Category Archives: political news

Even the fact checkers have become suspect

0609fact_check

I’m puzzled about fact checkers.

These are the folks and organizations that check the accuracy of declarations that politicians make.

They were at it again after Donald J. Trump’s fiery immigration speech. They sought to parse many of Trump’s contentions about illegal immigration.

Why the puzzlement?

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/factcheckingthecandidates/fact-checking-donald-trump%E2%80%99s-immigration-speech/ar-AAilszb?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp

Well, many observers contend the fact checkers are as biased as the politicians, or the “liberal media,” or the print and broadcast pundits.

Hillary Clinton’s speeches get examined, too. The fact checkers “check the facts” relating to her declarations. She once proclaimed that she worked well across the aisle with Republicans to approve legislation that benefited the country. A fact checker determined that Clinton clearly overstated her bipartisan approach to legislating. Biased?

Trump’s “facts” get “checked” constantly. Indeed, there’s so much to verify, given the Republican presidential nominee’s penchant for saying that are demonstrably untrue. My favorite untruth is Trump’s assertion that he witnessed “thousands” of Muslims cheering the collapse of the World Trade Center. It didn’t happen, man.

I’m still trying to process this fact checking thing, though, to determine if the fact checkers are looking for holes in candidates’ statements because they disagree in principle with the politician they’re examining.

The ranks of the totally trustworthy are shrinking all around us.

This humble immigrant became a great American

papou

Take a look at this gentleman.

He was an immigrant to the United States of America. He grew up in southern Greece. He found his way to Pittsburgh, Pa. He got married and started family.

He worked hard. He played by the rules. He was a simple man. He had little formal education. He wasn’t destined to achieve financial wealth or become famous the way we understand the meaning of the term “famous.”

His name was Ioannis Panayotis Kanellopoulos. He shortened his last name to Kanelis; his first and middle names, translated to English, were John Peter.

He was my grandfather.

As I heard Donald J. Trump’s screed last night about immigration, one passage jumped out at me, grabbed me by the throat and damn near throttled me as I heard it.

Trump laid down some markers that legal immigrants needed to meet before they would be “selected” for entry into the United States of America.

My grandfather wouldn’t have met the standard set.

My Papou wouldn’t be welcome in a country where Donald J. Trump would serve as president.

He toiled in a steel mill in Pittsburgh. He lost his job when the Great Depression decimated the Rust Belt in the early 1930s. He and my grandmother and five of their children gravitated to Vermont, where they ran a hotel; that venture failed, too.

Papou and his family — which grew to seven children in Vermont — then moved west, to Portland, Ore.

My grandfather then shined shoes in the basement of a high-end downtown Portland department store for the rest of his working life.

Would he have been “selected”? It appeared to me, based on what I heard Trump say, he very well would have been turned away.

I wrote about it yesterday in the blog post attached below.

https://highplainsblogger.com/2016/09/select-immigrants-based-on-skill/

Were that to happen, the United States of America would have lost a great patriot.

Donald Trump’s arrogance as it related to immigrants — illegal and legal — has disgraced the American political process.

Mexico outraged over Trump’s wall proposal

wall

Donald J. Trump’s impromptu visit to Mexico went well.

Don’t you think?

Me neither.

The Republican presidential nominee flew to Mexico City and met behind closed doors with Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto. They talked about illegal immigration, but apparently did not discuss that “big, beautiful wall” that Trump wants to extend along the countries’ border.

Now comes word from Mexico that the plan is “outrageous” and that Mexico isn’t going to pay a nickel for it, as Trump insists they should.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/mexico-calls-trump-wall-plan-outrageous-after-visit/ar-AAinv5Z?li=BBnb7Kz

So, where do we stand?

I believe we are precisely at the same point we were prior to Trump’s visit.

As near as I can figure, one sovereign country cannot dictate to another sovereign country how to spend its money. So, if the United States is going to demand that Mexico pay for construction of a wall, then Mexico is within its legal authority to refuse.

Here’s how Reuters reported an exchange between Trump and Pena Nieto: “On Twitter early on Thursday, Trump wrote, ‘Mexico will pay for the wall!’

“That prompted a Twitter reply from Pena Nieto later in the day: ‘I repeat what I told you personally Mr. Trump, Mexico would never pay for a wall.'”

This is Donald Trump’s view of international diplomacy.

“Yes, you will. No we won’t. Yes, you will, or else! I dare you to invoke the ‘or else.'”

Do you see how this is a ridiculous notion?

Trump’s build-a-wall theme played well to the Republican Party voter base that propelled him to the GOP nomination. He’s got those folks in his hip pocket.

The rest of the country? The voters of Latin American heritage who are becoming increasingly infuriated at Trump’s anti-Mexico rhetoric? Independent voters?

Whatever the GOP nominee hoped to accomplish with those folks has now, I believe, been flushed away.

9/11 to bring relief from campaign

911-september-11th-attacks

Now, for a little good news regarding the dismal campaign for the presidency of the United States.

