miras_chinotto
certified low iq
No bio...
User ID: 348
miras_chinotto
certified low iq
5mo ago
They have the power to pretend they're totally following orders, but drag their feet until the next guy is elected.
That's not a "power" though. There isn't some law or legal ruling giving them this check on the president and is a risk in quite literally any organization. It's on the new admin to identify and replace people who aren't doing their duties.
These are all just words that bureaucrats said, not an objective fact. What evidence is there that it failed any such test, and that they'd totally allow it if it didn't?
SCOTUS has a majority opinion you can find from 30 seconds of googling on the topic. They start the opinion from the get-go acknowledging Trump's authority to do so but that the procedure was not compliant to law.
Why did you skip the later part of my sentemce
Letters, emails? What's the difference? If they are providing orders to the administration they are all vaguely the same thing as an executive order though with different levels of formality and purpose. Sending an email with guidance on how to enforce some presidential policy isn't verboten or just one weird trick to avoid process.
You haven't really given much of an argument for that
Explain, please. The bureaucracy simply doesn't have powers that supercede the executive. Claiming otherwise is throwing your hands up and calling it impossible at the first signs of resistance. Consider the example of DACA where SCOTUS decided the Trump admin full and well had the authority to rescind the program but because the announcement was just Sessions loudly pooing (rightfully) on Obama, it didn't meet the relatively low bar required by the APA to show that the action actually had a reasoning behind it rather than failing the "arbitrary and capricious" test. That isn't the bureaucracy being so powerful the president can't do anything, that's the president relying on people who don't know what they're doing to execute his agenda.
As far as I remember Bush and Obama did both rule by diktat
Yes, ruling by executive order has been a thing for a long time. My point is that the process requirements are guardrails established by Congress that allow judicial review of some of the most arbitrary ones.
And then, 4 years later, the problem is solved by the election of a different President.
I think you misunderstood me. The problem is solved by changing the rules to ones you can work with or by using the established procedures to accomplish what you're trying to do. This is basic institutional competence and I would hope that given effectively a do-over, Trump would be hiring people who can navigate these types of obstacles since he himself isn't expected to do so.
The power of the bureaucracy to enforce procedural rules would exceed the power of elected officials to run the executive branch.
I mean this is just a maximally uncharitable reading of the situation. No one doubts Trump's authority to do much of want he wants to do but due process obligation and the administrative procedure act are one of the great limiters of federal overreach. The failing as such falls on whatever staffers aren't capable of reading documentation or consulting with white house legal before trying to do whatever they're trying to do.
I understand that frustrates people who want to punish the other tribe or who want results today and not tomorrow, but it's probably worth considering how much worse things would be for cultural conservatives under Bush/Obama/etc if the president really was able to rule by diktat.
miras_chinotto
certified low iq
5mo ago
Good. I frankly don't trust or expect people like Elon to be able to meaningfully be able to separate wheat from chaff within the federal government.
miras_chinotto
certified low iq
5mo ago
I don't think power lies in rulings and laws, power is the ability to make things happen or stop them from happening.
Then what's your complaint exactly? There isn't a structural thing giving these people power as you've defined it.
it's not evidence that these bureaucrats would have come to a different decision if the administration happened to follow the procedure outlined int that particular ruling
How not? They explicitly say that they would have. One of the major issues of contention was that at the district Court level, they did actually put together a rationale and justification document for rescinding DACA however, it couldn't be used to defend the previous order which had to be argued against on its own compliance. At the time, the legal speculation was that Trump could have just given up on that particular court case and announcement and then immediately do it again using the revised version or as a similar new EO and it would have actually stuck. If you read the ruling, it seems a lot more reasonable than the 5-4 would seem.
Then I have no idea what you argument is that Trump is not following process here, or ruling by diktat whereas other presidents have not.
Huh? Formal instruction from the president whether it's an EO or an email or whatever is subject to law surrounding the procedure. I'm arguing that's probably a good thing or it would otherwise be diktat.
miras_chinotto
certified low iq
5mo ago
He said this after making the gesture twice did he not? I think he knew what he was doing - how could he not? He's not some everyman in his first public appearance ever, he's one of the most powerful men on the planet whose primary contribution to his affiliated companies these days seems to in fact be public and private appearances.
miras_chinotto
certified low iq
5mo ago
He claims that this is an ultimate goal for him but that doesn't mean it's something he actually values nor does it give much predictive power for his actions.
If he accomplishes it, many dumb trolling events like this can be forgiven.
miras_chinotto
certified low iq
5mo ago
You said that Trump sending e-mails being illegal is not initially crazy
Ah I see what you're getting at. Initially I was simply stating that I wouldn't be surprised if there were some probably dumb process requirements that would make that illegal as OP alluded to. I don't know what those processes necessarily are or would be but I do know that certain kinds of email guidance from the president requires physical copies, signatures, numbering and archiving much like an actual executive order. Not having that or the general process requirements in the APA would be more like Obama/Bush/Trump/Biden just post on Twitter/send a text/shoot an email and suddenly it has force of law - a diktat not subject to judicial or legislative restraint the way EOs are.
You're missing the point. Why was it 5-4, if the standard was so objective, and it's violation was so obvious?
