Tag Archives: Donald Trump

Does POTUS believe climate change is a hoax?

Donald J. Trump campaigned for the presidency on the heels of a series of outrageous assertions.

One of them involved climate change.

This individual would travel around the country and declare that climate change is a “hoax” — perpetrated by nations such as China. He would buck the consensus developed by the worldwide scientific community. Many scientists, including more than a few Nobel laureates, have concluded that Earth’s climate is changing, the temperature is warming — and that humankind is largely responsible for the change.

Polar ice caps are shrinking; animal habitats are being threatened; rampant development is ridding the world of millions of acres of forestland; yes, sea levels are rising and vast expanses of coastline around the world are being threatened.

A hoax? I don’t think so.

So the president pulls the United States out of the Paris Accord meant to unite the world’s nations in the fight against the changing climate. He wants to “make America great again.” How does this move accomplish that? By taking the world’s greatest nation out of the global discussion?

The president keeps harping on jobs, how regulations rob Americans of jobs. He never mentions all the jobs being created by the development of alternative energy sources, such as wind, solar and nuclear power.

Trump yaps about bringing back the coal industry, about boosting the production of petroleum. He rolls back environmental regulations with the blessing — and this is hard to stomach — of the Environmental Protection Agency administrator.

And yet, when the media keep asking the president’s representatives about whether he still believes climate change is a hoax, they won’t answer. They hem and haw, they bob and weave, they won’t provide a direct answer to a direct question.

I’ll ask again here: Does the president still insist that all the evidence we are witnessing in real time is a hoax, a figment of our imagination?

‘Comedian’ reaps what she has sown

I just watched a brief TV news video of “comedian” Kathy Griffin blubbering about the future of her career.

I’m not sure what her future holds in store, but I wouldn’t be surprised if she needs a good bit of time to “rehabilitate” her image — or perhaps she could start over — from scratch.

Griffin recently took part in a hideous video depicting her holding a “severed head” that supposedly belonged to Donald Trump.
The outrage was immediate and forceful.

It was just the kind of response that Griffin should have expected to receive from what she called “an artsy fartsy statement.”

It was nothing of the kind.

I get that entertainers are entitled to their own political points of view, just like, oh, bloggers. However, when entertainers are as well-known as Kathy Griffin, then they risk the kind of blowback that has exploded all over her.

Lest we forget: Kathy Griffin built her career on raunchy “humor.” She went too far. Now she is paying the price for stepping way beyond the bounds of good taste.

What do you suppose blocking Comey would tell us?

Let’s play out a certain scenario that’s being discussed in Washington, D.C. at the moment.

Donald J. Trump reportedly is considering whether to invoke executive privilege to block former FBI director James Comey from testifying before the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee.

The White House isn’t saying what the president will do.

Trump fired Comey as FBI director while the FBI is in the midst of an investigation into whether the Trump presidential campaign colluded with Russians who were hacking into the 2016 presidential election.

Trump canned Comey suddenly.

The Justice Department has appointed a special counsel to lead the investigation.

If the president blocks Comey’s testimony, what are we supposed to presume? Might it be that Comey has something terribly damaging to tell senators — under oath — about whether the president obstructed justice by pressuring him to back off an investigation?

Inquiring minds might want to know. Don’t you think?

Kushner, Ivanka get stiffed by POTUS/Dad

Just when you thought Ivanka Trump and her husband Jared Kushner were deputy presidents of the United States, the actual president stiffs them on their staunch support of the Paris Accord aimed at dealing with climate change.

What gives? Oh, I think I know, actually.

The nationalist wing of the White House inner circle got to the president; it had his ear for the final time before announcing Thursday that he would pull the United States out of the worldwide alliance to fight the planet’s changing climate and the consequences it is bringing.

So much, then, for Ivanka and her husband’s legendary influence over the president. Frankly, I stand with them — and against Trump and his nationalist buddies — in this crazy development.

The president’s daughter and son-in-law weren’t alone in their support of the climate agreement. National security adviser H.R. McMaster wanted to stay involved; so did Secretary of State Rex Tillerson; same with Energy Secretary Rick Perry. I should add, too, that a number of key Republicans in and out of public office wanted the president to stay the course.

