DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Trump’s Campaign Promises. The scoreboard II

If you've been a non-fan of the Biden admin reinterpreting archaic language to re-invent "law", you'll probably be a fan of this. It actually amends the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act to future-proof. I know it's slim, but the outside chance another liberal-minded madman takes the helm with an eye on cultivating new voters requires all the advance checks and balances possible.

It also expands "crime of domestic violence" so that we can identify trash as what it is and ship it back where it came from.

If you're a fan of the 10,000 illegal immigrants in Texas alone charged with sexual offenses (more than 6,700 of those charges were for sexual assault), you probably won't like this bill. If you think it's about time we do something about it and quit acting like these are just wash-away statistics -- you'll love it.


On a side note and not really being talked about, what many will call "grandstanding" I call sending a message. Sanctuary cities now have a new set of circumstances to stand up to (and man-up to the pressure applied because of) while they wave their flag of "trying to protect".

If it's possible that they may face increased legal scrutiny by continuing to shield individuals who could be deportable under the expanded criteria, we should all be in favor of that. This pissing match needs to end with someone realizing they're peeing down their own leg so that we can get back to a sense of normality guided by common sense.

So are those 10k in Texas that were charged going to be deported after serving their sentence? I'm thinking the answer is yes. Convicted criminals are already deportable.

But first maybe we should wait until they're convicted?

So you think duplicating a law whose actual wording is something that's already law is "sending a message"?

Let me ask you, exactly what portion of this country do you really believe and wants convicted criminals that are in our country illegally to stay here? That's why this is grandstanding.

All you're doing is supporting one pissing match while claiming pissing matches should end.

I keep forgetting -- Thursday is "ignore responses and create new questions day". Not my favorite day as I have to constantly reword like I'm writing "Reading For Dummies" and my copy/paste fingers get tired.

You've been defending this trash for four years, plus you always have some unique insight to sexual predators, so I'll let you have the last word on this one.

And I have to read how to respond to the posts of dummies. So I guess we both have a problem here.

Show me one example of where I have ever defended people with an illegal status who have either committed a crime in this country or cross the border with a felony record ever be allowed to remain in this country? You won't because you can't.

Actually the only thing I've advocated for is that those who crossed the border illegally over 5 year ago who are working and have have committed no crimes be offered a path to citizenship. I don't see how removing productive, tax paying people who have proven they are not a criminal should be expelled from our country.

And once again that is too mean for far left liberals and not tough enough for trumpians.

This trash? You mean like a man who cheated on all three of his wives? Cheated on his current wife with a porn star? Claimed being rich and famous allowed him to grab women by the pu$$y and was convicted on 34 felony counts? Constantly threatens and calls people names who oppose him or won't go along with everything he says? Let me guess. You mean a different kind of trash?

Oh, crap, forgot to scream "Truuuummmp!!!"

So predictable.

Calling one side trash while you promote trash is just as predictable.

I wanted to make sure I circled back to this. Couldn't just do a quick post because it required some thought and it was a fair ask.

To answer your initial question, I would say the biggest was everything to do with the 2020 election. It certainly culminated in J6, but Mike Pence certifying the election was perhaps the most glaring example of "checking" Trump. I think that also serves as a double-down of my point as well. During that time, he had quite a combination of manipulators (Thomas, Stone, et al) who were beyond destructive, combined with enabled sycophants (Giuliani, Cruz) who I think exacerbated his impulses. I do think he is very easily manipulated and/or spun up by those who stroke his ego.

Some of the other times when he was held in check:

When Trump fired James Comey. We all remember it, but just from the Wikipedia page:

"Trump dismissed Comey by way of a termination letter in which he stated that he was acting on the recommendation of Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.[4][5][6] In the following days, he gave numerous explanations of the dismissal that contradicted his staff and also belied the initial impression that Sessions and Rosenstein had influenced his decision.[7][8] Trump publicly stated that he had already decided to fire Comey;[9] it later emerged that he had written his own early draft of the termination letter,[10] and had solicited the Rosenstein memo the day before citing it.[11] "

Another example is when Jeff Sessions recused himself from the Russia investigation, and then he, too, was "asked to resign."

