About Me

My photo
SEEKONK, MASSACHUSETTS, United States

Friday, January 3, 2020

ESQUIRE: So Trump Employs Undocumented Immigrants at His Properties and Nobody Really Cares? (PLUS, QUITE A WEEK FOR DONALD...)

BUT FIRST...QUITE A WEEK FOR DONALD TRUMP.
LETS SEE, HE PROTECTS A WAR CRIMINAL, AND IGNORES HONORABLE ACTIVE DUTY PERSONNEL...
...NOW, WE FIND THAT HIS BUSINESSES CONTINUE TO EMPLOY UNDOCUMENTED WORKERS...
...WHILE TRYING TO AVOID HIS TRIAL IN THE SENATE, FOR IMPEACHABLE ACTS WHILE IN OFFICE, BECAUSE HE CONTINUES TO BELIEVE THAT HE IS ABOVE THE LAW.
 FASCISM: a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.
WWW.DICTIONARY.COM

DAVID MCDONALD- PUBLISHER.
When ICE raided some chicken plants in Mississippi last year, they rounded up nearly 700 undocumented immigrant workers. They did not arrest the managers or corporate executives who systematically employed them. This fits a pattern, according to The New York Times: between March 2018 and 2019, the feds prosecuted 112,000 people for illegal entry or re-entry, but charged just 11 employers for hiring some of these same people.
Before anti-immigrant rhetoric descended into full-on propaganda about crime and MS-13, there was a lot of talk about undocumented immigrants taking jobs from American citizens. In Mississippi, citizens did take some of the vacated jobs. (There's also the related charge that undocumented workers drag down wages, which is unproven but at least does not boil down solely to uncut racial grievance.) But the persistent refusal to enact penalties on people who choose to employ undocumented immigrants suggests these are not the most pressing concerns for decision-makers. The people who travel hundreds or thousands of miles to get to the U.S. are desperate for decent work, and feel it's worth the risk of deportation. It's employers who are primed for a change in incentive structure, yet they are rarely, if ever, punished. It's enough to make you think this is not, nor has it never been, about the plight of the American worker. It's a regime where workers can be simultaneously exploited by employers and demonized by political elites, ground up by the great American machine.
As usual, the President of the United States is a flag-bearer for all these most base instincts. It's tempting to see hypocrisy as a quaint relic of the Before Times, a dead concept in the era of post-truth politicking. (We are, after all, in a moment in which the president's allies are casting him as an International Corruption Crusader while he's orchestrating the Great American Heist.) But pointing this out can still serve as a reminder that none of these folks ever cared about this stuff. Donald Trump, you see, has always employed undocumented immigrants—at many of his properties, on many of his construction projects. He has no issue with these people except when it's convenient fodder for a rage spasm to get The Base going. The latest example arrived on the last day of 2019 via the Washington Post.

Nearly a year after the Trump Organization pledged to root out undocumented workers at its properties, supervisors at the Trump Winery on Monday summoned at least seven employees and fired them because of their lack of legal immigration status, according to two of the dismissed workers...
Two of the fired workers ... said they thought the company had held off on firing them until after the year’s work was complete, taking advantage of their labor for as long as possible. Both had worked at the winery for more than a decade.
That seems like the whole arrangement in a nutshell. Extract cheap labor from people—in this case, allow them to finish the grape harvest—then discard them as soon as it's convenient to do so. In general, the property relies on immigrant labor from Mexico in the form of seasonal workers who arrive on legal visas, according to the Post, but there are also year-round undocumented workers. They are among some 49 undocumented people the Post alone has spoken with, who worked at 11 different Trump properties across four states. For years now, the president has traveled the country railing against immigrants as violent criminals and imploring people to "Buy American, Hire American," while he profited from undocumented labor in systematic fashion. In July 2018, his Mar-a-Lago property announced it was seeking 61 foreign workers on a legal basis. Hire American for thee, but not for me.


