Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Reposting since it got page bottomed:
https://whatthefuckjusthappenedtoday.com/2019/07/03/day-895/
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-idUSKCN1TY1A5
2/ A federal judge blocked Attorney General William Barr's order to indefinitely detain immigrants seeking asylum and deny them bail if they crossed into the U.S. border without permission. The order requires immigration judges to conduct hearings for asylum applicants to ask for release on bail within seven days if they have shown a "credible fear" of returning to their country of origin. (Bloomberg / New York Times)
3/ Trump claimed that he is "absolutely moving forward" with including the citizenship question on the 2020 census, contradicting both the Justice Department and the Commerce secretary, and calling the news reports "FAKE!" Yesterday, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said the Census Bureau was in the process of printing the census form without the citizenship question following the Supreme Court's decision to effectively block the question from being added to the questionnaire. (New York Times / CNBC / The Hill)
4/ The National Parks Service is diverting $2.5 million meant to improve parks in order to cover costs associated with Trump's Fourth of July event on the National Mall. Trump officials have consistently refused to disclose how much taxpayers will have to pay for the "Salute to America" event. The diverted park fees make up just a fraction of the extra costs the government will have to pay as a result of the event, which will include tanks, military flyovers, Air Force One, and an extended pyrotechnics display. (Washington Post)
5/ Trump defended the cost of his "Salute to America" event, saying it will be "very little compared to what it is worth" because it will be "the show of a lifetime." Military chiefs, meanwhile, are concerned about the politicization of the event – They've been asked to stand with Trump during the event. (Politico / Washington Post / CNN)
https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/03/politics/military-concerns-trump-july-4th-event/index.html
6/ Trump will hold a campaign rally in North Carolina on the same day Robert Mueller is scheduled to testify publicly to Congress. Trump's campaign announced that he will be returning to Greenville, N.C. on July 17 to offer counter-programming to Mueller's highly anticipated public testimony about his report on Russian election interference in 2016 and possible obstruction of justice by Trump. The Trump campaign's chief operating officer said the rally will be an opportunity to highlight "the successes of the Trump presidency." (Washington Post)
📌 Day 888: Robert Mueller agreed to testify before the House Intelligence and Judiciary Committees in back-to-back public hearings on July 17th about his investigation into Russia's election interference and possible obstruction of justice by Trump. The announcement came after the two panels issued a subpoena compelling Mueller's testimony. Mueller previously said he did not want to testify and his report should serve as his testimony. Members of Mueller's team will also participate in a closed-door session with lawmakers. (NBC News / Washington Post / New York Times / Politico / ABC News / CNN)
poll/ 41% approve the job Trump is doing as president while 54% disapprove. 29% strongly approve with 44% who strongly disapprove. (Gallup)
https://news.gallup.com/poll/259871/trump-approval-remains-low-40s.aspx
"A report from the Department of Homeland Security's independent watchdog"
I'd like to point out that the Secretary of Homeland Security and other department officials have repeatedly denied all reports of the horrible treatment at these detention camps and now their own investigators are essentially calling them liars.
NRA meltdown has Trump campaign sweating – Republicans worry that the NRA and two other groups that have long formed the core of their electoral infrastructure will be effectively on the sidelines.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/03/nra-guns-trump-campaign-1395970
Now, the gun rights group is in total meltdown — and senior Republicans and Trump 2020 officials are alarmed.
In recent weeks, the NRA has seen everything from a failed coup attempt to the departure of its longtime political architect to embarrassing tales of self-dealing by top leaders. The turmoil is fueling fears that the organization will be profoundly diminished heading into the election, leaving the Republican Party with a gaping hole in its political machinery.
With the Chamber of Commerce and Koch political network withdrawing from their once-dominant roles in electing conservatives, Republicans worry that three organizations that have long formed the core of their electoral infrastructure will be effectively on the sidelines.
The predicament has so troubled some Republicans that they are calling on the famously secretive NRA to address its 2020 plans. Within the past week, senators have privately expressed concerns about the group to National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman Todd Young.
“No organization has been more important to conservative voter education and engagement than the NRA. We all hope they’re able to mount the kind of effort in the 2020 cycle they have in the past,” said Gregg Keller, a former American Conservative Union executive director. “But in case they can’t, given their current situation, I hope they’re being forthright about that within the movement so others can pick up the slack.”
“The situation,” he added, “has folks nervous.”
In some good news the charges have been dropped against that pregnant woman in Alabama who was shot and charged with manslaughter because the baby died.