The House Foreign Affairs Committee (both Republicans and Democrats) also had to pressure Trump to incorporate sanctions against Russia in 2019, which were legally mandated (this pertained to the nerve agent assassination in England). The same thing happened previously with sanctions pertaining to election interference.

Another example along that same theme has to do with Trump's appointment of Michael Flynn, which, to this day, absolutely terrifies me. FBI investigated and held it in check:

"On December 29, 2016, the day President Obama announced sanctions against Russia, Flynn discussed the sanctions with Kislyak, urging that Russia not retaliate.[439] Flynn initially denied speaking to Kislyak, then acknowledged the conversation but denied discussing the sanctions.[440][441] When it was revealed in February 2017 that U.S. intelligence agencies had evidence, through monitoring of the ambassador's communications, that he actually had discussed the sanctions, Flynn said he couldn't remember if he did or not.[440]

Upon Trump's inauguration on January 20, 2017, he appointed Flynn his National Security Advisor. On January 24, Flynn was interviewed by the FBI. Two days later, acting Attorney General Sally Yates informed the White House that Flynn was "compromised" by the Russians and possibly open to blackmail.[442] Flynn was forced to resign as national security advisor on February 13, 2017.[441]"

Keep in mind, there was also photographs of Flynn sitting next to Putin I believe at a dinner.

As you can tell, by nature of what I do, I am no fan of Russia. To be perfectly frank with you, I thought Obama botched relations with Russia horribly for the first six years of his administration. Awful. He seemed to turn it around after the Ukraine invasion and called Putin out for what he was. I was hoping Trump would continue that line of thought because of how strong his personality was. Needless to say, it was a letdown. The worst of which was when he gave into his impulses and AGREED WITH PUTIN OVER THE NSA on live television. I remember seeing that clip when I was on a treadmill at the gym after work. That had me abondoning all hope on his relationship with Russia. I stopped the treadmill and put my hands over my head just staring in disbelief. That was the moment when my disappointment with him on Russian stuff really started turning to anger.

Anyhow, other areas:

I suppose he wasn't really held in check on this one, but there were attempts to raise alarm: COVID-19 Outbreak, and I'm not talking about vaccines, but the initial response. He even had Republican Senators (Lamar Alexander IIRC) speaking out against how he downplayed the initial outbreak and kept undermining the whistle blowers.

Mattis resigning when Trump decided to abandon our allies in Syria. Mattis was my "boss" at the time and he was well decorated and respected. Former four star in that post. Now we have a talk show host.

David Shulkin getting fired and then talking about resisting efforts from the WH to privatize VA healthcare.

There is also all the fallout scenarios with John Kelly. He went into the administration as CoS who I think agreed vehemently with Trump on a lot of policy decisions, but I think was ready to hit the road, citing the chaos and impulsiveness of the WH.

There are probably other scenarios too, that I am forgetting, but I need to wrap this up for now.

Good discussion.

Something I thought at least you might be interested in if you didn't already know about it................

Federal Staff Erasing DEI Buzzwords to Escape Musk’s DOGE Axe

Workers are worried that using woke language could make them targets for job cuts.

Federal employees are editing out any mention of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in government documents to avoid being axed by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy’s budget purge.

They fear the new Department of Government Efficiency will target any woke language or policy speak as it launches the Trump administration’s avowed federal jobs cull.

Five sources from different government agencies told CNN that workers are changing the wording in performance reviews and job descriptions in an attempt to go under the radar.

Since Trump’s election victory, any mention of DEI has been dropped to avoid unwanted scrutiny. According to the insiders, even words that could be associated with DEI policies—such as “equity” or “diversification”—are being stripped from government documents.

