So what exactly is the significance of Trump's ancestry, @Hugal?
I used to have a friend who was a vegetarian artist. Sometimes I'd tease him by saying "Just like Hitler, eh?" It wasn't meant as a judgement on vegetarians or artists, just two biographical details I could rib him about as similar to Hitler's.
Same, I assume, with @Hugal's reference to Trump having few ancestors born in America. Though, given that ethnicity is often used to deny someone's legitimacy as a citizen, the joke was probably open to that interpretation, though I personally doubt it's what he was trying to say.
(Apart from any Hitler comparisons, there IS a legitimate joke to be made about Trump having few American-born ancestors, in that he himself seems to make such things a criterion for being a "true" American. Also, there's the non-humourous observation that hyper-nationalist leaders tend to be, in Orwell's words, "from peripheral regions where nationality is doubtful." Orwell's examples being Napoleon, Stalin, Hitler, and De Valera, and one or two others.)
I didn't think of comparing Trump and Hitler, but I did remember all the brouhaha and lies concerning Barack Obama's ancestry. Serving up Trump with some of his own venom would be uncharitable, but satisfying.
Point taken regarding mixed ancestry - it applies in the UK, too. I'm British, born in England, but my maternal forebears were Scottish/Irish, and my father's family is believed to have come to England from France in about 1066...
I didn't think of comparing Trump and Hitler, but I did remember all the brouhaha and lies concerning Barack Obama's ancestry. Serving up Trump with some of his own venom would be uncharitable, but satisfying.
'Let's start another birther movement' isn't the win you think it is.
I didn't think of comparing Trump and Hitler, but I did remember all the brouhaha and lies concerning Barack Obama's ancestry. Serving up Trump with some of his own venom would be uncharitable, but satisfying.
'Let's start another birther movement' isn't the win you think it is.
Well, as applied against Trump and his ancestors, it's more of a parody of birtherism, rather than birtherism itself. The people joking about it are mostly NOT saying that the internal logic of anti-Obama birtherism was sound, and should therefore be applied equally to Trump. It's more like...
A: I think there is no sadder and shocking a sight than a man with his zipper down in public. Such a tawdry character merits no less than the full and sincere condemnation of all society.
B: (deadpan): But your zipper is down right now.
Person B isn't neccessarily endorsing the sartorial-moral connection posited by Person A, just pointing out the humour of his failing to live up to his own so urgently proclaimed standards.
Hitler was not German he was Austrian. As far as we know he had no or little German ancestry. Yet he became chancellor. That is what I was aiming at. If you see more than that in my comment then ok but not my intention.
My partner's father was born in Croatia, as were both of his mother's parents. So he has no American ancestry. Like 97% of Americans. It's virtually meaningless to talk about American ancestry because "American" is not an ethnic group. @Gramps49 and @Nick Tamen have roots going back 400 years, as do some Black people. But all those people's ancestry is European and African, not American.
And now this appalling human being is playing politics with the Los Angeles unprecedented fires. Choosing this time to criticise the Governor and express concern about the impact on insurance companies. “It’s all Newsom’s fault”.
Already he is making continuing federal support when he takes office conditional on Newsom accepting his wrongheaded views on climate change and forest management.
And now this appalling human being is playing politics with the Los Angeles unprecedented fires. Choosing this time to criticise the Governor and express concern about the impact on insurance companies. “It’s all Newsom’s fault”.
Although not using Newsom's true name but turning into a childish mockery.
My partner's father was born in Croatia, as were both of his mother's parents. So he has no American ancestry. Like 97% of Americans. It's virtually meaningless to talk about American ancestry because "American" is not an ethnic group. @Gramps49 and @Nick Tamen have roots going back 400 years, as do some Black people. But all those people's ancestry is European and African, not American.
You are reading far too much into the post. I was comparing the two people nothing else. Pointing out the similarities for as somewhat humorous post. That is all. If you wish to move us that way great but it was not meant as you are taking it. I’ve said my piece. If you feel you need to call me to Hell and we can have a proper discussion. I don’t want to take up more space here.
