The Trump Administration

867 posts / 0 new
Last post
Sean in Ottawa

quizzical wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:
I am not a Trudeau fan -- surely you ought to have been able to tell by now. But I recognize the position the PM is in, that any PM would be in. Trudeau is not the hostage here. I understand the problem and I know (as the article I posted stated) that silence is not going to work for long. As I said with the Chamberlain story -- I hope something is being put in place for the conflict when it comes.

And, while I do not think Trudeau is a great PM, I fully recognize the dilemma and wrote about it. I would feel the same if a PM I liked were in office as well.

no i can't tell you're not a Trudeau fan. in fact i think the opposite.

just giving him credit when it's not due indicates otherwise.

so the mens in Canada - if the examples here translate outside - are what would be the words? willing to let Trump roll on even knowing it' not going to stop and something will have to be said... while the majority of women are out there saying no fucking way.

lolol says something doesn't it.

It is cool if you do not want to read a post entirely. But then why comment on it?

This post looked at both sides and did not get into the solution other than to say it cannot last long -- your interpretation is as near to a mirror opposite as you could possibly get of what I was saying.

I think the problem is that often you see things in black and white as a means to get to a powerful statement. You want clean one-sided statements. I think those types of statements lack any real force becuase there is no indication that they include the necessary considerations. I like to consider the relevant factors, and declare them, as a means to come to a more credible statement than it would otherwise be without those considerations.

I understand the real conflict facing the PM at the moment. Declaring this understanding means that any conclusions I draw about his manageemnt account for that. Comparing the responsibility of a PM with some guy (Kenney) or an opposition politician (Mulcair) who can say what he wants without impact is a false equivelency. To not credit the PM position with at least being required to consider the impact of any statement when dealing with an irrational bully is to fail to understand the question. I want to speak about the PM's performance and I take the time to layout the considerations so that I can do that with credibility.

You answer but skip over any parts of a post that contradicts your theory. Be careful becuase this tendency is the very thing we often criticize in the other side. The following speaks more to the issue you raised than the parts you quoted:

"But at what point does human decency require Canada to be more direct? And that is where we are now. As with any bully, avoiding confrontation is a plan but somebody eventually has to confront the bully."

Seems you like black and white. Most things are grey.

I want any PM to get to the right answer but I want that to go through the considerations.

As well I used the Chamberlain story to say I would hope that even without going into a battle with Trump now, Trudeau is preparing for it. He should be taking steps to plan for the conflict that I said was inevitable. So you come back and say I am suggesting we do not stand up to Trump. Yours is a very poor reading of my post and I want to ask you why that is. I don't come here for the humour, or the pithy sound-bite. I am on twitter and that takes care of that. I come here for rounded out thought.

quizzical

first off Sean i don't believe "Justin" does anything other than to try and be the pretty face of the Liberal party. i don't believe he has the capacity.

I.e. it wasn't him who sent the message to Fox news.   don't even believe the order to do it came from him.

secondly i read your post several times. and got the same impression everytime.

imv 'human decency' requires you stand immediately.

 

6079_Smith_W

I can see what Sean is talking about in terms of picking one's battles. I was quite aware in watching the debates that Mulcair had a freedom to use the word "fascist" that the government does not. Same for Dennis Skinner in the UK. Really, what matters is that someone said it.

It is worth noting that two important figures - Angela Merkel and Bernie Sanders - responded to the election by pointing out principles, and laying out the conditions under which they were prepared to work with Trump.

That is not giving ground, or ignoring. But it is dealing with a threat in a professional way with an eye to what may or may not reach a solution.

I read a couple of articles recently comparing Trump to Hugo Chavez's populism (one is a companion piece to David Frum's video I just posted).

I wasn't going to post them here for obvious reasons, but it actually is an important message, so I will. Please ignore what is being said about Chavez, about Putin and others, as that is not important, not why I am posting them, and not something I care to argue about

Focus on what is being said about Trump, on the tactics that did and did not work in those other cases. I don't agree with all of it (I thought the Hamilton protest was important) but I think it supports some of what Sean is saying in terms of when and how to act, and when to wait.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/01/27/in-venezuela...

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/03/how-to-build-an-aut...

 

 

NDPP

American Psychosis  -  by Chris Hedges

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/american_psychosis_20170129

"...The neoliberal Trump demonizes Muslims, undocumented workers and the media. The neoliberal Democratic Party demonizes Vladimir Putin and FBI Director James Comey.

