Jump to content

Trump’s America


tx 3 putt

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

CBS reports. Um, this is way the cargo load of a C-17. Why not just use Spirit Airlines like they used to? And they only lost two people. Yay?

"Meanwhile, a defense official said there were two flights overnight. Both went to Guatemala, according to two sources, and carried 81 deportees. However, a Guatemalan official said 79 Guatemalans had been returned, 31 women and 48 men. 

Leavitt stated, "The Trump Administration also deported hundreds of illegal immigrant criminals via military aircraft. The largest massive deportation operation in history is well underway."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hundreds-illegal-immigrant-criminals-arrested-more-flown-from-us-military-white-house-says/

At 80 deportees per plane ride, it’s going to take 137,500 flights or almost 377 flights per day to get all those undocumented immigrants out of the country over the next year. Efficient, indeed. As you pointed out, chartering a 737 or A320 is going to be a lot cheaper than using a military C-17 and at a 50% load factor, we’re giving these folks a comfortable ride back to their home country.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

CBS reports. Um, this is way the cargo load of a C-17. Why not just use Spirit Airlines like they used to? And they only lost two people. Yay?

"Meanwhile, a defense official said there were two flights overnight. Both went to Guatemala, according to two sources, and carried 81 deportees. However, a Guatemalan official said 79 Guatemalans had been returned, 31 women and 48 men. 

Leavitt stated, "The Trump Administration also deported hundreds of illegal immigrant criminals via military aircraft. The largest massive deportation operation in history is well underway."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hundreds-illegal-immigrant-criminals-arrested-more-flown-from-us-military-white-house-says/

Seems like a great use of airframe hours on a C-17...

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Underdog said:

Until MAL gets damaged in a storm then the hand will be out. 

 

Dude, effective at noon on Jan 20, if MAL gets damaged, it will get fixed or rebuilt courtesy of Uncle Sam.

Or some oligarch kicks in $100 million into a Trump crypto coin or whatever.  Shit, maybe they just hand the money over to Trump on TV; it's not like anything is going to happen to either of them

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

CBS reports. Um, this is way the cargo load of a C-17. Why not just use Spirit Airlines like they used to? And they only lost two people. Yay?

"Meanwhile, a defense official said there were two flights overnight. Both went to Guatemala, according to two sources, and carried 81 deportees. However, a Guatemalan official said 79 Guatemalans had been returned, 31 women and 48 men. 

Pilot and co-pilot have a side hustle as sommeliers so they were allowed to come back. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, hookem2010 said:

Pardoning anti-abortion "activists" now. We should all have the freedom to indimidate and harrass doctors and their patients!

So instead of calling 911 just kick their asses for trespassing and harassment right?

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, royiv said:

chartering a 737 or A320 is going to be a lot cheaper than using a military C-17 and at a 50% load factor, we’re giving these folks a comfortable ride back to their home country.

Comfortable ride?

They're lucky these Compassionate Christian Conservatives aren't having them dragged back by horses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, royiv said:

At 80 deportees per plane ride, it’s going to take 137,500 flights or almost 377 flights per day to get all those undocumented immigrants out of the country over the next year. Efficient, indeed. As you pointed out, chartering a 737 or A320 is going to be a lot cheaper than using a military C-17 and at a 50% load factor, we’re giving these folks a comfortable ride back to their home country.

Yeah a while back I figured out that even if they could deport 1000 immigrants per day, 7 days a week, it would take something like 33 years to deport 12,000,000 immigrants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, wood said:

Yeah a while back I figured out that even if they could deport 1000 immigrants per day, 7 days a week, it would take something like 33 years to deport 12,000,000 immigrants.

They aren’t planning on deporting them all….

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SquishMitten said:

Republicans better stop calling the border a "disaster" or else a Trump EO might unintentionally block his own border wall funding. 

It rasies the question that if we (states) are going to be decoupled from a federal umbrella of protection with respect to natural disasters (i.e. FEMA), then what are we really doing here as a republic? I guess we still have the overarching need of a singular military and an economic engine as the sum of the parts is greater than if we had 4 or 5 balkanized countries by region (e.g. Confederacy Redux, PNW, New Yorkia, etc.), but we are seemingly content to erode any other value of having a federal government if we continue down this path...

