Trump...

[Frontstep]

Not quite, he stopped Mexicans because they were more likely to be illegal Mexican migrants than none Mexicans.
He could have stopped everyone but his success rate would have been somewhat lower.

One of the issues;

“Thanks to the Supreme Court ruling Zadvydas v. Davis (2001), the U.S. has become a dumping ground for Third World rapists. Aliens convicted of violent crimes can’t be held for more than six months if their home country…doesn’t want to take them back.
The ruling unleashed 134,000 aliens onto American streets in only three years.

Trump on illegal Mexican immigration problems (the last line is usually left off)

"When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. …They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems to us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."



The problem America has is it took a reality TV star and property dealer to point at the elephant in the room with the finesse of a perennial drunk, the problem is despite the divisive messenger the message was correct.

 

[Craiglxviii]

Well, the problem for the people with the problem, is that they don't want it pointed at...

 

[Frontstep]

The I'm alright Jack brigade particularly in the entertainment industry are falling over themselves to appear "on message" with their love everyone message, the truth is they scuttle back to their mansions and gated communities when the cameras stop rolling.
Every national TV event is now a bash Trump opportunity every story is manipulated to denigrate him, his wife and family.
All it does is reinforce the fact that their, pin up girl Hilary was beaten by a divisive amateur despite their best efforts to maintain the Status Quo.

 

[Frontstep]

Trump gets his wall prototypes;
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/31/us/mexico-wall-prototypes-trump.html

 

[Craiglxviii]

Buying shares in US concrete companies might be a good idea.........

 

[LostKiwi]

Senate still hasn't approved the money yet.

 

[grober]

The problem with TRUMP is he is psychologically flawed. He suffers from Narcissistic personality disorder. [ticks all the boxes]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder
while it could be argued that all politicians suffer from this to a degree many have learned conceal/control it well. One senses with Trump he simply can't help himself .

Unlike President Truman's famous sign on his desk [ he who dropped the atomic bombs on Japan] THE BUCK STOPS HERE you know that with TRUMP that's never going to happen- because in the narcissist's world- its always someone else's fault!

 

[Craiglxviii]

And yet he is draining the swamp.

Right now, regardless of world affairs or an external threat, America is facing a significant internal enemy. That enemy can be classified as the Progressive Liberal Elite, spearheaded by the DNC. This grouping of people across a large walk of society has determined that it is They who Know Best, therefore They should tell The People how to live their lives. In doing this, the Constitution has to go by the board of course. Some people refer to this approach as the "Deep State" and that is a fairly accurate descriptor.

So look at what we have seen over the last 2-3 decades, pretty much since Clinton, W. J. entered the White House:

Increasingly anti-Constitutionalist judges and thus court judgements.
Increasing levels of political attacks on the Constitution within the legislature.
Increasingly Liberal politicization of the Civil Service bureaucracy.
Increasingly political appointees into senior levels of the Civil Service.
Increasing levels of Liberal/ Leftist political agitation (AntiFA etc)*.
Increasing levels of Liberal leaning mass media hysteria over Trump.
Increasing levels of highly onerous diversity regulations compliance.
Bald statements of preventing peaceful, legal rule e.g. the DNC stating that it would oppose a peaceful transition of power.

So, what Trump has done has been to start tackling all of the items above.

He has appointed a Constitutionalist judge to the USSC to restore some balance there.
He has placed the Constitution at the heart of his drive- this needs specifying, that is The Rule of Law first and foremost.
He has begun systematically weeding out overt politicization of the Civil Service.
He has begun sacking obvious politically-appointed senior manager level staff from within the civil service.
He has totally subverted the mass media by using Twitter.
He has begun repealing the diversity regulations compliance **

Regardless of any personality disorder, real or imagined, those are the issues facing the country and that is what the bloke they elected to lead them has started to do about it.

=================================================

* The FBI has classed AntiFA as a "terrorist organization or an organization involved in domestic terrorist-like activities". AntiFA senior figures are mainly highly Left-leaning public high and middle school teachers, and are also involved in BAMN ("By Any Means Necessary", which should tell you what they think of the law).

** See below quote from 12 Power Line:

The Office of Management and Budget instructed the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to shelve a rule change that would have required employers to submit 20 times as much data to the agency as previously required. The Obama administration called for the new standards, which would have affected 61,000 American companies with more than 100 workers and federal contractors with more than 50 workers, to demonstrate his commitment to closing the much-disputed “gender wage gap.”

