US Politics, December 2019: Profound procedural deficiencies

USA Today published a massive story on life in an ICE or ICE-contracted facility (FT: one of the reporters is a buddy):

For the past year, much of the nation’s attention on immigration issues has focused on how the Trump administration polices the southern border and how Border Patrol agents treat migrants arriving there. But away from that spotlight there is a separate detention system overseen by ICE that has continued to grow with far less scrutiny. It is now a $3 billion network of 221 facilities, the largest of which are operated by private companies under government contract. Combined, those facilities detain more than 50,000 women, men and children who wait months or years for immigration court proceedings.

Two-thirds of detainees have no criminal records, ICE records show. About 26% are detained solely because they are requesting asylum in the U.S. That is why ICE policy mandates that immigration detention be civil in nature - an administrative hold on detainees as they await deportation or their next hearing - as opposed to a punitive, corrective prison system. But the USA TODAY Network review found that the ICE system operates in many ways like a prison system; detainees wear red and orange jumpsuits that sometimes read “inmate” on the back.

Just before one detainee died in Florida, he “vomited feces,” according to a death report written by ICE. Two others detainees died elsewhere after being taken off life support without consent from their relatives. Death reports also show detainees died of pneumonia, heart attacks and internal bleeding. In several instances, the cause of death remains “unknown.”

A central theme identified by government inspectors was the failure of guards to grasp the difference between running a prison and an immigration detention center.

Prisons are designed to be corrective or punitive in nature; immigration detention centers are not. The introduction to ICE’s detention standards, which have been in effect in different forms since the creation of the agency in 2002, makes that clear: “ICE detains people for no purpose other than to secure their presence both for immigration proceedings and their removal.”

Poor ET.

to be fair E.T. knew nothing about perfect calls

gonna think about "vomiting feces" whenever a Dem candidate says we need to keep ICE going

A top evangelical Christian magazine on Thursday called for President Trump’s removal from office over a lack of morality and the action he took as part of the Ukraine pressure scheme, which is at the center of the impeachment inquiry.

Christianity Today editor Mark Galli admitted that he believed Democrats “have had it out for him from day one” and condemned the impeachment process in the House, which he felt didn’t give Trump “a serious opportunity to offer his side of the story.”

if only trump had a chance to offer his side of the story, i wonder what he thinks about all this?!!?!?!?!?

did christianity today endorse anyone in 2016?

Franklin Graham out today excoriating CT as a bunch of libtards (paraphrased)

radical holy shit, i just checked the internet for the first time and it turns out that trump has constantly offering his side of the story since the mid-70s

I also know nothing about reading a perfect transcript of a routine phone call. I feel great shame but honestly it's great to get that off my chest finally.

We already have a perfect transcript of Jesus, and it said Trump was 100% Not Guilty.

Did trump learn CT was 'progressive' by reading this thread? I think so.

Perfect calls are so rare, it's understandable that most of us can't truly comprehend this one.

so now it's the transcript that's perfect, not the phone call? so hard to keep up.

Well yes, they were all perfectly captured. No typos or flubbed lines.

Upon reflection, we really should all stop interrupting the president every time he starts to speak. Let him get a word in edgewise, whaddaya say.

Why do these people even have sense organs when all they need to assess the world around them is their imagination.

it's just like, what does he think about stuff? i don't know, and i want to find out

He is an enigma inside of a half-deflated beanbag wrapped in a side of bacon.

tbf bacon is perfect

TRUMP BACON isn't.

His brand would be like the pig ears they sell at pet stores.

Kind of amazed he didn't try to capitalize on the Bacon Craze in some way.

Pretty sure he named his kid Bacon, iirc.

Occasionally I will remember outrageous things that happened from the past three years that, in another era, would have been permanently seared into the public consciousness but which get utterly lost in the shuffle of day after mindmeltingly insane day.

Like this. I just remembered that this happened.

https://www.washingtonian.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/AP_19015023184999-2048x1365.jpg

In what world should I ever have forgotten that that happened.

But that doesn’t mean he actually IS bacon. Xp

Someone will need to compile a multi-volume compendium of these moments so that when we recount them for future generations they won't just assume it's the dementia talking.

this is what i was worrying about before:

And Mr. McConnell was entirely unmoved by Ms. Pelosi’s tactics, delivering a speech on Thursday evening in which he appeared barely able to contain his amusement at what he regarded as the speaker’s missteps.