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The entire United States of America experiment is generally based on the notion of a balance between pooled resources and specialized resources being deployed to provide the maximum advantages while doing the best to minimize risks for its citizens.  Is that balance always perfectly struck and administered?  Of course not.  But, if your solution to that problem is to slowly dismantle most of the pooled resources, in favor of the specialized ones I guess I gotta ask....why are we united?

  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, royiv said:

At 80 deportees per plane ride, it’s going to take 137,500 flights or almost 377 flights per day to get all those undocumented immigrants out of the country over the next year. Efficient, indeed. As you pointed out, chartering a 737 or A320 is going to be a lot cheaper than using a military C-17 and at a 50% load factor, we’re giving these folks a comfortable ride back to their home country.

 

1 hour ago, Evil Bill Obrien said:

Seems like a great use of airframe hours on a C-17...

A C-17 costs about $25,000 per flight hour (internet search). Houston to Guatemala City is about a 3-hour flight. 

 

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, HornPhD said:

 

A C-17 costs about $25,000 per flight hour (internet search). Houston to Guatemala City is about a 3-hour flight. 

 

But MEXICO is gonna pay for it!

 

 

*** Until Mexico tells trump to go fuck himself. Then Americans pay for it with their devalued currency after trump adds $30 trillion in deficit in 2025***

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 27-25 said:

Did anyone have getting rid of FEMA on their bingo card?

 

 

1 hour ago, Aqua Buddha said:

GhSpEedWsAAj34w?format=jpg&name=large

Fine with me, every disaster going forward is gonna be political depending on whether it's a red or blue state, and the "low tax" red states are the ones taking more federal money than they're paying in anyway. I'm pretty much on board now with shrinking the federal government to basically nothing for that reason too. Let the low tax shitholes crumble, I'm gonna pretty much be forced to move to a blue state anyways.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, royiv said:

At 80 deportees per plane ride, it’s going to take 137,500 flights or almost 377 flights per day to get all those undocumented immigrants out of the country over the next year. Efficient, indeed. As you pointed out, chartering a 737 or A320 is going to be a lot cheaper than using a military C-17 and at a 50% load factor, we’re giving these folks a comfortable ride back to their home country.

Wouldn't said country/ies have to give those planes permission to enter their air space and land?  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Hagbard Celine said:

State of Washington AG on CNN just now....  teamdotard says they will appeal the ruling on the 14th, but it's a restraining order which (?) can't be appealed and "he doesn't understand that"

also the judge that made the ruling was appointed by reagan.....

So he's a flaming liberal? Got it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

They aren’t planning on deporting them all….

What I'm waiting for is for the authorities to go after the REAL, BIG-TIME criminals.

Bust a migrant worker here and there?  Psshaw.  That's child's play.  Go after the big-timers: the people who employ them by the thousands.  Until this regime starts arresting employers and charging them with a stack of federal crimes for illegally employing undocumented workers, we'll know that it's just for show and they aren't serious AT ALL about "solving immigration."

And we know they won't.  Because they don't care about immigration in the least.  They just care about performative bullshit, punching down at the weak and then claiming you're a badass because you arrested some busboys.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, 'stache said:

 

Fine with me, every disaster going forward is gonna be political depending on whether it's a red or blue state, and the "low tax" red states are the ones taking more federal money than they're paying in anyway. I'm pretty much on board now with shrinking the federal government to basically nothing for that reason too. Let the low tax shitholes crumble, I'm gonna pretty much be forced to move to a blue state anyways.

Red states will still receive federal funding under this proposal. But Trump can’t undo legislation by EOs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, SydneyCarton said:

Lol. The Dems can't explain the grift in a way that makes news coverage, much less on the networks the idiots watch, for half the country to even SEE. Much less UNDERSTAND. 

Just accept we're broken. I already think about the ways I teach my kid about America just being a place his parents had to live. 

Pssst, they've already seen the evidence in sunlight. They either don't care or become willfully obtuse or both.

 

My resignation about the election is largely because the electorate chose or acquiesced to something they could clearly see. Clearly. We are indeed broken on the rocks of greed, hate, and idiocy.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pig Bellmont said:

They aren’t planning on deporting them all….