If we want to talk about non Native American Ancestry, some of my people survived Jamestown. I also have a bunch of Pilgrams who came over on (ahem) the Mayflower. You may kiss my ring.
“Ring” as is understood in the Antipodes? No thanks
You are reading far too much into the post. I was comparing the two people nothing else. Pointing out the similarities for as somewhat humorous post. That is all. If you wish to move us that way great but it was not meant as you are taking it.
You can insult someone without meaning to. Decent people apologize when they've inadvertently insulted others and had it pointed out to them.
One can only hope that Trump's deranged utterances - like those of his ally (?) Musk - turn out to be just piss and wind.
Alas! as many commentators have remarked, including those on this side of the Pond (and that means Europe, too), such utterances are, at the very least, destabilising.
There seems no way to stop the wretched man, so I guess this is the sort of thing up with which we shall have to put (as I think Churchill may have said, in another context).
@Nick Tamen, I'm sure you've seen that t-shirt picturing Native American warriors captioned, "Fighting illegal immigration since 1492."
I have indeed.
I've also seem t-shirts alluding to the historical revision that it was Leif Erikson who first happened upon North America. Typically it's "Fighting illegal immigration since 1000AD" with a Viking ship behind a red circle/slash.
@Nick Tamen, I'm sure you've seen that t-shirt picturing Native American warriors captioned, "Fighting illegal immigration since 1492."
I have indeed.
I've also seem t-shirts alluding to the historical revision that it was Leif Erikson who first happened upon North America. Typically it's "Fighting illegal immigration since 1000AD" with a Viking ship behind a red circle/slash.
Do those people think they're making a valid point about Leif Erikson being the one who actually deserves the blame for the moral calamity of European colonization? Because that would really be ignoring the wildly different historical contexts of the two "discoveries".
I was reacting to the comment that Trump's claim to be an American went back only two generations, yet Nick and I can make that claim back to nearly 12 to 14 generations. If the Presidency was based on the depth of the generations we have a good shot at being at the front of the line.
I don't think we need to go further on that tangent.
Did anyone else see that SCOTUS refused to block the sentencing of DJT tomorrow? They voted 5-4 against interfering. Instead, the court said Trump should continue the appeals process to overturn the verdict.
One of the reasons why Trump is so concerned about overturning the verdict is he and his organization could lose their ability to hold a liquor license. His three golf courses in New Jersey lost their liquor licenses when he was convicted of a felony. (Story here), Every state has their own requirements for liquor licensees. If NJ refuses to grant their licenses, I wonder if other states have similar prohibitions.
Or does Trump just hate doing down in history as a felon who happened to when the presidency again?
Of course, if the Democrats are able to regain the Senate and Congress in two years, could it be grounds for impeachment and conviction?
Can they get round the alcohol licence problem by having a manager as licensee? They could over here.
Yeah, it seems weird that they couldn't just put the licenses in someone else's name.
It turns out the licenses aren't in Trump's name; theyre in Don Jr's name. But New Jersey officials say Trump is the primary beneficiary of the licenses.
State law requires revocation if anyone who either holds or is the primary beneficiary of a liquor license commits a crime of moral turpitude.
"In New Jersey, felony convictions are universally considered to be crimes of moral turpitude," said the lawyer Peter M. Rhodes, a partner at the Haddonfield law firm Cahill Wilinski Rhodes & Joyce.
Surely the fact that he's been convicted should stand; why the judge chose not to punish him in any way whatsoever is a complete mystery to me.
Out of curiosity, what does an "unconditional discharge" actually mean? Is it like "not proven" in Scottish law which is often taken to mean "you did it, we know you did it but we can't prove it"?
Or does it just mean that the judge is scared of him?
My understanding is that it's a very unusual decision, effectively saying that a crime has been committed but there's no practical punishment that can be imposed - I can see an argument that says that a custodial sentence may be impractical (both because it would mean locking up the President elect, someone who has to be present at several events in the coming months from Inauguration to various state visits, and because any VIP prisoner would need particular and hence expensive measures to ensure their safety), but I don't see why a fine couldn't be imposed (unless, of course, Trump was insolvent and has no resources to pay).
