Reports of Anti-LGBTQ Extremists Tapped for Major Roles on President-Elect Trump’s Transition - Polidicks

[quote]Today, HRC expressed concern about leaked documents indicating that President-Elect Donald Trump is considering for his transition team candidates with histories of anti-LGBTQ animus, including Ken Blackwell of the Family Research Council, which has been designated a hate group.[/quote] [url]http://www.hrc.org/blog/reports-of-anti-lgbtq-extremists-tapped-for-major-roles-on-president-elect[/url]

Thanks Hillary for letting it come to this! Guess Big Government isn't so bad when you can use it to restrict LGBT rights, huh?

I can't believe there's still people out there who will defend this guy.

Same sex activity was illegal in a dozen states until being struck down by the supreme court 2003, can't wait to see it reversed! At least you didn't elect email grandma amirite?

[QUOTE=chemo;51351628]I can't believe there's still people out there who will defend this guy.[/QUOTE] because he hasn't done anything yet and when he does, it will be too late

[QUOTE=Naught;51351643]because he hasn't done anything yet and when he does, it will be too late[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Socialist. Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Trade Unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.[/QUOTE]

I am excited to see Pro Trump posters explain this away as nothing to fear.

Even assuming democrats take control in 4 years, how fucked can everything get? like we have fucking conversion therapy supporters. What an EMBARRASMENT

and similar leaks suggest peter thiel (openly gay) also taking some sort of tech advisory role. Wait and see where the chips fall, then get the pitchforks.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;51351658]I am excited to see Pro Trump posters explain this away as nothing to fear.[/QUOTE] Dont get excited. I doubt any would show up

[QUOTE=BlindSniper17;51351627]Thanks Hillary for letting it come to this! Guess Big Government isn't so bad when you can use it to restrict LGBT rights, huh?[/QUOTE] You're blaming the candidate who ran against the guy? No, the American people are to blame for this, and their stupidity. The American people elected Trump, and they deserve him.

[QUOTE=archangel125;51351671]You're blaming the candidate who ran against the guy? No, the American people are to blame for this, and their stupidity. The American people elected Trump, and they deserve him.[/QUOTE] I'm blaming Hillary for dropping the ball and colluding with the DNC to rig the election, as well as ignoring critical battleground states -both leading to Trump's victory.

[QUOTE=da space core;51351670]Dont get excited. I doubt any would show up[/QUOTE] If I said what I truly wanted to say which is "I guarantee not a single Trump supporter will drop in to say one word about this" then they'd come in just to bitch at me, and ignore the entire thread

[QUOTE=J!NX;51351666]Even assuming democrats take control in 4 years, how fucked can everything get? like we have fucking conversion therapy supporters. What an EMBARRASMENT[/QUOTE] Organize NOW and get involved with letting your voice be heard. It is already time to start campaigning and raising awareness in preparation for the 2018 elections. We, as a nation, cannot afford to be silent and apathetic over the next 4 years. This election may be over, but we can mitigate the damage by electing local officials and getting involved in local government. Protest, organize, do whatever you need to do to make sure we can cut the damage that will potentially be done in half.

[QUOTE=BlindSniper17;51351680]I'm blaming Hillary for dropping the ball and colluding with the DNC to rig the election, as well as ignoring critical battleground states -both leading to Trump's victory.[/QUOTE] What election? The democratic primaries? I was a Sanders supporter, but he was an outlier, a stranger to the Democrat party, whereas Hillary was their darling. It was a foregone conclusion that he would lose. Hillary's a crook, but really no worse than the average Republican politician. No. If you're looking for someone to blame for what has happened, you need only look in a mirror. This is what fifteen years of eating up media fearmongering and ten years of war do to the voters in a country. This is what you reap for having shitty public education, terrible social services, and letting bigoted demagogues sit on your seats of power - Trump's the first one in recent memory who actually made president, but there are many, many such people sitting in Congress and in state government. No, America did this to themselves. I only hope it's a harsh enough lesson to be a wake up call - And that the degenerates who use it as an excuse to commit violence against minorities are made examples of.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;51351690]If I said what I truly wanted to say which is "I guarantee not a single Trump supporter will drop in to say one word about this" then they'd come in just to bitch at me, and ignore the entire thread[/QUOTE] Exactly. LGBT issues don't even register to Trump's supporters. Telling them point-blank that their candidate intends to erode the hard-won civil rights of others just gets you a shrugged response.

[QUOTE=nintenman1;51351667]and similar leaks suggest peter thiel (openly gay) also taking some sort of tech advisory role. Wait and see where the chips fall, then get the pitchforks.[/QUOTE] by the time "the chips fall", it will be far, far, far too late to do anything about it

What is the source for all these potential cabinet appointments? OP's source just says "leaked documents" with no mention of the document source or where I can view them. It's not so much that I doubt Trump will choose awful people in his cabinet as much as it is that I want to see the proof before I get too riled up.

Is this confirmed in any way?

[QUOTE=nintenman1;51351667]and similar leaks suggest peter thiel (openly gay) also taking some sort of tech advisory role. Wait and see where the chips fall, then get the pitchforks.[/QUOTE] Thiel is not openly gay at all, which is why Gawker no longer exists, and that's the point. No one is talking about black FEMA vans pulling up and dragging people with blue hair and trendy piercings off in the night. [I]Trump[/I] isn't going to do anything. Trump is going to sit back and :buddy: while someone five levels under him gets local state bodies to rawdog anyone in the 'undesirable' category to death without blinking an eye. Thiel was rich enough to make Gawker die by proxy, and that's exactly what's going happen here.

what does a transition team do again

[QUOTE=Perrine;51351751]what does a transition team do again[/QUOTE] I think it's the people who print the flash cards out to explain to Trump how government works for the next few weeks.