Omar Miranda worked for Trump’s Virginia winery without papers.
 He was just fired now that the harvest’s finished.
This goes all the way back to the '80s, of course, when Trump had hundreds of undocumented Polish immigrants building Trump Tower. He paid them as little as $4 an hour—and always well below union wage—because that's why people like Donald Trump employ people without papers. He ultimately settled a lawsuit around the workers' treatment. It's fitting that the people who made his flagship project possible would fit the theoretical description of the people he has built a political career smearing as criminals. (In practice, he is referring to brown immigrants.) But it also fits because Trump is merely a particularly garish emblem of the post-Reagan plutocrat class, where greed is good and other people—whether they're undocumented workers or they own a small contracting business—are just marks waiting to get fleeced.
That hustle now extends to the angry and isolated people who show up to his rallies in search of community and solidarity against The Other. They will not mind that he's profited so handsomely off undocumented labor, because it's about the performance of demonstrating who's a Real American with a say in how this country is run. Also, anything he does is excusable on the basis that Democrats do it, too, or anybody who's smart would do it, or everybody does it. Now there's some truth to that: the president is indeed one of a huge number of employers who uses undocumented labor with zero consequences.

AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL ASSOCIATION: The APA Eastern Division meeting is next week!


Dear DAVID,


The 2020 Eastern Division meeting is less than a week away. We hope you’ll join us in Philadelphia, PA, January 8–11!
 
Online registration is closed, but you can still register on site at the meeting. The registration desk will open at 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday, January 8. The on-site registration rates are $175 for APA members, $290 for non-members, and $90 for student members.
 

Department Chairs Network

The APA will host a special session for the Department Chairs Network (DCN), “Building Support for Philosophy on Campus,” on Friday, January 10, at 9:00 a.m. Panelists include John Corvino (Wayne State University), David Levy (SUNY Geneseo), and Sally Scholz (Villanova University). APA Executive Director Amy Ferrer will chair the session.
 
The DCN exists to discover and discuss issues of particular interest to philosophy department chairs, but DCN sessions are open to all. We encourage you to attend the session and to join the DCN.
 

Exhibits and Prize Reception

The 2020 Eastern Division meeting features 24 exhibitors and over 50 tables. We encourage you to visit our exhibits and spend some time browsing new and popular philosophy titles that will be on display during the meeting. The exhibits will be located on the second floor of the meeting hotel in Liberty Ballroom A/B, near APA registration. The following exhibitors will be on site:


• Brill
• Cambridge University Press
• Cato Institute
• Grand Canyon University
• Hackett Publishing Company
• Ingram Academic Services
• Institute for Humane Studies
• Law School Admission Council
• Lexington Books
• McFarland
• Oxford University Press
• Palgrave Macmillan
• Philosopher's Information Center
• Philosophy Documentation Center
• Philosophy Now
• Princeton University Press
• Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group
• Rowman and Littlefield
• Springer
• SUNY Press
• Temple University Press
• The Scholar's Choice
• Walter De Gruyter GmbH
• Wiley


All meeting registrants are invited to attend the annual APA prize reception in the exhibit area at 5:30 p.m. on Thursday, January 9. The exhibits will remain open during the prize reception, and wine and cheese will be served. The exhibit hours during the meeting are as follows:


January 9: 10:00 a.m.–6:30 p.m.
January 10: 9:00 a.m –5:00 p.m.
January 11: 9:00 a.m.–1:00 p.m.


We hope to see you in Philadelphia next week!

All the best,

Melissa Smallbrook
Meeting Coordinator

Sunday, December 29, 2019

IN THIS CASE, THE U.S. NAVY AND DONALD TRUMP APPARENTLY TREAT HONOR AND TRUTH THE SAME WAY: PROTECT THE GUILTY, COVER UP, AND IGNORE TRUE HEROS. PART 2.



FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES.

BY- DAVE PHILIPPS.


