Democrats' Response To President Trump

[Ashock]

I know from your immigration background your political views are to be expected but that shows that the US fails.

I guess you missed the previous post by Ashock, wherein the Democrat from Idaho suggested white people shut up. You had a great chance to follow that advice, and didn't.

Trump is chaotic neutral, I think. His "build a wall" is already getting a reaction in Texas, much of it negative, as in against. I think it's been one of the worst ideas floated in the past ten years -- yes, that wall thing is about a ten year old idea so it's not even original with Trump.

You actually don't know much about America, so maybe that Democrat's advice is some you ought to take to heart.

By the time Trump's four years are up (no way he gets a second round) we'll all be able to sing, with the Greatful Dead: What a long, strange trip it's been.

None of you can predict the future, and I sure can't. Unlike you, my only attempt will be to predict that in four years he'll lose interest in the work that job takes, and everyone will have had quite their fill.

Check back in four years and cite this post.

For my money, Trump's "let's start a tariff war" is also a poorly advised policy. I hope a few people can get him to see reason on that. I'd have thought he'd understand what a win - win deal is ... what with his book "The Art of the Deal" and all that. Maybe not.

Most presidents get that "100 days thing" and I suggest to the rest of you that you afford this latest example of the American experiment in self government the same courtesy ... unless you are just rude by nature.

In that case, if you can't afford that courtesy, you're just like Trump: rude ... and I congratulate you on your hypocrisy.

Trump might be the first president to unite us in decades.... Against him.

We'll see. So far he is the most pro-active president I've ever seen. The US needs that, and frankly the whole "We are the World" bullshit has not led to anything positive. A standard Republican would still be worried about how he can make the libertard press like him while getting nothing constructive done. Of course a Democrat would just be continuing on the whole "should we allow women to use men's bathrooms" theme.

I don't see a problem with not allowing ppl from those nations from entering ours. See what is happening in Europe?

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/...criticism/

You might not like the source, and you don't need to. Just absorb the content. Pay close attention to section 4.

1. It is NOT a “Muslim ban.” You will search the Executive Order in vain for mentions of Islam, or any other religion. By Sunday morning, the media began suffering acute attacks of honesty and writing headlines such as “Trump’s Latest Executive Order: Banning People From 7 Countries and More” (CNN) and printing the full text of the order.

Granted, CNN still slips the phrase “Muslim-majority countries” into every article about the order, including the post in which they reprinted its text in full, but CNN used the word “Muslim,” not Trump. The order applies to all citizens of Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen. It does not specify Muslims. The indefinite hold on Syrian refugees will affect Christians and Muslims alike.

As Tim Carney at the Washington Examiner points out, the largest Muslim-majority countries in the world are not named in the Executive Order.

More countries may be added to the moratorium in the days to come, as the Secretary of Homeland Security has been instructed to complete a 30-day review of nations that don’t provide adequate information for vetting visa applicants.

It’s also noteworthy that the ban is not absolute. Exceptions for “foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas” are expressly made in the order. The Departments of State and Homeland Security can also grant exceptions on a “case-by-case basis,” and “when in the national interest, issue visas or other immigration benefits to nationals of countries for which visas and benefits are otherwise blocked.”

There is a provision in the Executive Order that says applications based on religious persecution will be prioritized “provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual’s country of nationality.”

This has been denounced as a “stealth Muslim ban” by some of the very same people who were conspicuously silent when the Obama administration pushed Christians – who the most savagely persecuted minority in the Middle East, with only the Yazidis offering real competition — to the back of the migration line.

2. The order is based on security reviews conducted by President Barack Obama’s deputies. As White House counselor Kellyanne Conway pointed out on “Fox News Sunday,” the seven nations named in Trump’s executive order are drawn from the Terrorist Prevention Act of 2015. The 2015 “Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015” named Iraq, Iran, Sudan, and Syria, while its 2016 update added Libya, Somalia, and Yemen.

