Trump 40: Donald Trump and the Chamber of Incompetence

[Dandruff]

4 hours ago, formergothardite said:

I do think that siding with Trump might just be the beginning of the end for the huge influence of evangelicals. Younger people are already moving away from religion and are more likely to hold more liberal beliefs. Siding with someone who preaches hate  and tramples on the teachings of Jesus just shows their hypocrisy and it is going to be difficult to claim any moral high ground after this.

I certainly hope so vs. the young people deciding instead to join the dark side.  How much influence might the threat of hell have if the evangelicals are forsaking their Lord (who hasn't answered their prayers) for Trump (who apparently has)?  Is the hypocrisy visible and powerful enough to make a difference or is it being progressively normalized?

Perhaps the Democrats should use this during the 2020 campaigning.  Stick it in their faces and make sure it stays.  The Almighty vs. Trump.  Dems would need to carefully pick their candidate though.

1 hour ago, AmazonGrace said:

Why does he sit like he's on the toilet?

It's where his best thinking occurs?

[fraurosena]

50 minutes ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

As someone who has taken prescribed adderall for years my words are much more fluent when public speaking if I rememeber to take it than if I don’t.

I've nothing against anyone taking prescribed meds the way they're supposed to! But I'm willing to bet you don't grind up your adderall and snort it.  The presidunce however has allegedly been taking it that way since the eighties, and that could be the reason why his brain has been fried, not because he's been prescribed them and ingesting them the way normal people do.

[HerNameIsBuffy]

7 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

I've nothing against anyone taking prescribed meds the way they're supposed to! But I'm willing to bet you don't grind up your adderall and snort it.  The presidunce however has allegedly been taking it that way since the eighties, and that could be the reason why his brain has been fried, not because he's been prescribed them and ingesting them the way normal people do.

Thanks - TIL that on top of everything else he’s got not only a drug habit but is abusing medication I need and can’t have atm because no insurance = no healthcare.

and I didn’t think I could hate him more.

and you are correct - even when I had access I didn’t do lines and tweet like my life depended on it.   

[fraurosena]

5 minutes ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

medication I need and can’t have atm because no insurance = no healthcare.

Damn. That sucks. 

I can't imagine not having healthcare. In my country it's mandatory... and (relatively) affordable. We do have a set amount we have to pay out of pocket (I believe it's around 380 euro, or 428 dollars per year), but after that amount everything* is covered by your insurance. 

*Everything that you have chosen to have insured, that is. There are different levels of insurance (which also differ from one insurer to the next). Everyone has at minimum the so-called basic-coverage, but you can opt to have more coverage (for which you pay more of course). The basic-coverage is quite broad and covers most general and some specialized medication, hospital visits and stays, GP costs, physiotherapy (I believe 12 consults), pre-natal and peri-natal care, birth control, some dentistry (fixing cavities and the like) and a lot more that I can't think of off the top of my head. All of that costs about 118 euro (or 133 dollars) per month. So it's not free, but it's affordable for most people. For those who have lower incomes there are assistance or subsidy programs that will pay for part of those costs, ensuring everyone has healthcare.

Believe it or not, but over here you can get fined for not having healthcare insurance.

[Destiny]

22 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

Believe it or not, but over here you can get fined for not having healthcare insurance.

We had that too, but it was one of the things that was recently changed. I can't remember if it was via legislation or via the courts offhand. The ACA tried to do a lot of what you have, but it depended on states to do their part, which some of the red states refused to do. Healthcare in the US is a complicated clusterfuck of fail, but what it really comes down to is unless you have a job with insurance, insurance is unaffordable. Mister checked while he was unemployed. Insurance for the two of us would be $1600/mo. We just went without and hoped nothing bad would happen. 

[fraurosena]

2 minutes ago, Destiny said:

what it really comes down to is unless you have a job with insurance, insurance is unaffordable. Mister checked while he was unemployed. Insurance for the two of us would be $1600/mo.

Wow... that's an indecently high amount of money. (Although I've no idea what percentage that would be of one's total income, it still seems off the charts high to me).

