The All Things Political Topic - SNAFU edition

[Malcador]

Saw some one say "We gave the powers of pardon to a mob boss"

[Gromnir]

5 hours ago, Malcador said:

Saw some one say "We gave the powers of pardon to a mob boss"

keep in mind this is worse than it appears 'cause is an attempt to redefine the pardon power so that it applies to state crimes. for the entire history o' the US, it has been understood that a President may only pardon an individual for violations of federal law.  as such, those who would commit crime on behalf o' trump knowing he could pardon them for fed crimes might nevertheless hesitate if they believed they would be subject to the laws of new york or california. 

am suspecting this is another story which gets far less coverage than it deserves. after jan 6 and changpeng zhao, this fells like more o' the same, right? is not more o' the same.

HA! Good Fun!

Edited Tuesday at 03:41 AM by Gromnir

[rjshae]

8 hours ago, Malcador said:

Saw some one say "We gave the powers of pardon to a mob boss"

"There is no rule of law until the Mafia needs lawyers."

--Stephen Holmes

[rjshae]

On 11/10/2025 at 7:03 AM, PK htiw klaw eriF said:

The democrats' ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory is truly amazing. What the hell was the point of extending the shutdown if you were just going to cave anyways?

Even if there is, they just threw out what leverage they had so it's doubtful it would pass. I swear, these clowns would lose a game of chess to a dog.

What I saw was a democratic party engaged in negotiating tactics over health care funding by talking up an extreme position. But what they're facing is a CEO-mentality of DJT being willing to sacrifice people for his own purposes. Remember that C. Schumer dealt with the previous such government funding vote by going along with the Republicans, for which he was heavily criticized. This time he tried a different tactic, which clearly won't work and he still gets criticized. I'm not sure what he's supposed to do about it when he has no leverage. People voted in this clown of a President; they get to live with the consequences.

Like I've said before, the health care situation in the US won't be dealt with until a lot of people start dying. The unaffordability of health care is one way (and perhaps the only way) to achieve that goal here. It's a completely irrational situation.

[uuuhhii]

9 hours ago, rjshae said:

What I saw was a democratic party engaged in negotiating tactics over health care funding by talking up an extreme position. But what they're facing is a CEO-mentality of DJT being willing to sacrifice people for his own purposes. Remember that C. Schumer dealt with the previous such government funding vote by going along with the Republicans, for which he was heavily criticized. This time he tried a different tactic, which clearly won't work and he still gets criticized. I'm not sure what he's supposed to do about it when he has no leverage. People voted in this clown of a President; they get to live with the consequences.

Like I've said before, the health care situation in the US won't be dealt with until a lot of people start dying. The unaffordability of health care is one way (and perhaps the only way) to achieve that goal here. It's a completely irrational situation.

 

if there are no leverage goverment wouldn't be shut down for 40 day

this level of incompetence are entirely expected

people of usa are extra angry because this come at the worst time

but situation will only get worse so there are plenty of worst to come

edit

uk the worst war criminal in history

just accuse usa of war crime and shut off some intel sharing

would be hilarious if not for the war crime

Edited yesterday at 12:39 AM by uuuhhii

[rjshae]

Here's a contrast in requirements:

White House told to bring back sign-language interpreters even though Trump dislikes ‘sharing a platform,’ judge rules

Quote

The National Association of the Deaf sued President Donald Trump, White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles and White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt in May, arguing that the administration’s failure to provide ASL interpreters at press briefings violates the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The federal law prohibits discrimination conducted by an “executive agency.”

Arizona's first Chicana representative has been sworn in. She's going to code-switch.

Quote

'Les aseguro que aunque sea la primera, no será la última,' she said in Spanish to a smattering of applause, again withholding a translation to the packed chamber.

Okay, apart from the legal specifics, why is the White House required to provide ASL interpreters but a Chicana representative speaking to Congress in spanish is not required to provide a translator? This seems inconsistent, if not rude.

[Hurlshort]

1 hour ago, rjshae said:

Here's a contrast in requirements:

White House told to bring back sign-language interpreters even though Trump dislikes ‘sharing a platform,’ judge rules

Arizona's first Chicana representative has been sworn in. She's going to code-switch.

Okay, apart from the legal specifics, why is the White House required to provide ASL interpreters but a Chicana representative speaking to Congress in spanish is not required to provide a translator? This seems inconsistent, if not rude.

Because one is the President addressing the entire nation, and the other is a representative addressing a few hundred?

Also it sounds like she was mixing English and Spanish. I'd love to see Trump mix in some sign language in his addresses.  

[rjshae]

2 hours ago, Hurlshort said:

Because one is the President addressing the entire nation, and the other is a representative addressing a few hundred?