In England and Wales (where the term would be absolute discharge) this might be given where someone has already spent time in remand awaiting trial and that imprisonment is considered adequate punishment (aka "time served") or the convicted criminal has already incurred significant consequences (loss of employment, break up of marriage and loss of home etc) that is considered adequate punishment. The Scottish "not proven" verdict is a variation on "not guilty" - effectively the jury saying there's insufficient evidence to convict and hence there's no penalty to pay at all.
Though comparisons with UK law would be poor. In the UK a conviction (regardless of sentence) relating to election law (eg: spending, as in this case) would result in an automatic ban on standing for election for 5 years - and an already elected person would need to stand down if so convicted.
This is indeed one of those cases where US and UK law differ. Some sort of financial penalty might be seen to be appropriate, as @Alan Cresswell suggests, but AIUI the conviction remains on Trump's sorry record - IOW, he is now permanently branded as a criminal.
US cousins, please correct me if I've got that wrong.
Unconditional discharge, as I understand it, is usually used in minor offenses where restitution has already been made, but the conviction still stands. Of all four possible cases against Trump, the hush money case was the flimsiest, but it was the only one that made it through the court system.
I am still thinking should the Democrats ever regain control of both houses of Congress, it might give them the option to impeach him once again because he would have already been convicted of a high crime and misdemeanor in a court of law. This was the excuse the Senate Republicans used when they refused to uphold the impeachment after January 6. They said he had not yet been convicted in a court of law. Now he has been. Of course, he is still appealing the conviction, and it may get overturned in SCOTUS.
In other news, part of Jack Smith's report may get released this weekend. There are two volumes in the full report. One volume deals with January 6, the other volume deals with the Florida document case. It appears the DOJ will release all or part of the January 6th volume. The Florida volume will likely be held back because several defendants are still going through the court system.
Then too Trump is still being sued in civil court for inciting January 6 riot by seven police officers who were attacked. While SCOTUS has shielded Trump from criminal prosecution with their immunity ruling, he is still liable in civil court.
This is indeed one of those cases where US and UK law differ.
Perhaps time for the friendly reminder that there are 51+ criminal justice systems in the US, not just “US criminal law.” While there are many similarities and some constants among all of those criminal justice systems, there are also differences, sometimes significant differences. The only relevant criminal justice system here is New York’s.
Personally I would be happy if Trump and his accomplices spent the next 4 years 'owning the libs' by renaming geographical features more to their liking. At least it is harmless in the grand scheme of things.
Here may not be the right home for this query, but it is reported that a Fox News 'host' has commented that 'Everyone in the world wants to be a citizen of the USA', the implication being that if Canadians don't there must be something wrong with them and the US Marines and/or 5th Cavalry will soon show them the error of their ways. Where on earth did he get that notion from? Is it an article of faith with all Americans?
Note to Host: I know this has only a tenuous connection with Trump, but I could not find anywhere else to put it.
As @Nick Tamen says, it's Fox News propaganda, but they didn't invent it out of thin air. All the US history I was taught before college had the subtext that the US is the best country in the world, and while not everyone outside the US wants to be an American, a lot of them do, or they want to be like us. We're the envy of the world! We're number one! Or so I was told.
The US Census Office says 6.8 million people immigrated to the US in the last three years. Take that real fact, disregard any US contributions to the conditions that drove people to leave their countries of birth, sprinkle in some revivified version of manifest destiny, mix that with American parochialism and mis-placed pride, run everything through your handy-dandy right-wing propaganda machine, and what comes out is "everyone wants to be a US citizen."
On one occasion flying into the US we both passed through the non-US line and seeing us present our US and UK passports the immigration agent felt compelled to make absolutely clear I didn't have the right paperwork to work in the US as though he thought I'd only married an American to gain the rights to move to the US. We've also had the accusation that we got married so that she had the right to live in the UK.