No one speaks about the destructive force of corporate power. The warring elites put alternative facts against alternative facts.

All engage in demagoguery. We will, I expect, be condemned to despotism by the venality of Trump AND the cowardice and dishonesty of the liberal class..."

 

Outrage About Trump Exposes 'Librul' Hypocrisy

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2017/01/outrage-about-trump-exposes-librul-...

Rev Pesky

NDPP wrote:

American Psychosis  -  by Chris Hedges

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/american_psychosis_20170129

"...The neoliberal Trump demonizes Muslims, undocumented workers and the media. The neoliberal Democratic Party demonizes Vladimir Putin and FBI Director James Comey.

No one speaks about the destructive force of corporate power. The warring elites put alternative facts against alternative facts.

All engage in demagoguery. We will, I expect, be condemned to despotism by the venality of Trump AND the cowardice and dishonesty of the liberal class..."

 

Outrage About Trump Exposes 'Librul' Hypocrisy

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2017/01/outrage-about-trump-exposes-librul-...

Intelligent leftists use current circumstance to help raise people's consciousness of important issues.

Losers deride those efforts because 'where were they when similar stuff was happening'.

Hundreds of thousands of people are standing with, and for, immigrants. What a wonderful opportunity to educate people about the issues.

bekayne

pookie

I feel the comparisons to Merkel and Hollande are facile.

Which Western European leader has anywhere the economic dependence upon the US that Canada does?

Mulcair's hectoring of Trudeau on this is increasingly tiresome, nay, idiotic.  What is he going to say if Trump retaliates by thickening the border, or giving notice to pull out of NAFTA just out of spite?  Oh I get it - that would be Trudeau's fault too.

Jerk.

6079_Smith_W

But Mulcair does have that freedom. I don't have a problem with him saying it, even if he was playing politics. He isn't going to be PM.

Trudeau does not, and not just because of the potential for retaliation. Because it would undermine his own credibility as head of government. Even Harper knew well enough to send Baird and Kenney out to say the really stupid shit that he couldn't.

And for the really really stupid stuff, Paul Calandra.

 

 

pookie

Oh I have no problem with Mulcair railing against Cheeto Jesus.  But trying to draw PM into his circle of outrage is the most transparent kind of politics.

It was something, too, to see him practically sneering at Trudeau's use of social media this weekend (check out his scrum following caucus today). He looked old and out of touch.  Has he paid no attention to the evolution of how politics is played today?  Including and most especially by POTUS?

josh

pookie wrote:

I feel the comparisons to Merkel and Hollande are facile.

Which Western European leader has anywhere the economic dependence upon the US that Canada does?

Mulcair's hectoring of Trudeau on this is increasingly tiresome, nay, idiotic.  What is he going to say if Trump retaliates by thickening the border, or giving notice to pull out of NAFTA just out of spite?  Oh I get it - that would be Trudeau's fault too.

Jerk.

Jerk? It's probably his finest hour.

6079_Smith_W

pookie wrote:

But trying to draw PM into his circle of outrage is the most transparent kind of politics.

Yeah, I agree it is politics. Fair comment, but I'd say the ire and the game playing is mutual.

Plus given how quick he was to agree to reopen NAFTA I think a gentle reminder is not out of order.

Rev Pesky

6079_Smith_W wrote:

But Mulcair does have that freedom. I don't have a problem with him saying it, even if he was playing politics. He isn't going to be PM.

...

Soon he won't be leader of the NDP either.

Paladin1

pookie wrote:

Oh I have no problem with Mulcair railing against Cheeto Jesus.  But trying to draw PM into his circle of outrage is the most transparent kind of politics.

It was something, too, to see him practically sneering at Trudeau's use of social media this weekend (check out his scrum following caucus today). He looked old and out of touch.  Has he paid no attention to the evolution of how politics is played today?  Including and most especially by POTUS?

 

I find your unwaivering soldier like loyalty to Trudeau impressive!  Ave Imperator ;)

Sean in Ottawa

I guess this is back home now.

Quizzical -- you are clearly reading things I did not write. That's unfortunate since you miss what I did write.

I have not excused Trudeau, I have not said he should not stand up. I have said that

1) he should plan it and do it properly and I hope he is planning it

2) that him saying something about Trump is different than someone elsesaying it and that is a responsibility

3) That he does have to consider the costs to Canadians of speaking out, be careful, time things well with plans in place

4) That an unavoidbale confrontation is coming -- see point 1

You read my statement that the PM of Canada has a challenge here, a responsibility and conflicting pressures to mean something else.

