Trump's Law-Breaking Law Enforcement Commission Has Plenty Of Dystopian Ideas

from the if-only-the-public-didn't-have-so-damn-many-rights dept

Trump has made no secret of the fact he adores law enforcement. One of the first edicts he issued from his office told America in no uncertain terms that cops were to be respected, if not worshipped, for deigning to stand between millions of US peons and the forces of evil.

The Trump Administration will be a law and order administration. President Trump will honor our men and women in uniform and will support their mission of protecting the public. The dangerous anti-police atmosphere in America is wrong. The Trump Administration will end it.

The Trump Administration has yet to end the "dangerous anti-police atmosphere." But, it's not for a lack of bootlicking. Unfortunately, cops have spent the intervening years increasing the distance between them and the people they serve by violating rights and killing unarmed people.

The professed respect for law and order doesn't extend to the Administration itself, which has violated the law on multiple occasions. This all dovetailed together when the Presidential Commission on Law Enforcement was found to be in violation of the law by a federal judge.

Composed solely of law enforcement representatives, the Commission ran afoul of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. It did not provide adequate transparency or public access options. And it did not include a range of stakeholders to better serve the stated goal of improving police-community relations, which also violated the law. This egregious violation was called out by the judge handling the lawsuit against the government.

The Commission’s function is to improve policing, including relations between law enforcement and the communities they protect. Yet the Commission does not include a single member who represents elements of those communities, rather than law enforcement. Thus, even employing a deferential review, the Court concludes that the Commission’s membership is not “fairly balanced in terms of the points of view represented and the functions to be performed by the advisory committee.” 5 U.S.C. app. 2 § 5(b)(2). Indeed, the Court is hard pressed to think of a starker example of non-compliance with FACA’s fair balance requirement than a commission charged with examining broad issues of policing in today’s America that is composed entirely of past and present law enforcement officials.

It gets worse. As Phillip Goff points out in his op-ed for the New York Times, the Commission was apparently assembled to help the President get his police state dystopia on.

The recommendations would... make the avenues to accountability for law enforcement so narrow that even the most egregious cases of police violence would have a harder time finding their way to just resolutions. Officers accused of wrongdoing would be granted access to body camera footage before speaking to internal investigators, allowing them to shape legally valid explanations for otherwise incriminating actions.

The Commission also offered its full support for qualified immunity, the rigged game that almost always lets badly behaving officers escape being held accountable for their actions. It also targeted so-called "progressive" prosecutors with plans to limit their ability to decline low level charges or eliminate cash bail.

In addition, more domestic surveillance is on tap. As local governments around the nation tangle with the tricky subject of facial recognition and its impact on residents, the federal commission was saying we just need more of it faster.

The commission recommends providing America’s roughly 18,000 law enforcement agencies, from small town departments to the New York Police Department, with more money for facial recognition technologies.

More facial recognition. Less security for Americans.

The commission also recommends that police departments be granted back door access to encrypted cellphones.

If we gain nothing else from this, at least we can see law enforcement's desires laid bare. Here's what cops want. And with no one on the Commission to push back on these bad ideas, this is what the President may get if he remains in office. Fortunately, a lot of this lies beyond the expansive powers granted to the Leader of the Free World and it's unlikely many of these ideas will find the Congressional support needed to bring this dystopia to life fully. But this is how authoritarian governments begin: with a one-sided Commission that carefully considers both sides of the same side.

Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: donald trump, dystopia, faca, facial recognition, law and order, police, qualified immunity


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Baron von Robber, 23 Oct 2020 @ 9:47am

    Amazing how a "Law & Order" is so into criminality and disorder. Tremendous. The likes of which have never been seen.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Stephen T. Stone (profile), 23 Oct 2020 @ 10:09am

      When talking about the GOP, you should remember these two phrases:

      1. Every accusation, a confession.

      2. Every self-imposed label, a rejection.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 24 Oct 2020 @ 9:26pm

      Re:

      "Law and Order" is an abbreviation for "My word is law, and I give the orders."

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Uriel-238 (profile), 25 Oct 2020 @ 12:40pm

        More "order" less "law"

        One can technically establish order by neutralizing all people associated with the crime, including witnesses. Peace by annihilation.

        Similarly tough on crime generally means cruel to underclasses, as it doesn't involve any extra efforts to delineate guilt from innocence.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonyomous, 25 Nov 2020 @ 3:02pm

        Re: Re:

        No, "Law and order", is an abbreviation for "No anarchy", let the American people democratically elect their officials, laws, and enjoy the protections of the constitution.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2020 @ 10:19am

    I can't wait until January 20, 2021, when we can finally stop focusing on what an idiot Trump is and start worrying about important things like undoing everything the idiot did during his 4 year trashing of the US presidency.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Baron von Robber, 23 Oct 2020 @ 11:00am

      Re:

      Clean up in aisles 1, 3, 4, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17,.....

