a figure for the troops Mexico were going to send anyway, so having that may or may not be a new thing.

I'd add Trumps huge win over Columbia by threatening tarrifs, then not applying them because... he agreed to everything Columbia demanded, and got nothing at all in return (except some liberal tears, and to dominate another news cycle).

I suspect that those around Trump knew about the deals Biden had done with Mexico and Canada, and probably told Trump (whether the blancmange he uses for a brain could hold onto that information though...). It was about being seen to throw his weight around, be strong, and get a win. Reality never has all that much to do with Trumpian pronouncements.
People, and media, fall for it - and will continue to repeat the lie for years to come (see Mandela effect). "We used to say a lie was halfway round the world before the truth had got its boots on. Now lies are like decrepit satellites that circle the Earth for ever" GNU Sir Terry

[Mellsblue]

Not how it’s being reported by the BBC, The Times and a few others but hey ho. The general consensus is that Columbia caved over accepting deported migrants.
Who knows who’s falling for what.

[Son of Mathonwy]

Thank duck that this hunt isn't anything to do with government anymore
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... de-tariffs

If Trumps starts a trade war with the UK, the UK shouldn't start a trade war by standing up for itself, but bend over and take it, because we don't have the economic might of Canada or Mexico

Nothing like a has-been suck-up of a Tory to undermine our bargaining position.

[Which Tyler]

Not how it’s being reported by the BBC, The Times and a few others but hey ho. The general consensus is that Columbia caved over accepting deported migrants.
Who knows who’s falling for what.

They always accepted the deportations.
They rejected two(?) aeroplanes' worth because Trump did a publicity stunt, and sent them handcuffed etc on a military flight, instead of not handcuffed, and on civilian flights, as they always had been before, and we're again after the stunt.

I believe I mentioned about the press falling for it.
They also fell for the Canada and Mexico caving in line as well.
And so many lies from so many politicians.

[Mellsblue]

From Trudeau’s X account:
‘In addition, Canada is making new commitments to appoint a Fentanyl Czar, we will list cartels as terrorists, ensure 24/7 eyes on the border, launch a Canada- U.S. Joint Strike Force to combat organized crime, fentanyl and money laundering. I have also signed a new intelligence directive on organized crime and fentanyl and we will be backing it with $200 million.’
For a 30 days pause.

[Mellsblue]

Not how it’s being reported by the BBC, The Times and a few others but hey ho. The general consensus is that Columbia caved over accepting deported migrants.
Who knows who’s falling for what.

They always accepted the deportations.
They rejected two(?) aeroplanes' worth because Trump did a publicity stunt, and sent them handcuffed etc on a military flight, instead of not handcuffed, and on civilian flights, as they always had been before, and we're again after the stunt.

I believe I mentioned about the press falling for it.
They also fell for the Canada and Mexico caving in line as well.
And so many lies from so many politicians.

Reuters, NYT and CNN all reporting it differently but hey ho. Everyone’s fallen for it, seemingly.

[Which Tyler]

Moving on from a discussion where no-one's going to convince the other...

Trump's next landgrab
https://us.cnn.com/2025/02/04/politics/ ... index.html
Use US troops to ethnically cleanse Gaza, and then have it as a US vassal.

[Mikey Brown]

I mean is that even new? Isn’t the whole stance on Israel because it functions as a US military outpost anyway?