That would be the same “gender wage gap” that existed in Barack Obama’s own White House.

Obama’s EEOC called for businesses to provide 3,660 different data points about each employee and their pay structure, up from the 188 points.
***
The agency estimated the new regulations would cost employers $53.5 million and take about 1.9 million hours to complete. Those numbers paled in comparison to the findings of a survey conducted by the Chamber of Commerce, which estimated the regulations would cost $400 million and increase work hours by 8 million—if additional overhead is taken into account the rules could cost up to $1.3 billion.
[/quote

 

[Craiglxviii]

The problem with TRUMP is he is psychologically flawed. He suffers from Narcissistic personality disorder. [ticks all the boxes]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder
while it could be argued that all politicians suffer from this to a degree many have learned conceal/control it well. One senses with Trump he simply can't help himself .

Unlike President Truman's famous sign on his desk [ he who dropped the atomic bombs on Japan] THE BUCK STOPS HERE you know that with TRUMP that's never going to happen- because in the narcissist's world- its always someone else's fault!

Not to take away from Truman here either. His most courageous moment wasn't making the decision to drop Little Boy & Fat Man, it was doing so whilst making the decision to cancel Operations OLYMPIC & CORONET, the planned amphibious invasions of the Home Islands. Almost all of his intelligence briefings were telling him that it was highly doubtful the atomic strikes on Hiroshima & Nagasaki would knock Japan out of the war, and in point of fact they very nearly didn't. The Japanese would have been wiped out as a nation had the invasions gone ahead.

 

[Xtractorfan]

And yet he is draining the swamp.

Right now, regardless of world affairs or an external threat, America is facing a significant internal enemy. That enemy can be classified as the Progressive Liberal Elite, spearheaded by the DNC. This grouping of people across a large walk of society has determined that it is They who Know Best, therefore They should tell The People how to live their lives. In doing this, the Constitution has to go by the board of course. Some people refer to this approach as the "Deep State" and that is a fairly accurate descriptor.

So look at what we have seen over the last 2-3 decades, pretty much since Clinton, W. J. entered the White House:

Increasingly anti-Constitutionalist judges and thus court judgements.
Increasing levels of political attacks on the Constitution within the legislature.
Increasingly Liberal politicization of the Civil Service bureaucracy.
Increasingly political appointees into senior levels of the Civil Service.
Increasing levels of Liberal/ Leftist political agitation (AntiFA etc)*.
Increasing levels of Liberal leaning mass media hysteria over Trump.
Increasing levels of highly onerous diversity regulations compliance.
Bald statements of preventing peaceful, legal rule e.g. the DNC stating that it would oppose a peaceful transition of power.

So, what Trump has done has been to start tackling all of the items above.

He has appointed a Constitutionalist judge to the USSC to restore some balance there.
He has placed the Constitution at the heart of his drive- this needs specifying, that is The Rule of Law first and foremost.
He has begun systematically weeding out overt politicization of the Civil Service.
He has begun sacking obvious politically-appointed senior manager level staff from within the civil service.
He has totally subverted the mass media by using Twitter.
He has begun repealing the diversity regulations compliance **

Regardless of any personality disorder, real or imagined, those are the issues facing the country and that is what the bloke they elected to lead them has started to do about it.

=================================================

* The FBI has classed AntiFA as a "terrorist organization or an organization involved in domestic terrorist-like activities". AntiFA senior figures are mainly highly Left-leaning public high and middle school teachers, and are also involved in BAMN ("By Any Means Necessary", which should tell you what they think of the law).

** See below quote from 12 Power Line:

The things you have listed above (in bold) could all be made up by a disgruntled right wing politician... think here of our own much loved 'Stir Nigel' of Little Britian... and it would be the subject of much debate and opinion without any real evidence either way...So in effect he has accomplished sod all. Other than put people whom he sees as those who will do his will, in positions where he needs them. Isn't this how all Presidents and leaders operate.

 

[Craiglxviii]

The things you have listed above (in bold) could all be made up by a disgruntled right wing politician... think here of our own much loved 'Stir Nigel' of Little Britian... and it would be the subject of much debate and opinion without any real evidence either way...So in effect he has accomplished sod all. Other than put people whom he sees as those who will do his will, in positions where he needs them. Isn't this how all Presidents and leaders operate.