“These are countries that have a history of training, harboring, exporting terrorists. We can’t keep pretending and looking the other way,” said Conway.

3. The moratorium is largely temporary. Citizens of the seven countries named as security risks are banned from entering the United States for the next 90 days. Refugee processing is halted for 120 days. The longest-lived aspect of the ban may prove to be the halt on Syrian refugees, but that isn’t given a time frame at all. It will last “until such time as I have determined that sufficient changes have been made to the USRAP to ensure that admission of Syrian refugees is consistent with the national interest,” as President Trump wrote.

4. Obama banned immigration from Iraq, and Carter banned it from Iran.
“Fact-checking” website PolitiFact twists itself into knots to avoid giving a “true” rating to the absolutely true fact that Jimmy Carter banned Iranian immigration in 1980, unless applicants could prove they were enemies of the Khomenei theocracy.

One of Politifact’s phony talking points states that Carter “acted against Iranian nationals, not an entire religion.” As noted above, Trump’s Executive Order is precisely the same – it does not act against an “entire religion,” it names seven countries.

As for Barack Obama, he did indeed ban immigration from Iraq, for much longer than Trump’s order bans it from the seven listed nations, and none of the people melting down today uttered a peep of protest. Richard Grenell summed it up perfectly in a Tweet:

Obama took 6 months to review screening for 1 country. Trump will take 3 months for 7 countries. #MAGA @realDonaldTrump

— Richard Grenell (@RichardGrenell) January 29, 2017

5. Trump’s refugee caps are comparable to Obama’s pre-2016 practices: David French, who was touted as a spoiler candidate to keep Donald Trump out of the White House during the presidential campaign – in other words, not a big Trump fan – wrote a lengthy and clear-headed analysis of the Executive Order for National Review. He noted that after the moratorium ends in 120 days, Trump caps refugee admissions at 50,000 per year… which is roughly the same as President Obama’s admissions in 2011 and 2012, and not far below the 70,000 per year cap in place from 2013 to 2015.

Obama had fairly low caps on refugees during the worst years of the Syrian civil war. He didn’t throw open the doors to mass refugee admissions until his final year in office. Depending on how Trump’s review of Syrian refugee policy turns out, he’s doing little more than returning admissions to normal levels after a four-month pause for security reviews.

6. The Executive Order is legal: Those invoking the Constitution to attack Trump’s order are simply embarrassing themselves. The President has clear statutory authority to take these actions. As noted, his predecessors did so, without much controversy.

Most of the legal arguments against Trump’s order summarized by USA Today are entirely specious, such as attacking him for “banning an entire religion,” which the order manifestly does not do. Critics of the order have a political opinion that it will in effect “ban Muslims,” but that’s not what it says. Designating specific nations as trouble spots and ordering a pause is entirely within the President’s authority, and there is ample precedent to prove it.

It should be possible to argue with the reasoning behind the order, or argue that it will have negative unintended consequences, without advancing hollow legal arguments. Of course, this is America 2017, so a wave of lawsuits will soon be sloshing through the courts.

7. This Executive Order is a security measure, not an arbitrary expression of supposed xenophobia. Conway stressed the need to enhance immigration security from trouble spots in her “Fox News Sunday” interview. French also addressed the subject in his post:

When we know our enemy is seeking to strike America and its allies through the refugee population, when we know they’ve succeeded in Europe, and when the administration has doubts about our ability to adequately vet the refugees we admit into this nation, a pause is again not just prudent but arguably necessary. It is important that we provide sufficient aid and protection to keep refugees safe and healthy in place, but it is not necessary to bring Syrians to the United States to fulfill our vital moral obligations.

French’s major objection to the Executive Order is that applying it to green-card holders is “madness,” but unfortunately many of the terrorists who attacked Americans during the Obama years were green-card holders. Daniel Horowitz and Chris Pandolfo addressed that subject at Conservative Review:

Both liberals and conservatives expressed concern over hundreds of individuals going over to fight for ISIS. We are already limited in how we can combat this growing threat among U.S. citizens. Given that it is completely legal to exclude non-citizens upon re-entry, Trump extended the ban to legal permanent residents as well.