[QUOTE=da space core;51351670]Dont get excited. I doubt any would show up[/QUOTE] Reluctant Trump supporter checking in, only because I don't like the Clintons. Everyone is trying so hard to hate Trump so much they don't understand the simple facts: -He hasn't even DONE anything yet. -He won fair and square in a democratic electoral process, despite him saying how the system was 'rigged against him.' -With how close this election was I can imagine the other half freaking out and rioting in the streets if Clinton won. You just can't avoid this, it's a very controversial election cycle. The crazy Trump supporters would have to give Clinton 4 years if she won, so let's give this guy the same respect. We don't know what the future will bring, being overwhelmingly negative is the equivalent of fear-mongering.

[QUOTE=Depe;51351768] -He hasn't even DONE anything yet.[/QUOTE] He's planning to do shit but people aren't allowed to be worried despite the fact that he's telling everyone he's going to do it I'll respect that trump won but how are you even wondering why people are pan icing. There are a huge number of LGBT people here who Trump is planning to fuck over. like what the fuck is the point here? what does saying "He hasn't done it yet" actually achieve.

[QUOTE=archangel125;51351671]You're blaming the candidate who ran against the guy? No, the American people are to blame for this, and their stupidity. The American people elected Trump, [b]and they deserve him.[/b][/QUOTE] Good thing that's completely arbitrary.

[QUOTE=Naught;51351643]because he hasn't done anything yet and when he does, it will be too late[/QUOTE] Still doesn't excuse the shit he's already pulled.

[QUOTE=J!NX;51351774]He's planning to do shit but people aren't allowed to be worried despite the fact that he's telling everyone he's going to do it[/QUOTE] Congress exists for a reason, it's not like every single thing Trump says will get approved with no resistance. Checks and balances exist for this very reason.

Dear god. If I see, "he will reverse these Supreme Court rulings," one more time, I'm going to scream and wake up the house. The U.S. Supreme Court does not work that way. They do not sit down at their Shammenic Court Council on Thursday nights and determine which precedents, cases and laws they'll uphold or reverse or slide to the left. Even if, somehow, Trump appointed 3 conservative justices (mind again, there is only 1 up for grabs, for a [I]formerly conservative seat[/I]), there would still be 5 other justices on the bench. 5 other justices who's entire depth of credibility depends on upholding [I]former cases.[/I] Do you know what powers the U.S. Supreme Court are formally invested with in the Constitution? [B]None.[/B] The fact that the court is obeyed hinges entirely on custom, tradition and precedent. The U.S. Supreme Court has no constitutionally binding power, and no legal mandate. Let's even get to "reversing" those cases. To do ANYTHING in regard to those cases, the Court would have to grant [I]certiorari[/I] or [B]cert[/B] to a case that is being appealed at the Federal Level. To grant Cert requires, iirc, 4 justices to agree that the case has merit to be seen. THEN, each justice, after going through the entire case mind you, hands down an opinion. A simple yay/nay vote, that forms the [I]majority opinion.[/I] The justices have to option to either affirm or dissent with the majority, the justices each have the option to write their own opinion, or to use the written opinion of another justice. These opinions, [I]even the dissenting opinions,[/I] form an important element of the law in and of themselves. To fully overturn the cases talked about (cases often decided with "big" majorities of 6 or 7 justices, and not "mere" majorities of 5) would require that 1) A case on [insert rights here] comes to the court 1a) There has to be some case that is [B]relevant[/B], we can't pull a Futurama "rare double whammy" and have a case over parking tickets suddenly rewrite abortion laws 2) Four justices, at least, agree it has merit to be seen before the court 3) A majority (at [I]least[/I] 5 of 9 justices) come to an agreement on the ruling 5) The [I]SENIOR[/I] justice in that majority would then write the majority opinion, that is, the ruling in detail on the case that is taken to be the ruling on behalf of the entire court 6) Each justice of ALL of the justices would then somehow have to write [I]no coherent defense or dissent in favor of [insert right here.] [/I] 7) The Supreme Court, now having done the exact opposite of what it has worked to do for the last two hundred years, in all manners of political climates with all manners of political colorings, with a broad range of justices all of whom have always been more conservative-than-liberal, could [I]still[/I] be ignored, legally, since it has no technical power to enforce it's rulings. 8) Congress and Senate would then of it's own volition have to enact the revisions to law decided upon by the Supreme Court. I have [I]no idea[/I] how, in a Court that is to-the-man at least largely secular, formalist, and hinged on two hundred years of Supreme Court rulings (At LEAST, that is entirely discounting the liberal, progressive, judicial activists) you would force through "reverses" of cases that were [I]intentionally decided with clear majorities so this sort of thing wouldn't happen.[/I] The only way the Republican government can damage rights in this cataclysmic way would be to instate a Constitutional amendment that itself would have to be seen as constitutionally valid by the U.S. supreme court. Jesus fucking Christ. Scare mongering ignorant bullshit.

I'm very skeptic of stuffs published by the HRC because of their founder's bias and his connection with the Clinton family. Not a very trustworthy source in my book.

[QUOTE=Depe;51351783]Congress exists for a reason, it's not like every single thing Trump says will get approved with no resistance. Checks and balances exist for this very reason.[/QUOTE] That doesn't mean people shouldn't be worried. The dems are going to hit against this hard, but even the possibility is something people should panic over. [editline]11th November 2016[/editline] I will admit that being gay makes me biased into worrying, for obvious reasons