Anguish and Anger From the Navy SEALs Who Turned In Edward Gallagher

(I ITALICIZED ONE PARAGRAPH, AND OUTLINED IT IN RED.- DAVID McD.)
“I think Eddie was proud of it, and that was, like, part of it for him,” Special Operator Miller told investigators.
Chief Gallagher’s lawyer, Timothy Parlatore, said the video interviews were rife with inconsistencies and falsehoods that created “a clear road map to the acquittal.”
Since his arrest nearly a year ago, Chief Gallagher has insisted that the charges against him were concocted by six disgruntled SEALs in his platoon who could not meet his high standards and wanted to force him out.
“My first reaction to seeing the videos was surprise and disgust that they would make up blatant lies about me, but I quickly realized that they were scared that the truth would come out of how cowardly they acted on deployment,” Chief Gallagher said in a statement issued through his lawyer.
“I felt sorry for them that they thought it necessary to smear my name, but they never realized what the consequences of their lies would be. As upset as I was, the videos also gave me confidence because I knew that their lies would never hold up under real questioning and the jury would see through it. Their lies and N.C.I.S.’s refusal to ask hard questions or corroborate their stories strengthened my resolve to go to trial and clear my name.”
The video interviews and private group text conversations obtained by The Times do not reveal any coordinated deception among the SEALs in the chief’s platoon. Instead, they show men who were hesitant to come forward, but who urged one another to resist outside pressure and threats of violence, and to be honest.
“Tell the truth, don’t lie or embellish,” one sniper who is now in SEAL Team 6 told the others in a group text in 2017, when they first tried to report the chief. “That way, he can’t say that we slandered him in any way.”
When several SEALs in the group questioned what would come of reporting the chief to their commanders, another wrote: “That’s their decision. We just need to give them the truth.”
It is an unspoken rule among their teams that SEALs should not report other SEALs for misconduct. An internal investigation could close off choice assignments or end careers for the accusers as well as the accused. And anyone who reported concerns outside the tight-knit SEAL community risked being branded a traitor.
“In a perfect world, there would be no risk, but that is not where we are,” Rick Haas, a retired command master chief who served in the SEALs for 30 years, said in an interview with The Times. “The teams are now divided over this, like I’ve never seen happen before.”
In cramped interview rooms in San Diego, SEALs who spoke to Navy investigators painted a picture of a platoon driven to despair by a chief who seemed to care primarily about racking up kills. They described how their chief targeted women and children and boasted that “burqas were flying.”
Asked whether the chief had a bias against Middle Eastern people, Special Operator Scott replied, “I think he just wants to kill anybody he can.”
Some of the SEALs said they came to believe that the chief was purposefully exposing them to enemy fire to bait ISIS fighters into revealing their positions. They said the chief thought that casualties in the platoon would increase his chances for a Silver Star.
Special Operator Vriens told investigators he had wanted to confront the chief in Iraq but had worried that if he did, he would be cut from missions and no longer be present to protect other SEALs from the chief. As he spoke, he struggled to keep his composure.
“I can speak up, stand my ground,” he said in the interview. “He’s just going to do this to a new guy who he can manipulate. So I was like, I’m going to be his right-hand man, so — so no one else got hurt.”
He pressed his forehead into his fists and started to cry. Then he took several deep breaths, rubbed his hands together and tried to continue.
“So I worked for him and I kept my mouth shut,” he said.
The platoon members told investigators that they tried repeatedly to report what they saw, but that the chain of command above them was friendly toward Chief Gallagher and took no action. Finally, in April 2018, they went outside the SEALs to the Naval Criminal Investigative Service. Chief Gallagher was arrested a few months later.
The SEALs in the platoon were scattered to new assignments. They tried to keep tabs on the case, texting one another and commiserating over a series of setbacks, including accusations of prosecutorial misconduct, the removal of the lead prosecutor and reports that the judge overseeing the case was being investigated on suspicion of lying under oath.
“This stuff is frustrating to read and makes it seem like Eddie will possibly get away with murder (literally),” Special Operator First Class Dylan Dille texted the group. “Let’s not forget there are 7-12 of us in here who had the balls to tell the truth about what Eddie has done.”
He said he thought the case against Chief Gallagher was strong despite the procedural setbacks. “I am also convinced that we are gonna answer to a higher power someday, and everything happens for a reason,” wrote Special Operator Dille, who has since left the Navy. “Not compromising our integrity and keeping right on our side is all we can do.”
Seven members of the 22-person platoon testified at the trial that they saw the chief commit war crimes. Two men from the platoon testified that they did not see any evidence of crimes. Others refused to cooperate with prosecutors. Crucially, one SEAL who had accused the chief during the investigation — Special Operator Scott — changed his story on the witness stand, testifying that he and not Chief Gallagher had caused the captive’s death.
Three of the men who testified at the trial left the Navy afterward, and have been trying to keep a low profile while they build civilian lives. Others are still in the SEAL teams, in some cases working on classified assignments. Some fear that coming forward has hurt their chances at success in the SEALs, but none have reported any retaliation. All of them declined to comment for this article.
Since the trial, Chief Gallagher has repeatedly insulted them on social media and on Fox News, especially Craig Miller, whom the chief singled out for weeping while talking to investigators.
Chief Gallagher retired from the Navy with full honors at the end of November, and has announced that he was starting a SEAL-themed clothing line.
A few days after he retired, an Instagram account belonging to him and his wife posted a photo of a custom-made hatchet, forged by the same SEAL veteran who made the hunting knife he was accused of using to kill the captive. Before the deployment, Chief Gallagher had told the knife maker he hoped to “dig that knife or hatchet on someone’s skull!”
“Eddie finally got his stuff back from NCIS,” the post said, listing the hatchet among a “few of our favorite things now returned.”
Another item returned to him was a black-and-white Islamic State flag. On Saturday, Chief Gallagher presented Mr. Trump with a folded black-and-white cloth that other SEALs from the platoon said appeared to be the flag.
A post on the chief’s Instagram account said, “Finally got to thank the President and his amazing wife by giving them a little gift from Eddie’s deployment to Mosul.”