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 25 Nov 2020 @ 2:43pm

      Re:

      You mean like tearing down the border wall so violent Mexican cartels can sneak their drugs/human trafficking/weapons across our border, build a melitia slowly in souther border cities, expand and eventually take towns over? And things like the USMCA, and protections for Americans from having their jobs replaced by H1b visa workers and laid off? Defunding, destroying police departments/unions that protect American cities from crime and aid in emergencies? That kind of IDIOTIC STUFF?

      SEEMS IDIOTIC TO ME.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That One Guy (profile), 23 Oct 2020 @ 10:23am

    So very much experience...

    It makes sense when you think about it, who better to figure out ways to break laws, end lives and violate rights than people who are highly experienced in the field of doing so and have figured out the best ways to do so and get away with it?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2020 @ 10:31am

    something about fox watching the henhouse....

    blah blah blah

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 23 Oct 2020 @ 11:33am

      Re: something about fox watching the henhouse....

      Or in this case a bunch of foxes 'watching' the henhouse as a Fox tells all the other animals what a great idea it is and how talk about what a conflict of interest it is and how chickens seem to keep 'disappearing' are fake news and nothing but baseless fearmongering from animals who just want anarchy in the henhouse.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    anon, 23 Oct 2020 @ 11:44am

    re: cops

    Does this mean that he'll direct the DoJ to prosecute every cop who bends or breaks the law? Or is his A.G. a fuckwad.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    ECA (profile), 23 Oct 2020 @ 1:26pm

    The history of policing.

    Came to a head during the early industrial in the USA.
    People hired to break up unionizing.
    Paid for by the companies.
    There really wasnt much payment and support by the Poor.
    But they werent being Paid enough to do much.
    Unions finally got made, even after all the fighting from both sides.
    The rich of the City decided to keep them around.
    To help keep the poor in their places.
    To keep the Blacks, the Irish, the Chinese, and everyone else in line.

    The Elections of officials, tended to be backed by those with money. Most were good people, doing the job. But time and money to Back a favorite of those Supporting the police, not counting the poor paying Taxes to support the police, ends up in good/bad coming to the top.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous, 25 Nov 2020 @ 2:45pm

      Re: The history of policing.

      You need to go back and LEARN about police history, because you don't know a damn thing.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Uriel-238 (profile), 25 Nov 2020 @ 3:33pm

        "you don't know a damn thing"

        Oh wow. Contradict and insult without reference to evidence. This seems to be your manner of personal conduct.

        At this point you're less like a participant and more of a specimen, an example of what happens when a human being is subject to a closed bubble of bias.

        Feel free to demonstrate otherwise. I'd be delighted to be proven wrong.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous, 25 Nov 2020 @ 6:40pm

          Re: "you don't know a damn thing"

          I don't need to demonstrate that you do not know about police history. You already proved by the prior statement that you do not know police history, therefore, you should actually go to school and learn about law enforcement. I recommend police systems and practices college course.

          But if you are just too poor to take a college course. You can go to your local library and check out the book Police Systems and Practices: An Introduction. By Thomas Barker.

          You might learn something, because your account isn't accurate at all.

          So, how do I know you're wrong. I took the course. I read the book(s) associated with criminal justice and law enforcement. And I am not a cop or police officer. I just happen to have had an interest in something in the line of work involving criminal justice.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            Uriel-238 (profile), 25 Nov 2020 @ 7:09pm

            "I took the course. I read the books."

            That's not a way you convince someone outside of a church. Around here we don't assume that because you allegedly learned a thing in school that you actually did or are correct.

            But curiously, you just insulted someone without actually talking about how that's relevant. So you picked a fight for no cause.

            Again, why should I, or anyone, take you seriously? You don't know how to have a conversation.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous, 25 Nov 2020 @ 8:46pm

              Re: "I took the course. I read the books."

              Do you know police history? it's a very very long story from beginning up to today. Here's a semi start with police history, takes about an hour to watch.
              Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9P48YT61zII

              I'm certain you will not find an account of police history to anything said by the prior statement I criticized for it's lacking of knowing what they were talking about, and for good reason, because they do not.

              Keep in mind, this is not a full account of police history, hence I recommended the book I sourced.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • icon
                Uriel-238 (profile), 25 Nov 2020 @ 10:03pm

                History of the police.

                Well, you see, I was sold by the CSI series during the aughts, and considered a career in criminal investigation. (And was very disappointed.) So I took the early classes and learned about the Runners and the Peelers. On my own, I'd learn about the slave catchers (here in the states) the thief takers (in Old England). The classes I was in didn't want to talk about those. They skipped right to the Pinkertons and the US Marshals Service.