Well no, not really (points in bold). The key difference between Farage's actions and Trump's in this regard is the US Constitution; it is a formalized, written document and Trump's campaign was to return the US to the Rule of Law as laid down in that Constitution. The attacks on it in Congress and the Senate are also documented. Judges making judgements that go directly against the Constitution are documented. Politicisation of the Civil Service is documented, directly through self-admitted political actions of Federal employees. The hysteria in the Liberal mass media against Trump is documented in almost every headline. The DNC stating that it would prevent a peaceful transition of power was documented. Leftist political agitation & armed mobs taking the streets, self-proclaiming that they will break up Republican rallies are documented. I made a case in point about one highly onerous piece of diversity legislation that had been repealed. None of that is opinion, it is either ruling of law, findings of criminal investigative agencies or direct self-admission.

 

[d215yq]

Didn't he pardon the guy who was guilty of numerous contempts of court and other perjorous behaviour? Very much "endorsing the rule of law". Not so sure what the obsession with the constitution is anyway. Given it's 200 years old no wonder it produces a country with huge inequality, no proper healthcare system and militias walking around open-carrying in the streets. Surely policies/quality of life/ civilisation is more important than sticking to the letter of an old document.

As for this liberalist/leftist conspiracy stuff I wonder what you think of every UK government that we've ever had, as they have been way to the left of the Democrats if you compare their policies? The UK and indeed the rest of the developed world must seem like communism by comparison to DNC

 

[grober]

While the USA constitution has much in its favour, I am always wary of politicians who seek to clothe themselves in its mantle.
It sets out some basic principles of government but inevitably these are manifest by interpretation of government or judicial decision. No one document has the universal monopoly to truth under all circumstance and anyone claiming the same can be described as a fundamentalist. In much the same way that ISIS or other islamic fundamentalist groups claim their interpretation of the Koran is the only truth, political groups claim their literal interpretation of the Constitution is the the only interpretation.
The classic example of this is the second amendment
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed
As a document drawn up in a colonial war with Britain it makes perfect sense. In a present day nation with a largely urbanised population as a justification to own multiple hand guns and semi automitic weapons its lead to a horrific annual death toll of US citizenry. Surely not the intention of the original legislation?

The constitution makes much play of " citizens rights" but in contradiction of this many of the founding fathers were slave traders or owners including Benjamin Franklin. So it would appear that US citizen's rights were not so universal after all. Different times of course but things change and so did the constitution.

In terms of some "liberalist agenda" to infiltrate the corridors of government the same sort of conspiracy theories were put forward by Senator Joseph McCarthy and his Unamerican Activities hearings in the 50's where writers and Hollywood stars [ media/ fake news] were outed as Communist sympathisers for their political views -- same old right wing conspiracy theories.

Joseph Raymond McCarthy (November 14, 1908 – May 2, 1957) was an American politician who served as U.S. Senator from the state of Wisconsin from 1947 until his death in 1957. Beginning in 1950, McCarthy became the most visible public face of a period in the United States in which Cold War tensions fueled fears of widespread Communist subversion. He is known for alleging that numerous Communists and Soviet spies and sympathizers had infiltrated the United States federal government, universities, film industry, and elsewhere. Ultimately, the smear tactics he used led him to be censured by the U.S. Senate. The term "McCarthyism", coined in 1950 in reference to McCarthy's practices, was soon applied to similar anti-communist activities. Today, the term is used in reference to what are considered demagogic, reckless, and unsubstantiated accusations, as well as public attacks on the character or patriotism of political opponents.

Plus ca change plus c'est la meme chose

 

[Craiglxviii]

Whatever one wants to say about the Constitution, regardless it IS the law as far as the USA is concerned. it isn't perfect which is why it has various amendments.

As regards slavery, when the Constitution was written slavery was commonplace. One cannot put today's values on the people of the 1770s- the people themselves there need to be seen through the lens of the time. It's a cheap debating point though as well you know. If you remember correctly, 80-odd years after the Constitution was written the US had a small internal debate over the topic that lasted a few years and involved someone from Rugby school and a ferry owned by a bloke named Harper. Or something. Anyway it resulted in the 13th Amendment which banned slavery. Which rather proves my point about the law adapting itself to the times.