There are people in the UK who think the UK is the best place in the world to live and that the entire population of the world would move here if they could. There are people in the US who think the same about the US. And, I'd be shocked if there aren't people who have the same views about their nation in France and Germany and Sweden and Australia and New Zealand and ...
On one occasion flying into the US we both passed through the non-US line and seeing us present our US and UK passports the immigration agent felt compelled to make absolutely clear I didn't have the right paperwork to work in the US as though he thought I'd only married an American to gain the rights to move to the US. We've also had the accusation that we got married so that she had the right to live in the UK.
But is his suspicion that you might have entered into a marriage-of-convenience proof that he thought something like "Everybody wants to be an American citizen?" Might he not just have suspected it because it's something that does, indeed, happen, and he as an immigration agent would be well aware of the phenomenon?
FWIW, I personally know someone who married a guy just so he could move to Canada.
There are people in the UK who think the UK is the best place in the world to live and that the entire population of the world would move here if they could. There are people in the US who think the same about the US. And, I'd be shocked if there aren't people who have the same views about their nation in France and Germany and Sweden and Australia and New Zealand and ...
A few weeks back I was browsing through a patriotic coffee-table book at the local thrift shop, and saw a quote: "I think the best thing about being Canadian is how proud I feel when telling people abroad that's where I'm from."
I dunno, I mean, maybe if you're in Holland on Liberation Day, but that's about the only situation I can think of.
There are people in the UK who think the UK is the best place in the world to live and that the entire population of the world would move here if they could. There are people in the US who think the same about the US. And, I'd be shocked if there aren't people who have the same views about their nation in France and Germany and Sweden and Australia and New Zealand and ...
A few weeks back I was browsing through a patriotic coffee-table book at the local thrift shop, and saw a quote: "I think the best thing about being Canadian is how proud I feel when telling people abroad that's where I'm from."
I dunno, I mean, maybe if you're in Holland on Liberation Day, but that's about the only situation I can think of.
I can think of a lot more, especially for the next four years. Or just if talking about health care…
There are people in the UK who think the UK is the best place in the world to live and that the entire population of the world would move here if they could. There are people in the US who think the same about the US. And, I'd be shocked if there aren't people who have the same views about their nation in France and Germany and Sweden and Australia and New Zealand and ...
A few weeks back I was browsing through a patriotic coffee-table book at the local thrift shop, and saw a quote: "I think the best thing about being Canadian is how proud I feel when telling people abroad that's where I'm from."
I dunno, I mean, maybe if you're in Holland on Liberation Day, but that's about the only situation I can think of.
I can think of a lot more, especially for the next four years. Or just if talking about health care…
But "Not being as bad as MAGA USA" could apply to other countries(*), and as for health-care, I actually prefer the Korean system.
(*) And if Poilievre is elected in a few months, there will be among Canadian progressives a perceived decline in bragging rights relative Americans. Whether that will be accurate relative to before, I don't know, because those sorta things are always pretty subjective anyway.
Before I got married, I had to make a 1400 km round trip to foie gras land to meet an elected official to prove I wasn't getting married just for immigration purposes. To add insult to injury, said elected official then failed to turn up to the meeting. To give him his due, the guy she sent to deputise was quite embarrassed.
Turns out the guy who wants to buy Greenland is moving his inauguration inside. Ostensibly because it will be very cold in DC. In reality, I think it is because he does not want TV crews showing a nearly empty mall again.
Comments
It may only be my particular subculture but that may not have travelled particularly well across the Pond!
I used to have a friend who was a vegetarian artist. Sometimes I'd tease him by saying "Just like Hitler, eh?" It wasn't meant as a judgement on vegetarians or artists, just two biographical details I could rib him about as similar to Hitler's.
Same, I assume, with @Hugal's reference to Trump having few ancestors born in America. Though, given that ethnicity is often used to deny someone's legitimacy as a citizen, the joke was probably open to that interpretation, though I personally doubt it's what he was trying to say.