                So which specific part of the history of US law enforcement do you think I'm missing?

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • identicon
                  Anonymous, 26 Nov 2020 @ 12:44am

                  Re: History of the police.

                  "Well, you see, I was sold by the CSI series during the aughts, and considered a career in criminal investigation. (And was very disappointed.) So I took the early classes and learned about the Runners and the Peelers. On my own, I'd learn about the slave catchers (here in the states) the thief takers (in Old England). The classes I was in didn't want to talk about those. They skipped right to the Pinkertons and the US Marshals Service.

                  So which specific part of the history of US law enforcement do you think I'm missing?"

                  Enough to know you do not have your ducks in a row. There's more to police history in more than one place, though America likes to claim the European model, that's a good star with history on forward, not some half assed, slant of history that doesn't account for the space of one page, therefore, it's neither accurate nor good enough to be a factual account of police history.

                  And If that's all you learned, you need to go back to school.

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  • icon
                    Uriel-238 (profile), 26 Nov 2020 @ 1:34am

                    "Ducks in a row"

                    Once again, you didn't answer my question, and you only accuse and belittle without offering actual input.

                    Again, I don't have any cause to figure you are here or talking to me in good faith.

                    I suspect you can't tell what racism looks like. I suspect you don't understand how we might have to triage a failing nation. And I suspect you're blind to the stratified separate overclass that law enforcement (from the small town precinct to the federal departments) have come.

                    And I expect you have no idea of what the history of US law enforcement looks like. I'd ask you to prove me wrong, but you've only continued to act as a conditioned biological specimen.

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                    • identicon
                      Anonymous, 26 Nov 2020 @ 7:50am

                      Re: "Ducks in a row"

                      "Once again, you didn't answer my question, and you only accuse and belittle without offering actual input.

                      I answered your question with my answer. Which was ignored because your question is irrelevant to your account of Police history.

                      Again, I don't have any cause to figure you are here or talking to me in good faith.

                      I was acting in good faith to correct your account on police history, wether you like it or not.

                      I suspect you can't tell what racism looks like. I suspect you don't understand how we might have to triage a failing nation. And I suspect you're blind to the stratified separate overclass that law enforcement (from the small town precinct to the federal departments) have come.

                      Well you're suspicions are right. I can't tell what racism looks like, it's so non-existant in this country that it doesn't account for 1% of the population. Yep, I must be BLIND to whatever this overclass is supposed to mean about law enforcement because law enforcement makes up of citizens(of all races and backgrounds otherwise known as Americans) who apply for jobs to serve their communities. Police patrol the streets and act on probable cause or when called to an incident. The procedure may be what you have a problem with but there is a reason it's to the discretion of police officers, which I'm sure has something to do with racism, compared actually doing what may be a solution.

                      How about you start bitching about the military too. I bet you didn't know they have police and you know what, they aren't complaining about getting rid of their police and they have almost all the same qualifications and discretions. But I'm sure they are racist too because they makeup of all races that enforce laws, are American citizens,and enforce laws. Yea, I'm blind to the racism alright.

                      And I expect you have no idea of what the history of US law enforcement looks like. I'd ask you to prove me wrong, but you've only continued to act as a conditioned biological specimen."

                      Ooh a biological specimen? I think that's the nicest thing I've been told on Thanksgiving, ever. But, I guess that's what it makes me for correcting your non-historical account of police history, with actual police history.

                      Once again, you didn't answer my question, and you only accuse and belittle without offering actual input.

                      Again, I don't have any cause to figure you are here or talking to me in good faith.

                      Good faith... Hmm.. Are you a Christian? Do you believe in GOD? Do I care? No.

                      But I'll play a game of duck duck goose. You're the duck and I'm the goose. Oh no, that's racist. Quack quack quack quack quack quack!

                      Happy Thanksgiving! Gobble gobble gobble gobble!

                      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Uriel-238 (profile), 23 Oct 2020 @ 1:50pm

    Trump really said all the quiet parts loud from the beginning.

    He was pretty explicit in the first hundred days of his administration. He courted the federal departments, particularly ICE and CBP, told them they could have whatever they wanted and bash whatever heads they liked. In fact, bash more heads, please.

    And all he wanted was loyalty to Trump (contrast, loyalty to the White House, loyalty to the Constitutions of the US, or loyalty to the United States.)

    He was setting up his own private army, his own garrison by which to protect his own fiefdom.

    This is remarkably analogous to the establishment of the Schutzstaffel, Hitler's private personally-loyal army who would become his landed knights once eastern Europe had been conquered and redistributed to German hands.

    With all that in mind, I suspect he'll be counting on them to enforce his continued regime if the election doesn't go his way.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      ECA (profile), 24 Oct 2020 @ 12:06pm

      Re: Trump really said all the quiet parts loud from the beginnin

      And what happens After he is out of office?
      Those agencies, will TRY to keep doing the same until someone YELLS at them.