Exactly. They never were. I doubt they'll even get remotely close to Obama levels. They'll probably just continue as normal, but make a spectacle of it to show what a 'difference' they're making.

They just want to make a big show of it and claim a yuuuuge victory over the brown people.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Evil Bill Obrien said:

Seems like a great use of airframe hours on a C-17...

 

they're using abbott accounting 

 

 

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

Because clearly, Canada is our greatest existential threat.

684fd5c6-1821-46fe-9620-07e0bca0d5d3_tex

 

Happy Blame Canada GIF by South Park

Edited by tx 3 putt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Brew said:

This week has to be icing on the cake of the most perfectly executed grift of all time at this point. Create a bunch of social justice crises to capture a certain subsect of the US population, get elected, sign a bunch of EO’s and then tell them how much you have done, enrich yourself along the way, and go into midterms patting yourself on the back for all that has been accomplished with your proclamations. It’s not like the Dems are going to post ads saying wait a second, there are still brown people at Home Depot, Haitians in Ohio, trans/gay people among us, etc. They are just hoping egg prices stay up so they can use that at this point.

Half the country is celebrating like the US is fixed and they can’t wait to go on vacation to the Gulf of America and the Dems aren’t going to be willing to go low enough to explain the grift to them. The idiots have been enthralled with the sideshow at the circus while getting fleeced all along the way.

I hope they all do go to the Gulf (redneck paradise) for their vacations. Leaves more room on the sand for us in Mexico and elsewhere - if they'll have us.

Fewer obnoxious 'Murican rednecks embarrassing me on Playa Norte is 10000% fine with me.

Edited by wood
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Brew said:

TN has to have the dumbest bunch of elected officials of any state at this point. I don’t know what it is about Middle/East TN specifically, but they are a special group of idiots.

Yeah we lived in Cookeville/Putnam County from 1976-79. Special, indeed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wood said:

Yeah a while back I figured out that even if they could deport 1000 immigrants per day, 7 days a week, it would take something like 33 years to deport 12,000,000 immigrants.

spacer.png

A whole new Trail of Tears. Trump is an admirer of Old Hickory. Sick fuck.

Nice news about not prosecuting war crimes in the military and approving harrassment of women seeking abortion.

@Brisketexan had it fucking right. Cruelty is our brand. Undiluted. Unrestrained. Unrepentant.

@immamac I suggest a vomit +1 icon as an option. Maybe replace the drool. I'm outraged-out. I can still feel revulsion.

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

someone explain to me how tariffs are about national security ?

I can make a legitimate case for tariffs and national security for some things, if we're talking about an exercise in good faith. 

You want to slap tariffs on China for electronics, to force American companies to manufacture everything start to finish here in the US, to prevent China from putting in codes and listenting devices into fucking everything and spying on us, and preventing them from constantly tealing our intellectual property? Well ok. You want to force companies to move supply chain for pharmacitcals here, in case we go to war with someone who produces 90% of our insulin, as a simple illustration? Sure. The idea is to spur domestic production of things that could be a real problem if one day the US woke up and didn't have access to things anymore. 

But the Republican Party isn't interested in actually playing this game/exercise in good faith. Otherwise they wouldn't be fucking talking about rescinding the motherfucking CHIPS act. It's about placating their orange diety, grifting, throwing a tantrum, or all 3. 

Edited by SydneyCarton
  • Hook 'Em 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

I can make a legitimate case for tariffs and national security for some things, if we're talking about an exercise in good faith. 

You want to slap tariffs on China for electronics, to force American companies to manufacture everything start to finish here in the US, to prevent China from putting in codes and listenting devices into fucking everything and spying on us, and preventing them from constantly tealing our intellectual property? Well ok. You want to force companies to move supply chain for pharmacitcals here, in case we go to war with someone who produces 90% of our insulin, as a simple illustration? Sure. The idea is to spur domestic production of things that could be a real problem if one day the US woke up and didn't have access to things anymore. 

But the Republican Party isn't interested in actually playing this game/exercise in good faith. Otherwise they wouldn't be fucking talking about rescinding the motherfucking CHIPS act. It's about placating their orange diety, grifting, throwing a tantrum, or all 3. 