If a Somali refugee is travelling back to Somalia (so much for credible fear of persecution!), government officials should have the ability to prevent that person from coming back when necessary. Obviously, there are some individuals from these seven countries who already have green cards and we might not want to exclude. That is why the order grants discretion to the State Department to issue case-by-case exemptions for “religious persecution, “or when the person is already in transit and denying admission would cause undue hardship.” A CBP agent is always stationed at any international airport from which these individuals would board a direct flight to the United States (Paris and Dubai, for example). That individual would not allow anyone covered by this ban onto a U.S.-bound flight unless he grants them a hardship exemption.

Indeed, it appears that green card holders returning yesterday from those seven countries were all granted entry.

Because he is a progressive globalist, Obama deliberately blinded us to security threats, in the name of political correctness and left-wing ideology. Ninety or 120 days isn’t much time for Trump to turn all that around, especially because it is unlikely much will change in the seven countries Trump named.

The hysterical reaction to Trump’s order illustrates the very thing that worries advocates of strong immigration security: Americans’ security is the lowest priority, far below progressive ideology, crass political opportunism, and emotional theater.

We’re being effectively told by the theatrical class to tolerate a certain amount of Islamic terrorism because their feelings would be hurt by the tough measures we need protest ourselves from a tough enemy. But this time, President Trump is proving tough enough to push our security up into the top priority.

[FireIceTalon]

A standard Republican would still be worried about how he can make the libertard press like him

And now, you are guilty of ableism by discriminating against persons with intellectual and/or congnitive disabilities as a way to negatively describe a political view you don't like. You are one disgusting and reprehensible human being.

[Ashock]

A standard Republican would still be worried about how he can make the libertard press like him

And now, you are guilty of ableism by discriminating against persons with intellectual and/or congnitive disabilities as a way to negatively describe a political view you don't like. You are one disgusting and reprehensible human being.

Pah, I've not even started. OTOH, you call those on the right, let's see..... nazis, homophobes, racists, sexists... shall I go on?

That's one, maybe another one somewhere, to your dozens of name callings. I think I'm entitled. I know, as I do not agree with you, I must be shut down. I know, it's hard to not be able to wrap your fingers around my throat. To do what your breathren have done throughout their existance.

Here's some good news! This year is the 100th Anniversary of that one event in history that makes you smile in that misty, wistful way.

"I stuck around St. Petersburg
When I saw it was a time for a change
Killed the Czar and his ministers
Anastasia screamed in vain"

ps. I do not need to call you, as you call me "disgusting and reprehensible human being". I believe that is self-evident.

[kandrathe]

A standard Republican would still be worried about how he can make the libertard press like him

And now, you are guilty of ableism by discriminating against persons with intellectual and/or congnitive disabilities as a way to negatively describe a political view you don't like. You are one disgusting and reprehensible human being.

Has thee selective memory about thine own words re: Trump?

The fact this moron is even possibly a candidate and actually has a following is in itself rather terrifying, much less him actually getting elected as president of the most powerful imperialist nation on the planet. Just goes to show the iron grip that the reaction has on the joke that is the chauvinistic American political culture. Trump is truly dumber than a rock. Seriously, this guy is making even Dubya look like Sir Isaac fucking Newton.

Or, dost thou eateth crow?

The internet remembers... every invective, every slur, every profanity laced tirade.

[FireIceTalon]

Pah, I've not even started. OTOH, you call those on the right, let's see..... nazis, homophobes, racists, sexists... shall I go on?

I call them for what they are, and will continue to do so, so long as they hold such ideologies. If they don't want to be labled such things, then maybe they should change their ideology and verbage.

I think I'm entitled.

Indeed, most conservatives do see themselves as an entitled bunch. But you aren't. You thinking you are entitled to be a discriminatory douche canoe under the false guise of 'freedom of speech' is just another of your wild right-wing fantasies.