Both major-party nominees — Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton and Republican Donald J. Trump — have agreed to suspend campaigning for a day.

That day will be Sept. 11, which happens to be the 15th year since the terrorists attacked the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and crashed a third jetliner into a Pennsylvania field.

An aside: I hesitate to use the word “anniversary” to define this event … if you get my drift.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/trump-clinton-september-11-campaigns-227559

We all remember how we heard the terrible news. We all remember the horror, the shock, the grief, the sickening feeling we felt as we watched the events unfold on that terrible day.

That day ought to be a day of reflection over what happened and a day of solemn prayer for the nation that continues to fight on against the evil forces that seek to destroy us.

It has become something of a tradition since 9/11. President Bush and Sen. John Kerry suspended their campaigns in 2004, as did Sens. Barack Obama and John McCain in 2008; indeed, Obama and McCain appeared together at an event at Ground Zero in lower Manhattan. In 2012, President Obama and former Gov. Mitt Romney held events, but those events memorialized the victims of the attack.

We need not hear the candidates’ yammering on this solemn date.

Trump chokes on confronting Mexico on wall payment

immigrant trump

Donald J. Trump is in the middle of a “policy speech” on immigration as I write this blog.

I want to focus for a moment on the Republican presidential nominee’s quick trip to Mexico City, where he met with Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto.

He didn’t mention something that’s been a hallmark of his presidential campaign: getting Mexico to pay for building that “beautiful wall” across our southern border.

Trump’s initial — and signature — campaign pledge was to stop illegal immigrants. He vowed to build that wall. He then vowed in the next breath that Mexico would pay for it. “I’ll make Mexico pay for the wall,” he told his cheering supporters.

Well, he had President Pena Nieto in the room today. He didn’t bring up Mexico’s tab. How come?

Pena Nieto later restated his view that Mexico isn’t going to pay for the wall.

What did Trump accomplish by accepting this invitation to visit President Pena Nieto? I’m trying to figure it out.

No word of an apology for the insults Trump has hurled at the Mexican government for suggesting that “Mexico is sending” career criminals into the United States. Then again, Trump doesn’t apologize for anything.

Now, let’s hear what Trump has to say about how “I alone” will fix the nation’s immigration policy.

Trump might be walking into a trap

fox

Donald J. Trump is going to pay a visit in Mexico City to President Enrique Pena Nieto.

Let’s just say up front that the Republican presidential nominee’s visit isn’t being hailed universally as a sign that Trump is going to rebuild the many bridges he has burned.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/trump-mexico-visit-margarita-zavala-de-calderon-227577

Former Mexican President Vicente Fox said this, according to Politico: “It’s a very opportunistic move, and I hope U.S. public opinion, U.S. citizens can see this and finally, and finally see what is behind Trump, this false prophet that is just cheating everybody,” Fox said during the Skype chat on “New Day” on Wednesday, adding that it is “a desperate move and I don’t see how it can work at all.”

The only way it “works” is for Trump to say he’s sorry for all those incredibly crass things he has said about Mexicans — and about the Mexican government.

Ah, the record is full of highly regrettable statements. This one might be my favorite: It was when he said Mexico “is sending” rapists, murderers, drug dealers and assorted other criminals in the United States. The implication, of course, is that the Mexican government is doing this. How, then, might President Pena Nieto broach that subject with Trump?

How about, too, the idea that Trump is going to “make Mexico pay for the wall”? That has gone over, um, quite badly in Mexico.

And this seems to beg the question: Was the invitation by the head of the very government that Trump has insulted a trap, a set-up made to embarrass the GOP nominee?

Have a good day, Donald Trump.

 

Build a wall along a river? How do you do that?

border-wall1

My friend Rick has asked a perfectly reasonable question regarding the wall that Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump wants to build along our nation’s southern border.

How’s he going to do that, Rick asks, along the Rio Grande River, which comprises the entire border between Texas and Mexico?

He points out three obstacles facing Trump’s plan to build that wall:

* Does he build the wall on the Texas side of the river, denying Texans access to the river?

* Does the wall go up in the middle of the river?

* Finally, does Trump propose to build the wall on the Mexican side of the river, in territory governed by another sovereign nation?

Trump is going to Mexico City on Wednesday to meet with Mexico’s president.

He’s got some serious fence-mending ahead of him.

If he’s willing to apologize for all the insults he has hurled at Mexican citizens — and remember, he says he never apologizes — then he’s got to figure out a way to explain to his hosts how he intends to make Mexico pay for the wall.

I believe I’ve heard the Mexicans say there’s no way on God’s Earth that they’re going to foot the bill for the wall.

Travel safely, Donald.

Awaiting first joint Clinton-Trump joint appearance

Clinton-Trump-debate-jpg

OK, I’ll admit it.

I am anxiously awaiting the first joint appearance in four weeks between Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton and her Republican opponent, Donald J. Trump.

