EO just a "shock event" -- what is the real goal?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The piece is well-sourced, and each data point probably is true and verifiable, but the dots are strung together in a weird way that doesn't totally make sense. Given a set of facts, you can create multiple narratives that fit. That doesn't make any particular narrative true.

I don't buy the "shock to the system" thing because there is still no evidence that we are being distracted from something. And as someone who works in government, this just seems like actions taken by people who do not understand how government works. Being President is not like being CEO, where you just order something and it's done. These clowns are definitely evil but they also are ignorant of the bureaucracy, legal framework, political system, etc etc that they are dealing with.

The courts will keep them in check, even if some aspects of the EO remain, and congress will step in eventually too when they realize the political/institutional risk of enabling him is greater than the gain. And 2018 will be a bloodbath.

This is where I think you are wrong. They certainly DO understand how government works and they are purposefully testing it. The courts DID try to keep them in check and DHS defied the courts - you really do not see that as deliberate and with purpose?

Exactly. You're trying to tell me they deleted the Judicial Branch from the White House website on January 20th as a kind of oops?

Does the actual judicial branch disappear when the website gets taken down? The courts are slow, and if CBP keeps defying orders the ACLU should and probably will file to find them in contempt. Judges may send out the federal marshals, who knows. But the bottom line is the three branches of government have real power over each other, they just have to use it, and eventually they will. Trump can't make Congress and the courts go away.

If they understood how government works they would've had professionals draft the EO with OLC oversight and coordinated with the agencies responsible for implementation to avoid the mass confusion and chaos of the weekend. It would've been a shitty EO but legally tight, pissing people off but leaving them mostly with no options to fight back. There are parts of that EO that *will* hold up in court, after all. But by fucking it up overall both on substance and process they left themselves incredibly vulnerable to public outrage and legal challenges, and they created political space for Republicans to push back. Chaos only works for them if they are still in control, but they gave up that control by being sloppy and overreaching.

That's what it looks like to the left, who wants to see him as incompetent. But to the right it looks like power. He passed it quickly, he said F you to the judges, he fired the AG.

He's giving the people that elected him exactly what he said he would. Shumer crying on TV and a bunch of lefty lawyers screaming about the civil rights of refugees is not going to win the mid terms.

But if this is a "shock event", that's probably intentional, right? If I were testing things out I'd start with something that supporters would get behind so that critics can be brushed off as whiners. What happens if next time it's something even republicans are squeamish about?

Well, it can be more than one thing at once. Shock event to test the waters, and a set up to invalidate everyone who speaks out about it. If there is a terrorist attack now he may be banking on people to turn against those who spoke out against the ban, including judges, protestors, other politicians (the article makes this point).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The piece is well-sourced, and each data point probably is true and verifiable, but the dots are strung together in a weird way that doesn't totally make sense. Given a set of facts, you can create multiple narratives that fit. That doesn't make any particular narrative true.

I don't buy the "shock to the system" thing because there is still no evidence that we are being distracted from something. And as someone who works in government, this just seems like actions taken by people who do not understand how government works. Being President is not like being CEO, where you just order something and it's done. These clowns are definitely evil but they also are ignorant of the bureaucracy, legal framework, political system, etc etc that they are dealing with.

The courts will keep them in check, even if some aspects of the EO remain, and congress will step in eventually too when they realize the political/institutional risk of enabling him is greater than the gain. And 2018 will be a bloodbath.

I sure hope that's the case. I definitely agree that Trump has no idea what he's doing, but am concerned about all of the people surrounding him who might know exactly what they are doing and are using him to advance their own scary agenda.

[Anonymous]

One thing that it was meant to hide:

- no EO on DACA, which Bannon/Alt-right wants but RNC is strongly opposed

-no EO yet on H1B,which Bannon/Alt-right wants but corporate America is strongly opposed


So they gave the Bannon/Alt-right some Muslim meat to chew on for now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One thing that it was meant to hide:

- no EO on DACA, which Bannon/Alt-right wants but RNC is strongly opposed

-no EO yet on H1B,which Bannon/Alt-right wants but corporate America is strongly opposed


So they gave the Bannon/Alt-right some Muslim meat to chew on for now.

So the point is to distract his own supporters who want these things? I so hope that's true....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The piece is well-sourced, and each data point probably is true and verifiable, but the dots are strung together in a weird way that doesn't totally make sense. Given a set of facts, you can create multiple narratives that fit. That doesn't make any particular narrative true.

I don't buy the "shock to the system" thing because there is still no evidence that we are being distracted from something. And as someone who works in government, this just seems like actions taken by people who do not understand how government works. Being President is not like being CEO, where you just order something and it's done. These clowns are definitely evil but they also are ignorant of the bureaucracy, legal framework, political system, etc etc that they are dealing with.

The courts will keep them in check, even if some aspects of the EO remain, and congress will step in eventually too when they realize the political/institutional risk of enabling him is greater than the gain. And 2018 will be a bloodbath.