What I really don't understand is why the cost of healthcare is so incredibly high in America. Take insulin for example, which (depending on type) roughly costs $100 - $300 per vial in America, while over here the average cost is 10 euro per vial, or $11,27. That difference is just absurd, and completely unjustifiable. 

The problem America has re healthcare is not only that you don't have adequate legislation, but that the pharma companies are so powerful that they can charge whatever the hell they want. 

[Destiny]

Wow... that's an indecently high amount of money. (Although I've no idea what percentage that would be of one's total income, it still seems off the charts high to me).
What I really don't understand is why the cost of healthcare is so incredibly high in America. Take insulin for example, which (depending on type) roughly costs $100 - $300 per vial in America, while over here the average cost is 10 euro per vial, or $11,27. That difference is just absurd, and completely unjustifiable. 
The problem America has re healthcare is not only that you don't have adequate legislation, but that the pharma companies are so powerful that they can charge whatever the hell they want. 

We had no income at all. Even in the beforetimes when we were at least somewhat well off, that was completely out of reach.

[formergothardite]

1 hour ago, Dandruff said:

How much influence might the threat of hell have if the evangelicals are forsaking their Lord (who hasn't answered their prayers) for Trump (who apparently has)?  Is the hypocrisy visible and powerful enough to make a difference or is it being progressively normalized?

I think they are trying to normalize choosing power of Jesus, but I hope that people will see through it. 

 

[fraurosena]

1 minute ago, Destiny said:

We had no income at all. Even in the beforetimes when we were at least somewhat well off, that was completely out of reach.

How does that work though, when you have no income? Isn't there anything like unemployment benefits? In the Netherlands, if you get laid off or otherwise lose your job, you can get unemployment benefits, and (like I said earlier) if you can't pay your health insurance your county offers financial assistance until your income is high enough to pay all of it yourself.

Damn, when I read that last sentence back it sounds a bit like I'm trying to make you jealous. I'm not though. I'm genuinely concerned for you all, and wish you could get all the care you need when you need. Because healthcare is a fucking human right.

[formergothardite]

4 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

Because healthcare is a fucking human right.

I know. I don't get why people are so resistant to the idea of better insurance. 

[Alisamer]

8 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

What I really don't understand is why the cost of healthcare is so incredibly high in America. Take insulin for example, which (depending on type) roughly costs $100 - $300 per vial in America, while over here the average cost is 10 euro per vial, or $11,27. That difference is just absurd, and completely unjustifiable. 

The problem America has re healthcare is not only that you don't have adequate legislation, but that the pharma companies are so powerful that they can charge whatever the hell they want. 

Part of it is the pharma companies, and part is the fact that so many people can't afford insurance. People who can't afford insurance often wait a bit longer to get treatment - so treatment may be more expensive than it might have been at the beginning. They are also more likely to go to the emergency room for pretty much everything, because they have to treat you whether you can pay or not. That raises the prices for the insurance companies and the people who can pay for care, because they are covering the costs for the uninsured who can't pay. The hospital gets their money one way or another. They'll charge insurance companies far more than they will charge self-paying customers, who get discounts in an attempt to get them to pay anything at all. It's just all messed up.

My co-worker was relieved when Trump said he'd done away with the penalty for not having insurance, and went without this year because it was going to be over $900 a month just for HER. Unfortunately she didn't realize that the penalty ACTUALLY doesn't go away until next year...  Still, the penalty is less than the nearly $12,000 a year she'd have paid for insurance.

My insurance is over $400 a month, luckily I qualify for a subsidy and don't have to pay it all myself. However, my deductible in the (very small) network it covers is $7900. It covers basically nothing before I've spent that much, except the few things the ACA requires it to cover (and if the Repubs have their way, it'll literally cover NOTHING at all soon). Out of network? $39,500. Which is significantly more than I earn in a year. ALL the healthcare available near where I work is out of network, btw. So I've told everyone that if something happens at work to please throw me in the work van or get me an Uber and take me 20 minutes to the next county over where I am in network. 

