|
|
Post by whemblycthulhu on Jul 4, 2019 20:40:04 GMT -5
Every POTUS has inherent pardon power with no limits via Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution. It's another question whether or not it is wise to do so. Whembly, when someone asks WHY something is the way it is, that person has already implicitly accepted that it is that way because otherwise the question would make zero sense. I wasn't asking what law gave him the power (as I was already aware), I was wondering why that part of the Constitution exists. It's demented. Because every government is ran by flawed men. As such, justice and prosecutions can go awry and a pardon is one way to correct a miscarriage of justice. Yes, it can be abused. Just as I disagree with Trump pardoning Arpiao as it was a cynical political act, rather something to correct a miscarriage of justice (Arpiao was held in contempt of court!). Just as it was cynical for Obama to pardon Bradley Manning... as Obama used that to "build up" some sort of legacy. However, presidential pardons has been used to good effects as well. |
|
|
|
Post by whemblycthulhu on Jul 4, 2019 20:43:12 GMT -5
Normal president, right, whembly? It's like you didn't even read my post so why bother.... you'll just assume my positions. Is that because you said “His tweeting is different but his policies aren't” and pretend the tweeting doesn't matter? [/quote] I never said his tweeting doesn't matter. I don't consider current status "inhuman". It's not ideal and we should do better. But far from inhumane and of course far from the truth being that it's a "concentration camp". Glutton for punishment? I like having debates? Why ask why? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2019 20:59:45 GMT -5
"But far from inhumane and of course far from the truth being that it's a "concentration camp"."
Edit: i had to add that since, again, this forum software sucks and your quote box was empty.
Whemb, that's a lie. They are very much concentration camps, as DHS points out when it managed a surprise inspection of one. They're just not death camps. Yet. If the history of American death camps is anything to go by, figure between six months and a year before it reaches that point. Unless Trump decides that he needs to speed up the process.
According to pretty much everyone I've spoken to at them, they're playing an elaborate shell game trying to hide just how bad it is from not only the press and Congress, but their own superiors in many cases.
This is, exactly, the situation that led to some previous death camps run by the US government.
|
|
|
|
Post by Least censored on the planet! on Jul 5, 2019 5:37:26 GMT -5
I never said his tweeting doesn't matter. Ok, if you say so. So you agree it does matter, and it does set Trump apart, and it does set him apart in a bad way? I don't consider current status "inhuman". It's not ideal and we should do better. But far from inhumane and of course far from the truth being that it's a "concentration camp". It's to concentrate people in a single place, and it's a camp. It's a concentration camp. And it doesn't seem humane to me to force people to drink toilet water. But you are just skipping the actual question here. I'll repeat it without using the world inhumane if that's what it takes. Can you answer this : What going to be your answer? Are you going to explain that those necessities aren't basic enough? Or are you going to actually address the question? Because I want to point out that if you don't want to discuss with me because it's useless, you might as well not be here. |
|
|
|
Post by semipotentwalrus on Jul 5, 2019 5:56:03 GMT -5
Cramming 80 people into a holding cell designed for 40 or not supplying fucking soap and toothbrushes for weeks (and then having officials try to defend it in court!) is "not inhumane"?
|
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Jul 5, 2019 6:24:10 GMT -5
Maybe the definition of inhumane is as rigid as the one we're supposed to be handling for calling concentration camps not concentration camps.
|
|
|
|
Post by A Town Called Malus on Jul 5, 2019 10:01:49 GMT -5
Definition of inhumane: "without compassion for misery or suffering; cruel."
Seems like the boot fits to me. I doubt that these kids separated from their parents are not miserable and lack of access to basic sanitary products would certainly cause suffering. Not to mention that they're having to try and care for younger children dumped on them by the guards.
D, you've been there. Would you describe the children as miserable and suffering? Do they have access to sanitation, play, education, medication and everything else we consider vital to childhood development?
|
|
dusa
Ye Olde King of OT
Posts: 555
|
Post by dusa on Jul 5, 2019 10:22:05 GMT -5
My place was an initial processing center, so folks were there for a week at the longest. But it was still barebones holding cells: no games, no TV, no books, no education, and a shower offered every 72 hours.
