2559: Spicy Jigglies
 

with Jo Firestone – Serena and Venus Williams; Split and Silence reviewed; boycotting A Dog’s Purpose; Pope Francis on Holocaust Remembrance Day; Steve Bannon vs. The Media; Keith protests at JFK airport; Russia decriminalizes domestic violence; behind-the-scenes of The Chris Gethard Show


Guest:
Jo Firestone
http://static-4.keithandthegirl.net/...ne-100x100.jpg

Share this episode: Twitter, Facebook & email

Get the show: on iTunes, on Stitcher and RSS feed

Who'd you vote for again..?

Russias Domestic Violence.
 

I learned only recently, and think it's important to know, that both males and females are going to be hurt by this domestic violence ruling in Russia. We most often see females in hospital situations, and getting extremely hurt, but men are experiencing just as much spousal abuse, and since they are not being physically hurt, it doesn't get taken seriously. With the rules being rolled back it gives men no legs to stand on as they usually will not end up in a hospital.
I'm Canadian and we are about 50/50 in perpetrators and vitims. Most countries follow this trend. The little data we see from Russia suggests they are following that trend too.

Past presidents (including Obama, and I think Bill Clinton) have issued similar travel bans from countries with high terrorist activity. That's where Trump got the list of countries from. I don't remember seeing any protests then.

The difference is that the Trump administration was sloppy. Their ban was issued quickly without legal and security consultation, so the language is hard to interpret. It's also more severe and inexact in terms of who it applies to. That's where all of the confusion is coming from. I heard that some people's status for entry into the US changed while they were midflight.

If they did it right, it would have gone mostly unnoticed like previous travel bans.

Ace new guest.

Whoever's booking the show lately deserves a raise.

Love Jo Firestone! Great show.

I think a big part of how they've come out with the ban was to get a lot of attention. On one hand, Trump's base gets to feel like their guy is sticking to his guns, plus it adds to the general hysteria about how powerful he is - kind of a "look what I can do, no one can stop me."

The big difference between this ban and similar actions taken in the past by Bush/Obama is the brazenness of it. Past administrations have worked in contradictory ways, ie proclaiming "Islam is peace" as we bomb and harass muslim populations to little fanfare. Trump's team is saying explicitly that we are at war with Islam, and acting like it. Even if this specific action isn't a huge break from US policy, it seems to be leading us towards harsher measures that will come out of the new administration being specific about their enemy.

I think it's hard to say what the "right" way to govern is anymore. It assumes that the people in charge are operating with the same fundamental principles as administrations in the past, which they aren't. Trump isn't going to win political battles in the same model of Obama or Bush or Clinton - the way he won the presidency is by throwing out that conventional wisdom.

There was no previous travel ban. People from countries on the list just had to go through a stricter vetting process before getting a visa. It also applied to people who were not from the listed countries but had traveled to one within the last 5 years.

There have been many - but more targeted. (e.g. Reagan banning all boat people)

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R44743.pdf pages 7-10

Yeah we have a long history of presidents issuing travel bans, but I didn't know there were as many per president as in that PDF. Some of those seem like they're so targeted that they would be hard to enforce.

The Trump administration is saying they never called it ban after calling it a ban on air in a press conference.

None of the those are "bans" on countries or religions. It is a detailed list of who is not allowed to travel here because they participated in some shady shit in their own country or against the UN.

It specifies shady royal families, affiliations with shady foreign governments (like North Korea) and foreign diplomats who profit from impeding democracies.

Thats typical border control/safety/diplomacy stuff, not a ban.

The suspension of entry into the US is a travel ban. Carter's ban of Iranian citizens after the hostage crisis isn't even on that list. Reagan's bans on the list targeted Cubans, and his "high seas" ban was supposed to target Haitians coming here by boat. I looked it up, and the Coast Guard had permission to fire on a vessel if they didn't stop and wait for inspection.

If you go through it again, you'll see that the orders have a wider range than what you're saying. It shows that presidents have broad authority when it comes to immigration. It looks like one of Obama's orders banned entry for anyone that was involved with (or maybe just suspected of) hacking.

This isn't a defense of Trump's ban.

Do you have details on Carter's ban of Iranians?

Reagan's "ban" on Cuban is targeted towards those in cahoots with the government. Cause cold war. Cubans notoriously are able to immigrate here easier than any other nationalities because of "wet food dry foot" which basically says if they can make it to Florida they can be a US citizen.

Not allowing people to immigrate here through illegal means (by boat) is not a ban.

How border control treats those they catch trying to enter illegally is a totally different and depressing topic.

I'm just saying that similar controversial orders have been done before, but were more specific like you mentioned. The president has the authority to ban any group of aliens that he believes are harmful to the country on his own (but it can be challenged).

Reagan's high seas order was targeted, so you could argue that it is a country specific ban. You can call these actions something else if the word ban is the issue.

No reason to read all of this unless you really want to know.

Article on Carter's Iran order:

Carter Cuts Ties With Iran | News | The Harvard Crimson


This talks about how complicated and disorganized Trump's order is:

Trump’s Immigration Order Tests Limits of Law and Executive Power

It is not illegal for asylum seekers to arrive by boat.

It is however banned by executive order.

I loved Jo on the Chris Gethard show, great guest!