I need some medical testing, and am crossing my fingers I can afford it. Insurance won't pay for it at all, because I've not met the deductible. They might, however, require the testing to be done at the hospital where it will cost over a thousand dollars, as opposed to in-office where it might be less than $200. So I may end up just paying out of pocket for in-office testing, as if I had no insurance. It'll be out of pocket either way, it's just whether I want to toss a grand at my deductible on the off chance I have a major medical problem and spend $6900 more later in the year, or if I want to pay much less but not have it count toward the deductible.

Sorry, I know I end up writing a novel every time health insurance is mentioned, but it is just SO screwed up here. We have great care available, but most people can't afford to access it! I literally cannot afford to be sick or to die, at this point. Both are way too expensive. 

[HerNameIsBuffy]

1 hour ago, fraurosena said:

Damn. That sucks. 

I can't imagine not having healthcare. In my country it's mandatory... and (relatively) affordable. We do have a set amount we have to pay out of pocket (I believe it's around 380 euro, or 428 dollars per year), but after that amount everything* is covered by your insurance. 

*Everything that you have chosen to have insured, that is. There are different levels of insurance (which also differ from one insurer to the next). Everyone has at minimum the so-called basic-coverage, but you can opt to have more coverage (for which you pay more of course). The basic-coverage is quite broad and covers most general and some specialized medication, hospital visits and stays, GP costs, physiotherapy (I believe 12 consults), pre-natal and peri-natal care, birth control, some dentistry (fixing cavities and the like) and a lot more that I can't think of off the top of my head. All of that costs about 118 euro (or 133 dollars) per month. So it's not free, but it's affordable for most people. For those who have lower incomes there are assistance or subsidy programs that will pay for part of those costs, ensuring everyone has healthcare.

Believe it or not, but over here you can get fined for not having healthcare insurance.

We get fined too - in the form of tax penalty.  But for me I just changed jobs so my old employers insurance ran out end of March and new coverage doesn’t kick in for 2 months and cobra is very cost prohibitive.

fingers crossed whatever horrible ailments I have waiting to strike can wait another two months.

and sadly I’m one of the lucky ones.

51 minutes ago, Destiny said:

We had that too, but it was one of the things that was recently changed. I can't remember if it was via legislation or via the courts offhand. The ACA tried to do a lot of what you have, but it depended on states to do their part, which some of the red states refused to do. Healthcare in the US is a complicated clusterfuck of fail, but what it really comes down to is unless you have a job with insurance, insurance is unaffordable. Mister checked while he was unemployed. Insurance for the two of us would be $1600/mo. We just went without and hoped nothing bad would happen. 

Yeah, they offered me COBRA per law but at $1200 per month wasn’t happening.

I have family members who own their own business and as they are in their 60s they pay almost 4K per month in premiums.

[fraurosena]

3 minutes ago, Alisamer said:

I need some medical testing, and am crossing my fingers I can afford it. Insurance won't pay for it at all, because I've not met the deductible. They might, however, require the testing to be done at the hospital where it will cost over a thousand dollars, as opposed to in-office where it might be less than $200. So I may end up just paying out of pocket for in-office testing, as if I had no insurance. It'll be out of pocket either way, it's just whether I want to toss a grand at my deductible on the off chance I have a major medical problem and spend $6900 more later in the year, or if I want to pay much less but not have it count toward the deductible.

I'm confused. Not because you're not being clear, but because of the convoluted way things seem to work for you over there. Starting at the beginning of the year, I will have to pay € 380,- before any healthcare costs will be paid for by my insurance. For instance, if I needed blood work done in January which amounted to €400,-* then I would pay €380,- and my insurance would pay the rest. Thereafter, any healthcare costs covered by my insurance for the rest of the year would be paid by my insurance. All I need to pay is my monthly premium of €118,-. That's it. 

*To be clear, I'm just making these sums up. I've no idea what something like that would cost in reality.

[onekidanddone]

3 hours ago, AmazonGrace said:

Why does he sit like he's on the toilet?

Why you ask? It Depends.

Two thoughts:

1) On second thought my 'Depends" comment does seem disrespectful to people who really need such products. As you all must know by now sometimes type faster than I think. Please forgive me.