The word “policy” is also being removed from written job descriptions and reviews.

Staff are said to be concerned that artificial intelligence will be used to scout out buzzwords to alert the administration cost-cutters even if the context has nothing to do with progressive policies.

“People are definitely reimagining how to communicate what they’ve done and do to try and escape scrutiny,” admitted one federal employee.

There was concern that DOGE would use a “hatchet not a scalpel” in finding roles to lose.

“It’s in line with what lots of organizations and the private sector are doing, changing the words they use,” Jason Briefel, head of policy and legislative affairs at the Senior Executive Association, which represents senior federal staff, told CNN.

Musk and Ramaswamy are leading the outside initiative and say they plan to implement the incoming president’s plan to slash the federal workforce and cut the federal budget by at least $1 trillion.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/federal-staff-erasing-dei-buzzwords-to-escape-musks-doge-axe/

Trump Threatens to Bypass GOP Congress to Unleash MAGA Plans
Janna Brancolini
Fri, January 17, 2025 at 8:33 AM EST·4 min read
51

Donald Trump is threatening to bypass Congress to unleash his MAGA agenda, according to a report.
Jeenah Moon / REUTERS
If anyone was expecting moderate Republicans in Congress to temper Donald Trump’s more extreme plans on immigration and tariffs, the president-elect doesn’t plan to give them the chance, Trump told lawmakers this week.

During a two-hour meeting with Senate Republicans, Trump said he plans to immediately enact his MAGA vision instead of waiting for Congress to act, according to a new report in the Wall Street Journal. He has already prepared about 100 executive orders, and he has no qualms testing the legal limits of presidential authority, he said.

For months, Trump’s aides have been looking at obscure laws passed about 50 years ago that he can invoke to unilaterally carry out his plans and bypass congressional funding limits. Instead of feeling preemptively constrained by constitutional checks and balances, he plans to do what he wants and take his chances with the courts, the Journal reported.

“The American people can bank on President Trump using his executive power on day one to deliver on the promises he made to them on the campaign trail.” Trump transition spokesperson Karoline Leavitt told the Daily Beast in a statement.


For example, to help pay for his mass deportations, he plans to use the 1976 National Emergencies Act, which he also used to fund parts of his border wall during his first term. Previous presidents used the act to fund things like the response to the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks—not to fund something Congress had explicitly declined to pay for, the Journal noted.

Trump is also eyeing a provision in the 1944 Public Health Service Act called Title 42 that lets the government expel migrants coming from countries with communicable diseases. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention used it to lock border entry during the COVID-19 pandemic, and now, Trump is disease-shopping to find a new excuse to invoke it.


He also reportedly plans to issue an executive order limiting birthright citizenship, even though the 14th Amendment to the Constitution explicitly says, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.”

Instead of taking on the near-impossible task of changing the Constitution, he apparently wants to issue an executive order and then argue to the Supreme Court that the 14th Amendment doesn’t actually guarantee birthright citizenship.


Meanwhile, on the tariff front, Trump is reportedly intrigued by the idea of using the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act—which lets the president impose tariffs and economic sanctions during times of war or another national emergency—or the 1974 Trade Act, which allows tariffs to be used to address national security concerns.

In theory, those laws don’t just give the president unchecked power, though. The Supreme Court has held that any time a federal agency tries to enact a policy with “vast economic and political significance,” the courts have to scrutinize the law in question to determine whether Congress actually intended to give the agency that power.

The Supreme Court used this so-called “major questions doctrine,” to strike down two of President Joe Biden’s key policies in 2022 and 2023. It remains to be seen whether the justices will hold Trump—who appointed three of them to the bench—to the same standard.

This week, Trump announced he planned to create an “external revenue service” to collect “tariffs, duties and all revenue that come from foreign sources,” which in theory would need to be approved by Congress.

The announcement obscures the fact that “tariff” is just a fancy word for an American tax paid by American businesses on imported goods, with the added costs typically passed on to American consumers.