I know, as I do not agree with you, I must be shut down.

Well, this is the internet, and this isn't my forum. I can't shut you down. I can (and will) however, call you out for what you are everytime you spew your hateful and discriminatory claptrap. Go over to libcom.org or revleft.com and try and preach your garbage over there and see what happens. You would indeed be shut down (banned) with the quickness, and rightfully so.

[Ashock]

Pah, I've not even started. OTOH, you call those on the right, let's see..... nazis, homophobes, racists, sexists... shall I go on?

I call them for what they are, and will continue to do so, so long as they hold such ideologies. If they don't want to be labled such things, then maybe they should change their ideology and verbage.

I think I'm entitled.

Indeed, most conservatives do see themselves as an entitled bunch. But you aren't. You thinking you are entitled to be a discriminatory douche canoe under the false guise of 'freedom of speech' is just another of your wild right-wing fantasies.

I know, as I do not agree with you, I must be shut down.

Well, this is the internet, and this isn't my forum. I can't shut you down. I can (and will) however, call you out for what you are everytime you spew your hateful and discriminatory claptrap. Go over to libcom.org or revleft.com and try and preach your garbage over there and see what happens. You would indeed be shut down (banned) with the quickness, and rightfully so.

And yet, you've still not quoted me on anything that would prove that I am what you accuse me of being. Regurgitating the same baseless accusations must be so hard on you, poor thing.

Must be frustrating for you. Keep digging. See, I don't need to dig. All I need to do, is to look at any current page with your response on it, and I have more than enough.

Just as the attitude of any average progressive, YOUR intolerant and hateful attitude is EXACTLY the attitude that you accuse ME of having.

Need intellectual stimuli.....Getting bored with you again.....

[FireIceTalon]

A standard Republican would still be worried about how he can make the libertard press like him

And now, you are guilty of ableism by discriminating against persons with intellectual and/or congnitive disabilities as a way to negatively describe a political view you don't like. You are one disgusting and reprehensible human being.

Has thee selective memory about thine own words re: Trump?

The fact this moron is even possibly a candidate and actually has a following is in itself rather terrifying, much less him actually getting elected as president of the most powerful imperialist nation on the planet. Just goes to show the iron grip that the reaction has on the joke that is the chauvinistic American political culture. Trump is truly dumber than a rock. Seriously, this guy is making even Dubya look like Sir Isaac fucking Newton.

Or, dost thou eateth crow?

The internet remembers... every invective, every slur, every profanity laced tirade.

This is weak. Sorry, calling someone dumb does not equate to discrimination against disabled persons as using the term 'libtard' does. It's not even in the same ball park. Trump has not been diagnosed as having an intellectual or cognitive disability, but he is quite stupid. Having an intellectual/congnitive disability and being stupid are not the same things.

In fact, you trying to use that post against me, inadvertently makes YOU the one who is guilty of ableism since you just implied that being "dumb" and having a intellectual or congnitive disability are the same things. Epic fail.

[FireIceTalon]

And yet, you've still not quoted me on anything that would prove that I am what you accuse me of being. Regurgitating the same baseless accusations must be so hard on you, poor thing.

Seems you suffer from short-term meomry loss. Is not the term 'libtard', what I just fucking called you out on 2 posts ago, a discriminatory term towards intellectually/congnitively disabled persons? Most every thread you make or post in is laced with discrimination of some sort, so no, they are not baseless accusations - they are factual observations of what you post. You deny it, just as you deny climate change, in the face of overwhelming evidence.

Oh I forgot, that's just your perspective (even if your perspective has been proven wrong by contradicting evidence and data).

Just as the attitude of any average progressive, YOUR intolerant and hateful attitude is EXACTLY the attitude that you accuse ME of having.

Yep, I am intolerant and hateful of racism, sexism, ableism, and other discriminatory and deplorable ideas - as most decent human beings are, and should be. You can't deal with that, it seems, because you are not a decent human being.