2) I don't think he as ever gone poo poo like EVER. He is so full of shit I don't know how he can even walk.

Edited April 9, 2019 by onekidanddone

[fraurosena]

6 minutes ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

We get fined too - in the form of tax penalty.  But for me I just changed jobs so my old employers insurance ran out end of March and new coverage doesn’t kick in for 2 months and cobra is very cost prohibitive.

fingers crossed whatever horrible ailments I have waiting to strike can wait another two months.

and sadly I’m one of the lucky ones.

Yeah, they offered me COBRA per law but at $1200 per month wasn’t happening.

I have family members who own their own business and as they are in their 60s they pay almost 4K per month in premiums.

If I understand correctly, can you only get insurance via your employers? Can't you have your own personal healthcare insurance? Or is personal insurance simply way too expensive, and is it more affordable to join a co-opt insurance with employers?

Is there a reason why it takes two months for coverage to set in? Why can't it simply start as soon as payments start? 

Maybe I'm asking a lot of silly questions however, and being too inquisitive. I don't want to keep pointing at how bad things seem to be for you guys and emphasize all you 'have not', whilst I'm sitting here as a 'have got'. 

 

 

[front hugs > duggs]

26 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

I'm confused. Not because you're not being clear, but because of the convoluted way things seem to work for you over there. Starting at the beginning of the year, I will have to pay € 380,- before any healthcare costs will be paid for by my insurance. For instance, if I needed blood work done in January which amounted to €400,-* then I would pay €380,- and my insurance would pay the rest. Thereafter, any healthcare costs covered by my insurance for the rest of the year would be paid by my insurance. All I need to pay is my monthly premium of €118,-. That's it. 

*To be clear, I'm just making these sums up. I've no idea what something like that would cost in reality.

That's actually kind of how my healthcare plan works.

Except I have to spend about $2,500 USD before insurance kicks in.

And then I pay 20% of all health and prescription costs until my max spend of $6,000 USD.

At that point everything is covered. My monthly premium is about $250 USD. And that is through my employer, with them apparently paying "most" of the cost of the healthcare.

[Ali]

18 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

If I understand correctly, can you only get insurance via your employers? Can't you have your own personal healthcare insurance? Or is personal insurance simply way too expensive, and is it more affordable to join a co-opt insurance with employers?

Is there a reason why it takes two months for coverage to set in? Why can't it simply start as soon as payments start? 

Maybe I'm asking a lot of silly questions however, and being too inquisitive. I don't want to keep pointing at how bad things seem to be for you guys and emphasize all you 'have not', whilst I'm sitting here as a 'have got'. 

 

 

It is significantly more expensive to get health insurance not through an employer and it is not always affordable that get it through an employer. Most jobs have a probationary period before benefits such as health insurance are available. 

[Alisamer]

50 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

I'm confused. Not because you're not being clear, but because of the convoluted way things seem to work for you over there. Starting at the beginning of the year, I will have to pay € 380,- before any healthcare costs will be paid for by my insurance. For instance, if I needed blood work done in January which amounted to €400,-* then I would pay €380,- and my insurance would pay the rest. Thereafter, any healthcare costs covered by my insurance for the rest of the year would be paid by my insurance. All I need to pay is my monthly premium of €118,-. That's it. 

*To be clear, I'm just making these sums up. I've no idea what something like that would cost in reality.

It's somewhat similar? In that insurance pays nothing until I hit my deductible. EXCEPT, there are a few things they are currently required to cover - a once a year visit with the primary doctor, I think, birth control, and not a lot else. I went to my primary care doctor yesterday for an office visit, and I have no idea if they'll cover it or if I'll get a bill. I'm always super confused by insurance, there's no way to really know what they'll cover and what they won't - my co-worker spent over 6 months going back and forth with her insurance a couple years ago when they refused to pay for her $60 Depo-Provera shot, which as birth control they were required to cover. Some stuff they'll refuse after it's done, some stuff they'll require pre-authorization. They can require that you try a multitude of other tests or medications before agreeing to pay for the one your doctor ordered for you. 