      That or WE take them to court for Subversion of the gov.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Uriel-238 (profile), 24 Oct 2020 @ 1:01pm

        Law enforcement after Trump

        Oh yeah, law enforcement are going to want to retain their privilege after the fact, but they had a lot of it during the Obama administration, which the federal government only began to incrementally temper.

        Biden may still be an incrementalist or he may recognize that too many people are getting murdered by the law enforcement class.

        It's one of the potential flashpoints for the Civil War when protesters decide they want to abolish the police once and for all, and the police unions are very used to getting their own way by use of force. It'll be hard to say which officer-involved citizen killing or precinct-burning was the trigger.

        Biden might be able to cool some heads by closing private prisons and detention centers, freeing a lot of non-violent inmates and abolishing ICE. But he'd piss off a lot of his establishment friends doing so.

        We need to keep on biden and badger him to show rapid progress in the first hundred days to fix all the things. Otherwise we're practically guaranteed a Trump / Mussolini reprisal in 2024.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous, 25 Nov 2020 @ 7:02pm

      Re: Trump really said all the quiet parts loud from the beginnin

      "He was pretty explicit in the first hundred days of his administration. He courted the federal departments, particularly ICE and CBP, told them they could have whatever they wanted and bash whatever heads they liked. In fact, bash more heads, please.

      And all he wanted was loyalty to Trump (contrast, loyalty to the White House, loyalty to the Constitutions of the US, or loyalty to the United States.)

      He was setting up his own private army, his own garrison by which to protect his own fiefdom.

      This is remarkably analogous to the establishment of the Schutzstaffel, Hitler's private personally-loyal army who would become his landed knights once eastern Europe had been conquered and redistributed to German hands.

      With all that in mind, I suspect he'll be counting on them to enforce his continued regime if the election doesn't go his way."

      Spoken like someone who doesn't know a damn thing about law enforcement or how the commander and chief (the presidency) actually work, or what the references are about(REALLY BAD GUY CRIMINALS).

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Glenn, 23 Oct 2020 @ 1:56pm

    Well, Trump, thinks it's a crime to not agree with him about everything. If his father hadn't gifted him with a fortune, he would've spent his entire adult life in and out of prison.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Ed (profile), 24 Oct 2020 @ 8:33am

    "Good cop" is an oxymoron. Aided by mafioso-like police unions, law enforcement in the US has become a nationwide terrorist organization that must be swiftly and decisively curtailed.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 24 Oct 2020 @ 9:21am

      Re:

      Oh they exist, they just tend to quickly become former good cops in one way or another, whether being corrupted, fired or pressured to quit.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous, 25 Nov 2020 @ 7:46pm

        Re: Re:

        Oh they exist, they just tend to quickly become former good cops in one way or another, whether being corrupted, fired or pressured to quit.

        False, obviously you don't know your statistics very well. As a reference. You never watched the live TV show COPs obviously enough to know, there are PLENTY OF GOOD COPS. Oh yea, and statistically, there are not that many "BAD COPS", that's just what the media likes to portray, it's not true.

        Law enforcement is a job. People apply for the job like anyone else. Most people with a college education can get into the career after training. Usually, the department sends them to a college or academy on law, police procedure. Some require paramedic training, while others privide courses thta require them to pass what would amount to lifeguard training(CPR, saving a drownig/dying victim). Police go through a pass or fail course on every single requirement before they are sent out on the streets. They usually spend at least one to two years doing other duties that amount to community service as a public servant before being sent out on duty. Their training amounts to the equal of the military when it comes to marksmanship and gun safety. One out of ten officers fail becoming a police officer. They also are given a lie detector test and anual drug tests. They literally are required to go through many many hours that train them to be first responders and serve and protect people.

        Just because you do not like a police officer in a uniform, doesn't mean they arn't people just like you. They have a job to do, and they know they have to reform bad practices and continue to adapt them. Each department handles their training and emloyment of officers different. Some have a merit system based on their performance, others it's a waiting game like any other job to get an advancement. It's not all the same and some are better than others. But not all COPS are bad, but it doesn't take long for one cop to give ALL cops a bad name.

        The solution is better community engagement, legalize marijuana, have actual state funded reform programs for non-violent offenders to go to school and get a degree and a job. People need to know what self-help solutions states and governments offer to anyone who is in need of food, education, and a job. Believe it or not, most people commiting petty crimes like theft are homeless and just need a way out, not go to prison. But you have to put people in prison that start steeling cars and breaking into homes. You can't expect to call a police officer on a domestic issue that involves violence and not expect them to be on edge, because that's when most police or civilians are hurt.