Also it sounds like she was mixing English and Spanish. I'd love to see Trump mix in some sign language in his addresses.  

Ever heard of CPAN? Speeches to Congress can go out to the nation. She was clearly speaking in both languages intentionally, and wasn't translating for the benefit of either audience.

[Elerond]

26 minutes ago, rjshae said:

Ever heard of CPAN? Speeches to Congress can go out to the nation. She was clearly speaking in both languages intentionally, and wasn't translating for the benefit of either audience.

Should all speeches in Congress also be translated to Spanish (because of Puerto Rico) and all 177 indigenous languages spoken in US or at least for those that are official languages of US territories? 

[rjshae]

7 hours ago, Elerond said:

Should all speeches in Congress also be translated to Spanish (because of Puerto Rico) and all 177 indigenous languages spoken in US or at least for those that are official languages of US territories? 

Spanish, perhaps so. The others? Maybe if they are comparable to ASL communicators: ~1 million? Then that would include Chinese, Tagalog, Vietnamese, Arabic, French, Korean, and Russian. Some day maybe AI can be tasked with that.

[Gromnir]

12 hours ago, rjshae said:

Okay, apart from the legal specifics, why is the White House required to provide ASL interpreters but a Chicana representative speaking to Congress in spanish is not required to provide a translator? This seems inconsistent, if not rude.

'cause there is no, "apart from the legal specifics." Congress has passed a law which requires special consideration for americans with disabilities. lack o' conversational spanish knowledge is not a disability for purposes o' the various fed laws which address accommodations for those with disabilities.

why do you distinguish 'tween english and spanish as to which is requiring translation? am not knowing the exact number, but is more than 300 languages which is the primary language of american citizens. ( @Elerond, "177 indigenous languages" refers to those spoken by "native americans," or whatever is the label this week. Gromnir, for instance, understands enough lakota that we can follow the gist o' a conversation between our aunts who is aged 84 and 90 respective, but we sure as hell cannot carry on a conversation with them. am doubting there is more than 1500 living persons who are able to legit speak lakota, and that number shrinks every year.) 

regardless, trump passed an executive order in march o' this year which purports to make english the official language o' the US. at the very least, the trump executive order invalidates a clinton era eo which made translation services for non english speakers more readily available.

so you got no specific Congressional law which would require interpreters to translate legislators who is exercising their first amendment rights to speak howsoever the f they wish, while simultaneous you got a Presidential eo which, at least until challenged, makes english the official language o' the US while specific diminishing translation services for non-english speakers.

is not an "apart from the legal specifics," question. 

HA! Good Fun!

[BruceVC]

1 hour ago, rjshae said:

Spanish, perhaps so. The others? Maybe if they are comparable to ASL communicators: ~1 million? Then that would include Chinese, Tagalog, Vietnamese, Arabic, French, Korean, and Russian. Some day maybe AI can be tasked with that.

Countries that have many different official  languages still have one common  main and " middle ground " language that is used primarily 

And its selected based on the fact everyone living there should understand it 

In South Africa we have 12 official languages but English is the main language that is used for government and business communication 

Throughout Africa you could find a country that has dozens of different tribal languages so the European language is preferred as the official language because it actually reduces tribal tensions, translation complexity  and is consistent. It would  create massive tribal  tension in South Africa if Zulu was adopted as the main language because the other tribal activists would understandably say  " why Zulu,  what about our language. Why should Zulu be officially elevated higher than ours" 

Its perfectly normal for English to be the main language in the US and everyone should at least understand it 

[Gorth]

I speak European good

[Malcador]

Would think they could just arrange a translator in an ad hoc fashion. Similar if they have a foreign leader addressing them or something.

[Lexx]

Next step in american concentration camp tech-tree: https://www.commondreams.org/news/utah-homeless-internment-camp

[Gromnir]

more legal weirdness

and 

for those who cannot get past the paywall, a smidge...

The memo, which was completed in late summer, is said to open with a lengthy recitation of claims submitted by the White House, including that drug cartels are intentionally trying to kill Americans and destabilize the Western Hemisphere. The groups are presented not as unscrupulous businesses trying to profit from drug trafficking, but as terrorists who sell narcotics as a means of financing violence.

Based on such claims, the memo states that Mr. Trump has legitimate authority to determine that the United States and its allies are legally in a formal state of armed conflict with “narco-terrorist” drug cartels, according to the people who have read the document. The rest of the memo’s reasoning is based on that premise.

...

most parents is aware o' the Because I Said So doctrine of authority, but am thinking it is a bold approach to suggest it constitutes a legal sufficient rationale for the killing o' 80 people sans any proof that they is posing an imminent threat o' violence to americans.

HA! Good Fun!