PDA

View Full Version : It's been one hell of a first week!



Norman Bernstein
01-29-2017, 12:56 PM
From inauguration, to nearly triggering a constitutional crisis... yup, he's getting off to a terrific start. His own party is beginnig to have it's doubts... and the first week isn't even over yet.


Playbook (http://www.politico.com/tipsheets/playbook/2017/01/the-morning-after-impact-of-trumps-immigration-order-inside-koch-world-and-the-alfalfa-dinner-sunday-best-katy-tur-is-engaged-bday-paul-ryan-218454): “No matter what you think about this policy, it’s going to make life harder for Trump. First, it’s Trump’s biggest political blow since taking office. There are already a spate of legal challenges that will grab headlines for weeks. It’s splitting his party — only a handful of Republicans have spoken out against him but privately, a large number of GOP lawmakers are grumbling. If congressional Republicans were for this policy, they could pass legislation to codify it into law. They haven’t and probably won’t. They had no heads up from their president this was coming, and now they’re under pressure to defend this.”

Politico (http://politi.co/2kHsv4h): “Now, what was meant as a bold assertion of presidential prerogative and a down payment on his promise to ‘eradicate radical Islamic terrorism from the face of the Earth’ has dealt President Trump his first political defeat, and energized his opponents after a week of demoralizing developments.”

CWSmith
01-29-2017, 02:37 PM
It’s splitting his party — only a handful of Republicans have spoken out against him but privately, a large number of GOP lawmakers are grumbling.

This is the best news all week. I hope it proves true and they act.

skuthorp
01-29-2017, 03:13 PM
" It’s splitting his party — only a handful of Republicans have spoken out against him but privately, a large number of GOP lawmakers are grumbling. If congressional Republicans were for this policy, they could pass legislation to codify it into law. They haven’t and probably won’t. They had no heads up from their president this was coming, and now they’re under pressure to defend this."

"Wedged'' is the word. Do you think they have the spine to stand up to Trump?

bobbys
01-29-2017, 03:38 PM
He could have done more.

I think this next week he will sign even more .

You know , the libs here told us bush did it, so obama could do it , now DT can do it.

Kinda a karma thing.

bobbys
01-29-2017, 03:39 PM
This is the best news all week. I hope it proves true and they act..

This is what the DNC is reduced to, .

Hoping there is mutiny,.

mikefrommontana
01-29-2017, 03:44 PM
No, it's what Americans should hope for--that we are not welded to an ideological yoke that will crush us all.

David G
01-29-2017, 03:50 PM
It's been... klepto-tastic?

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/01/27/donald_trump_s_first_week_as_president_was_full_of _conflicts_of_interest.html

Ethics experts and good-government watchdogs spent months warning that Donald Trump would face a swirling mess of conflicts of interest once he took office. One week into his presidency, the full scope of that ethical catastrophe is already coming into focus.

In no particular order, the world learned this week that:



Trump replaced the head (http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/trump-picks-gsa-leader-oversee-hotel-234233) of the General Services Administration, the federal agency that effectively serves as the landlord for the new Trump hotel in Washington and has been asked to investigate whether Trump is now in violation of that lease.
Trump signed orders (http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/01/24/trump_s_green_lighting_of_keystone_and_dapl_is_a_p ower_play_that_won_t_create.html) clearing the way for the disputed Keystone XL and Dakota Access oil pipelines to proceed. As recently as last summer, the president owned between $15,000 and $50,000 in stock in the company building the Dakota project, and its chief executive donated $100,000 to the Trump Victory Fund, a joint effort between Trump and the Republican Party. (Trump claims to have sold off his stock portfolio before the election, though he has not provided documentation proving he did.)
Trump signaled his intent (http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/01/24/trump_to_sign_temporary_immigration_ban_targeting_ muslims_blocking_most.html) to sign an order suspending the granting of visas to seven predominantly Muslim countries. Not on the list: Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Indonesia, Turkey, Qatar, Dubai, the United Arab Emirates, and Azerbaijan, aka predominantly Muslim countries where the Trump Organization has existing business interests (https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2017-trump-immigration-ban-conflict-of-interest/).
Trump is pushing forward (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/white-house/article128492164.html) with his plans for a massive, privatization-heavy infrastructure bill that appears tailor-made for cronyism and self-dealing (http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2016/12/20/can-trumps-infrastructure-plan-work/trumps-infrastructure-financing-seems-like-a-joke).
The Trump Organization hired (http://www.politico.com/blogs/donald-trump-administration/2017/01/trump-conflict-of-interest-ethics-team-234165) a longtime Republican lawyer as its ethics adviser and a longtime Trump executive as its chief compliance counsel. Neither one of those familiar faces is likely to raise a stink in Trump Tower. Furthermore, both have a clear incentive to play nice since they’d put their jobs at risk if their oversight proves too costly to the company signing their paychecks.
The CEO of Trump Hotels is planning a massive domestic expansion (http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/01/25/trump_hotels_eyes_massive_expansion_that_s_a_big_p roblem.html), a decision that will significantly compound the conflicts of interests created by its existing portfolio.
The Trump-owned Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida, doubled its initiation fee (http://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/25/mar-a-lago-membership-fee-doubles-to-200000.html) to $200,000 for new members after Trump was elected.
At least two of Trump’s wealthy foreign business partners got the VIP treatment (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/01/donald-trump-foreign-business-partners-attended-inauguration-vips) during the inauguration weekend, including plenty of time with the new first family.
The American Chamber of Commerce in Canada, a business lobby focused on North American trade, made a sudden, last-second decision to move a scheduled event (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiAhZOImuPRAhWI8YMKHdsABjIQqUMIITAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fpolitic s%2Fin-sudden-change-a-business-group-opts-to-rent-event-space-at-a-trump-hotel%2F2017%2F01%2F26%2Faf6eb1bc-e3e3-11e6-ba11-63c4b4fb5a63_story.html&usg=AFQjCNH8fmOSPKfhOW8MxxXhu4BFkxe0uA&sig2=Fwz2Fj0tZgWDmak9l45mOg&bvm=bv.145063293,d.amc) from the Vancouver home of a U.S. diplomat to the newest addition to the Trump Hotel family in the same city. (The Trump Organization does not own the Trump International Hotel & Tower Vancouver, but it makes money managing the property and cutting naming-rights deals.)