No can do, he said.

The issue is American jobs, which the president believes would be lost because this country would work with other nations in seeking to curb the causes of global warming and climate change.

What … utter … crap!

This isn’t how you ‘make America great … again’

Donald J. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” now means that the United States of America will sit on the sidelines while the rest of the world wages war against climate change.

This isn’t surprising. Neither is it acceptable in any form or fashion.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/climate-pact-pullout-rewards-the-few-and-powerful/ar-BBBNixu?li=BBnb7Kz

The president today announced his decision to pull out of the Paris Accords, which aligns more than 190 nations in the fight against climate change.

It isn’t, as opponents have contended, a top-down edict forcing nations to adhere to some sort of global mandate. The agreement, hammered out among the participating nations, allows for individual countries to adapt to policies aimed at reducing carbon emissions and scale back on the myriad causes of climate change and, yes, the warming climate.

Scientists around the world have concluded that human activity has played a major role in the changing climate. The Paris Accords are meant to bring nations together to hold humans accountable for their actions.

The United States is the big dog on the planet. We are the greatest nation on Earth and we need a place at the world’s table.

The president today just pushed us away from that table. Why? To satisfy the electoral base that help elect him.

This is a sad day for those of us who are concerned about the fate of the world.

This isn’t how the greatest nation in that world is supposed to lead it.

Sanity presents itself in Trump White House

Donald Trump pledged to move the U.S. embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

Then the president thought better of it. He has signed a six-month extension to keep the embassy where it’s been since the founding of Israel in 1948, in Tel Aviv, a relatively safe distance from where terrorists and other sworn enemies of the United States and Israel commit their acts of violence.

http://thehill.com/policy/international/335850-trump-keeps-us-embassy-in-tel-aviv?rnd=1496325457

The Palestinians want East Jerusalem to become capital of an independent state, when or if that occurs. The Israelis claim all of Jerusalem as their own holy place.

“We know that peace is possible if we put aside the pain and disagreements of the past and commit together to finally resolving this crisis,” Trump said in a speech in Jerusalem. “I am personally committed to helping Israelis and Palestinians achieve a peace agreement.”

The idea is to broker a peace deal that determines the fate of the holy city, which has been the goal of U.S. presidents of both political parties all along.

Donald Trump has seen the reality of the situation and has backed off his overheated campaign pledge and has decided the status quo isn’t such a bad idea.

Good call, Mr. President.

Ricks on McMaster: Quit and save your reputation

Thomas E. Ricks has written one of the more astonishing political columns I’ve seen in a good while.

The Pulitzer Prize winner, writing in Politico, says that national security adviser H.R. McMaster should resign his post to salvage his stellar reputation as a military thinker and strategist.
McMaster is on active duty in the U.S. Army. He’s a lieutenant general known for his intellect, integrity and courage. He wrote a book, “Dereliction of Duty,” that provides a scathing critique of how the chain of command prosecuted the Vietnam War.

Here is a snippet from Ricks’ essay in Politico: “McMaster probably thinks that by staying at his post, rather than resigning in disgust, he is doing his duty. Specifically, he may think that if stepped down, he might well be succeeded by an alt-right ally of White House adviser Steve Bannon. As I said, I used to believe that too.

“But I have watched and waited, and I don’t see McMaster improving Trump. Rather, what I have seen so far is Trump degrading McMaster. In fact, nothing seems to change Trump. He continues to stumble through his foreign policy—embracing autocrats, alienating allies and embarrassing Americans who understand that NATO has helped keep peace in Europe for more than 65 years.”

Ricks’ concern about an Army officer he has known for 20 years is that he now works for someone who knows nothing about government and seems to have no interest in learning the ins and outs of governing the greatest nation on Earth.

Yet the general has to provide political cover for a president who, in Ricks’ view, doesn’t deserve to hold the office he now occupies.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/05/28/general-mcmaster-step-downand-let-trump-be-trump-215199

As Ricks writes: “The saving grace of Donald Trump as president is his incompetence. He knows almost nothing of how the federal government works. He seems to have been repeatedly surprised by the checks and balances written into the Constitution by the Founding Fathers. And he seems uninterested in learning.”