This is where I think you are wrong. They certainly DO understand how government works and they are purposefully testing it. The courts DID try to keep them in check and DHS defied the courts - you really do not see that as deliberate and with purpose?

Exactly. You're trying to tell me they deleted the Judicial Branch from the White House website on January 20th as a kind of oops?

Does the actual judicial branch disappear when the website gets taken down? The courts are slow, and if CBP keeps defying orders the ACLU should and probably will file to find them in contempt. Judges may send out the federal marshals, who knows. But the bottom line is the three branches of government have real power over each other, they just have to use it, and eventually they will. Trump can't make Congress and the courts go away.

If they understood how government works they would've had professionals draft the EO with OLC oversight and coordinated with the agencies responsible for implementation to avoid the mass confusion and chaos of the weekend. It would've been a shitty EO but legally tight, pissing people off but leaving them mostly with no options to fight back. There are parts of that EO that *will* hold up in court, after all. But by fucking it up overall both on substance and process they left themselves incredibly vulnerable to public outrage and legal challenges, and they created political space for Republicans to push back. Chaos only works for them if they are still in control, but they gave up that control by being sloppy and overreaching.

That's what it looks like to the left, who wants to see him as incompetent. But to the right it looks like power. He passed it quickly, he said F you to the judges, he fired the AG.

Lol the judges fucked him right back, and it actually stuck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One thing that it was meant to hide:

- no EO on DACA, which Bannon/Alt-right wants but RNC is strongly opposed

-no EO yet on H1B,which Bannon/Alt-right wants but corporate America is strongly opposed


So they gave the Bannon/Alt-right some Muslim meat to chew on for now.

So the point is to distract his own supporters who want these things? I so hope that's true....

Well, there might be more than one goal, but this is one.

The Alt-right was getting upset/nervous right before inauguration (I posted here some links), so they had to throw them some meat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The piece is well-sourced, and each data point probably is true and verifiable, but the dots are strung together in a weird way that doesn't totally make sense. Given a set of facts, you can create multiple narratives that fit. That doesn't make any particular narrative true.

I don't buy the "shock to the system" thing because there is still no evidence that we are being distracted from something. And as someone who works in government, this just seems like actions taken by people who do not understand how government works. Being President is not like being CEO, where you just order something and it's done. These clowns are definitely evil but they also are ignorant of the bureaucracy, legal framework, political system, etc etc that they are dealing with.

The courts will keep them in check, even if some aspects of the EO remain, and congress will step in eventually too when they realize the political/institutional risk of enabling him is greater than the gain. And 2018 will be a bloodbath.

This is where I think you are wrong. They certainly DO understand how government works and they are purposefully testing it. The courts DID try to keep them in check and DHS defied the courts - you really do not see that as deliberate and with purpose?

Exactly. You're trying to tell me they deleted the Judicial Branch from the White House website on January 20th as a kind of oops?

Does the actual judicial branch disappear when the website gets taken down? The courts are slow, and if CBP keeps defying orders the ACLU should and probably will file to find them in contempt. Judges may send out the federal marshals, who knows. But the bottom line is the three branches of government have real power over each other, they just have to use it, and eventually they will. Trump can't make Congress and the courts go away.

If they understood how government works they would've had professionals draft the EO with OLC oversight and coordinated with the agencies responsible for implementation to avoid the mass confusion and chaos of the weekend. It would've been a shitty EO but legally tight, pissing people off but leaving them mostly with no options to fight back. There are parts of that EO that *will* hold up in court, after all. But by fucking it up overall both on substance and process they left themselves incredibly vulnerable to public outrage and legal challenges, and they created political space for Republicans to push back. Chaos only works for them if they are still in control, but they gave up that control by being sloppy and overreaching.

That's what it looks like to the left, who wants to see him as incompetent. But to the right it looks like power. He passed it quickly, he said F you to the judges, he fired the AG.

Lol the judges fucked him right back, and it actually stuck.

A lawyer friend said that if the EO wasn't written so poorly, it would be a lot harder to challenge in court.
I am not a lawyer so I don't know the details but that's what he said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The piece is well-sourced, and each data point probably is true and verifiable, but the dots are strung together in a weird way that doesn't totally make sense. Given a set of facts, you can create multiple narratives that fit. That doesn't make any particular narrative true.

I don't buy the "shock to the system" thing because there is still no evidence that we are being distracted from something. And as someone who works in government, this just seems like actions taken by people who do not understand how government works. Being President is not like being CEO, where you just order something and it's done. These clowns are definitely evil but they also are ignorant of the bureaucracy, legal framework, political system, etc etc that they are dealing with.

The courts will keep them in check, even if some aspects of the EO remain, and congress will step in eventually too when they realize the political/institutional risk of enabling him is greater than the gain. And 2018 will be a bloodbath.