Trump and his allies continue to shrug off any and all criticism of the obvious overlapping interests of the president and his family’s sprawling business empire, in which he retains a major financial stake. Their defense, as much as they even bother to offer one (http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/01/11/the_specific_problems_with_trump_s_plan_to_separat e_himself_from_his_company.html), is that the appearance of such problems just comes with the territory of electing someone of Trump’s wealth, which voters were well aware of when they pulled the lever for him on Election Day. Americans, Team Trump contends, should simply trust the president to put the nation’s interest before his own because that’s what he says he’ll do.

Calling that argument unconvincing would be kind, but a week into Trump’s presidency it’s turned downright farcical. Take another look at that list. These developments aren’t the unfortunate but unavoidable byproduct of having a businessman in the Oval Office; they’re the result of that businessman and the company he built acting in their own self-interest. It’s not an accident that those interests align, either. President Trump is running the nation just as he ran his business: to maximize his own profits.

David G
01-29-2017, 04:33 PM
Most alarming in history?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trumps-erratic-first-week-was-among-the-most-alarming-in-history/2017/01/27/c6405144-e4b9-11e6-a453-19ec4b3d09ba_story.html?utm_term=.1d1c847b9ea6&wpisrc=nl_most-draw10&wpmm=1

Week One of the Trump administration was among the most alarming in the history of the American presidency.

There have been scarier weeks for the country, certainly — the Cuban missile crisis and the Sept. 11 attacks. There have been more tragic ones — the Sept. 11 attacks again, the terrible toll of wartime, the horror of four presidential assassinations.

There have been occasions of terrible presidential judgment — Franklin D. Roosevelt’s order to detain U.S. citizens and noncitizens of Japanese descent during World War II. And there have been moments of looming constitutional crisis — during Watergate alone, the Saturday Night Massacre, the showdown with the Supreme Court over the release of the tapes, the impeachment inquiry that resulted in Richard Nixon’s resignation.

But the first week of the Trump presidency was alarming in a different way, because the frightening part involved the president’s own erratic, even bizarre, behavior.

David G
01-29-2017, 04:37 PM
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/01/29/trump-s-border-patrol-defies-judge-u-s-senator-at-dulles-airport-at-his-first-constitutional-crisis-unfolds.html

Trump’s Border Patrol Defies Judge, U.S. Senator at Dulles Airport as His First Constitutional Crisis Unfolds


Mike H
01-30-2017, 09:08 AM
I live in the heart of deplorable country and no one here thinks that DFT is doing anything wrong.

Daniel Noyes
01-30-2017, 09:26 AM
He could have done more.

I think this next week he will sign even more .

You know , the libs here told us bush did it, so obama could do it , now DT can do it.

Kinda a karma thing.

Bush? Bush couldn't hold a candle up to Obama for executive actions.. Obama is the all time King! o exectuive actions when it comes to this century!


so if "Change" and fighting the system is a good thing like the Libs keep telling us, and being a "Hell raiser" is a good thing and "It's been one hell of a first week!" does that mean Libs are cheering Trumpy?!

Norman Bernstein
01-30-2017, 09:28 AM
so if "Change" and fighting the system is a good thing like the Libs keep telling us, and being a "Hell raiser" is a good thing and "It's been one hell of a first week!" does that mean Libs are cheering Trumpy?!

Only in your fantasies. Those of us in the 'reality based' community are not.

Gerarddm
01-30-2017, 09:30 AM
#10: to paraphrase Randy Newman, Oak Stumps got no reason to live.

David G
01-30-2017, 01:57 PM
As Mr. Cohen states (quoted in another thread) --

Precisely because the problem is one of temperament and character, it will not get better. It will get worse, as power intoxicates Trump and those around him. It will probably end in calamity—substantial domestic protest and violence, a breakdown of international economic relationships, the collapse of major alliances, or perhaps one or more new wars (even with China) on top of the ones we already have. It will not be surprising in the slightest if his term ends not in four or in eight years, but sooner, with impeachment or removal under the 25th Amendment. The sooner Americans get used to these likelihoods, the better.