Ricks’ essay is a beaut. I am quite sure that Gen. McMaster has read it. Whether he takes it to heart — and acts on it — of course only he can answer.

Climate change, Mr. President?

Let’s take a breather from “negative press covfefe” for a moment or two and zero in on something of considerably more significance.

That would be climate change and the future of Planet Earth — and whether the world’s most powerful nation will take part in a worldwide effort to protect the planet.

Reports have surfaced that Donald J. Trump is leaning toward pulling the United States out of the Paris Accord, which was signed by virtually every nation on Earth to battle climate change.

It’s a measure, according to the media, for the president to “put America first.” Good grief!

Two nations didn’t sign the accord: Syria and Nicaragua. The rest of the world signed on. It is meant to signal a global commitment to mitigate the consequences of what the vast majority of pertinent scientific minds have concluded: that humankind’s activity has contributed to the changing climate. Carbon emissions and deforestation are products of industrial development and all of it has taken a devastating toll on the world’s ecosystem.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/335838-climate-change-drama-grips-the-white-house

If the president goes through with this effort to yank the United States out of the agreement, most of us can predict worldwide outrage. A Trump decision to pull out of the Paris Accord would be nothing more than a sop to the Republican Party base that got him elected in 2016.

It also would be a bow to the nationalist wing of his inner circle, led by Stephen Bannon, the former Breitbart editor and spokesman for the far right wing of the Republican Party. Trump pledged to “make American great again.” How in the world does a “great” nation refuse to lead the world in fighting a global crisis?

It’s fascinating in the extreme, though, that other senior Trump administration officials want the United States to adhere to the Paris Accord. They include, and get a load of this list of heavy hitters: Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, the former CEO of ExxonMobil, for crying out loud; Energy Secretary Rick Perry; son-in-law/senior policy adviser Jared Kushner; economic adviser Gary Cohn; and national security adviser H.R. McMaster.

Can there be anything more that the president can do to infuriate our nation’s allies? He seems to be working overtime to find methods of angering our closest allies. Canada, Mexico, Germany, the UK, Australia and France all have felt the sting of Trump barbs; meanwhile, the president remains stunningly silent about Russia and that nation’s effort to meddle in our 2016 presidential election.

Trump says he’ll announce his Paris Accord decision “in a few days.” This ongoing story has tossed yet another crisis element into the stew that’s brewing inside the White House.

Here’s one more plea to the president from Flyover Country: Don’t pull us out of these accords.

Why not explain ‘covfefe’?

Donald J. Trump’s “covfefe” tweet has detonated the Twitterverse.

Social media of all stripes also have exploded with commentary, questions, bewilderment and confusion.

It seems to center on this fundamental question: What in the world was the president of the United States meaning when he wrote: “Despite the constant negative press covfefe”?

This is an example of one of the many failings of the Trump White House communications team. It cannot — or will not — offer a simple explanation of what happened.

Did the president hit the “send” button prematurely?

Did he get distracted?

Was it just a damn mistake?

The White House flacks won’t say.

Oh, wait! Maybe their reticence might have something to do with related questions that an answer might generate.

Doesn’t anyone vet the president?

Doesn’t anyone counsel him against using Twitter?

Does the president even listen, or care, what his advisers are telling him?

Oh, the chaos continues.

Griffin gets canned; ‘Madman’ gets a pass

David Axelrod, one of Barack Obama’s political gurus, poses an interesting thought on social media.

It concerns “comedian” Kathy Griffin’s disgraceful video showing her holding a “decapitated head” purporting to be that of Donald J. Trump.

CNN fired Griffin for her utterly crass stunt, which she initially thought of as an “artsy fartsy statement.” So long, kid. Don’t let the door hit in your backside.

But then, Axelrod wonders, how does Ted “Motor City Madman” Nugent get a pass for the endless string of grotesque statements he has made about, oh, Barack H. Obama. You know, things like calling him a “subhuman mongrel” and a litany of other vile epithets.

The president even invited Nugent to the White House for an intimate dinner, along with Sarah Palin and Kid Rock.

Well, Mr. President? Is there just a touch of a double standard here?
I’ll weigh in. I believe there is.