        Simply put, you need to educate yourself more about what law enforcement have to deal with and be apart of the solution by getting involved in your community instead of complaining and expecting law enforcement to meet your expectations. You have to work on the problems in your area where you live and that's the best way to problem solve. That's why people are with so many problems, they work too much, aren't engagued in their communities and too demanding on law enforcement to perfectly solve every problem, that's just never going to happen.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous, 25 Nov 2020 @ 2:48pm

      Re:

      "Good cop" is an oxymoron. Aided by mafioso-like police unions, law enforcement in the US has become a nationwide terrorist organization that must be swiftly and decisively curtailed."

      You don't know a damn think about how the police operate. To correct your ignorance. I recommend you go to COLLEGE and take a course called, police systems and practices, and in addition, study LAW, get a college degree in the practice, then apply for a law enforcement career, go through a police academy, then come back and TALK.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous, 25 Nov 2020 @ 4:17am

    Be honest

    Everyone (including the author of the article) here thinks the same. TRUMP never helped nobody in America. Building the WALL never actually was about stopping real crime from REAL mafia DRUG cartels. That RUSSIA gate was REAL. That Trump is a BIGGOTED, NAZI, FASCIST, RACIST.

    AM I RIGHT?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Uriel-238 (profile), 25 Nov 2020 @ 1:51pm

      Honest assessments

      Sounds like you're looking to confirm an assumption that we (Mr. Cushing and the rest of us on this forum) simply cling to anti-Trump sentiments without actually scrutinizing the facts and coming to our own determination of what is or isn't true.

      By doing that you might be looking to dismiss us all as misinformed simpletons. Am I on the right track, Anonymous?

      ~ The border wall between the US and Mexico is a vanity project. Most undocumented immigrants come to the US by plane and overstaying visas. Most drugs that come in through Mexico do so through normal customs entry points and are successfully smuggled, possibly with the aid of members of law enforcement. Many many more drugs come in on the coasts, again through major ports, since they're easily buried by the rest of the freight coming into the nation. If you want a border wall as something other than a vanity project, you need to consider why, and what better methods could be bought with that money. Maybe you want and like the vanity project. Just don't expect it to slow down immigration or drugs.

      ~ President Trump has definitely had dealings with Russian oligarchs and plutocrats. He was considering building a hotel there, and the facts of his negotiations for the project are established. Also there has been some documented collaboration between the Russian state and the 2016 presidential campaign of Donald Trump. This has been established in the Muller report however, Muller felt it was not in his jurisdiction to indict or prosecute the President of the United States, and left it to a (captured) congress to prosecute or not. They chose not to. But this can still go to court after Trump leaves office -- assuming he does before the nation collapses. The Ukraine phone call thing, incidentally, is also unresolved and may go to court since impeachment / removal from office is a separate process from criminal prosecution.

      ~ Trump has made several statements before and during his term as President that indicate racist sentiments and sympathy with white nationalist groups that establish a consistent set of racist views. I don't have to call him a bigot, a (proverbial, not literal) Nazi, or a racist; the points in which he expressed his sentiments are public information and undisputed. I can say that the methods used by the Trump administration align with (multiple) characteristics-analysis studies of what a fascist society looks like. But some of these properties were already here before Trump, and he just cranked up the dial. A discussion over coffee could be made over whether Trump is more fascist than the US already was or in saying the soft parts loud, he simply took the mask off.

      In that regard, Trump may have done the people of the US a favor by bringing to light the atrocities the US routinely committed and ignored, making them too public and too disgusting to remain unacknowledged. We now get to decide whether we continue to ignore them and just accept the US is awful, or change the nation to be the exemplar for the rest of the world Reagan told us we should aspire to.

      So, Anonymous what are your thoughts?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous, 25 Nov 2020 @ 2:35pm

        Re: Honest assessments

        "The border wall between the US and Mexico is a vanity project."

        You obviously are unaware the real infiltration attempts Mexican cartels are trying to extend their power to the USA. I recommend doing more homework about this, because it's not a vanity project, there is serious rational for a need for there to be a wall.

        "President Trump has definitely had dealings with Russian oligarchs and plutocrats. He was considering building a hotel there, and the facts of his negotiations for the project are established. "

        Oh.. So, Negoatiating with Russians, building American businesses there, befriending them, even talking to their press, etc, must be a crime and make anyone associated with a Russian an accomplice to interfering with the U.S. election?

        "This has been established in the Muller report however, Muller felt it was not in his jurisdiction to indict or prosecute the President of the United States".

        No, Russiagate was not established by the muller report. Obviously you never watched the hearing from start to finish and the critique of it from independent media. Also, if you didn't know Russiagate was a hoax, Aaron Mate' debunked it, there's plenty of ESTABLISHED documention about that. But my guess is, you don't even know who Aaron Mate' is.