(Apart from any Hitler comparisons, there IS a legitimate joke to be made about Trump having few American-born ancestors, in that he himself seems to make such things a criterion for being a "true" American. Also, there's the non-humourous observation that hyper-nationalist leaders tend to be, in Orwell's words, "from peripheral regions where nationality is doubtful." Orwell's examples being Napoleon, Stalin, Hitler, and De Valera, and one or two others.)
Point taken regarding mixed ancestry - it applies in the UK, too. I'm British, born in England, but my maternal forebears were Scottish/Irish, and my father's family is believed to have come to England from France in about 1066...
'Let's start another birther movement' isn't the win you think it is.
Well, as applied against Trump and his ancestors, it's more of a parody of birtherism, rather than birtherism itself. The people joking about it are mostly NOT saying that the internal logic of anti-Obama birtherism was sound, and should therefore be applied equally to Trump. It's more like...
A: I think there is no sadder and shocking a sight than a man with his zipper down in public. Such a tawdry character merits no less than the full and sincere condemnation of all society.
B: (deadpan): But your zipper is down right now.
Person B isn't neccessarily endorsing the sartorial-moral connection posited by Person A, just pointing out the humour of his failing to live up to his own so urgently proclaimed standards.
But compared to the people whose ancestors have been here for 15 millenia or more, you're both very recent immigrants.
Bingo!
Already he is making continuing federal support when he takes office conditional on Newsom accepting his wrongheaded views on climate change and forest management.
He truly is despicable. Relentless.
Although not using Newsom's true name but turning into a childish mockery.
You are reading far too much into the post. I was comparing the two people nothing else. Pointing out the similarities for as somewhat humorous post. That is all. If you wish to move us that way great but it was not meant as you are taking it. I’ve said my piece. If you feel you need to call me to Hell and we can have a proper discussion. I don’t want to take up more space here.
“Ring” as is understood in the Antipodes? No thanks
Alas! as many commentators have remarked, including those on this side of the Pond (and that means Europe, too), such utterances are, at the very least, destabilising.
There seems no way to stop the wretched man, so I guess this is the sort of thing up with which we shall have to put (as I think Churchill may have said, in another context).
I've also seem t-shirts alluding to the historical revision that it was Leif Erikson who first happened upon North America. Typically it's "Fighting illegal immigration since 1000AD" with a Viking ship behind a red circle/slash.
Do those people think they're making a valid point about Leif Erikson being the one who actually deserves the blame for the moral calamity of European colonization? Because that would really be ignoring the wildly different historical contexts of the two "discoveries".
I don't think we need to go further on that tangent.
Did anyone else see that SCOTUS refused to block the sentencing of DJT tomorrow? They voted 5-4 against interfering. Instead, the court said Trump should continue the appeals process to overturn the verdict.
One of the reasons why Trump is so concerned about overturning the verdict is he and his organization could lose their ability to hold a liquor license. His three golf courses in New Jersey lost their liquor licenses when he was convicted of a felony. (Story here), Every state has their own requirements for liquor licensees. If NJ refuses to grant their licenses, I wonder if other states have similar prohibitions.
Or does Trump just hate doing down in history as a felon who happened to when the presidency again?
Of course, if the Democrats are able to regain the Senate and Congress in two years, could it be grounds for impeachment and conviction?
Yeah, it seems weird that they couldn't just put the licenses in someone else's name.
It turns out the licenses aren't in Trump's name; theyre in Don Jr's name. But New Jersey officials say Trump is the primary beneficiary of the licenses. Source: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-s-golf-resort-liquor-licenses-may-be-one-reason-he-s-fighting-to-block-a-no-jail-hush-money-sentence/ar-BB1r7AiK
I see that Trump has duly been convicted, but without being fined or jailed.
If this makes him the first convicted felon to be President, he must be very pleased at this bigly achievement...
Out of curiosity, what does an "unconditional discharge" actually mean? Is it like "not proven" in Scottish law which is often taken to mean "you did it, we know you did it but we can't prove it"?