In November, Trump proposed a 25 percent tariff on all products from Mexico and Canada and a 10 percent tariff on products from China. That would amount to about $272 billion in taxes, economists told CNN at the time, which would in turn drive up prices.

Business groups are already lobbying the president for tariff exceptions and carve-outs, the Journal reported. That might explain in part why so many of America’s billionaires—whose companies rely on Chinese manufacturing—are flocking to Washington, D.C., for Trump’s inauguration on Monday.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-threatens-bypass-gop-congress-133310646.html

the find out phase begins;

'I don't think anyone voted for that': Trump's own fans bracing for 'catastrophic' cuts
Travis Gettys
January 16, 2025 11:58AM ET

'I don't think anyone voted for that': Trump's own fans bracing for 'catastrophic' cuts


Educators and families in areas where Donald Trump's "America First" seemed to resonate the most could be hit with "catastrophic" cuts.


Tom Gambrel, the superintendent of Bell County, Kentucky, schools, joined most of his neighbors and cast his vote for Trump with his students in mind, but he told CNN that he hopes the president-elect doesn't carry through with his plan to cut federal education funding.

“I don’t think that anyone in our county wants to cut our school funding," Gambrel said, "and I don’t think that anyone voted for that."

ALSO READ: Fox News has blood on its hands as Trump twists the knife

Gambrel said the proposed cuts would be “catastrophic," forcing teacher layoffs, packing more students into classrooms and getting less attention for vulnerable students.

A CNN analysis found that all 15 of the states that rely most heavily on federal support for public schools in 2022 backed Trump in November, while all but two of the 15 that receive the fewest federal dollars as a percentage of their overall revenue supported Kamala Harris.

“This is one of these cases where (Republican) policies are stabbing their base right in the heart and will directly impact their kids,” said Will Ragland, vice president of the Center for American Progress.

Trump hasn't shared many details of his proposal, although he has spoken in support of shutting down the Department of Education, and Republicans proposed an 80-percent cut in 2023 to Title I, which pays teacher salaries in low-income communities, and a 25 percent cut last year.

“You notice a trend here: A lot of these proposals are impacting the most vulnerable students,” said Weadé James, senior director of education policy at the Center for American Progress. “This is really just a pattern of making things worse for those who are already at the margins, and that’s concerning."

The Project 2025 blueprint for Republican governance calls for expanding school choice and turning federal school funding, such as Title I and programs that support students with disabilities into no-strings-attached block grants to states, which experts say would redirect funding away from marginalized communities.

“If we start putting public money in private schools, they become public schools," Gambrel said. "I just don’t think that taxpayer money should be distributed to private schools."

It seems that trump is following the advice of J.D. Vance where the rule of law as well as the separation and autonomy in regards to the three branches of government no longer matter. Of course it's not as if most of us hadn't seen signs of that before and expected more of it coming.


For anyone that isn't clear as to what that said, please read it again.

Tammy Duckworth blew up my future boss on his knowledge of ASEAN. That was not a good look and I do think it furthers a lot of the concerns that many of us already had about him. Coming from her with her history also didn’t help.

Anyhow, I’m sure he’ll get the job, but I don’t feel any better about it, for one.

I haven't seen anything about President Biden claiming the 28th amendment is law....lol...no doubt a statement by a demented soul.

yea they definitely voted for that. its really hard to feel any sort of empathy for people claiming they didnt vote for this.

Yours or his?

Biden did... He's president right now. But you'll probably say because Trump won, they bowed down to him.... Believe as you wish, but it happened on Bidens watch.