        "Trump has made several statements before and during his term as President that indicate racist sentiments, blah blah blah."

        Yea, Trump isn't racist. He never was, never has been, and has done a lot for minorities over the four years he has been president. There are many people of ALL races that has been to the whitehouse during press briefings, and friendships that go back decades, that discredit that. But believe what you want. You just can't discredit he has friends and relationships with people of other races, therefore it isn't true.

        "I can say that the methods used by the Trump administration align with (multiple) characteristics-analysis studies of what a fascist society looks like. "

        You can say that, but it doesn't make it true. Trump was elected president, whether you like it or not. Trump supported the police for many of the good reasons they should be, whether you like it or not. For good reason, Trump improved trade deals to bring American jobs back to America. Since, and before Covid, Americans were actually starting to get fair employment by preventing H1B workers replacing tenure employees . He passed the USMCA which was a HUGE deal for American trade(though you may dismiss this, it was an accomplishment which brought back hundreds of thousands of jobs for Americans).

        But hey, if you repeat the words BIGGOTED, NAZI, FASCIST, RACIST. Then think of Trump. You too can get your friends to join that Trump is a BIGGOTED, NAZI, FASCIST, RACIST CLUB too!

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Uriel-238 (profile), 25 Nov 2020 @ 3:20pm

          "Mexican cartels"

          You obviously are unaware the real infiltration attempts Mexican cartels are trying to extend their power to the USA.

          Not at all. Got any useful links?

          [Negotiating] with Russians, building American businesses there, befriending them, even talking to their press, etc, must be a crime...

          No, but Trump then actively denied it. That's malicious falsehood, as is his long list of 22000+ false and misleading statements.

          But then, since you ended with the rant from your last post:

          But hey, if you repeat the words BIGGOTED, NAZI, FASCIST, RACIST. Then think of Trump.

          I can assess from that you're not interested in an actual discussion, but much like President Trump, much like the post-Trump Republican party, much like the Republican senate since the Bush administration (if not before), you regard the rest of us as your enemy, or at minimum, as marks to be exploited.

          Assertions without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. And you have brought no evidence, and only bad attitude to the table.

          Why should I care any further what you think?

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous, 25 Nov 2020 @ 6:26pm

            Re: "Mexican cartels"

            "You obviously are unaware the real infiltration attempts Mexican cartels are trying to extend their power to the USA."

            Yea, here you go, two interviews from Ed Calderon, bye Joe Rogan should give you an idea what's going on, and that's just two interviews from one person. Listen to them all the way through.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llhb2ymtsw8

            and

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPBejhoKlb8

            And, off the top of my head, I also recommend reading.

            Cartel: The Coming Invasion of Mexico's Drug Wars
            Book by Sylvia Longmire

            El Narco: Inside Mexico's Criminal Insurgency

            Also, I'm sure there are plenty of documentaries about mexican cartels on free sources like youtube.

            No, but Trump then actively denied it. That's malicious falsehood. Hmm, malicious means intent to do someone harm, and it never happened, so...

            "as is his long list of 22000+ false and misleading statements. "

            Have you ever sought to see what the Trump administration's explanation were for any of these "false misleading statements"? If not, well, I'm sure you haven't observed the full context of anything said, which can always be misinterpreted and misconstrued.

            " can assess from that you're not interested in an actual discussion, but much like President Trump, much like the post-Trump Republican party, much like the Republican senate since the Bush administration (if not before), you regard the rest of us as your enemy, or at minimum, as marks to be exploited."

            Oh, you can, can you? Post-Trump Republican party? Much like the Repubican Senate since the Bush Administration(if not before), I regard the rest of US(who's us? you?) as my enemy, or at a minimum, as marks to be exploited?

            Hmm... Amusing, that you just somehow know all this stuff.. Perhaps you called Cleo's 1800 hotline and she gave you a tip?

            Back to reality. No, I did not vote for Trump in 2016. I voted for Jill Stein. I regretfully made the mistake of voting for Obama, twice. I bet you knew that too? RIGHT?

            There's plenty of evidence that i've provided. You just aren't looking after I slipped to you that Aaron Mate debunked the RUSSIAGATE hoax. But i'm sure my guess was right, you do not know who that is. Google and youtube him associated with Russiagate, there's plenty of evidence supported by this journalist.

            How about you do your own research on these topics. I have no reason to lie.

            As for my support of Trump. I wouldn't call it that. I would rather have a better candidate, but that candidate isn't Joe Biden. I'm old, old enough to know ALL the well documented stories about how corrupt Joe Biden is. Trump has done a lot for Americans, and his support for law enforcement is a good thing, despite the issues with law enforcement, he's commander and chief of the military, not police chief of whatever police department where whatever a police officer did something, and that's where due process comes in. Also, there's plenty of documentation about that, so much, I don't need to document it here.