I won’t call it a “debate,” because it isn’t going to be one. They’ll answer questions from a moderator and likely will be unable to question each other.

Why the anxiousness?

I keep hearing and reading things about the way Trump is preparing for this event. He’s relying on ousted Fox News president Roger Ailes, his son Donald Jr., his daughter Ivanka and his new campaign chairman Steve Bannon.

There’s also buzz about how Trump isn’t going to have mock exchanges with stand-ins.

We all saw how he dismantled his GOP primary opponents. He mugged at them, called them names — e.g., Lyin’ Ted and Little Marco.

He faces someone in Clinton, though, who is as unflappable as they come. She’s been through these one-on-one exchanges before, in 2008 against a young U.S. senator named Barack Obama and again this year against U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders.

Her own preparation likely is going to be as comprehensive as possible. Just how does one prepare for a candidate whose style has been compared to that of a nuclear bomb, or a runaway freight train?

She must expected to the totally unexpected.

There will be two more of these joint appearances with Clinton and Trump, as well as one with the VP picks, U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine and Gov. Mike Pence.

This first one, though, well might be the whole show, the ballgame, the big enchilada.

I’m going to look for two things relating to body language:

How will they greet each other when they walk onto the stage? Will they exchange warm handshakes, with them grabbing the person’s elbow with the “off hand”? Or will they greet each other with what amounts to a “pinkie handshake” while avoiding eye contact?

How will it end? Will they still smile at the end of it? Or will Trump’s insults, invective and innuendo be too much for Clinton to take? Or will Trump snub his opponent after she continues to bombard him over his “unfitness to be commander in chief”?

They say the TV audience will be y-u-u-u-g-e.

I believe it. I’ll be one of many millions seeking to take some measure of these individuals.

I’ll have the popcorn ready.

Clinton Foundation needs to end certain practices … now!

clintons

Hillary Rodham Clinton has been accused — although not formally — during her during her entire public life of just about every possible crime imaginable.

Even murder!

They are bogus, phony and meant only to smear her and her husband. They come from those who hate them both.

A situation exists, though, that needs the Democratic presidential nominee’s immediate attention. The New York Times editorial board has come up with a reasonable solution, not that it will stop the critics from piling on.

It involves the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation, which Bill Clinton founded in 2001 to help raise money for his presidential library in Little Rock, Ark. It has become, of course, much larger than that.

Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has forced her to make some pledges, such as refusing to take money from foreign governments. She did so, with some exceptions.

The Times has suggested that the foundation cease at this moment taking money from any foreign government, period, for as long as Hillary Clinton is a candidate for president and certainly while she serves as president if she is elected in November.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/30/opinion/cutting-ties-to-the-clinton-foundation.html?ref=opinion&_r=1

I do not believe Hillary Clinton has broken any laws. Nor do I believe she fits the epithets being hurled at her, particularly by her Republican campaign foe, Donald J. Trump. However, this foundation has created many more problems for her than she might have imagined.

The Times also suggests that if she’s elected, her husband and daughter need to remove themselves completely from any day-to-day operations at the foundation, leaving all administrative matters to others.

The Clintons’ foundation has done tremendous work around the world and it ought to continue.

It can continue raising money and spending it on valuable medical research without the Clintons’ involvement.

Would any of this quell the critics? No. It would, though, send the message that the candidate has heard the concerns — and the criticism — and it willing to provide transparency and accountability to those who are demanding them both.

Let’s await the next plan on immigration

On-Immigration-Trump-Appears-To-Shift-Focus-To-Getting-Rid-Of-The-Bad-Ones-Politics-696x391

Donald J. Trump has a big speech planned this week.

The Republican presidential nominee is going to lay out his latest plan for dealing with illegal immigration.

I can hardly wait to hear what it is. Well, actually … I can wait.

The Trump immigration plan has been all over creation since the candidate rode down the escalator this past summer at Trump Tower to announce his presidential campaign.

We’ll build a wall; we’re going to make Mexico pay for it; we’ll deport all the illegal immigrants; we’ll ban Muslims from entering the country; we’ll make America “great again.”

Then in recent days he began to “soften” his approach. He might not deport all those 11 million immigrants. But he’ll still build the wall. The deportation scheme resurfaced, but it will be done “humanely.” We’ll make the immigrants “follow the law.”

Do you see a pattern here?

Neither do I … except that this clown has no clue about what kind of policy he wants to initiate as president of the United States.

I believe, too, he’s back to deporting the illegal immigrants through the deployment of what he has described as a “deportation force.”

The greatest unknown in all of this is its cost. How much is all this going to cost the U.S. Treasury, which Trump and other critics of the Obama administration say is stretched beyond its limit. We’ve rolled up all that debt, Trump says.

So, do we acquire even more debt, borrow even more money — or do we slash, if not eliminate, other essential government programs to pay for this plan? Which programs do we toss aside?

And precisely how is he going to “get Mexico to pay for the wall”?

We haven’t heard a single detail in any of this.

I’m all ears.