Need intellectual stimuli.....Getting bored with you again.....

The steaming shit piles of Breitbart and Stormfront await you. You'll get all the intellectual stimuli you need there.

[Ashock]

And yet, you've still not quoted me on anything that would prove that I am what you accuse me of being. Regurgitating the same baseless accusations must be so hard on you, poor thing.

Seems you suffer from short-term meomry loss. Is not the term 'libtard', what I just fucking called you out on 2 posts ago, a discriminatory term towards intellectually/congnitively disabled persons? Most every thread you make or post in is laced with discrimination of some sort, so no, they are not baseless accusations - they are factual observations of what you post. You deny it, just as you deny climate change, in the face of overwhelming evidence.

Quote it, prove it, or shut it.

[FireIceTalon]

Quoted in post #22 of this VERY thread. Can. You. Not. Fucking. Read?

And don't even think about editing your post. I already got a screen shot.

As a matter of fact, from this moment forward: I'm going to start screen shotting every discriminatory and derogatory thing you say - be it racist, sexist, homophobic, ableist, xenophobic or otherwise. Gonna save them all, and a make a "Classic Ashock quotes" thread one day with all of them posted...so you, and everyone else, can see what an ass you are.

[Ashock]

Quoted in post #22 of this VERY thread. Can. You. Not. Fucking. Read?

And don't even think about editing your post. I already got a screen shot.

LOL. I did not realize we are in kindergarten. Libertard is what... sexist, racist, homophobic? Which one is it? C'mon now. This is as compared to your multitude of insults, personal and otherwise, open hatred of conservatives and me personally and all sorts foul language. I know, grasping at straws and making tree trunks out of them.

You have NOTHING.

[FireIceTalon]

Did you not read what I said in post #22? Sexism, racism and homophobia are not the only kinds of discrimination.

Keep talking buddy boy, keep those quotes coming as only you can do. As said before, I'm going to screen shot every single one of them and post them in a thread when I have enough. I'd have probably close to a dozen just from the 'Hate Crime' thread alone if I decided to do this retroactively.

[Ashock]

Did you not read what I said in post #22? Sexism, racism and homophobia are not the only kinds of discrimination.

Keep talking buddy boy, keep those quotes coming as only you can do. As said before, I'm going to screen shot every single one of them and post them in a thread when I have enough. I'd have probably close to a dozen just from the 'Hate Crime' thread alone if I decided to do this retroactively.

The fact that this is the only quote that you've found is telling in itself.
Here's a bit of yours... just from skimming the top half of the first page and only to my posts. I also bypassed simple things like you calling me fascist:

"You are one disgusting and reprehensible human being." - Post 22 in this thread

"You thinking you are entitled to be a discriminatory douche canoe" post 25 in this thread

"Trump has not been diagnosed as having an intellectual or cognitive disability, but he is quite stupid" Post 27 of this thread

"In short, you're dumb, and the rest of us are getting dumber from reading your ahistorical crud" post 28, So not a hate crime?

"Either way you are racist scum, and on almost any forum, you'd be banned by now" Post 36, same thread

"but I guess I can't expect anything more from a Fascie." Post 41 same thread

"You, as a blatant racist, who spews false ideological narratives such as 'reverse racism' are hardly in any position to be calling anyone else racist or an idiot. Me, or anyone else, confronting racism has nothing to do with having an agenda, but is simply being a decent, non-shitty human being. So yes, if me calling you and other racists out for being what you really are stirs up more hatred, so be it. Your idiocy in this post only shows your white privilege all the more. Your whole thought process is a farce.