This is where I think you are wrong. They certainly DO understand how government works and they are purposefully testing it. The courts DID try to keep them in check and DHS defied the courts - you really do not see that as deliberate and with purpose?

Exactly. You're trying to tell me they deleted the Judicial Branch from the White House website on January 20th as a kind of oops?

Does the actual judicial branch disappear when the website gets taken down? The courts are slow, and if CBP keeps defying orders the ACLU should and probably will file to find them in contempt. Judges may send out the federal marshals, who knows. But the bottom line is the three branches of government have real power over each other, they just have to use it, and eventually they will. Trump can't make Congress and the courts go away.

If they understood how government works they would've had professionals draft the EO with OLC oversight and coordinated with the agencies responsible for implementation to avoid the mass confusion and chaos of the weekend. It would've been a shitty EO but legally tight, pissing people off but leaving them mostly with no options to fight back. There are parts of that EO that *will* hold up in court, after all. But by fucking it up overall both on substance and process they left themselves incredibly vulnerable to public outrage and legal challenges, and they created political space for Republicans to push back. Chaos only works for them if they are still in control, but they gave up that control by being sloppy and overreaching.

That's what it looks like to the left, who wants to see him as incompetent. But to the right it looks like power. He passed it quickly, he said F you to the judges, he fired the AG.

Lol the judges fucked him right back, and it actually stuck.

Yup, things are getting interesting. It doesn't look good for him to lose. Unless of course, terror attack...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
A lawyer friend said that if the EO wasn't written so poorly, it would be a lot harder to challenge in court.
I am not a lawyer so I don't know the details but that's what he said.

I'm not a lawyer, but that seemed apparent to me from the beginning. The POTUS has fairly broad powers to implement the authority given to the Executive Branch around immigration. They could have done a lot within that authority (Obama did, though he also overstepped in a few cases). They chose to go so far outside that authority it precipitated ad hoc protests around the country overnight. You can blame those protests on liberal hysteria if you want, but a lot of the people protesting were not hysterical liberals. They managed both to violate laws and to stick a needle in the eye of people who could even be cautious allies or at least "look the other way"-ers (like Big Tech). That's just dumb.

And then they started bragging about protecting Christians and conflating the EO with Trump's "muslim ban" promise...bolstering a First Amendment challenge that might otherwise have been harder to mount. Dumb is too generous a word for that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A lawyer friend said that if the EO wasn't written so poorly, it would be a lot harder to challenge in court.
I am not a lawyer so I don't know the details but that's what he said.

I'm not a lawyer, but that seemed apparent to me from the beginning. The POTUS has fairly broad powers to implement the authority given to the Executive Branch around immigration. They could have done a lot within that authority (Obama did, though he also overstepped in a few cases). They chose to go so far outside that authority it precipitated ad hoc protests around the country overnight. You can blame those protests on liberal hysteria if you want, but a lot of the people protesting were not hysterical liberals. They managed both to violate laws and to stick a needle in the eye of people who could even be cautious allies or at least "look the other way"-ers (like Big Tech). That's just dumb.

And then they started bragging about protecting Christians and conflating the EO with Trump's "muslim ban" promise...bolstering a First Amendment challenge that might otherwise have been harder to mount. Dumb is too generous a word for that.

Here's what I don't get about this. When Trump himself was a businessman, he recognized the fact that immigrants are great workers and have been instrumental to the success of American economy in all sorts of ways. There's even some sort of interview, see below, between him and Bannon in which he says we need to avoid having talented immigrants go back to their countries, and Bannon (like the true racist he is) cites some totally false statistics about Asian CEOs in Silicon Valley and how we have to be a "civic" (read: white) society.

So is this all Bannon? Or does Trump stand by it? And if he does, he must have enough brain to know that CEOs and people in research & development, academia, business, and so on will all oppose it because the edge we have had over other countries is precisely in our ability to attract and retain talent from abroad. My best guess is that he's trying to appease his base to stay in power, since he actually doesn't have any economic plan to give them their jobs back he can at least try to appear as if he's doing everything in his power to whiten their society to a shiny gleam.


***

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-bannon-flattered-and-coaxed-trump-on-policies-key-to-the-alt-right/2016/11/15/53c66362-ab69-11e6-a31b-4b6397e625d0_story.html?utm_term=.f480881eb200

"Last November, for instance, Trump said he was concerned that foreign students attending Ivy League schools have to return home because of U.S. immigration laws.

“We have to be careful of that, Steve. You know, we have to keep our talented people in this country,” Trump said. He paused. Bannon said, “Um.”

“I think you agree with that,” Trump said. “Do you agree with that?”

Bannon was hesitant.

“When two-thirds or three-quarters of the CEOs in Silicon Valley are from South Asia or from Asia, I think .?.?. ” Bannon said, not finishing the sentence. “A country is more than an economy. We’re a civic society.”