And severe overcrowding.
|
|
|
|
Post by whemblycthulhu on Jul 5, 2019 18:25:35 GMT -5
I never said his tweeting doesn't matter. Ok, if you say so. Thanks. His use of Twitter is unique as he's the first POTUS to really use it. Furthermore, he uses it like a "campaign podium" as he's riffing shit left and right. And often times, it's not a good look. But my point was, if you're willing to read my next point, is that him riffing shit left and right on twitter isn't the same as how his administration and his policies are enacted. For the most part, his policies are the standard GOP fare with a few exceptions. My issue is the pendantry here... is that folks a alluding to Nazi concentration camps. The idea that we're going to fire up the furnaces, or start given cyanide showers is beyond the pale... I've repeatedly stated that we've had a crisis on the border. Its the anti-trumpers and some folks on this board mere months ago claimed that this was a manufactured crisis and it was the GOP congressional-critters who kept banging on that drum that funding is needed to handle the influx of migrant seekers. But it was the Democrats who refused to see the problem to and try to address it. All in the name to prevent Trump from getting "a win" on his signature campaign promise. But now? The narrative is that we have this "concentration camps" and it's all GOP/Trump's faults. And that *we're* racists for not letting these migrants in. The gaslighting is strong yo. I've already told you. No catch and release. Its incumbent on us to do better... yes. But I absolutely refuse to accept the premise that things are so bad AND they can't be fixed, that we must throw our hands up in the air and give up. That is you are implying. Is it not? Or I can ignore you? Or you ignore me? Or is it because you are doing your damnedest to paint me as some sort of monster. Or... dare I say a Nazi? If that's your agenda here, you can fuck off. Cool?  |
|
|
|
Post by semipotentwalrus on Jul 5, 2019 18:54:10 GMT -5
Whembly, months ago you were demanding funds for a stupid wall and I was arguing in favour of more money to the processing system. We can go back in this thread and see it. Go ahead and whine about gaslighting all you want.
You don't get bonus points for "doing something" about a problem when it doesn't actually help. There is no intrinsic value in taking action.
|
|
|
|
Post by whemblycthulhu on Jul 5, 2019 18:57:56 GMT -5
Whembly, months ago you were demanding funds for a stupid wall and I was arguing in favour of more money to the processing system. We can go back in this thread and see it. Go ahead and whine about gaslighting all you want. You don't get bonus points for "doing something" about a problem when it doesn't actually help. There is no intrinsic value in taking action. I was demanding funds for all of it. Feel free to look back. Again, what is the alternative? |
|
|
|
Post by semipotentwalrus on Jul 5, 2019 19:07:58 GMT -5
Allow catch and release to continue while building up the infrastructure and support personnel required to not have to resort to putting people in internment camps (which includes doing a 180 on the closing of offices where people can apply for asylum abroad). Have the infrastructure in place instead of going for the lazy solution that solves nothing.
Or, frankly, letting catch and release continue and accepting that while it is a shitty solution it is less awful than putting people in camps. While we're at it, stop cutting programs that provide legal aid to immigrants that have been shown to increase the likelihood that they'll show up in court.
That last point actually deserves its own emphasis: stop cutting legal ways of getting into the US and then complaining that people are doing it illegally. If illegal immigration is such a colossal fucking problem, stop making it worse!
|
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Jul 5, 2019 19:34:39 GMT -5
People are trying to tie the concentration camp comments to Nazis to make it seem like people are overreacting.
What you're describing are Nazi death camps. Nazi Germany had concentration camps that went back to 1933 when they were small overcrowded facilities with little oversight run by the local SA or SS. The vast labor and holding camps were a gradual evolution.
What the detention centres are is more like a classic (as in stop thinking it was just Nazis) concentration camp, intended to corral politically inconvenient groups of people under terrible conditions.
Its just historical ignorance and frankly pretty weird to throw the Jewish community under the bus as some sort of shield against doing horrible things.