One of the negotiator's for the Biden (Brent McGurk) did an interview yesterday and said that he did bring in trumps incoming person assigned to the task and they did work through the final stages together.
When he asked if this deal should be attributed to trump, McGurk said that when trump met Biden at the WH, Biden told trump what was going to happen and what he was working on and how close they were to the deal. And this deal was the same deal the Biden proposed in May that was ready to ratify in August when the other hostages got killed

Dems will tie that all up in the courts as much as possible. He’ll do some bad stuff before they can stop him though. We all know the real plan is to make the elite wealthier… so we’ll just have to see how it all unfolds. I personally think the crazy crap is more distraction than him actually being committed to doing the things people want/need him to do. He’s already back peddled on grocery prices and housing prices… but he fully intends to be brutal in any way he can to keep average joe off balance and unfocused on the heist.

I think you are stuck in the 60's and 70's.

The Dems have plenty of elite who are all good with being wealthier. I'd say the table has flipped. Republicans are now the party of the working person. The dems are the educated elite and the folks who don't work.

I have told my dem friends they should really be republicans. Over the last 60 years, what have the dems done to raise the working class? Nothing in my book. They are still talking about minimum wage, which only helps for about 6 months before increased prices chew it up or people get laid off.

You leaders are very content to keep you in public housing projects and chains.

TikTok is down

Let me know when the Dems install 11 billionaires into positions of our government and then claim they " are now the party of the working person".

Or maybe let me know when the Dems install a billionaire into our government so powerful he is the one going national announcing government policy. You have been fooled again.

Your answer seems to be when people are working 40 hours a week for wages that are below the poverty level, keeping it that way is "for the working man"?

No wonder you're confused.

I'd still be a republican if they hadn't just supported a lying, cheating, crooked felon.

There's a difference between a Republican and a trumpian.

Oh, the irony.

Oh the irony in your claim of irony.

I made the claim earlier in a conversation with Swish that neither party, as a whole, supports the working man.

I have to ask you…what do you think Republicans and the dominant MAGA wing, specifically, have done to become the party of the working man?

The Dems’ previous constituency moving away from them may show warranted frustration that the Dems only paid lip service to people they counted as being “in the bag,” but frustration with one does not equate to satisfaction with another.

I have never used TicTok. I just know it being shut down will hurt a lot of small business owners. And I look for this shut down not to last very long.

I agree - I think what DJT has accomplished is a facade that he's for the working man. It's easy enough to do when they are so disenfranchised with politics overall - the little guy always getting the short end of the stick.... along comes Trump who wants to paint himself as ultra American Man. Remember dancing with the flag? He makes it sound like all the country's issues are due to one reason - immigrants. He says things to make the average working class guy feel like he's talking to them. But the reality is - Trump isn't going to do anything for them. Not unless it's a biproduct of him helping himself.

Trump Campaign Promises? It shouldn't even be a topic. Most successful candidates don't seem to do what they said they would in order to be elected. I'll be happy to hope things go well and judge what happens regardless of the campaign.

If I was a betting man - I'd say Trump will be unorthodox, chaotic, lie just as much as he did term 1 - probably be vindictive and go hard after anyone he feels dissed him. Media, personalities, politicians. I've been listening to the radio a bit today and heard endless callers tell me how talking about and being upset at Musk ( and the "Oligarchs" ) is hyprocritical of the Dems/Left ... because what about Soros??? Well can people really not see the difference between billionaires like Soros and the Koch's donating and influencing from the outside - and a guy being able to influence things from the inside or as a right hand man? I heard a stat about how many billionaires had donated to Harris/Biden ... gosh whoppdee doo. LOL missing the point but flooding the zone.

To be fair, I feel like each of the last 4-5 presidential terms have seen boundaries pushed on what is appropriate to be handled by EA. I never liked it but I'd be surprised if Trump 2.0 wasn't just more of the same.

Excellent post. Agree wholeheartedly.

jc



$TRUMP speculative crypto meme coin rises 600% overnight

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-speculative-crypto-meme-coin-211212967.html


i cant even hate. if i was Trump, i'd do the same thing. total immunity, gullible supporters, and an american voting base with the memory of a goldfish.