Yep.

All of this.  Tariffs can indeed be deployed strategically, and every purpose you mention has merit and is at least worthy of discussion.

No such strategic thinking is in play here.  None.  It's about "the most beautiful word in the English language, more beautiful than even 'love.'"  It's performative bullshit to look like a "tough guy" to people who have no clue what a tough guy actually is, but think it's probably when a big dude kicks sand in a kid's face.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

I can make a legitimate case for tariffs and national security for some things, if we're talking about an exercise in good faith. 

You want to slap tariffs on China for electronics, to force American companies to manufacture everything start to finish here in the US, to prevent China from putting in codes and listenting devices into fucking everything and spying on us, and preventing them from constantly tealing our intellectual property? Well ok. You want to force companies to move supply chain for pharmacitcals here, in case we go to war with someone who produces 90% of our insulin, as a simple illustration? Sure. The idea is to spur domestic production of things that could be a real problem if one day the US woke up and didn't have access to things anymore. 

But the Republican Party isn't interested in actually playing this game/exercise in good faith. Otherwise they wouldn't be fucking talking about rescinding the motherfucking CHIPS act. It's about placating their orange diety, grifting, throwing a tantrum, or all 3. 

 

wasn't the CHIPS act a 'success' ? 

R's are cutting their throat for their new jesus 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, tx 3 putt said:

 

wasn't the CHIPS act a 'success' ? 

R's are cutting their throat for their new jesus 

It was a BIPARTISAN success.  

But, it happened under Biden.

And the Orange God can't have anything successful that can be tied to Biden remain in existence.  So, it has to be killed.

And because the Orange God wants it, the GQP is for it as well.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

 

wasn't the CHIPS act a 'success' ? 

R's are cutting their throat for their new jesus 

It has bene a fucking MASSIVE success, even with early days of data. There's been a lot of articles written about what a huge boon it's been for America, in just the early days. And yet here we are.

https://apnews.com/article/mike-johnson-chips-act-d5504f76d3aa0d5b401216f3592c9a09

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given that Presidents are given wide latitude in dealing with emergencies, are we just going to have one emergency declaration after another in the next 4 years? We know the GOP congress will unlikely go against Trump, so would the courts have any ability to call bs on everything being an emergency?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

FEMA is there to coordinate and oversee the federal response and money. Cutting it out doesn’t mean the federal benefits go away.  It means the money goes right to these red-state governors to misdirect and misuse.  The point is to reduce oversight and accountability. 

Exactly. Just like when Gov. Hot Wheels moved the MERP subsidy from the Comptroller's office to the Governor's office so he could control the grift and give COTA $35M a year - over $500M so far. Back then it was called the METF. I wonder how much of that gets kicked back to him by Bobby Epstein. He claimed he was moving it in order to 'clean it up' lol.

Edited by wood
  • Haha 1
  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FEMA has issues like any organization but I find that there problems mainly fall on incorrect aid expectations and the requirement to watch their budgets.

in any disaster, some (many?) Americans expect FEMA to make them whole. Rebuild my house, cover lost income, buy me new shit even though I have limited if not zero insurance. And Congress forces FEMA to ensure that residents are not fleecing or lying to the US govt., so some of the recovery funds are slow.

then politics gets involved and people start complaining about Ukraine aid which has zero impact on FEMA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

What I'm waiting for is for the authorities to go after the REAL, BIG-TIME criminals.

Bust a migrant worker here and there?  Psshaw.  That's child's play.  Go after the big-timers: the people who employ them by the thousands.  Until this regime starts arresting employers and charging them with a stack of federal crimes for illegally employing undocumented workers, we'll know that it's just for show and they aren't serious AT ALL about "solving immigration."

And we know they won't.  Because they don't care about immigration in the least.  They just care about performative bullshit, punching down at the weak and then claiming you're a badass because you arrested some busboys.

This. The Obama admin heavily prioritized going after criminals and still deported far more undocumented immigrants per year than dotard ever did. When dotard took office, he deprioritized criminals, starting the 'criminal immigrant' problem', then blamed it all on Biden of course.

Edited by wood
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...