Like I say -- looks like you see things in a more black and white way than I do.

Understanding the situation a person faces is a requirement to criticize not an excuse, endorsement or compliment.

Many people raised the fact that Trudeau had no experience. He is facing a difficult situation he is not prepared for. Considering this there is good reason to acknowledge what he is facing and be concerned rather than making poor comparisons.

You seem to read with so  much bias that the meaning eludes you. I think you might even be a better critic and advocate if you considered these things.

As for Mulcair, there is nothing wrong with his handling of this -- or his very legitimate attackl on Trudeau for betraying his lectoral reform committment. I don't know how Liberal voters feel becuase I did not beleive him, did not vote for him and expected him to break the promise -- many did beleive him and voted for him including a good many NDP supporters -- exactly because of that promise.

pookie

Paladin1 wrote:

pookie wrote:

Oh I have no problem with Mulcair railing against Cheeto Jesus.  But trying to draw PM into his circle of outrage is the most transparent kind of politics.

It was something, too, to see him practically sneering at Trudeau's use of social media this weekend (check out his scrum following caucus today). He looked old and out of touch.  Has he paid no attention to the evolution of how politics is played today?  Including and most especially by POTUS?

 

I find your unwaivering soldier like loyalty to Trudeau impressive!  Ave Imperator ;)

Pfft.  Because  I am disgusted by Mulcair's holier than thou shrieking?

If you're not, please do fill your boots.

pookie

josh wrote:
pookie wrote:

I feel the comparisons to Merkel and Hollande are facile.

Which Western European leader has anywhere the economic dependence upon the US that Canada does?

Mulcair's hectoring of Trudeau on this is increasingly tiresome, nay, idiotic.  What is he going to say if Trump retaliates by thickening the border, or giving notice to pull out of NAFTA just out of spite?  Oh I get it - that would be Trudeau's fault too.

Jerk.

Jerk? It's probably his finest hour.

He's taking the easiest possible position. For him.  

He's also going back to his lecturing, snide mode.

ETA: I'd find it less irritating if he simply owned up to the risk of serious blowback he is asking the PM to take, and just said "this is more important than Canada's economic interests".  But he never does.

Ward

What is the drill if Trump is actually suffering from a true mental disorder?

kropotkin1951

pookie wrote:

I feel the comparisons to Merkel and Hollande are facile.

Which Western European leader has anywhere the economic dependence upon the US that Canada does?

Mulcair's hectoring of Trudeau on this is increasingly tiresome, nay, idiotic.  What is he going to say if Trump retaliates by thickening the border, or giving notice to pull out of NAFTA just out of spite?  Oh I get it - that would be Trudeau's fault too.

Jerk.

If Trump gave the six months notice to rescind NAFTA it would be a wonderful day. The trade thing with the US is a two way street not a one way dependence. Prior to "free trade" we traded mostly with the US and they with us, its called being each other's biggest trading partners. There is also geography. The US Governors of the Northern Border States would never stand for the border being too restrictive because it would be their economies going down the sewer as well. 

We would still have trade but without the corporate rights agreement.

bekayne

Ward wrote:

What is the drill if Trump is actually suffering from a true mental disorder?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_State...

Ward

bekayne wrote:

Ward wrote:

What is the drill if Trump is actually suffering from a true mental disorder?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_State...

 

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/brainstorm/201701/shrinks-battle-ov...

bekayne

Ward wrote:

What is the drill if Trump is actually suffering from a true mental disorder?

Speaking of "drill":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trepanning

bekayne

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-extremists-program-exclusiv-...

The Trump administration wants to revamp and rename a U.S. government program designed to counter all violent ideologies so that it focuses solely on Islamist extremism, five people briefed on the matter told Reuters.

The program, "Countering Violent Extremism," or CVE, would be changed to "Countering Islamic Extremism" or "Countering Radical Islamic Extremism," the sources said, and would no longer target groups such as white supremacists who have also carried out bombings and shootings in the United States.

https://www.thenation.com/article/leaked-draft-of-trumps-religious-freed...

Aleaked copy of a draft executive order titled “Establishing a Government-Wide Initiative to Respect Religious Freedom,” obtained by The Investigative Fund and The Nation, reveals sweeping plans by the Trump administration to legalize discrimination.

Ward

bekayne wrote:

Ward wrote:

What is the drill if Trump is actually suffering from a true mental disorder?