If you are dealing with a major injury or illness, it's likely you'll spend hours and hours weekly if not daily on the phone with the insurance company, asking if they'll pay for this, will they pre-approve that, why did they say they'd cover this but then refuse to pay it (likely because a code number was input wrong, or something similarly tiny but that takes months to correct if they are willing to correct it at all). The insurance company's goal is to pay as little as they can get away with, and they often count on people not having the energy or persistence to stay on their backs to force them to pay for things that should be covered.

Insurance is usually less expensive as a group plan through a workplace. IF you work for a big company. My sister works for a major electrical utility, and her insurance costs her maybe $4 a week? And would be free if she'd chosen a higher deductible. I work for a very small company, and we all have private insurance. Mine is over $400 a month, but I make little enough to get some help with a subsidy. My co-worker is the only person in her home working, her husband is permanently disabled. He gets government-provided health care (to a point, there's a time every year where they have to pay a few thousand out of pocket for prescriptions after he's met the maximum and before the safety net kicks in), but because he gets disability payments they "make too much money" to qualify for subsidies. Thus the over $900 a month cost for JUST HER. Her daughter, an unemployed college student, has a variety of major chronic illnesses, so my co-worker pays (I think around $800 a month) for her daughter's insurance and goes without herself. Many people have suggested she divorce her husband in order to qualify for a subsidy. People really do this.

Also, insurance companies used to be able to deny coverage to anyone with a pre-existing condition (Trump's trying to get it back to that, while saying the exact opposite.) They also used to have a lifetime maximum payout - my co-worker's husband would have hit that with the hospitalization and multiple surgeries and therapy for his brain injury. They had to declare bankruptcy as it was, since they lost their primary wage earner and had massive medical bills.  Despite the pre-existing condition restriction being eliminated with the ACA, there are still ways the companies get around it. That co-worker's daughter only has one option for insurance, and it's NOT the one option that is available on the Marketplace here, it's something she got grandfathered in to.

It's pretty common for a person not to get insurance until they've been at a workplace for 60 days or more. And there are only a couple "enrollment periods" a year when you can change or add someone to your insurance, excepting starting a new job and having a new baby, and even then there are time restrictions. Which is why the government's Health Insurance Marketplace site struggles so much during those weeks.

It's super messed up. If I have a major illness or injury and go to my one in-network hospital (WITH pre-authorization if it's not immediately life threatening), then I have to pay $7900 out of pocket before the insurance company kicks in. If that illness or injury occurs anywhere outside the county I live in, that amount is $39,500. 

I have spent $7.25 toward my deductible. For a prescription.

On the plus side, once someone has reached their deductible they can go nuts and try to get anything possibly that might be an issue dealt with. My sister had surgery early last year, so scheduled her medically-necessary but not emergency ankle surgery and hip replacement for later the same year. My boss just had his second hip replacement, and is hoping to get his knees done later this year since he's hit his deductible. You've still got to fight the insurance company and get pre-approvals and go back and forth between the doctor and the insurance company to get every little part of the process covered, but it's possible.

Oh and also? Dental stuff? Separate insurance. Vision coverage? Also separate. Depending. If it's eyeglasses stuff, it's separate. Drop your phone on your eye? Medical. And my insurance would have gone up by over $100 a month if I wanted it to cover the medical eye stuff, as that doctor is out of network despite being within sight of the in-network hospital. So I opted out of that. I hope I don't drop my phone on my eye again, but if I do I'll go to my primary care doctor for it.

My dental and vision insurance are through work. My dental is capped at I think $1000 a year, vision covers 6 months worth of contacts. For the year. OR glasses. Not both.

Edited April 9, 2019 by Alisamer

[Destiny]

2 hours ago, fraurosena said:

How does that work though, when you have no income? Isn't there anything like unemployment benefits? In the Netherlands, if you get laid off or otherwise lose your job, you can get unemployment benefits, and (like I said earlier) if you can't pay your health insurance your county offers financial assistance until your income is high enough to pay all of it yourself.
Damn, when I read that last sentence back it sounds a bit like I'm trying to make you jealous. I'm not though. I'm genuinely concerned for you all, and wish you could get all the care you need when you need. Because healthcare is a fucking human right.

