The Trump Presidency – 2016

[JPhillips]

The Chinese people almost unanimously consider Taiwan a part of China. Even if the Chinese government wanted to bargain on the One China policy, they can't.

And the call was less about China/U.S. relations than it was about possible Taiwanese recognition. Dole's firm, who set up the call, is paid by Taiwan. There's no reason to believe this was part of some well conceived strategy to bring China to the table.

[ISiddiqui]

For something different, I wonder what Trump backers think of Trump hanging out and yukking it up with Kanye West? I'd imagine most Trump supporters aren't fans of West (just judging from JIMG).

[panerd]

Trump taps former Texas Gov. Rick Perry to head Energy Department he once vowed to abolish - The Washington Post

This was the idiot who during the 2012 Presidential Campaign blanked on the names of the three departments he planned to eliminate. Guess what one of them was? If you guessed the Department of Energy you are correct! (EDIT: The headline changed so guessing the department probably wasn't that difficult. )

See with Ron Paul or Rand Paul when they talk about cutting government waste or agencies they at least have a plan and know what they are talking about. You could argue the effects might not work out or disagree with the idea all together but at least they are serious. This guy is the pure definition of an empty suit politician. What a joke.

[Shkspr]

Cliven Bundy is going to head up BATF, isn't he?

[JPhillips]

“Lenin wanted to destroy the state, and that’s my goal too. I want to bring everything crashing down, and destroy all of today’s establishment.”

Steve Bannon

[panerd]

Originally Posted by Shkspr

Cliven Bundy is going to head up BATF, isn't he?

Either him or Randy Weaver.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

For something different, I wonder what Trump backers think of Trump hanging out and yukking it up with Kanye West? I'd imagine most Trump supporters aren't fans of West (just judging from JIMG).

Hadn't seen it, but I'd say that's a reasonable bet

It probably goes over about as well as Christie hanging out with Springsteen, but with a caveat: (having not yet seen it) we may hold out some hope that Trump is just clowning the clown.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

For something different, I wonder what Trump backers think of Trump hanging out and yukking it up with Kanye West? I'd imagine most Trump supporters aren't fans of West (just judging from JIMG).

But less about them and more about you. Aren't you delighted and tickled pink?

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

This isn't going to end well for the Dept. of Energy. Trump's not going to back down and this move just makes the department look like they have something to hide.

Energy Dept. rejects Trump’s request to name climate change workers, who remain worried - The Washington Post

[cartman]

I guess reading the names on the climate change studies produced by the DoE was too much for the transition team to be expected to do.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

this move just makes the department look like they have something to hide.

Well ... duh.

If they choose not to cooperate, their call (for as long as they have a job at least). However, I figure a pretty good list of suspect characters could be compiled by some enterprising folks with simply time, patience,and Google.

And expense reports could be very helpful too.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by cartman

I guess reading the names on the climate change studies produced by the DoE was too much for the transition team to be expected to do.

It's not just people that have been a part of studies. They want names of people that have attended meetings on climate change.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by TroyF

I just happen to think he's right that China isn't our friend and it's time to change the terms of that relationship.

I agree with this statement. I do agree that TPP was a method to change the equation but maybe Trump wants to take a more direct, in your face approach.

I can handle a trade war and recession if it positions us better, just don't start a nuclear war is all I ask.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

This isn't going to end well for the Dept. of Energy. Trump's not going to back down and this move just makes the department look like they have something to hide.

Energy Dept. rejects Trump’s request to name climate change workers, who remain worried - The Washington Post

Trump has been against science on climate change from the beginning. Why would a department provide a list of people that have attended climate change meetings? Nothing good is coming for those people if you provide the list.

I'm guessing next he wants a list of all pro vaccination people in the department of health and human services?

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Hadn't seen it, but I'd say that's a reasonable bet

It probably goes over about as well as Christie hanging out with Springsteen, but with a caveat: (having not yet seen it) we may hold out some hope that Trump is just clowning the clown.

It looks like both of them are just trolling us all.

Donald Trump, Kanye West Hug at Trump Tower Video - ABC News

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Why would a department provide a list of people that have attended climate change meetings?