|
|
|
|
Post by Least censored on the planet! on Jul 5, 2019 19:39:52 GMT -5
His use of Twitter is unique as he's the first POTUS to really use it. Do you believe that it is just about form and using a new media, not about the content of what Trump is saying there (and elsewhere too)? But my point was, if you're willing to read my next point, is that him riffing shit left and right on twitter isn't the same as how his administration and his policies are enacted. For the most part, his policies are the standard GOP fare with a few exceptions. That reflects badly on standard GOP fare, then. My issue is the pendantry here... is that folks a alluding to Nazi concentration camps. The idea that we're going to fire up the furnaces, or start given cyanide showers is beyond the pale... Well ok, if you say so. I've repeatedly stated that we've had a crisis on the border. Its the anti-trumpers and some folks on this board mere months ago claimed that this was a manufactured crisis and it was the GOP congressional-critters who kept banging on that drum that funding is needed to handle the influx of migrant seekers. It's not hypocrisy, it is because they didn't think that a few people managing to cross the border was a crisis. They do believe that concentration camps with no access to basic necessities are a crisis though. From our point of view, we went from the “Not a crisis” situation of catch and release to the “Crisis” situation of concentration camps with no access to basic necessities through the actions of the GOP. It's not hypocritical, it's a different opinion. You believe that “Catch and release” was a crisis, and that the current situation is less of a crisis, somehow. I've already told you. No catch and release. So, your answer is yes. Now, let me ask a different question. “Which level of mistreatment of illegal immigrants would be high enough for you to say that Catch and Release is the least bad of the two options?” But I absolutely refuse to accept the premise that things are so bad AND they can't be fixed, that we must throw our hands up in the air and give up. That is you are implying. Is it not? No, I have been pretty clear about what I am saying. What I am saying is that if given the choice between two options, and one of those is catch and release, and the other is CCWNATBN, then definitively catch an release is the lesser evil. This doesn't mean that you should stop trying to make a third option possible. It just mean that choosing CCWNATBN when C&R is possible is morally bankrupt. Or I can ignore you? Or you ignore me? Or is it because you are doing your damnedest to paint me as some sort of monster. Or... dare I say a Nazi? So, if you ignore me, who are you going to talk to? The people that will literally call you a Nazi, or other mean words? Seriously, who do you want to talk to, if me explaining why I think your views are bad is enough for you to decide you want to ignore me? What kind of debate do you want? I've never called you a Nazi but sure I think your ideas are bad, do you want me to hide that or something? Really the only reason I can think of why you are reacting this way now despite being attacked much harsher before is because I am somehow hitting a little too close to home and the sting is therefore much worse. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2019 20:07:42 GMT -5
My issue is the pendantry here... is that folks a alluding to Nazi concentration camps. The idea that we're going to fire up the furnaces, or start given cyanide showers is beyond the pale... I've repeatedly stated that we've had a crisis on the border. Its the anti-trumpers and some folks on this board mere months ago claimed that this was a manufactured crisis and it was the GOP congressional-critters who kept banging on that drum that funding is needed to handle the influx of migrant seekers. But it was the Democrats who refused to see the problem to and try to address it. All in the name to prevent Trump from getting "a win" on his signature campaign promise. But now? The narrative is that we have this "concentration camps" and it's all GOP/Trump's faults. And that *we're* racists for not letting these migrants in. The gaslighting is strong yo.
The strawman is pretty fucking strong here too.
As I've been quite specific in what Concentration camps we're talking about. I mean, I know that pointing out that Elmira is not in Germany, or Europe, but rather New York State, might be a subtlety utterly BEYOND you, but really, this post is an astonishingly textbook standard strawman, even for YOU whemb. I mean, I know it's a Fox News talking point to try and confuse the issue with Nazi Germany, but frankly, that's so transparent that it might as well be made of glass.
NASA has been warning us that climate change was going to do this for more than a decade now, but the issue has been utterly ignored as 'someone else's problem' since they released their preliminary findings in 2009. Unfortunately, a large proportion of the US population just assumed that these people would remain where they were and die rather than trying to save themselves. Imagine, people, trying to flee to safety!
As far as the 'crisis', the only crisis there atm is absolutely manufactured. It's not like these people crossed the boarder and immediately put themselves in concentration camps, now is it? Rather than recognize that these are, in fact, refugees, and thus, under international law, protected, the administration is trying to paint it as the stereotypical 'illegal immigrants' that make it so they don't have to actually address the issue that climate change i rendering stretches of the world uninhabitable by their current populations.
And they're not just fleeing to the US before you try and jump on the 'why flee here' bandwagon. They're going into the other direction too. Many of of the countries along South America's northern coast have reported upticks in refugees. The US and Colombia are trying to paint this as Venezuala's doing, for obvious political gain, but the fact is that its much more broad than that.
Simple truth, people, is it will get much worse. These are just the start, the people who realized that to stay was to die, and had enough wherewithal to leave.
Edit: Today, it was announced that USDA is cutting it's study of honeybee colony collapse because 'financial reasons'. The fact that it includes some dire predictions about food production in the US suffering from climate change in preliminary studies are supposedly unrelated.
|
|