Because our institutions, the people that fill them, and the people that do the filling have all sorts of priorities that only sometimes seem to match good faith action and then only partially.
That doesn't mean they'd actually do it.
Yeah but we could have tested that easily enough but just redoing the announcement this time with Nielsen's rationale.
My problem is the insistence on analyzing it from a structural perspective. I consider it mostly a red herring.
Can you expand on this? If it's not a structural thing then how are you supposed to ever fix it or work around it?
miras_chinotto
certified low iq
5mo ago
Do you know if any of the new Trump EOs will affect MBEs? There are massive federal subsidies and quotas to companies that are owned by minorities and in my experience it's grift at every level - state, city, etc.
miras_chinotto
certified low iq
6mo ago
Thanks I was really confused why it was linking to a deleted reddit comment or whatever.
miras_chinotto
certified low iq
1yr ago
And I disagree. If you assume performative equates to insincere, then my original comment doesn't even make sense. Austin progressives are absolutely sincere in their beliefs. They are also incredibly focused on their appearance of being super progressive, even to the point where they will pass local ordinances that are counterproductive (e.g. the various ongoing homeless policies) or that are clearly intended to be overturned by the state.
miras_chinotto
certified low iq
1yr ago
Performativity simply means that the priority is projecting an image or impression, i.e. performing. It doesn't mean that the person performing can't actually believe the things they claim.
miras_chinotto
certified low iq
2yr ago
I would just get over it. It really just doesn't matter 99% of the time. If you want to spend money and time on treatments that will at best slow it down, then by all means do so, but I would recommend really examining why it matter so much to you.
miras_chinotto
certified low iq
5mo ago
You are mistaking me. I think the government does need downsizing. I don't think Elon and the like are capable of doing so effectively. They are much more likely to just fire people based on contrived criteria or, now that we've seen the RTO mandate, push out the smart ones and keep only the least competent workers.
Can someone put together an actual timeline of events here? It is proving very difficult to determine from the articles I've read. Those critical of the maccabi depend on them doing genocidal chants, vandalism, and low level violence prior to the game. Those staunchly on the other side are relying heavily on this being "preplanned" but the only pre planned attack evidence seems to be some messages on social media that they were sent the same day as the attacks? So presumably after the prior maccabi provocation? It's not clear to me.
Obviously mob violence is not justified by chants and vandalism, but if you fly into some other city and stir things up, it's not a pogrom or fitting with a "Europe has an antisemitism problem" when psycho locals escalate. This story seems hopelessly distorted in the news coverage.
miras_chinotto
certified low iq
9mo ago
I mean, good for them. We should all be so fortunate. When software engineers are begging for scraps on the streets, the longshoremen will truly be kings among men. When the social contract (referring to pro-social business norms) cannot keep your family fed, people will resort to other means.
miras_chinotto
certified low iq
1yr ago
That doesn't make much sense to me. The dancing Israelis on 9/11 are one of the most widely known conspiracy theory-esque ideas in the United States. It seems like a direct counter example to your argument.
miras_chinotto
certified low iq
1yr ago
Do we have any idea when a ruling on Chevron could be expected and how sure are we that it's actually on the chopping block?
miras_chinotto
certified low iq
1yr ago
The residency slots are capped by the AMA, are they not? Seems like a relatively easy fix while we are talking about grandiose civil rights reform.
miras_chinotto
certified low iq
2yr ago
Ticks will stay on your body for comparatively a much longer duration than mosquitoes. I don't see how there's any actual benefit from a mosquito having any kind of analgesic property when they'll finish sucking and fly off in seconds. The benefit to a tick is much more obvious.
Additionly, as someone in the American south and no stranger to "skeeters" and ticks, I don't know that I've ever had a mosquitoes bite become itchy as quickly as you describe.
miras_chinotto
certified low iq
2yr ago
How long until Julius Bronson finds this place? There have been a few other bad actors the Motte has come across as well (e.g. vintology). Has there been any thought about how to handle them if they were to show up? Should their permabans be continued here or this a chance for everyone to have a fresh start?
miras_chinotto
certified low iq
2yr ago
I do not believe there's a sincere desire in the masses to reconcile, nor do I believe there's a practical way to do so.
I agree and think this is the real mystery in today's culture war - how far will escalation continue?
In a way, civil war is incredibly unlikely for now because of the relative comfort and safety we have. However, I worry that this comfort allows the divisions plaguing us to keep simmering away and implicitly raises the stakes of any eventual conflict or divorce. We defer the conflict resolution at our peril. The evaporative cooling of a small scale civil war or something analogous like secession a decade ago, could have actually allowed a rapprochement.
Bizarrely the only "just" solution is one state encompassing the Palestinian territories and modern Israel with full rights for Palestinians and Israelis and the only way something like that could happen would be total domination, monopolization of force, and annexation/rule by the US.
miras_chinotto
certified low iq
5mo ago
Doesn't seem initially crazy to me. Not following established processes was frequently used to prevent Trump policies in term one. If you have a rule that something has to be done a certain way, you need to revoke that rule. If you're too brash to figure out how the system works first, you probably need to slow down and understand what you're trying to do.
I certainly think he did so. Probably intentionally seeking to rile people up since I don't think he has any meaningful political philosophy let alone nazism.
More options
Context Copy link