Further, you using a genuine and serious problem like global warming to downplay racism really shows your true character (or rather, the lack of it). Racism is a REAL issue, regardless of whether or not global warming is real and substantially human-made (it is both of these things, but that is beside the point here). You downplaying racism by saying we should focus solely on climate change is not only political opportunism, it's also extremely tactless and only further demonstrates your inherently racist views and that you are, in general, a douche bag. You disgust me. - Post 62 same thread

"Did the resident white supremacist crackpot" Post 13 - Why I think it is challenging for the government to ration our care

"Who gives a fuck if Trump gets murked anyways? I sure as hell don't. Would be one less racist, classist, homophobic, ableist, sexist, rich, delusional, fascist, windbag demagogue on the planet. If it does happen, I'm throwing a party - drinks are on me." Post 16 same thread

"If you aren't a full blown fascist, you certainly have a soft spot for many of its ideals, which is just as bad. You constantly spew views which are racist and xenophobic, you are ableist, you are extremely chauvinistic and nationalist, you voted for Trump who is, if not an outright fascist, is as close to being one as you can get, and you use Breitbart - a blatantly fascist, white nationalist media organization - as your source of news. So yea, you well qualify as deserving the fascist label." Post 25 same thread

"I don't say anything that is any worse than your despicably chauvinistic, racist drivel that you constantly spew" Post 25 same thread

"And if I wanted to hear an asshole talk, I'd fart" Post 27 same thread

My quote - "have absolutely no qualms about at least jailing me and most likely eliminating me" - Your answer "And good fucking riddance. Fascists deserve nothing less. Cause if you had it your way, blacks would be slaves all over again, women would only be allowed in the kitchen and be viewed and used as sub-human instruments for reproduction with no bodily autonomy whatsoever, Muslims would all be imprisoned or exterminated, and LGTBQ persons would be viewed as sinners and/or criminals. Anyone who wasn't a white, straight male would be completely fucked - coerced to wake up every day and salute a confederate flag and be told they have "freedom" - though in fact, nobody, except white/straight/males, would have "freedom" of ANYTHING whatsoever. You are a despicable human being, every bit as condemnable as your heroes Hitler and Pinochet." Post 27 same thread.

Seriously, need I say more? Your level of hypocrisy is off the Beria scale.

Just so you know... this is the last time I'm spending more than 30 seconds on my replies to you. Of course this post was not for you, but for our listening audience.

[FireIceTalon]

You asked for a quote. I gave you one. I could have given you many, many more, but you didn't specifiy a number. One is enough to prove my point. It matters not.

More importantly, me insulting you and your views, and the hateful views of right-wing ideology in general, is nowhere near as offensive, threatening, or dangerous as said views that I attack. Anger is a legitimate response to discrimination whether you like it or not, and there would be no anger if there was no discrimination to begin with.

Conservatives always harp on about how people need to take responsibility for their actions,but that same philosophy doesn't apply to them. Well, you reep what you sow. You expect to spew your hateful and derogatory views without pissing people off, or other consequences? You live in a fucking dream world if thats what you expect. As I've said before, speech has causation. If you can't deal with that, then maybe you should rethink what you say, or say nothing at all.

Everything I've said to you is well earned, including all the quotes you listed above. I take none of it back. You may not like it, but at least I don't attack you based on your race, sex, gender, sexual orientation, disability (if you have one), citizenship status, and the like - as you do with others. I attack your views (which should be attacked and challenged), and your character (or the lack thereof).

But maybe now that I am going to screenshot everytime you make a discriminatory remark, you will think twice about the verbage and context of what you are saying before you post. I don't need to worry about anything I say to you, cause nothing I say to you has discriminatory foundations behind it - because that isn't the type of person I am. Anyone who is offended at how I critique your views is probably just an apologist for YOUR views anyways, and therefore I couldn't care less what they think about what or how I say things to you.

Just be glad we aren't on Revleft.com, Libcom.org or something like that, cause if you think I am aggressive here, LOL man.... this is absolutely NOTHING. NOTHING. The way I speak to you here on LL is a "toned down" version of how I would speak to you elsewhere. Believe that.

[Bolty]

I'm giving both of you a time out. You were warned. See you in three days.

[kandrathe]

This is weak. Sorry, calling someone dumb does not equate to discrimination against disabled persons as using the term 'libtard' does.