Speaking of "drill":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trepanning

Laughing I could handle 4 years of him after such an intervention (Gives new meaning to "put a cork in it")

josh
josh

Ward wrote:

What is the drill if Trump is actually suffering from a true mental disorder?

If?

Ward

josh wrote:

Trump picks a fight with Australian PM.

https://politicalwire.com/2017/02/01/trumps-train-wreck-call-australias-...

Oh man...somebody has to say something.

Sean in Ottawa

Ward wrote:

What is the drill if Trump is actually suffering from a true mental disorder?

Well a mental disorder is a catch-all for many things. Most people in their lives suffer from mental illness for a time. 20% at any one time.

Most people either struggle without treatment or get treatment.

Most are not dangerous and most do not have their work suffer.

That being said Trump might be an incredibly nasty man only, a dim bulb, or he could have one of those rare mental disorders that actually make a person dangerous if given the power. Many think it is the latter.

I worry that Trump will add to the stigam of mental illness. The vast majority are able to function without causing the kind of havoc he is.

and by the way, Trump is far from the first President (or PM for that matter) to suffer from mental illness.

Finally, mental illness that causes a person very difficult home life may in fact be an asset to a career... The list of top performers with mental illness is very, high. Some do great things and live difficult lives.

I say all this, knowing most here well understand this, just in case there is even one person who does not.

Sean in Ottawa

Ward wrote:

josh wrote:

Trump picks a fight with Australian PM.

https://politicalwire.com/2017/02/01/trumps-train-wreck-call-australias-...

Oh man...somebody has to say something.

Well. Ill or not he certainly is unfit.

I also want to say mentally people are different -- and not all differences are a bad thing but some may be better doing things other than leading countries -- or representing anyone.

Possibly Trump is so uninformed as to think that the Liberals in Australia are the left party. I imagine a lot of Australians are laughing at Trump.

 

Ward

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

 

Well. Ill or not he certainly is unfit.

I also want to say mentally people are different -- and not all differences are a bad thing but some may be better doing things other than leading countries -- or representing anyone.

Possibly Trump is so uninformed as to think that the Liberals in Australia are the left party. I imagine a lot of Australians are laughing at Trump.

 

 

1st to agree with you about the mental health of all us... however dementia has a similar meaning for many of us.

bekayne

Alena Smith‏@internetalena FollowMore

First, he came for Australia, and I said nothing, because I was so confused

 

josh

bekayne wrote:

Alena Smith‏@internetalena FollowMore

First, he came for Australia, and I said nothing, because I was so confused

 


Good one.

Sean in Ottawa

bekayne wrote:

Alena Smith‏@internetalena FollowMore

First, he came for Australia, and I said nothing, because I was so confused

 

Let me help.

The Australian PM is a Liberal which there means a conservative. Trump probably thought they have a Conservative party but they are called Liberal. What he would call liberal would be the Australian Labour Party. And in Australia the Labour Party and the Green Party are republicans.

But the Liberal PM of Australia is also a republican.

Now are you as confused as he is?

Cool

bekayne

Karen TumultyVerified account‏@ktumulty FollowMore

Time to build an ocean and make Australia pay for it.

 

bekayne

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/01/us/politics/donald-trump-islam.html?h...

Trump Pushes Dark View of Islam to Center of U.S. Policy-Making

Sean in Ottawa

 

Canadians' Internet Data Affected As Trump Cancels Privacy Rules

http://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/topstories/canadians-internet-data-affect...

NDPP

White House Issues War Threat Against Iran

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2017/02/02/usde-f02.html

"In an extraordinarily bellicose statement Wednesday, US National Security Adviser Michael Flynn accused Iran of 'destabilizing behaviour across the Middle East.' And warned, 'As of today we are officially putting Iran on notice.

Tehran is already at loggerheads with Washington over the Trump administration's visa ban on 7 predominantly Muslim countries, including Iran. Tehran retaliated on Tuesday, imposing a ban on American citizens traveling to Iran.

The Trump administration includes pro-Zionist figures, such as son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner, as well as politicians and generals who are deeply hostile to Iran. Newly installed CIA chief Mike Pompeo led the campaign in Congress in 2015 to block the nuclear agreement with Iran."

josh

And here I thought this "Trump is out of his fucking mind" was just CIA propaganda meant to foster a coup before he took office.

Doug Woodard

High-skilled tech workers fear Trump visa crackdown:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/01/tech-worker-visa-trump-ban

 

 

Paladin1

josh wrote:

U.S. military officials told Reuters that Trump approved his first covert counterterrorism operation without sufficient intelligence, ground support or adequate backup preparations.