I agree on both parties being guilty of serving the elite/corps, but GOPers sold out to them decades ago and are a wholly owned subsidiary of their corporate masters. Hell, Trump basically held a fire-sale when he was struggling with Kamala’s rise; donate a billion to my election and get whatever you want… that should have been disqualifying too. It was as bad as J6 sans violence IMHO. And NO MSM called him out on it. No right-wingers called him out… I’ve reached the point that I think it’s up to US working class folks to take our country back from the elite powers than be.

We need a good old fashion monopoly busting FDR-like candidate to level the playing field. That will never happen with regular people being so divided, and the king of chaos knows that. But that CEO killing sent a shockwave through the elite and their media mouth pieces, we all saw that. They fear the pitchforks. Always have, always will… unless we as a people let it get so bad that we have no hope of change.

AI is going to play a huge roll in this next decade, and some say only those with vast wealth now deserve to benefit. Profit over people. That’s scary considering starting this year, human employment will be optional for most of those massive corps, and we have leadership that only cares about the rich. I hope I’m wrong, but I think we are in for the fight of our lives over the next 5-10 years. Not because of Trump, as much as AI and the elite.

AI WILL make everything less costly to manufacture. It will find CURES, with little effort, but unless forced, the elite will keep those away from lower classes because of profits. Keeping us in-fighting, struggling, and down while the elite try to take EVERYTHING for themselves. If you don’t believe me, ask yourself what happens to people when AI can do the digital work of several humans for 2K a month and be extremely more efficient. Or what happens when all physical labor is replaced by robots that cost under 20K a year to maintain. The working class has become obsolete, or will be soon. But many will need to wake up to what’s coming and just how much it will change everything. I can tell you that the elite and major corps all get it, they are silently preparing, and we have no clue what their plan is.

In a decade, we could be living in a life of abundance for all, or in a dystopian future where the elite control your water, air, food, and everything you get must be paid for by giving them even more wealth and power… Plan A is how it should be, because those AI are built upon ALL of humanities accomplishments, not with just the greed of the rich. OpenAI is no longer OPEN, but a for-profit non-profit hybrid is their new business model declared on filings. And only the open source community seems to be committed to keeping AI in the ‘for the good of all’ and the ‘world of abundaunce’ in the converstion.

Good post.

I will say this having dealt first hand with private equity groups and corporations where greed is taken to such a high level that the ultra-greedy dont even realize how greedy they’re being.

The common theme in my dealings is that there is zero human factor. Zero. There is just the bottom line. People are costs. Employees are costs. People’s medical bills are costs. Selling assets reaps money. Shareholder return over all else.

It’s next level.

It’s also the controlling mantra right now across economics, politics, and pop culture.

"C.R.E.A.M."

It's always been around, but (thanks to the internet) there has never been a time in history when it has been so easily and immediately seen.
Money-flush power brokers have always been this brazen.

The only difference between 2024 and The Gilded Age?
Commoners now have the ability to see what they are doing as it's happening.

We don't have the same excuse that 19th/early 20th c Americans had.

We can see it as it's happening.
Our ignorance of History/Human Nature is ours alone to own.



.02

speaking of CREAM, Melania Trump also launched a cryptocoin.

I don't think you see many democrats making $50,000 per year on democrats secretary lists. Plus, what's wrong with billionaires? Seems to me they are successful people who wouldn't be as open to bribes.

No you wouldn't. You were talking about being an ex republican long before Trump became part of the story. I know it goes back to at least Obama's first run when you were moaning about paying for insurance.

there's absolutely no way you believe what you just posted. nah, no way.

I think the problem is just the opposite. They want to bribe others to do their will and/or will throw ridiculous money to give themselves outsized influence. From your perspective, ask around to like-minded folks what they think of George Soros.

The problem isn’t billionaires per se…the problem is when the sociopathy and greed that accompanies billionaires reigns supreme. Look at the trust era/Gilded Age that Clem mentioned, for example.