            Assertions without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. And you have brought no evidence and only bad attitude to the table.

            I was using humor, not a bad attitude. Also, I gave plenty of evidence, you just didn't read very well to understand what I meant.

            Why should I care any further what you think? How about you care what is true and not. I'm not gaslighting you. You can check out all the stuff I am talking about at your leisure.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonyomous, 25 Nov 2020 @ 7:08pm

              Re: Re: "Mexican cartels"

              Please excuse my typo's. I have sticky keyboard keys.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • icon
                Uriel-238 (profile), 25 Nov 2020 @ 7:19pm

                Re: Re: Re: "Mexican cartels"

                Fair enough. So let us for a moment take the Mexican drug trade as a serious matter. (It is serious, but right now I have other concerns for the United States that take more priority).

                How do you think Trump's wall is going to slow these guys down. I mean holy fuck, did you see the tunnel? Trump's wall -- the parts of which have been erected to replace old wall -- was cut through with >$200 of hardware, has been climbed by underage climbing enthusiasts. And it wouldn't stop the tunnel.

                Nor world it stop contraband going through normal ports of call.

                We have a considerable number of better solutions, including following Portugal's success in decriminalizing drug trade and focusing on public access to recovery programs.

                Why don't we do that? It'd be cheaper than the wall and our crazy militarization of the CBP and ICE.

                Are you interested in actual solutions, Anonymous? I'll be pleasantly and cheerfully surprised if you are.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • identicon
                  Anonymous, 25 Nov 2020 @ 8:31pm

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: "Mexican cartels"

                  "Fair enough. So let us for a moment take the Mexican drug trade as a serious matter. (It is serious, but right now I have other concerns for the United States that take more priority).

                  How do you think Trump's wall is going to slow these guys down. I mean holy fuck, did you see the tunnel? Trump's wall -- the parts of which have been erected to replace old wall -- was cut through with >$200 of hardware, has been climbed by underage climbing enthusiasts. And it wouldn't stop the tunnel."

                  If you watch the two youtube clips I sourced from Joe Rogans podcast interviewing, Ed Calderon. Listen to what he has to say because some of those concerns are addressed during the two interviews.

                  Even if "drugs" are decriminalised, doesn't mean that crime from cartels will stop. I am aware of the tunnels, but the wall has been very affective.

                  Here's what the Customs and border protection have to say about the wall.

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAt4esdlZOA

                  in 2012. there was something few news sources covered, called the Nuevo Laredo massacre. Who was president then? It I'll give you a hint, it wasn't Trump.

                  If you want to read more about it, you can read this article here.
                  https://www.propublica.org/article/allende-zetas-cartel-massacre-and-the-us-dea

                  If you watch the two video links I gave, you'll have a better understanding that the U.S. is a hell of a lot safer now then in 2012 thanks to the border wall. Sure, there's plenty of room to make fun of trump for statments like, "mexico is going to pay for it". I'm not sure if that will happen, but I'm 100% certain that the wall is a hell of a lot better than not having it.

                  We have a considerable number of better solutions, including following Portugal's success in decriminalizing drug trade and focusing on public access to recovery programs.

                  Why don't we do that? It'd be cheaper than the wall and our crazy militarization of the CBP and ICE.

                  I'm all for legalizing marijuan and Cocaine, peyote, LSD, and MDMA(ectasy). The hitory behind it is fascinating and how they became illegal were due to fearmongering in one way or another.

                  Prtugal has had some success and reduction in crime when they decriminalized drugs. But there are problems they have as well with that, but it's better than serving life in prison, compared to being free to choose to be dependent on drugs and let it destroy your life, because it can do that.

                  However, if you listen to the Joe Rogan podcast I was mentioning before

                  found here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llhb2ymtsw8

                  and here

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPBejhoKlb8

                  You will come to realize that the solution to getting rid of mexican cartels is not going to happen just because drugs become legal. They have overtaken many legal sources of business through extortion/protection rackets. For example, Avacados source: https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2019-11-20/mexico-cartel-violence-avocados

                  THey have infiltrated many law enforcements to such a degree it's something that only a real war would resolve. The solution without going in a real war with mexico cartels? Build a wall.

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  • identicon
                    Anonymous, 25 Nov 2020 @ 9:14pm

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "Mexican cartels"

                    P.S. Judge Jeanine, a woman of color, is a long time friend of Donald Trump. An example Trump isn't Racist.

                    Just wanted to add that.

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                    • icon
                      Uriel-238 (profile), 25 Nov 2020 @ 9:49pm

                      Racists

                      Again, there's a Wikipedia page on how racist Trump is. You can decide whether or not you agree with that.