As regards the 2nd Amendment... remember what the Militia is there for.

They do exactly what Founding Fathers envisaged - provide a body of armed people whom the local authority can assemble to maintain order.

There's another point here too. That is that the 2nd Amendment provides the ability for The People to resist tyranny. Read a bit further into it, the document was written by the elected representatives of a people determined not to be tyrannized by a king over the sea or anyone else internal. So, the Second Amendment was deliberately added to allow The People to be armed heavily enough to resist the tyranny and oppression of their own government- that is to say, if the government would not step down once an election had taken place. Further to that, the government itself (via the Constitution) was deliberately designed to be both weak (replaceable via election every 4 years) and slow-moving (the structure of it prevents big changes from taking place rapidly).

Things go further here, Federal Law expressly prohibits the Armed Forces to be deployed in internal police matters (Posse Comitatus). So a government which has decided not to step down (hence an illegal government) cannot order the suspension of Posse Comitatus; that then leaves the existing internal security forces facing The People in the form of the Unorganised Militia. Which is armed, in some cases quite heavily- and fully capable of replacing the government by force.

So, any attack on the 2nd Amendment is a direct attack on the ability of The People to replace their government. You'll notice that all gun control proposals include very much greater registration of gun owners- we see that as fine, but read it against the Constitution and it is very highly oppressive. If one is allowed the right to keep and bear arms, why would the government- which exists at the will of The People- need to know so much about what The People are doing?... and so on.

Yes, I'm fully aware of Joe McCarthy and his witch hunts. What's interesting here is that as the Iron Curtain has lifted, we got to find out in much greater detail what the Soviet intelligence apparatus was up to (and with who)... and the McCarthy investigations didn't really scratch the surface. Not that that gets reported though.

 

[grober]

Who exactly are "the people"? Who elected them? Who put them in charge? How exactly is that decided? Experience from other countries where central governments [ bad or good ] have been deposed by force would indicate the likely result is not democracy but anarchy

 

[Craiglxviii]

Who exactly are "the people"? Who elected them? Who put them in charge? How exactly is that decided? Experience from other countries where central governments [ bad or good ] have been deposed by force would indicate the likely result is not democracy but anarchy

The People. The electorate. Those citizens eligible to vote in a new government. As in, "We, the people..." Those three words affirm that the government of the United States exists to serve its citizens.

Who elected the people? No-one. They are the electorate. Who put them in charge? The Founding Fathers did, explicitly, in the framing of the Constitution. How was it decided? Each State elected representatives to attend the Constitutional Convention when it was framed. By all accounts there were some differing views initially; it took three years to get the original States to all ratify it.

The point here isn't what other countries may or may not have experienced. It is that for this particular country, the document framing the laws of the land and the structure of government was specifically codified and laid out in a way to allow the People who voted a particular government in, to remove that government from power if or when that government began to tyrannise the People.

Regardless of your opinion of however good or bad it is, that is the law as far as the country in question is concerned- and it is to the rule of that law that the current President is attempting to return that country.

What is your counter-proposal- should the law be rewritten? That's allowed for in an Amendment or Amendments to the Constitution. Should it be scrapped altogether? So far it's held up tolerably well, to the point where the majority of the country voted in favour of it. If it should be scrapped, what should it be replaced with and who should decide that?

Anyway, that's all rather getting away from the topic of this thread.

 

[Frontstep]

Hillary is doing the rounds selling her why she lost book, whatever your politics its pretty weird stuff I think America made the right choice with the divisive one.

Hillary Clinton's book has a clear message: don't blame me

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ary-clintons-book-what-happened-clear-message

 

[coxyhog]

I read she wrote the book to learn....I think she mistakenly put an L in front.

 

[AMGeed]

One thing is clear, the US made the right decision not to elect H Clinton.
For all his faults, Trump has to be the better choice.

Clintons book will be in the bargain bin before Christmas.

 

[geraldrobins]

One thing is clear, the US made the right decision not to elect H Clinton.
For all his faults, Trump has to be the better choice.

Clintons book will be in the bargain bin before Christmas.

It may be clear to you but its not clear to me, nor approx. 50% of the USA that voted.