Unemployment did exist. It’s so little I forgot about it. It’s not even enough to cover our mortgage and we don’t have a nice house. (In fact, our mortgage is low for our area) For a while there we were skipping meals to get the dog insulin. We sure as fuck didn’t have money for insurance, and for some reason that I no longer remember we weren’t eligible for subsidised insurance.

Edited April 9, 2019 by Destiny
spelling

[Jaamillion]

On 4/8/2019 at 12:45 PM, smittykins said:

Is there a link?

Here ya go..........

http://religiondispatches.org/trump-before-jesus-the-christian-right-v-the-liberal-state/

[fraurosena]

16 minutes ago, Alisamer said:

The insurance company's goal is to pay as little as they can get away with, and they often count on people not having the energy or persistence to stay on their backs to force them to pay for things that should be covered.

This. This is universally true for any and all insurance companies. It's my pet peeve. 

Luckily, for healthcare a lot is legislated, so the insurance companies can't get out from under it. At the end of each year, you can change insurance companies if you are so inclined. DH is pretty keen on getting the best priced insurance with the best care packages. 

Other insurances are hellish to get any pay outs from. They always, always sputter and protest. Knowing your rights is key in these cases. We've found out that if you start citing specific laws and policies, they back down right quick. But you have to be prepared to fight back, not acquiesce to the whims of insurance companies.

[onekidanddone]

Back to Trump’s drugs use. Is this new or has it been ongoing over time?

 Is there new or increasing evidence of his decline and who is noticing? 

[Destiny]

44 minutes ago, onekidanddone said:

Back to Trump’s drugs use. Is this new or has it been ongoing over time?
 Is there new or increasing evidence of his decline and who is noticing? 

I don’t have sources handy at the moment but the rumours of same go back to the 80s iirc. Normally I would dismiss them but he honestly shows symptoms of long time snorting so I think there is some truth there.

Edited April 9, 2019 by Destiny

[GreyhoundFan]

2 hours ago, fraurosena said:

I'm confused. Not because you're not being clear, but because of the convoluted way things seem to work for you over there. Starting at the beginning of the year, I will have to pay € 380,- before any healthcare costs will be paid for by my insurance. For instance, if I needed blood work done in January which amounted to €400,-* then I would pay €380,- and my insurance would pay the rest. Thereafter, any healthcare costs covered by my insurance for the rest of the year would be paid by my insurance. All I need to pay is my monthly premium of €118,-. That's it. 

*To be clear, I'm just making these sums up. I've no idea what something like that would cost in reality.

I'm lucky, I have "good" insurance through my employer (> 200K employees). We have a choice of plans and insurance companies. Since I have multiple medical issues, I choose the highest plan with a national insurer. I pay (just for me) $450 per month in premiums. I have a $3000 deductible, which means they don't pay anything until I hit that. Once I make that, they pay 80% until I hit my out of pocket maximum, which is $5000. Of course, there are things that are not covered (like the $300 per tube medication for my rosacea) and if you go to a provider who is not "in-network", you pay at least twice as much. I had to have an ultrasound for a female issue. I paid $1600 out of pocket. And I have a good job and good insurance.

2 hours ago, fraurosena said:

If I understand correctly, can you only get insurance via your employers? Can't you have your own personal healthcare insurance? Or is personal insurance simply way too expensive, and is it more affordable to join a co-opt insurance with employers?

Is there a reason why it takes two months for coverage to set in? Why can't it simply start as soon as payments start?

Getting insurance outside of an employer is prohibitively expensive for most people. As far as the lapse in coverage, each employer can set their own parameters. The last company I worked for had a provision that insurance didn't start until the first day of the month following a full month of employment. I started on July 2 and didn't get insurance until September. Luckily, I had carryover from my previous job thanks to a loophole.

