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
Well, if there are no laws against it, and it’s impossible to make new laws to fix that because of the nature of institutions like the senate, then the system is a lost cause. However, I’ll grant that the conclusion is not true, which means one of the precedents are not true. I’m sure new laws being impossible to make is true, which means that the “no laws against it” must be false. What those laws are specifically, I assume the experts know, and they’re the ones who are needed to do something about it, anyway, not us.
My musician pageIf you pass laws now making what ICE did under Trump illegal, they could not be prosecuted anyway, since the Constitution explicitly prohibits ex post facto laws.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"![]()
However, the camps are still up. Meaning the moment the law is in place, anything they do from that point on CAN be charged. Forcing ICE into a situation of either closing the camps, or facing punishment for everything they do in them from that point on.
Edited by ScubaWolf on Nov 17th 2020 at 3:12:46 PM
"In a move surprising absolutely no one"As red have said, you cant separate the countr from republicans, neither just "you are all evil and always will be" because is pretty much sitting and expecting them to rot, im not saying biparship or anything or the like but that a some point, you need to mantain a semblence of unity because the left cant mantain their grip on power forever.
With all due respect, I don't really see this as a meaningful argument.
I don't think anybody is denying that at the end of the day, republicans exist in great numbers in the same country as everyone else and they have a right to vote and exist in the same country. But why exactly is that an argument for people to want to come together with people who are increasingly not even living in the same reality anymore and who keep voting to undermine the democratic process and undermine other people's civil rights? It doesn't necessarily mean thinking every single voter in that block is unreachable or lost forever, it just means acknowledging that there's still a lot of work to be done to turn the country around in a positive way.
In fact, what exactly does "unity" even mean in this context? If it's not bipartisanship, then what is it? It just feels like a meaningless buzzword in this context.
It's valid to be concerned about polarization, but there's nothing that exists in the short term that's going to stop it, or at least nothing that will leave the US with a mostly positive outcome. The ship has already sailed, there's no turning back. It's just a question of what's going to happen as a result of that and how to rebuild the country into something positive at the end.
My take about how to turn this around long term is to do what Stacey Abrams did: register new voters with grassroots organizations in states that are trending purple and work longterm to turn things around so that republicans have less power to do what they keep doing. They will only stop doing what they're doing until they see real consequences to their electoral power.
Now obviously, this has problems, since it's not realistic to think that the democrats can or should keep power forever (especially considering that democratic norms keep being eroded to the point that the US sliding into a right-wing illiberal democracy keeps looking more and more plausible, which could happen before democrats are able to gain a meaningful majority in the country to unstack the deck), but most other alternatives I can see are basically "let republicans keep fucking over the country until it turns into a right-wing illiberal democracy". So there's not really much of a choice anyway.
Edited by Draghinazzo on Nov 17th 2020 at 5:15:56 PM
Changing the laws going forward...sadly...the best we can do. Make new laws going forward and make sure said laws are followed. Given the nature of a certain segment of ICE it may not take too long for them to screw up and therefore start mucking out the lot of them.
We cannot change the past, we can try to make what amends we can and go forward to be better.
Edited by ShadowWingLG on Nov 17th 2020 at 2:15:14 PM
The US has a long history of doing that, so much so that other countries (IE Nazis) were emulating us. Look up The Oregon Board of Eugenics and 45-year reign terror of the North Carolina Eugenics Board.
It is NOT illegal for the government to do that.
Edited by Memers on Nov 17th 2020 at 12:16:36 PM
Yes, it is illegal.
The fact it was done in the past was illegal.
The fact that anyone would not want these people in the rest of their lives in a cage for what they done is not illegal but they should be ashamed of themselves. It is against the law of nations and America.
And it needs to be punished.
Which can only be done with their imprisonment.
Abetting crimes against humanity is why people talk about "the lesser evil."
Edited by CharlesPhipps on Nov 17th 2020 at 12:49:14 PM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.![]()
Illegal under what laws? Imprisoned for what?
Legal and moral aren’t the same thing, and the two should never be confused. These actions are absolutely immoral, and unfortunately absolutely legal.
They might have a case in civil court, I believe there are already a few suits there.
Edited by archonspeaks on Nov 17th 2020 at 12:56:45 PM
They should have sent a poet.Who gives a shit about civil cases? Money is not the issue. It's showing that the government cannot do this.
That will only happen with jail time.
If the President is abetting crimes against humanity then what was the point? Stopping it is not enough.
You're arguing that forced sterializations are legal under US law?
Edited by CharlesPhipps on Nov 17th 2020 at 1:02:41 AM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.Well, the problem is that it's unconstitutional to punish somebody for something that was legal at the time. If ICE's actions are legal (for the sake of argument), even if we change the rules to make their actions illegal, they still are legally protected from being punished for it.
Edited by Protagonist506 on Nov 17th 2020 at 1:04:00 AM
Leviticus 19:34The people involved?
So money fixes everything is your argument? Especially since it'll be the government paying?
That's...not a good attitude.
I'm dropping out of this conversation. I'm too disgusted and angry at the idea of them escaping justice.
My apologies, any anger is purely directed at the Nazis in ICE and those who would help them escape.
