A wizard sits alone, high in a tower of gold, calm and confident.

He whispers to himself, "I'm always right," picks up a pen and drafts a new tome of wisdom.

We literally had to do a $25 billion bailout for soybean farmers because of retaliatory tariffs.

Trump's massive farmer bailout failed to make up for the 'self-inflicted' trade damage

92 Percent of Trump’s China Tariff Proceeds Has Gone to Bail Out Angry Farmers | Council on Foreign Relations

I'm just trying to see how these auto tariffs benefit us.

1) American pays an extra $20,000-$30,000 for an inferior car.

2) Auto makers make more money as they can keep margins high and don't need to innovate or price competitively. Banks make money on the additional loans to cover that higher price.

3) High prices keep people in gas powered vehicles which are cheaper. Good for the Saudis, Iran, and Russia. Not so great for the climate.

4) Extra profits are used to buyback stocks boosting the share price for the wealthiest Americans and executives of these companies. No real tax revenue here since we don't tax unrealized capital gains (well for rich people) and buybacks reduce the company's corporate tax liability.

5) ???????

6) Americans somehow come out on top?

I'm just trying to see where the tariffs benefit the average American. Who makes up for that extra price I have to pay for a car? Because to me it seems like a workaround for a regressive national sales tax and elimination of income tax which overwhelmingly benefits wealthy people.

at least for the ones that didn't commit suicide...

Fox News anchor Pete Hegseth for Secretary of Defense. The first nomination out of left field. Or Right field, I guess. I guess we should be glad he didn't nominate a war criminal.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

Because we're stuck with the bane of consumer existence, the fucking labor unions.

Oh. He was the guy that lobbied Trump to pardon the war criminals. Now, he can direct the military to commit those crimes on American soil. Cool. Cool. Cool.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

Nah, labor costs have gone down as a percent of revenue and profits. But that's some next level bootlicking.

Some of you guys need to pace yourselves if you're going to get through the next four years without a coronary.

Lol A guy who thinks germs aren't real.

Sounds like business interests have gotten to Trump or his people because all of a sudden I'm seeing a couple articles about Trump softening his "mass deportation" plans to focus on illegal immigrants who commit crimes.

Looks like the plan is for the House to use tariffs as a way to lock in the Trump tax cuts permanently. The problem is it will take universal tariffs of maybe 20% to make the math work for reconciliation.

Trump taps Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy to lead Department of Government Efficiency

Honestly it sounds like a good idea but with these clowns it will probably be counter-productive.

I haven't listened to any talk radio/news/etc...since it was called. I can't stomach it. I'm going to try and not pay attention the next 4 years and hope the world doesn't end

I've always read there would be a prioritization. Focus on illegal felons, national security people (fentanyl) has been on the top of the list. After that, it's been cloudy on plan/logistics.

Honestly, just as I believe MSM has been conflating legal & illegal into just immigrants (and now the delineation is coming back in MSM), things are getting more clear now as next steps are happening.

I've watched a couple Homan YT videos. We can argue about his stats; his pro-Trump, anti-Joe bias; but it's obvious to me that he is very passionate in wanting to stop illegal immigration (and I mean "very"). Pretty hardcore guy, looking forward to his plan and the inevitable confrontations with lawmakers and MSM.

You're looking forward to them deporting US citizens and dreamers?

Er, no? I can see how you read the below as looking forward to (whatever being done). I meant it as looking forward to reading/understanding his plan ...




Specific to re: deporting US citizens. Not in any plan that I've read other than for fraud. I'll refer you to post #6301 to 6305 below.

Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - POTUS 2024 - Harris vs Trump - General Election Discussion

The new border czar literally said families can be deported together if certain members are here illegally when asked about it

And yet the vast majority of farmers I know still vote Trump.

I believe the below is where this stems from below. If there are others, please provide source.

Access to this page has been denied

How I read that is, the US citizen family members can stay if they wish, but if they want they want to stay together, then the legal (voluntarily) & illegal (involuntarily) family members can leave together.