 

[GreyhoundFan]

"Trump is trashing the rule of law to stay in power"

Spoiler

President Trump is not hard to figure out. Whenever he is threatened, he lashes out — ethics, rules, laws be damned. He has been threatened on three fronts recently — immigration, his taxes and the Mueller report — and in all three cases, he is urging defiance of the law.

Ending illegal immigration was the central message of Trump’s 2016 campaign. “A Trump administration will stop illegal immigration, deport all criminal aliens and save American lives,” he said on Nov. 2, 2016. There was indeed a dip in undocumented immigration in 2017, but it went up in 2018 — and again so far in 2019. There were more than 92,000 apprehensions at the southwest border in March — the highest level reported in one month in about a decade.

No wonder Trump is so frantic right now — “ranting and raving,” according to CNN. It’s not because he is worried about the welfare of the United States if undocumented immigration continues; as my colleague Michael Gerson notes, Trump appeared to be fine with immigration before he was against it. It’s because he is worried about his own reelection prospects.

Already Trump has declared a state of emergency so that he can spend money on a border wall that Congress refuses to appropriate. This is a direct violation of Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution: “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.”

Now Trump has forced out Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen, reportedly because she would not countenance illegal measures such as denying migrants a chance to seek asylum. According to CNN’s Jake Tapper, Trump, while visiting California on Friday, “told border agents to not let migrants in. Tell them we don’t have the capacity, he said. If judges give you trouble, say, ‘Sorry, judge, I can’t do it. We don’t have the room.’ After the President left the room, agents sought further advice from their leaders, who told them they were not giving them that direction and if they did what the President said they would take on personal liability. You have to follow the law, they were told.” If this report is accurate, supervisors are telling their agents to disobey an unlawful presidential directive — an extraordinary and perhaps unprecedented occurrence that deserves greater attention.

Trump is mounting another assault on the law by leaving so many vacancies in his administration and relying on “acting” appointees. Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution: The president “shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for.” Yet at the Departments of Interior, Defense and now Homeland Security, “acting” — i.e., unconfirmed — secretaries are in charge. Also “acting” are the United Nations ambassador and the director of the Office of Management and Budget.

In all, about 40 percent of the key Senate-confirmed positions in the government have not been filled by individuals who have been appointed and confirmed with the “Advice and Consent of the Senate.” At the Department of Homeland Security alone, there are 18 vacancies at the top, including secretary, deputy secretary, chief financial officer, two undersecretaries, assistant secretary for policy, assistant secretary for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency. And with the announcement of Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Kevin McAleenan as DHS acting secretary, his position in Customs and Border Protection will be vacant as well.

Trump perceives a personal advantage in this chaos. “I like acting. It gives me more flexibility,” he said in January, presumably because unconfirmed appointees are more likely to be loyal to him personally rather than to the Congress or Constitution. This helps to explain why, nearly four months after Defense Secretary Jim Mattis resigned after Trump announced a decision to withdraw from Syria, the president has made no attempt to confirm a successor.

Trump has also signaled his intent to defy the law to keep his taxes secret. The acting White House chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, vowed on Sunday that Democrats will “never” see the president’s tax returns, even though the Internal Revenue Code dictates that the Internal Revenue Service “shall” turn over any taxpayer’s returns upon the request of Congress’s tax-writing committees.

Meanwhile, Trump has changed his tune on special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s report, from calling for its release to now suggesting that it should stay secret. While Attorney General William P. Barr vows to release the report within a week, he is suggesting that it may come with heavy redactions ostensibly designed to protect information including grand-jury testimony and classified information but likely designed to protect the president. (Barr could ask for authorization from a judge to release grand-jury material, and Congress already can receive classified information.) Barr preemptively attempted to clear Trump of obstruction-of-justice charges in his public summary released last month, after having gotten the job seemingly because he wrote a bizarre memorandum embracing the theory that the president cannot commit obstruction of justice through acts such as firing the FBI director. If that’s the case, we have a czar, not a president.

The real national emergency isn’t at the border. It’s in Washington. Trump is trashing the rule of law to stay in power — and the very same Republicans who excoriated President Barack Obama for his supposed misuse of executive power are meekly going along.