Depends upon whether or not those being asked want to keep their jobs
between now & the departmental shutdown. They're certainly welcome to go down with the ship if that's their choice. {shrug}

As I pointed out, it doesn't seem like it'll be all that difficult to identify the first round of cuts independently with just a reasonable amount of effort. This seems more likely to have been meant to help identify the obstructionists that will be in round two.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Trump has been against science on climate change from the beginning. Why would a department provide a list of people that have attended climate change meetings? Nothing good is coming for those people if you provide the list.

If you provide the list and he starts firing people, you can at least play the role of martyr, go on the Sunday morning talk shows, and get private gigs with some of the climate change think tanks/organizations. That's your best bet.

If you pull what they just pulled, it's another win for Trump ('draining the swamp') and he's still going to get his way at some level.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Depends upon whether or not those being asked want to keep their jobs between now & the departmental shutdown. They're certainly welcome to go down with the ship if that's their choice. {shrug}

That's not how the civil service laws work. But it is cool to imagine that they can all be fired at will just because you believe they are stupid for investigating climate change, right?

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Depends upon whether or not those being asked want to keep their jobs
between now & the departmental shutdown. They're certainly welcome to go down with the ship if that's their choice. {shrug}

As I pointed out, it doesn't seem like it'll be all that difficult to identify the first round of cuts independently with just a reasonable amount of effort. This seems more likely to have been meant to help identify the obstructionists that will be in round two.

He won't be able to fire them. What he can do is shift them to other positions within the department or transfer them to another department for equal or higher pay. They do have protections so not providing the list is the smart thing to protect your employees.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Atocep

He won't be able to fire them. What he can do is shift them to other positions within the department or transfer them to another department for equal or higher pay. They do have protections so not providing the list is the smart thing to protect your employees.

We're talking semantics here. There's ways to get rid of people through budget cuts. He can get rid of some things in the name of balancing the budget (which I suspect is his plan). It's hard to argue against that given the huge deficit, especially if he finds a way to take a chunk out of it. The congressional majority will be happy to jump on that bandwagon.

[cartman]

Total salaries for all DoE employees is $1.5 billion. A part of a sliver of the discretionary amount of the budget ($1.3 trillion), far from a 'chunk'.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

We're talking semantics here. There's ways to get rid of people through budget cuts. He can get rid of some things in the name of balancing the budget (which I suspect is his plan). It's hard to argue against that given the huge deficit, especially if he finds a way to take a chunk out of it. The congressional majority will be happy to jump on that bandwagon.

What's the point of providing the list? He can't fire them so they're waiting out budget cuts regardless.

This is an area where Trump is going heavily against the majority of Americans. 70% of Americans believe in climate change and 65% think man is playing a role in it. Attacking climate change makes us look like idiots and goes against what people actually believe. How exactly is Trump winning and draining the swamp here?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by cartman

That's not how the civil service laws work. But it is cool to imagine that they can all be fired at will just because you believe they are stupid for investigating climate change, right?

If somebody can't make you want to leave a job, they aren't trying hard enough.

Trust me.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Atocep

He won't be able to fire them. What he can do is shift them to other positions within the department or transfer them to another department for equal or higher pay. They do have protections so not providing the list is the smart thing to protect your employees.

And what this exercise provides is indications of who thinks those folks are worth "protecting".

And those are the people that don't need to be living on the taxpayer dime, they're the problem as much or more as those perpetrating the fraudulent climate change bogeyman.

[JPhillips]

At least we don't have to pretend anymore that MBBF believes in any sort of democratic norms.

All government jobs are patronage jobs!

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Atocep

What's the point of providing the list? He can't fire them so they're waiting out budget cuts regardless.

This is an area where Trump is going heavily against the majority of Americans. 70% of Americans believe in climate change and 65% think man is playing a role in it. Attacking climate change makes us look like idiots and goes against what people actually believe. How exactly is Trump winning and draining the swamp here?