“I admit, I am not sure what leverage there is in refraining from sending us something we do not want,” Mr. McConnell said with a wry smile from the Senate floor. “But alas, if they can figure that out, they can explain it. Meanwhile, other House Democrats say they would prefer never to transmit the articles. Fine with me!”

i'm sure he's overstating his advantage just to be a dick, but this is what i meant by a strong possibility that democrats would never get any sort of concession from the GOP/trump on this. their strategy depends on either 1) more damning evidence coming to light in the following days/weeks, and/or 2) trump freaking out and digging himself into a bigger hole somehow.

and sure, both of those things could happen, i hope they do! but there's also a good chance that this will end with pelosi weakly submitting the articles without any significant concessions. either way, trump/GOP are going to crow about how they won and are exonerated and all of that, but they'll be more convincing if this ploy doesn't work out

Someone will need to compile a multi-volume compendium of these moments so that when we recount them for future generations they won't just assume it's the dementia talking.

if i ever get rich i'll pay some sad person to update doonaldtrump.com

Hamberders

xxp but McConnell has choice except to play "amused."

In addition to these 2 potential benefits, delaying the senate exoneration is going to infuriate Dummy and w/ any luck he'll bully McConell into making concessions

argh NO choice

Trump could be giving his State of the Union during his Senate trial, while awaiting trial or right after he’s acquitted https://t.co/5dMnjWAwUW

— Manu Raju (@mkraju) December 20, 2019

hmmm

In addition to these 2 potential benefits, delaying the senate exoneration is going to infuriate Dummy and w/ any luck he'll bully McConell into making concessions

yep, that's what i was trying to say with "2) trump freaking out and digging himself into a bigger hole somehow."

i'm just saying, there's also a good chance that trump will freak out but it won't substantively change something. and yeah, mcconnell has to say that, both because of his political position and because he's a dick, but he's also the guy who blatantly stole a supreme court seat in the most machiavellian political move i've seen in my lifetime. unless trump somehow forces him to change the rules for the senate trial, i don't think he's going to budge an inch.

i will be very happy to be wrong on this, and i understand the advantages of waiting for now. i'm just not sure how this is going to work, say, by mid-january.

ah, gotcha. I thought you meant by freaking/digging holes you meant new crimes

I wish I could still make sentences

sentences are just a bunch of words, maaaaaan

i did mean potential new crimes too, haha! or blurting out more details of crimes in the past, etc

xp: She's not even the worst Steph in Simi Valley.

tough day on twitter for stephs for sure

I'm starting to think Pelosi should hold off passing the articles to the senate indefinitely. He's been impeached, that part is done and in the books. If the senate is just going to blow it off, gifting Trump a campaign claim of total exoneration, why bother? Hell, I'd be OK with her waiting until after the election. It's what the GOP would do. Piss off Trump, piss off the entire GOP, hold it over them like the Sword of Damocles. Play dirty.

Seems likely tbh - would make it an open question for GOP Senators running for reelection

When I try to game out the political implications of that it seems very bad for democrats. A ton of people, from both parties, would interpret that as “democrats don’t think they have a case”. That’s certainly what republicans would be crowing non-stop, and the democratic response would inevitably be some procedural jargon that wouldn’t be as effective. Over the course of months things would get very ugly.

Note that apparently I am alone on this in the entire world

But the success of that tactic would depend on democrats maintaining an aggressive, relentless “the republicans are demanding a sham trial, we refuse to participate” kind of posture. Don’t see them maintaining that for long, not to the extent that republicans will keep up the “they know they don’t have a case” lie

either scenario - letting Trump get exonerated or withholding the articles - leaves the GOP with obvious options that they will hammer non-stop.

the argument that Democrats are weaker at messaging is true in both scenarios.

So why would you think one is preferable to the other?

the dem's answer to senate acquital - "they all voted to protect their guy, they don't care about the truth or the law, throw the bums out" - might be easier to get across and understand than the case for procedural stalling. idk.

It's not stalling when Mitch and Linds outright abandon even the appearance of impartiality. All Pelosi has to say is "we did our job, we're waiting for them to show they're serious about doing theirs." Or better, as she said yesterday, "who cares what they say." He's impeached whether or not he gets removed from office, that part is done. So why give them any cover? She did her job. And yeah, Asshole will do more bad shit, and more bad shit will come out about Asshole. She even implied, iirc, that further charges could still be brought up and added.

I don’t know if it’s that Democrats are bad at messaging, or more that Democrats are less likely to believe in/get behind messaging. Republicans seem to be able to get in line and follow anything, and repeat ad nauseum anything. Democrats are all over the place and easily fractured. Something to do with being willingly blindfolded vs. actively seeking out truth/trying to determine what is actually good. One path is easy and one is hard! One path leads to one answer (the one that comes from the leader) and the other leads in many directions. Is it a problem with Democratic leadership? Or is it that Democrats as a party are less likely to coalesce behind leadership no matter what?

xxp

I swear it’s gone from being two opposing political ideologies, both of which have their own validity but are in disagreement, to a situation where it’s literally bad people and their easily led supporters on one side, versus everyone else. And it’s the “everyone else” that can’t function as a cohesive party.

Actually, it was never as simple as that, was it? That’s just how it was sold to those of us who weren’t paying attention. It’s always been this way- Trump has just accelerated the hellward spiral of the GOP.