                      But it's very possible to be racist and still have friends of color, or to have friends that are of a group about which you have prejudices. Hence the expression Don't worry, she's one of the good ones.

                      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                      • identicon
                        Anonymous, 25 Nov 2020 @ 11:58pm

                        Re: Racists

                        Yea, I took a look at it. Most of it is complete garbage considering wikipedia is not a source from which you read about anyone's racism. But it's funny how Trump his own special section. BIAS is certain to come up from media sources. Just because one of them is from Wikipedia, knowing people can create wiki's on Wikipedia and edit them too, doesn't bring too much credibility there.

                        But look, I know Trump had a crony college or whatever he called it. I know he's had failed businesses. I know he's not paid contractors what they billed him for and he paid them what he thought their work was worth. He's gone through several marriages, had a fling with stormy daniels and all that jazz.

                        I still do not believe that he is racist.

                        Would I voted for him had there been a real viable third party candidate like Tulsi Gabbard? No. I would have voted for Tulsi, hands down, because I believe she far more principled.

                        But since the DNC had the third party removed from ballots and I had no idea who the hell the candidate was, knowing I value border security, and I get to keep my job from H1B employees. I get higher pay because of the USMCA. My investments through the Trump administration were higher than at any time in my life, ever. My mortgage rate I locked in was the best I could ever get in years.

                        Add in the multitude of law enforcement efforts Trump has achieved, a vaccine for covid around the corner without being confined to my home. Knowing Biden was corrupt and bring back the Obama where I LOST my home and was screwed. When the crops I was growing were copyrighted under Obama, which almost screwed me, really really bad. I voted Trump and I don't regret it, even if with his faults.

                        With Biden around the corner, I'm worried I can't own my AR to defend my life and property, that my 2nd amerndment is going to be flushed down the drain, that my taxes and crime are going to sky rocket, that the border wall won't be finished, and I'll be forced to train some H1B worker and lose my tenure job. So, I weigh that among the media BS with the fake RUSSIAGATE and all that with all that Trump has helped me with, including the farm aid, hands down, he was a better choice than Biden.

                        Now you may not have been as fortunate to invest, own farm land, have a tech job that was under H1B threat, or positively affected by the USMCA. But you still have a president(dispite what the media says) that has done something to help all American citizens, no matter what their race, or age is. I know that for a fact becaues I've literally lost it all under Obama and got my life back under Trump, and I'm not white, and I'm not racist.

                        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  • icon
                    Uriel-238 (profile), 25 Nov 2020 @ 9:54pm

                    Mexican Cartels infiltrated Law Enforcement

                    You mean US law enforcement?

                    That is more typical of what we consider corruption, much the way the Chicago bootleggers kept much of the Cook County police (and the prosecutors, and the judges, and juries if necessary) on the take.

                    Right now, it's a really great time to be a bad cop, even those who aren't getting kickbacks from drug-gangs.

                    But so far, you've given me five hours of content to watch, that's deep into TL:DR territory.

                    I still don't think a wall is going to make that much of a difference, and the CBP has demonstrated it is not an institution that can be trusted with its word, even when under oath in court. Especially when under oath in court.

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                    • identicon
                      Anonymous, 25 Nov 2020 @ 11:04pm

                      Re: Mexican Cartels infiltrated Law Enforcement

                      You mean US law enforcement?

                      No, I mean, border patrol. US law enforcement is a body of agencies, not all are one in the same in their duties.

                      I know the wall makes a difference. A HUGE difference. But that's the newer built part of the wall. The older parts of the walls, migrants cut razor wire, and cut their way through parts to get through. The part the media portrays as infective isn't the newer side.

                      Many times, migrants take the path towards the older walls. They know border patrols are after them, so they use distractions so other migrants in larger gatherings can pass through. So, if you question effectiveness in areas, I agree, it's a whack a mole situation.

                      I get that people come to make a living, but our own government is at fault for that, such as the Venezuela situation, migrant caravans from countries that have become full of cartel violence.

                      I personally think if there was ever a war necessary, legalize most drugs, eliminate the cartels. But we still need a border wall. You have to stop physical capability to get across the border from groups of people who are not citizens. I mean, if America wants to buy Mexico, we'd have to take care of the crime there.

                      With all the anti-police talk, that's insane.

                      As far as trusting border patrol or police testimony, I've seen law enforcement officers lie, and I've seen them tell the truth. If I weigh how many times I've seen an officer lie in court personally my whole life, it was once. Later that officer was fired over it.

                      law enforcement is a job most people can apply for. There is a vetting process that sees almost 1 out of 10 applicants get the job. There's just no chance at this times(even with lie detectors) in any career can get perfect candidates, it's just impossible. The's why there's a judicial system and due process, appeals process etc.

                      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Essential Reading
Techdirt Insider Chat
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.