But yes, if there is forced/involuntary deportation of US citizens (non-fraud), that would be very bad. But no, I don't believe that is in the plan.

I read somewhere (not sure where?;) )that policy wise the parties are basically the same so not voting D wouldn't make a difference. I'm not even sure why this thread is here? :lol:

Having to choose between deportation or being permanently separated from a loved one is de facto forced deportations.

If you don't see the absolute cruelty and inhumanness in it you need to get a soul.

It is not forced, it is voluntary. There is a choice. Hard choices, but still a choice.


I'll use the Bill Maher quote. Not taking the GOP and the broader public's concern and not acknowledging it is a crisis has resulted in below ...


I absolutely do not deny its tough choices, no doubt. And Holman will probably take it further right than I would prefer, but yeah ... here we are.

JFC it’s not a choice and the cruelty is the point.

IIRC you immigrated here. I’d be nervous if I was you. No idea how far they will take this.

They could be flung out of fucking planes without parachutes afaic, preferrably into piranha infested waters.

That'd be a good start at least.

Stephen Miller has told us the plan. De-naturalization turbo-charged. They are absolutely planning to strip citizenship and deport some number of current Americans.

Yes, it's definitely a tough choice.


Naturalized citizens that went through the legal process don't have much to worry about. The de-naturalization, from what I've read, is from "fraud".

Yes, there may be some exceptions here and there e.g. how "fraud" is defined, but that'll work itself through the courts. But vast majority of naturalized citizens can sleep well.

You realize they want to remove birth right citizenship? What makes you think they won’t denaturalize people who came here legally? Though I’m sure you’re safe because your skin isn’t brown.

I can easily believe Holman/Miller want to increase the review of fraudulent citizenship cases. That is my understanding but admittedly, I might have missed something. But if not, what's wrong with de-naturalizing people that got citizenship under fraudulent pretenses?

See link of de-naturalization.

Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - Trump's Immigration Reform

If you have links that say they want to do de-naturalization for non-fraudulent cases (or A-D in my link above), provide the source.

re: birthright, see below, posts #6301-6305.

POTUS 2024 - Harris vs Trump - General Election Discussion - Page 127 - Front Office Football Central

In summary, we know there'll be a fight about it. If it works itself through the legal system (and it'll have to eventually), I'm okay with the final decision even though I personally prefer limits to birthright (e.g. one parent is a citizen or PR).

Because I've not seen any reports of plans to do it for non-fraud cases? There may be some extreme situations (see below) about but it's certainly not going to be widespread.

If you have something, provide a source that is not Twitter/X/TickTok that I can read in its full context.

I've provide link to my source above. But I'll requote the key stuff

Quote:

A) A person is subject to revocation of naturalization if he or she procured naturalization illegally B) A person is subject to revocation of naturalization if there is deliberate deceit on the part of the person in misrepresenting or failing to disclose a material fact or facts on his or her naturalization application and subsequent examination. C) A person is subject to revocation of naturalization if the person becomes a member of, or affiliated with, the Communist party, other totalitarian party, or terrorist organization within five years of his or her naturalization. D) Other than Honorable Discharge before Five Years of Honorable Service after Naturalization

You sure about that?

You entered your yearly income as 68,000 but your W-2 for that year indicates that you only made $67,139.17. That's fraud, you're deported.

Nope, not as far as de-naturalization goes. See link below.

Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - Trump's Immigration Reform

Here's the conditions of "fraud" as it relates to citizenship.

Quote:

A) A person is subject to revocation of naturalization if he or she procured naturalization illegally B) A person is subject to revocation of naturalization if there is deliberate deceit on the part of the person in misrepresenting or failing to disclose a material fact or facts on his or her naturalization application and subsequent examination. C) A person is subject to revocation of naturalization if the person becomes a member of, or affiliated with, the Communist party, other totalitarian party, or terrorist organization within five years of his or her naturalization. D) Other than Honorable Discharge before Five Years of Honorable Service after Naturalization

So yes, Melania "may" fall under these conditions. Prince Harry also (whenever he becomes naturalized). But we all know the rich and powerful get away with things regular folks don't.