The issue here isn't really climate change. The issue is the large amount of taxpayer money being spent on projects which may/may not be needed or relevant. Just because people support the idea that climate change exists doesn't mean they want money just spent for the sake of climate change. I'm part of your 65% that you cite, but I'm also part of the group that thinks the bloated budgets in some of these departments are WAY out of control and deserve a once-over.

I believe that cancer (or insert your own personal cause) is a bad thing, but that doesn't mean that all the money being thrown around in the name of defeating that disease is necessarily being used in an efficient manner. You can be on both side of this issue. The two are not mutually exclusive.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

The issue here isn't really climate change. The issue is the large amount of taxpayer money being spent on projects which may/may not be needed or relevant.

Then why are they asking for just the names of those researching climate change? Sure makes it seem that that is the issue.

[whomario]

I know of a few countries historical where this sort of thing happened.You don´t want to be compared to those.

What´s next, a reward or an anonymous tip site for people to denunciate their co-workers ?

[miked]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

The issue here isn't really climate change. The issue is the large amount of taxpayer money being spent on projects which may/may not be needed or relevant. Just because people support the idea that climate change exists doesn't mean they want money just spent for the sake of climate change. I'm part of your 65% that you cite, but I'm also part of the group that thinks the bloated budgets in some of these departments are WAY out of control and deserve a once-over.

I believe that cancer (or insert your own personal cause) is a bad thing, but that doesn't mean that all the money being thrown around in the name of defeating that disease is necessarily being used in an efficient manner. You can be on both side of this issue. The two are not mutually exclusive.

I believe it is anti-intellectualism and the idea that business will protect the Earth out of their own interests if left alone, which we know is not the case.

I wonder if we look back to the 80s when there was a hole in the ozone layer. I guess I was still young, but I remember the government deciding that we (as humans) had a heavy hand in the destruction of the atmosphere and if left alone it could be terrible. So they banned and limited certain things and yet, somehow, companies still figured out how to make money and the ozone is better.

If YOU truly believed that we were having an effect on the environment, would you not want money and resources devoted to more examination of this and how we can prevent it? Rather than tattling and firing on people who believed it and studied it? I mean, you seem somewhat intelligent and well versed. What would you say if he asked for the names of people at DHHS that studied the lack of link between autism and vaccines and stated that we wanted to disband that?

If you believe the goal is to "trim the fat" you are an even bigger idiot than you seem.

[kingfc22]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

We're talking semantics here. There's ways to get rid of people through budget cuts.

Or we can just subsidize AC units in the name of "saving jobs".

[jeff061]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

If somebody can't make you want to leave a job, they aren't trying hard enough.

Trust me.

Having worked with public sector directors who are now private, again you are misinformed and making assumptions. If you, as a manager, even accidentally make an employees life very slightly more difficult or stressful you are pulled in front of an investigative board, threatened and told to leave employee alone.

Even awful employees who sleep half the day are given the benefit of the doubt and any actions taken by a manager will generally be reviewed with the manager in the cross hairs, not the shit employee.

The private world doesn't work like the public one, it earns its reputation and is far worse than you think. Half of federal and state workforces are sleeping their days away waiting for their pension. With managers, the ones that aren't doing the same, that try and fail to fix it, go insane and join the private world.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by jeff061

Having worked with public sector directors who are now private, again you are misinformed and making assumptions. If you, as a manager, even accidentally make an employees life very slightly more difficult or stressful you are pulled in front of an investigative board, threatened and told to leave employee alone.

Even awful employees who sleep half the day are given the benefit of the doubt and any actions taken by a manager will generally be reviewed with the manager in the cross hairs, not the shit employee.

The private world doesn't work like the public one, it earns its reputation and is far worse than you think. Half of federal and state workforces are sleeping their days away waiting for their pension. With managers, the ones that aren't doing the same, that try and fail to fix it, go insane and join the private world.

I think you're missing some of the point here. Anybody who has backed the climate change agenda IS in the crosshairs (as I certainly believe they deserve to be).

I'm sadly aware of how hard it is to get rid of deadweight -- public or private -- I'm saying that changing that is part of the draining of the swamp. You're comments assume that the tide isn't shifting/going to shift. I'm viewing this more optimistically.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by whomario

I know of a few countries historical where this sort of thing happened.You don´t want to be compared to those.

