Trump47 Cabinet Picks & First 100 Days Agenda

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 2K
  • Views: 31K
  • Politics 


Ernst was an obvious easy pick for this appointment but I guess now she proves why she wasn’t picked — 99.8% loyal to Trump is not good enough.
 


“… He isn’t yet sure how to measure academic freedom, but he has looked at how a nonprofit called Foundation for Individual Rights in Education scores universities in its freedom-of-speech rankings, a person familiar with his thinking said.

The nonprofit scores schools based on a survey of students’ perceptions of factors such as whether they feel comfortable expressing ideas. Schools are also penalized if their administrators sanction faculty for opinions or disinvite a speaker from a campus event after a controversy.

Universities that are leading recipients of NIH grants but have poor FIRE rankings include the University of Pennsylvania (“very poor”), Columbia University (“abysmal”) and the University of Southern California (“very poor”). Schools with top scores in FIRE’s most recent rankings are the University of Virginia, Michigan Technological University and Florida State University. …”
 
(Cont’d)

“… “It’s not clear why we’d roadblock the best chances of finding a cure for cystic fibrosis or cancer or Alzheimer’s by adding potentially political, nonresearch factors into medical-research grant decisions,” said Lizbet Boroughs, associate vice president of government relations for the Association of American Universities, which represents 71 research schools.

Ned Sharpless, a former director of the National Cancer Institute, said Bhattacharya is qualified to lead the NIH but might find it difficult to implement broad changes. The agency could tweak the rubric used to assess grant applications to look at academic freedom, but could find it difficult to force grant reviewers to faithfully follow the change.

… Bhattacharya is a professor of medicine and health policy at Stanford. During the pandemic, he criticized the Covid-19 response, helping write the Great Barrington Declaration that called for ending lockdowns and isolating the vulnerable so that young, healthy people could get infected and build up immunity in the general population. …”

For reference, FIRE worst colleges for free speech 2024: 10 Worst Colleges for Free Speech: 2023
 
Last edited:
nycfan said:


“… He isn’t yet sure how to measure academic freedom, but he has looked at how a nonprofit called Foundation for Individual Rights in Education scores universities in its freedom-of-speech rankings, a person familiar with his thinking said.

The nonprofit scores schools based on a survey of students’ perceptions of factors such as whether they feel comfortable expressing ideas. Schools are also penalized if their administrators sanction faculty for opinions or disinvite a speaker from a campus event after a controversy.

Universities that are leading recipients of NIH grants but have poor FIRE rankings include the University of Pennsylvania (“very poor”), Columbia University (“abysmal”) and the University of Southern California (“very poor”). Schools with top scores in FIRE’s most recent rankings are the University of Virginia, Michigan Technological University and Florida State University. …”
Click to expand...

I continue to believe that Trump 2.0 is simply going to be a shitshow from the beginning, and likely to an even greater extent than his first term. And not just chaos, but I do believe that at a minimum we'll see the federal government used to go after Trump's critics and perceived enemies in the media, government, and politics very directly - much more so than in his first term.
 


“… Trump’s supporters have suggested two ways to get around the Senate’s advice-and-consent process. In the first, the Senate would vote to go into recess soon after Trump’s inauguration, allowing him to unilaterally make a series of “recess” appointments. That plan may formally be legal, but it is plainly improper. The president is authorized to make recess appointments to “ensure the continued functioning of the Federal Government when the Senate is away,” as Justice Stephen Breyer wrote for the Supreme Court in 2014.

… some House Republicans have begun to discuss a more extreme scheme, one Trump considered during his first term: Trump could instead send the Senate home against its will and fill the government during the resulting “recess.” This is flagrantly unlawful.

… The House Republicans’ idea seems to be to manufacture a “disagreement” to trigger this adjournment power. First, the House of Representatives would pass a resolution calling for a recess. The Senate would then (in all likelihood) refuse to pass the resolution. Trump would then declare the houses to be in “disagreement” and adjourn both houses for as long as he likes. From there, he would start his recess-appointments spree. There is just one glaring problem: The “disagreement” in this scenario is illusory.

Under the Constitution, each house can generally decide for itself how long it will sit. As Thomas Jefferson, an expert on legislative procedure, wrote in 1790: “Each house of Congress possesses [the] natural right of governing itself, and consequently of fixing it’s [sic] own times and places of meeting.”

… The Constitution limits this autonomy in one key way: “Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other Place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.” In other words, if one house of Congress wants to leave in the middle of a session, it has to get the permission of the other house. The House of Representatives can’t just skip town if the Senate thinks important legislative business remains. But note that this provision limits each house’s power to “adjourn,” and not each house’s power to remain “sitting.” Neither house needs the agreement of the other to stay in session. If the Senate wants to let the House of Representatives leave while it considers appointments or treaties, that is perfectly fine. Indeed, there are plenty of examples of one house giving the other permission to go home. Under Article I, then, each house requires consent of the other to quit, but not to sit. …”
 


Czar for AI, Crypto, Tech bias and censorship?

Trump continues to be All-in on crypto. I think it is a good idea to have someone focused AI, but the bias and censorship bit seems like a very different mandate …
 
nycfan said:


Czar for AI, Crypto, Tech bias and censorship?

Trump continues to be All-in on crypto. I think it is a good idea to have someone focused AI, but the bias and censorship bit seems like a very different mandate …
Click to expand...

Sacks is a grade A egomaniac and asshole. I hope he finds government service humbling and painful.
 
Trump remains his own banding czar pitching overpriced stuff and weird memes.



 
It's so Trump to think that cryptocurrency is going to be an economic miracle.

Nothing is a better metaphor for Trumpism than an environmentally destructive system for generating fake money that is exceedingly prone to fraud, has no real utility other than lining the pockets of the billionaires who can move the market because most of the money in that space is "line goes up," and is ultimately worth zilch.
 
I wouldn't consider "host of Fox and Friends Weekend" is a "winner" career for someone with those degrees.

At least Gretchen Carlson (degree from Stanford IIRC) was the weekday host. That's what blows my mind about this guy. He's not just a talk show host. He's on the talk show host JV squad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top