As a result, three officials said, the attacking SEAL team found itself dropping onto a reinforced al Qaeda base defended by landmines, snipers, and a larger than expected contingent of heavily armed Islamist extremists. 

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-commando-idUSKBN15G5RX 

 

 

Special Operations missions are planned many months in advance. SOF can and do train for 6 months to do a 6 hour mission.   If the mission was actually somehow launched prematurely then the guilt would fall on the presidents military advisors. Considering the US secratary of defense is world reknown for his intelligence, planning prowless and attention to detail I very much doubt the validity of this story.

josh

Of course.

quizzical

the Reuters page has been removed Josh link doesn't work

josh

U.S. military officials told Reuters that Trump approved his first covert counterterrorism operation without sufficient intelligence, ground support or adequate backup preparations.

As a result, three officials said, the attacking SEAL team found itself dropping onto a reinforced al Qaeda base defended by landmines, snipers, and a larger than expected contingent of heavily armed Islamist extremists. 

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-commando-idUSKBN15G5RX

 

 

josh

Sorry.  Should work now.

josh

Shortly after his address, a Schwarzenegger spokesman told ABC that the actor was "praying that President Trump can start improving his own approval ratings, which were the worst in history for an incoming President."

Recent polls from Quinnipiac and Gallup show Trump with approval ratings below 50 percent, well below those of recent commanders-in-chief including George W. Bush and Barack Obama.

Schwarzenegger also posted a short video to Twitter in which he asked Trump to "switch jobs" with him.

"You take over TV because you're such an expert in ratings and I take over your job so that people can finally sleep comfortably again, hmm?" the "Terminator" actor and former California governor asked. 

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/trump-national-prayer-breakfast-pray-arnold-apprentice-ratings?utm_content=buffer0db2b&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

 

 

6079_Smith_W

Paladin1 wrote:

Considering the US secratary of defense is world reknown for his intelligence, planning prowless and attention to detail I very much doubt the validity of this story.

Or his boss just ordered him to do it anyway because he's the boss, hard to believe as that might be.

Whatever the cause, someone got it really wrong.

 

josh

The payoff starts:

The U.S. Treasury Department on Thursday eased some economic sanctions against Russia, specifically licensing cyber-security sales to the Russian Federal Security Service, the successor to the KGB, according to official documents. 

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/02/02/us-eases-some-economic-sanctions-against-russia/97399136/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter 

 

 

NDPP

josh wrote:

U.S. military officials told Reuters that Trump approved his first covert counterterrorism operation without sufficient intelligence, ground support or adequate backup preparations.

As a result, three officials said, the attacking SEAL team found itself dropping onto a reinforced al Qaeda base defended by landmines, snipers, and a larger than expected contingent of heavily armed Islamist extremists. 

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-commando-idUSKBN15G5RX

 

NDPP:

Obama Killed A 16-Year Old American in Yemen. Trump Just Killed His 8-Year-Old Sister

https://theintercept.com/2017/01/30/obama-killed-a-16-year-old-american-...

For those concerned with more than Trump's skill at operating the US mass murder machine.

 

 

 

 

voice of the damned

josh wrote:

The payoff starts:

The U.S. Treasury Department on Thursday eased some economic sanctions against Russia, specifically licensing cyber-security sales to the Russian Federal Security Service, the successor to the KGB, according to official documents. 

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/02/02/us-eases-some-economic-sanctions-against-russia/97399136/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter 

 

 

 

Slate, which never misses a chance to expose the evils of Trump, has a piece up arguing that the easing of these sancrions isn't that big a deal. Google "Easing sanctions on the FSB isn't that much of a victory, but it's still spiking the football".

As can be seen by the caveat at the end, the writer does make the argument that at least one former FSB official seems to be portraying it as a win for Russia.

Edzell Edzell's picture

I do not understand the apparent preoccupation in comparing Obama's past actions with Trump's current ones. What is the point?

voice of the damned

Edzell wrote:

I do not understand the apparent preoccupation in comparing Obama's past actions with Trump's current ones. What is the point?

I'm not sure what specific issue you're addressing here. If it's the santions, then I would think the relevance is that Obama imposed the sanctions, and Trump eased some of them. Which may be pertinent to the issue of whether or not Trump is pursuing a more Russia-friendly foriegn policy than his predesessor.  

 

Pages

Topic locked