What´s next, a reward or an anonymous tip site for people to denunciate their co-workers ?

It already happened here in the 50s with Hollywood blackballing.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

At least we don't have to pretend anymore that MBBF believes in any sort of democratic norms.

All government jobs are patronage jobs!

You clearly haven't worked in the government. I've worked in the Dept. of Heath and the Dept. of Agriculture. I'm well aware of exactly how it works. It's nothing but politics.

[JPhillips]

You're defending a system of political purges for civil service workers. That isn't about efficiency, it's about control.

And you're nuts if you think a workforce staffed entirely with patronage jobs will be more efficient than civil service employees.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

If you provide the list and he starts firing people, you can at least play the role of martyr, go on the Sunday morning talk shows, and get private gigs with some of the climate change think tanks/organizations. That's your best bet.

If you pull what they just pulled, it's another win for Trump ('draining the swamp') and he's still going to get his way at some level.

I think his appointments already can end the talk about draining the swamp. Turns out that was just a campaign thing morons fell for.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

This isn't going to end well for the Dept. of Energy. Trump's not going to back down and this move just makes the department look like they have something to hide.

The Trump transition team did back down. They are saying the questionnaire was not approved and sent in by a rogue team member that has been reprimanded.

Trump Team Disavows Request To ID Climate Staffers: 'Not Authorized'

"The questionnaire was not authorized or part of our standard protocol. The person who sent it has been properly counseled"

[cuervo72]

So now some dude who was an ambassador to Uzbekistan/WikiLeaks "operative"/friend of Assange claims that hey, it wasn't Russia! It was a disgruntled DNCer who gave him the e-mails. And that American intelligence is lying. Yup, because they are obviously controlled by the Democratic machine (which doesn't hold the House, Senate, or soon Presidency).

Right. But, some people are lapping it up.

[Easy Mac]

So, I guess Republicans will twist themselves into knots to explain how Flynn sharing classified information isn't as bad as Clinton not sharing classified information.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

So, I guess Republicans will twist themselves into knots to explain how Flynn sharing classified information isn't as bad as Clinton not sharing classified information.

You're assuming that Republicans aren't hypocritical fucking idiots

[JPhillips]

And violating his clearance in multiple other ways.

[RainMaker]

Not sure why people continue to do this.

Yasmin Seweid teen accused of making up story of anti-Muslim harassment on NYC subway - CBS News

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Hadn't seen it, but I'd say that's a reasonable bet

It probably goes over about as well as Christie hanging out with Springsteen, but with a caveat: (having not yet seen it) we may hold out some hope that Trump is just clowning the clown.

I don't think it was much more than a PR stunt for both. Kanye gets in the news which he likes. Trump draws attention away from the Russia stuff because the media can't help but eat this story up and shame the black guy for daring to have individual thoughts on politics.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Really good read about 'Purple America' and what they want......

http://www.wsj.com/articles/what-pur...ump-1481675070

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Records: Too many votes in 37% of Detroit’s precincts

[Ben E Lou]

Has anyone looked at the really poor numbers of @VanityFair Magazine. Way down, big trouble, dead! Graydon Carter, no talent, will be out!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 15, 2016

Trump freaks out on Graydon Carter after bad restaurant review | New York Post

[RainMaker]

Trump's a turd but in fairness to him, Vanity Fair has been trash for awhile now. And the writer of that piece is a complete hack with a vendetta.

[Easy Mac]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Records: Too many votes in 37% of Detroit’s precincts

And 25% were over counted in 2 counties that went for Trump, so...

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Trump's a turd but in fairness to him, Vanity Fair has been trash for awhile now. And the writer of that piece is a complete hack with a vendetta.

Trump couldn't be less tactful in some of these situations, but the piece he's complaining about is so poorly done, it's really hard to not agree with his annoyance about it.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

And 25% were over counted in 2 counties that went for Trump, so...

Great, so we can agree the entire damn state can't count. What's your point? It was a Detroit paper writing about Detroit news.