Saturday, December 28, 2019

BLAST FROM THE PAST: 2/4/2017- AS A FRAUD TAKES OVER THE WHITE HOUSE.

FEATURE ARTICLES. A TRUMP VISION OF THE U.S.?


WHAT ARE THE TRUE GOALS OF A DONALD TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, AND WHAT WILL SUCH POLICIES MEAN TO ALL AMERICANS, NOW, AND IN THE FUTURE?
Donald Trump, Politics, Presidential, Election

HERE IS A SHORT LIST TO CONSIDER:


PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRATS                                      REPUBLICANS.
            SUPPORT.
                                                                                        
                                                                                         
-  UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE.                                         OPPOSE ALL

-  RAISING THE MINIMUM WAGE.                                           OF

-  LEGALIZING SAME- SEX MARRIAGE.                              THESE.

-  RESTRICTIONS AND DISCLOSURE LAWS,                       
   ON CONTROLLING  CAMPAIGN SPENDING.

-  PROVIDING SANCTUARY FOR WAR REFUGEES 
   FROM SYRIA.

... AND STRICT GUN CONTROL LAWS.


WHAT CAN WE TAKE FROM THIS?

It is a List that gives us a snapshot OF WHAT IS CONSIDERED IMPORTANT TO THE REPUBLICAN PARTY ON A NATIONAL LEVEL. ( OR ISN'T IMPORTANT, TAKE YOUR PICK.)

It can also give us INSIGHT INTO WHY THEY ARE ANXIOUS TO DEMONIZE ENTIRE GROUPS OF HUMAN BEINGS, WHICH INCLUDES FELLOW AMERICANS, WHO ARE GUILTY OF NOTHING.

HOW SO?

REPUBLICANS DO NOT SUPPORT
ANYTHING ON THE LIST, EVEN THOUGH IT...

-  Gives different groups of AMERICAN CITIZENS 
RELIEF FROM SPECIFIC CAUSES OF ECONOMIC 
DISTRESS. ( UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE, RAISING
THE MINIMUM WAGE.)

-  Offers an OPPORTUNITY FOR COUPLES OF THE 
SAME GENDER, TO ENTER INTO A LEGAL AND MORAL
MARRIAGE CONTRACT. 

-  Expands or Creates Laws that Limit Campaign Spending, and
Discloses Lists of Prominent Donors.

-  Expands Gun Control Laws To:  REQUIRE BACKGROUND CHECKS,
LIMIT PRIVATE GUN SALES, RESTRICT THE SALE OF
AUTOMATIC WEAPONS. 

-  OFFERS REFUGE TO WAR VICTIMS, WHO ALREADY
HAVE TO PASS A COMPREHENSIVE BACKGROUND CHECK, AND
HAVE NEVER BEEN ACCUSED OF HARMING ANYONE.

WITH THE ABOVE IN MIND, LET US ASK THE FOLLOWING:

QUESTION #1.
WHICH PART OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC IS
HARMED BY ANY OF THESE?

IF SO, HOW, AND IS THE HARM ENOUGH TO NEGATIVELY IMPACT
THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR ANY CITIZEN?

QUESTION #2.
DO ANY OF THESE ALLEVIATE HARDSHIP, OR CAUSE IT?

QUESTION #3.
WHO BENEFITS FROM THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS LIST,
AND WHO SUFFERS?

QUESTION #4.
DOES THIS LIST VIOLATE ANY PORTION OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION,
IF SO, HOW?

QUESTION #5-  DO ANY OF THESE REMEDY PAST INJUSTICES,
OR ELIMINATE ANY INEQUALITIES FOUND IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM, OR IN CIVIL LAW.

??????
(THE FIRST EDITION OF THIS ARTICLE WAS PUBLISHED ON 12/10/2015).