Or does it just mean that the judge is scared of him?
Either way -
In England and Wales (where the term would be absolute discharge) this might be given where someone has already spent time in remand awaiting trial and that imprisonment is considered adequate punishment (aka "time served") or the convicted criminal has already incurred significant consequences (loss of employment, break up of marriage and loss of home etc) that is considered adequate punishment. The Scottish "not proven" verdict is a variation on "not guilty" - effectively the jury saying there's insufficient evidence to convict and hence there's no penalty to pay at all.
Though comparisons with UK law would be poor. In the UK a conviction (regardless of sentence) relating to election law (eg: spending, as in this case) would result in an automatic ban on standing for election for 5 years - and an already elected person would need to stand down if so convicted.
US cousins, please correct me if I've got that wrong.
I am still thinking should the Democrats ever regain control of both houses of Congress, it might give them the option to impeach him once again because he would have already been convicted of a high crime and misdemeanor in a court of law. This was the excuse the Senate Republicans used when they refused to uphold the impeachment after January 6. They said he had not yet been convicted in a court of law. Now he has been. Of course, he is still appealing the conviction, and it may get overturned in SCOTUS.
In other news, part of Jack Smith's report may get released this weekend. There are two volumes in the full report. One volume deals with January 6, the other volume deals with the Florida document case. It appears the DOJ will release all or part of the January 6th volume. The Florida volume will likely be held back because several defendants are still going through the court system.
Then too Trump is still being sued in civil court for inciting January 6 riot by seven police officers who were attacked. While SCOTUS has shielded Trump from criminal prosecution with their immunity ruling, he is still liable in civil court.
Note to Host: I know this has only a tenuous connection with Trump, but I could not find anywhere else to put it.
As @Nick Tamen says, it's Fox News propaganda, but they didn't invent it out of thin air. All the US history I was taught before college had the subtext that the US is the best country in the world, and while not everyone outside the US wants to be an American, a lot of them do, or they want to be like us. We're the envy of the world! We're number one! Or so I was told.
The US Census Office says 6.8 million people immigrated to the US in the last three years. Take that real fact, disregard any US contributions to the conditions that drove people to leave their countries of birth, sprinkle in some revivified version of manifest destiny, mix that with American parochialism and mis-placed pride, run everything through your handy-dandy right-wing propaganda machine, and what comes out is "everyone wants to be a US citizen."
On one occasion flying into the US we both passed through the non-US line and seeing us present our US and UK passports the immigration agent felt compelled to make absolutely clear I didn't have the right paperwork to work in the US as though he thought I'd only married an American to gain the rights to move to the US. We've also had the accusation that we got married so that she had the right to live in the UK.
There are people in the UK who think the UK is the best place in the world to live and that the entire population of the world would move here if they could. There are people in the US who think the same about the US. And, I'd be shocked if there aren't people who have the same views about their nation in France and Germany and Sweden and Australia and New Zealand and ...
But is his suspicion that you might have entered into a marriage-of-convenience proof that he thought something like "Everybody wants to be an American citizen?" Might he not just have suspected it because it's something that does, indeed, happen, and he as an immigration agent would be well aware of the phenomenon?
FWIW, I personally know someone who married a guy just so he could move to Canada.
he should have
been sentenced to
fight fires in LA
for ten days.
A few weeks back I was browsing through a patriotic coffee-table book at the local thrift shop, and saw a quote: "I think the best thing about being Canadian is how proud I feel when telling people abroad that's where I'm from."
I dunno, I mean, maybe if you're in Holland on Liberation Day, but that's about the only situation I can think of.
I can think of a lot more, especially for the next four years. Or just if talking about health care…
But "Not being as bad as MAGA USA" could apply to other countries(*), and as for health-care, I actually prefer the Korean system.
(*) And if Poilievre is elected in a few months, there will be among Canadian progressives a perceived decline in bragging rights relative Americans. Whether that will be accurate relative to before, I don't know, because those sorta things are always pretty subjective anyway.
This was pre-Brexit BTW.