You called Trump a moron. Are you saying that calling someone a 'libtard' is ablist, while calling them a 'moron' is not?

But, now that you mention it, "dumb" is also offensive to those so physically handicapped.

It's not even in the same ball park. Trump has not been diagnosed as having an intellectual or cognitive disability, but he is quite stupid. Having an intellectual/congnitive disability and being stupid are not the same things.

But, this is a judgement by you in labeling him, which is insulting to actual disabled people. You also used the invective "moron" which I think is much in the same aspersion category as retard.

While the word is still used as an insult today, it usually just refers to ‘a stupid person’. However, the word started off as a psychological designation, referring to someone with learning difficulties (a learning disability in North American English). In fact, moron was first adopted and given this meaning in 1910 by the American Association for the Study of the Feeble-minded in 1910, with reference to the Greek word μῶρος, ‘foolish’ or ‘stupid’. Today, the word is generally avoided now due to the more widespread sense of ‘stupid person’. As in, Δεν θέλω να κάθομαι να ακούω μωρές κουβέντες

How shall we equivocate in our name calling? Or, maybe we stop name calling?

In fact, you trying to use that post against me, inadvertently makes YOU the one who is guilty of ableism since you just implied that being "dumb" and having a intellectual or congnitive disability are the same things. Epic fail.

No. Nice try to slip out of the noose you hung up yourself. These are all your words. You are in fact using words as weapons, and in this case you are guilty of insulting the disabled as well.

My suggestion: Stop using words as weapons.

[Occhidiangela]

K, they are in time out.

Trump is tossing grenades and seeing who will jump on them. Interesting style but it usually creates a lot of collateral damage.

[kandrathe]

K, they are in time out.

Trump is tossing grenades and seeing who will jump on them. Interesting style but it usually creates a lot of collateral damage.

My thoughts exactly. It's a tried and true executive method to see who's on board, and who needs to go. As a new leader, do something radical that shakes up the status quo, and see who squawks, quits, or sides against you.

[eppie]

K, they are in time out.

Trump is tossing grenades and seeing who will jump on them. Interesting style but it usually creates a lot of collateral damage.

Todays grenade is an interesting one again. US companies are allowed to do business with the russian secret agencies again.

I wonder how many people will still swallow this and try and find excuses again.
America first!

It is by the way the style of most of the right wing populist leaders in the EU as well. There are not many in charge yet but they have a common thing for not wanting to listen to facts and make up their own truth. This is going wrong in so many ways.

A few months ago I told people here I wasnt worried because he would not manage to be worse for the US and the world than GWBush, but I take those words back. I was very wrong.

[kandrathe]

K, they are in time out.

Trump is tossing grenades and seeing who will jump on them. Interesting style but it usually creates a lot of collateral damage.

Todays grenade is an interesting one again. US companies are allowed to do business with the russian secret agencies again.

I wonder how many people will still swallow this and try and find excuses again.
America first!

It is by the way the style of most of the right wing populist leaders in the EU as well. There are not many in charge yet but they have a common thing for not wanting to listen to facts and make up their own truth. This is going wrong in so many ways.

A few months ago I told people here I wasnt worried because he would not manage to be worse for the US and the world than GWBush, but I take those words back. I was very wrong.

I can see it is bad for the political optics... but... it is not a story... we still do business with Russia.

"The Treasury Department said it will allow American companies to make limited transactions with the FSB, the successor to the KGB, if it needs them to get approval to import or distribute technology products in Russia. The exception will also apply to situations in which companies need to comply with rules administered by the FSB.

The implications of the move were not immediately clear, but the U.S. has taken similar steps in the past to help businesses avoid unintended consequences on cross-border transactions.

The White House said the move was routine and not a change in policy or easing of the sanctions. A source familiar with the sanctions told NBC News that the change was a technical fix that was planned under Obama."


Trump administration modifies sanctions against Russian intelligence service