Edited by CharlesPhipps on Nov 17th 2020 at 1:04:25 AM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.I thought we were beyond Just Following Orders, though. That literally the actions of the Nazis said that there were some acts so reprehensible that they could not be justified even if the law said for them to be done.
Edit:
Sorry, Hypocrisy Nod acknowledged for above post.
Edited by CharlesPhipps on Nov 17th 2020 at 1:05:54 AM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.Who would have thought?
The election of a new party chair — slated for January — is expected to prove pivotal in determining the direction of the party after years of realizing few electoral gains among candidates not named Charlie Baker.
Jim Lyons, a President Trump ally and former state lawmaker who has led the party since 2019, has said he will seek reelection, and state Representative Shawn Dooley, a House member since 2014, said Monday he will also run for the post, pitching the need for a party “rebranding.”
The $75,000-a-year position is picked by the Massachusetts GOP’s 80-seat state committee, which has increasingly taken on a more conservative bent despite Baker’s efforts to shape it.
More candidates are also eyeing a race that is likely to show the sharp fault lines running through the party, which has hewed closely to President Trump, both in tone and approach, under Lyons.
That conservative rhetoric has often come at the expense of Baker, the state’s popular, moderate governor, and could complicate Baker’s own potential reelection bid in two years even with Trump out of the White House. (Baker has said he is considering vying for an unprecedented third consecutive term.)
“President Trump has brought tremendous energy,” said Lyons, though he acknowledged it’s unclear if it will translate past Trump’s departure on Jan. 20. “My focus since the day I ran in 2019 has been to try to increase our ranks in the Legislature. I really feel a strong desire to see if we can fundamentally change the Republican Party.”
At the ballot box, it’s proven to be a struggle.
There will be just three Republicans in the state Senate come January after the GOP lost five seats in the Legislature during 2020, strengthening Democrats' super-majority in both branches. And while some Republicans felt the results could have been worse, the losses still stung, including in a House district that had been held by Republicans — first by Kevin Poirier, then his wife, Betty Poirier — since the late 1970s.
Further fueling Republican frustration is that the party, on a national level and elsewhere, far exceeded expectations even as it lost the White House.
“There’s no silver lining to any of this,” said Tom Mountain, the state party’s vice chairman. Mountain did not directly address Monday whether he’s considering running for chairman. “We got clobbered. We’re the state [party] that probably got hit the hardest.”
It’s renewed calls from many in the party to embrace a message of unity. Dooley, a former Norfolk town clerk running for the first time to be party chairman, said that in repeatedly attacking Democrats and Baker, the party apparatus has focused too heavily on national issues and ignored the GOP’s “essential” messaging of promoting smaller government, individual liberty, and providing a check on Democrats.
An adviser to Baker said the governor is not engaged in the race for chair, nor is he supporting a candidate at this point. But Baker stressed at a press conference last week that Massachusetts Republicans need to recalibrate their pitch to voters.
“It’s important for people who run for statewide office to understand that what voters care about here are statewide or local issues. That’s really where our focus as a party needs to be,” Baker said. He did not say, however, whether he’ll be on the ticket in 2022. “That’s a long time away.”
Edited by megaeliz on Nov 17th 2020 at 4:08:00 AM
I want to address the idea that anyone here is arguing that we should just let people who did crimes walk. Because it's false. The argument is that the (new) Justice Department should ideally conduct an investigation into ICE and the like on their own volition. If evidence of criminal activity is found, they'll be prosecuted. No one would be getting off scot free in that scenario; they just wouldn't be sentenced as fast as some would like.
i'm tired, my friendTechically? Yeah they are legal check out the case of Buck v Bell which went to the Supreme Court and was UPHELD in a 8 to 1 decision that yes it was legal to force sterilization if it was deemed that the person was 'unfit' to procreate.
The most recent cases to go to trial about this were as recent as 2014, and we have only ad-hock network of states that have banned it and only in certain conditions, one CA law was passed 2014 and only applies to banning the forced sterilization of inmates unless the inmates life is in danger.
![]()
Right, my impression from Biden's comments was less a desire to give them a slap on the wrist to avoid upsetting rightwing voters and more that he wanted to personally recuse himself from involvement in such investigations for the sake of avoiding partisan optics, but otherwise was giving his tacit approval for them to purge away.
Which might not be enough for people who want to see justice done because ideally they should be bringing the hammer down as hard and fast as possible, but doing so risks the political issues associated with an Unskilled, but Strong approach.
Edited by AlleyOop on Nov 17th 2020 at 4:15:30 AM
Yes, they are. That’s kind of the entire problem here.
I’m not sure what you’re advocating for here. As immoral as these actions are, they’re fully legal. Unless you’re suggesting the basis of our entire justice system should be discarded there’s no way to send these people to prison.
They should have sent a poet.

As stated before, trying to get ICE tried under international law is a non-starter as, currently, under the law it literally cannot be done. The US would never extradite them as the laws do not allow it. Even if Mexico (or some other country) took the evidence of ICE's actions to the Hague it wouldn't work due to US Laws and the UN would have to figure out a way to more or less force the issue and how well do you think that'll work?
What NEEDS to be done first is to close the flipping loopholes that allow this abuse in the first place. ICE is in a very gray area of the law (not morally just legally) first action is to get better, stronger, clearer laws on the books. Give them teeth so if ICE keeps on breaking them they get nailed to the wall.