Trump 2.0: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

[wizardwatson]

Also....

...this is probably a big part of why they want this rule. "I.T. modernization" is essentially an outsourcing directive. In order to build their panopticon, they need the tech stack in the hands of the CIA/et al. So federal workers must all be in-person. But they want to outsource all the I.T. So what happens in reality. Someone who used to work for the Feds now works for a contractor that works for the Feds. The I.T. person makes the same or slightly more money, and the government pays the contractor twice as much.

What is end result. Same tech, more money, more deep state control of government infrastructure.

And guess what...

they still gonna be remote.

 

[TheTexan]

The also good:

Libs big MAD

Haha

 

[Matt Collins]

https://x.com/foxnewspolitics/status/1881637657622593943

 

[TheTexan]

https://x.com/foxnewspolitics/status/1881637657622593943

I'm sure he'll get to it by the end of his term, not like there's any rush

He's got more important stuff to do like rename the Gulf of America

 

[A. Havnes]

So far, I'm very happy with Trump's first couple of days. I do have something to add to the bad list, though: his capital punishment reforms.

https://reason.com/volokh/2025/01/21/president-trumps-executive-order-on-the-death-penalty/

Sec. 4. Preserving Capital Punishment in the States. (a) The Attorney General shall take all necessary and lawful action to ensure that each state that allows capital punishment has a sufficient supply of drugs needed to carry out lethal injection.

Let's subsidize government murder!

Sec. 5. Seeking The Overruling of Supreme Court Precedents That Hinder Capital Punishment. The Attorney General shall take all appropriate action to seek the overruling of Supreme Court precedents that limit the authority of State and Federal governments to impose capital punishment.

Obviously, as a pro-lifer who despises the death penalty, removing limitations on any government's ability to impose it is, in my opinion, a bad idea. The ability of a government to take life should absolutely be one of the few things that's actually regulated, whether that's by removing the ability to do so or by limiting the ability to do so.

Otherwise, Trump has been hitting it out of the park. Waiting to see if he pardons Snowden.

 

[TheCount]

Oh wow so many pieces of paper

 

[otherone]

Oh wow so many pieces of paper

"A moving paper fantasy"

 

[nobody's_hero]

I will say, the EO for "returning to in-person work" is dumb.

Even before Covid, our state-level government offices had some remote work. It makes sense for I.T. people. The machines typically aren't in the building anyway. This is even more true today in the cloud environment.

This is Elon Musk's influence.

Here was the main dilemma that really was the issue for government. "Wait, if all these cubicle monkeys go home, what about all these office space leases?" Remote work, where it can be done, saves money. Grifters who make money of government bureaucrats don't like it.

But if you read the order, it actually says departments can make exemptions. I assure you they will.

On the flip side, this may be a strategy to help trim-down the workforce, as many I.T./call center types, will simply move to private or state-level. If this is the strategy, I can see the logic. Another way to force fed level attrition.

But remote work, in general, is a done deal. No one in the industries that it works for wants to transition back.

I was kind of thinking the same thing. I would have added a specification that if there's not enough room at the office for them to physically return to work that their positions would be terminated, lol.

Welcome back to the office, everyone. We're going to start the workday off with a rousing game of musical chairs.

 

[nobody's_hero]

The border situation is an emergency.

This. It sucks, but there was a video of immigrants breaking down in tears because almost immediately the door got slammed shut in their face.

Mind you, if we had actually had any semblance of actual border control for the past 4 years, such drastic measures would likely not be necessary. As it stands, it is vitally important that the message is sent that this. stops. now.

Let word get back to Central & South America that there won't be any more turning-the-blind-eye. Stop telling your friend's 7th and 8th cousins that you know a guy who knows a gal who can get them waved in through a side door. Let the message get all the way back to where the migrant caravans originate so they can stop before they start.

 

[Matt Collins]

The border situation is an emergency.

I disagree.

I mean it is obviously a serious problem that needs to be addressed now, but it's not an "emergency"

 

[nobody's_hero]

 

[CCTelander]

https://x.com/foxnewspolitics/status/1881637657622593943

 

[Matt Collins]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuYig0moEK8

 

[Swordsmyth]

I disagree.

I mean it is obviously a serious problem that needs to be addressed now, but it's not an "emergency"

Nonsense, the invasion is far worse than Russia's invasion of Ukraine and has been going on much longer, it has also caused more deaths.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Nonsense, the invasion is far worse than Russia's invasion of Ukraine and has been going on much longer, it has also caused more deaths.

This.

Stopping the invasion and ejecting the invaders is the single most important task facing the fedgov right now.

 

[CCTelander]

So Trump actually came through on this one. Great. I’m happy for Ross Ulbricht and his family.

Apparently, at least in high profile cases that make him look good, Trump is capable of doing the right thing.

 

[Snowball]

Trump going big on AI . meh.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/21/trump-ai-joint-venture-openai-oracle-softbank

 

[Matt Collins]

Nonsense, the invasion is far worse than Russia's invasion of Ukraine and has been going on much longer, it has also caused more deaths.

It's not a military invasion, and it doesn't require a military response.

 

[GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged]

I have driven into Mexico on several occasions. Every time at some point, I have seen uniformed Mexican's with Assault Rifles pointed at people against a wall. I am not saying or insinuating that they shot those people, but those uniformed people didn't look friendly or welcoming.

 

[TheTexan]

It's not a military invasion, and it doesn't require a military response.

Border security has always been a military issue and could even be argued the only legitimate purpose of a military

Expelling trespassers falls under the category of border security