Although it really says something that that was even a thing to begin with.
Edited by LSBK on Jul 3rd 2019 at 9:52:26 AM
This would have set a really bad precedent otherwise. If this had actually gone through, in the future anyone could call the cops on pregnant women for doing anything that could be considered remotely risky. Which is pretty much everything.
![]()
I guess they'll have to rely on alt-right and Kremlin shitposters to pick up the slack.
Edited by M84 on Jul 3rd 2019 at 11:05:14 PM
Disgusted, but not surprisedThe NRA's founders weren't exactly in a good position with Trump either because of the fact that they poured massive amounts of money into electing him, only to have a huge fallout from that support.
So much so that it largely contributed to their bankruptcy.
The short version being:
- NRA enthusiasts believed Trump wouldn't take their guns so there was no need for the NRA to lobby.
- Massive amounts of cash thrown into it came from Russian sources that dried up.
- Their network was an enormous money pit.
- Trump gave absolutely no real boost the NRA (and why should he)?
Edited by CharlesPhipps on Jul 4th 2019 at 1:24:02 AM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.They also tend to be rather...selective about how that Right applies.
...By which I mean they're racist as fuck.
Now you might note that if rights are selective, they are not actually rights. They are privileges. This is of course something a lot of "gun nuts" willfully ignore.
Edited by M84 on Jul 4th 2019 at 2:03:08 AM
Disgusted, but not surprisedRecall that the Mulford Act which repealed a law allowing public carrying of loaded firearms was passed in response to the Black Panthers engaging in armed patrols of Oakland to make sure cops weren't killing black people. The Panthers marching on the state capitol while armed to protest the bill also reinforced their decision.
The NRA sure didn't mind gun control when faced with the image of a bunch of angry black guys carrying loaded firearms. Heck, they outright supported it if it meant disarming the Black Panthers.
The crux of the issue is that to a lot of people, firearms are a symbol of freedom and (more importantly) power.
And they don't want black people to have power.
Edited by M84 on Jul 4th 2019 at 2:13:53 AM
Disgusted, but not surprisedI don't think in 2020 they do. The problem is what about 2045? In 1920, I don't think anyone saw the horrors of the holocaust coming. 16,000,000+ dead. It seems to me plausible that an armed populace would and should give pause to anyone considering something like it. Assuming for a moment that it costs 40,000 lives a year, it would take 400 years for the two to even out. Do you think that we'll be that stable until 2420? I would like to hope so, but I can't guarantee it and neither can you.
Maybe not for the same reasons as above, but I definitely think the rise of the armed left is a good thing. Most “right wing” gun owners are more willing to compromise on gun control than you’d think, but they end up voting hardline pro-gun because there isn’t any other option for them. If they have other options their votes could definitely be swung.
Edited by archonspeaks on Jul 4th 2019 at 7:15:00 AM
They should have sent a poet.![]()
This, more than anything.
I have general concerns about personal firearms ownership that are unrelated to Constitutional issues. I don't think it's necessary, and I think that a gun is a net provocation to violence rather than a way to prevent it. I think that people who want to shoot as a hobby or lifestyle choice can rent or lease guns and have them stored in a secure facility rather than in their homes, with a few rare exceptions like ranchers. Anyone who needs to be armed professionally should be required to check in their weapons when they go off duty.
None of that addresses the core problem in U.S. politics, which is that the Second Amendment is indelibly associated with an anti-government, revolutionary mindset. The underlying theory is that an armed populace is the best defense against the tyranny of the government. If they start to take our freedoms, we'll shoot 'em down, or something like that. This idea has many, many flaws, not the least of which being that the only Federal governments that have seriously threatened our freedoms have been Republican ones, eagerly voted for by those same anti-government, Second Amendment people. The irony is utterly lost on them.
When I see someone waving a gun around in celebration of their freedoms, I see a person who supports racist, theocratic, jingoistic politics and votes for politicians who try to strip government of the power to redress social and economic injustices, and this is why, in turn, I want to take those guns away. They're like toddlers throwing a tantrum, and those are the last people you want to have deadly weapons. This constant threat of insurrection is a kind of poison eating away at our ability to govern effectively. We just saw that.
Edited by Fighteer on Jul 4th 2019 at 10:58:52 AM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

So, the constitution may prevent too long a period between them happening, but logistics will prevent too short a period between them happening.
Edited by Wyldchyld on Jul 4th 2019 at 11:13:53 AM
If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.