I don't know what Miller is planning, but turbo-charged is not a word I would use to describe uses in cases of documented fraud. There are going to be very few of those.

When there is widespread de-naturalization of US citizens beyond the A-D conditions I've quoted, then you can tell me how wrong I was.

Yes, there will be screwups and extreme cases but I stand by my statement that legally naturalized citizens, that don't fall under A-D, won't have to worry about getting de-naturalized.

In terms of DOGE priorities, certainly subsidizing a company's travel to Mars should be low on the list, right? High cost, low benefit to US citizens.

Immigration is an issue that both sides agree needs to be addressed. Just trying to find and deport illegals that commit crimes will take more than four years logistically. The idea that Trump is going to hamstring a bunch of businesses that supported him by tossing out legal and illegal workers seems pretty far fetched. He didn't do that from 2016-2020, so I doubt he starts now.

But, again, when we look the other way on a big problem -you have to understand that the people may elect someone who promises to come in and clean it up. Initially, that cleanup may be messier that most wanted - but I can't see this administration ever having the resources to start mass deporting legal citizens. There's no way that ever stands up in court and you will have millions of civil rights attorneys chomping at the bit to defend them (as they should).

I voted for Harris and wanted no part of Trump. I can't stand the guy. But I also have some perspective and understand that we survived the first Trump "reign" and will also survive the second one. My main concern is that the SC judges hold on for another four years.

That said, I think people were so invested in Trump losing and so angry that they almost want massive "dire consequences" for the country because they voted for him. So anything that comes up over the next 3-4 months (tariffs, immigration, tax cuts, dept of education) is going to be framed as an unmitigated disaster that this country will never recover from. It sucks that he's president, but the die has been cast by the awful process and campaign the democrats ran. Now we just need to take a breath and realize everything will be OK. Worst case, if he really fucks things up, we can just vote someone in to fix it in four years.

Eh, what does he care? He's not going to have to face another election, he can do whatever he wants.

(This is why I kind of find it amusing if people still think Putin "has stuff" on him. What could possibly matter at this point? Whatever he could have won't matter with the electorate and wouldn't lead Republicans to do anything to him.)

I can clearly see him "tossing out illegal workers". From what I've read, Homan will do some level of worksite raids (e.g. chicken processing operations).

It's certainly possible, but I would guess the initial focus will be on illegals that have committed crimes.

Boy, if people were complaining about their eggs being 50 cents more, wait until they see the price of chicken when the robber barons have to pay their workers...

Trump says he'll do something vague.
Centrists say he won't do that.
Trump does it.
Centrists say, well he won't do that other thing...

It's been like this for 8 years but sure, this time he won't do the thing he says he'll do.

My best guess, we have 12 weeks till our Reichstag Fire.

8 years later the Democrats run supporting that thing.

Nah, trailer trash gonna learn where they stand in the new future.

Now Tulsi Gabbard, lol.

This feels like a real-life governmental version of the Empty Cupboard Challenge.

Looks back at the 2016 rhetoric on what Trump was going to do and then compare to what actually happened. He has no "core beliefs" and the moment something becomes unpopular or he doesn't benefit from it as much as he planned, he drops it like a bad habit. He promised things like repealing Obamacare, building a wall that Mexico paid for, invest $550 billion into US infrastructure, renegotiate the Iran deal, cancel funding for "sanctuary cities" and (of course) deport all people here illegally.

Know how many of those promises he kept? 0, nada - none of those things happened.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...s/trumpometer/

Matt Gaetz for Attorney General lol

He did ask if the military could shoot protestors and had to be denied by the Pentagon.

lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Remember when he committed rape on a minor and the DOJ shrugged their shoulders despite mountains of evidence including testimony from his good friend.

This is very likely true. In the short term.