Tag Archives: Donald Trump

Secret Service not good enough for Trump?

secreat-service

Donald J. Trump keeps breaking with established norms, even as he prepares to become president of the United States.

For example, as the president-elect, Trump is being provided the best security in the world, courtesy of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Secret Service agents are at his disposal 24/7.

However, Trump is continuing to employ private security officials at those rallies. They are using aggressive tactics to quell protestors who occasionally have their voices heard at Trump rallies.

Is this the right thing to do? Is this appropriate for a president-elect who’s already being guarded by the finest publicly paid security service in the world?

I think not.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/donald-trump-security-force-232797

Security officials are concerned that use of the private officers puts Trump and his staff — and his family — at heightened risk. One official noted that the presence of the private security agents creates potential confusion among the Secret Service detail assigned to protect the president-elect and his family.

So, why doesn’t Trump simply rely on the security protocol that taxpayers will be funding?

These folks are damn good at what they do, Mr. President-elect.

Death threats against electors? What the … ?

Members of New York's Electoral College cast their ballots in the New York state Senate Chamber in Albany, N.Y., to elect President Barack Obama and Vice President Joseph Biden on Monday, Dec. 17, 2012. Members of the Electoral College cast the official, final votes in the 2012 presidential election, a constitutional formality on President Barack Obama's march to a second term.  (AP Photo/Tim Roske)

Donald J. Trump’s fans and followers behaved badly when protestors showed up at the president-elect’s rallies.

They were called down by the media, as they should have been.

Now, though, we’re hearing about death threats — for crying out loud! — against Republican electors who are going to cast their electoral votes for the man who won enough of them to be elected president.

Death threats! Are you kidding me?

Is this what we’ve become, a nation of bullies and boors?

The notion that someone would threaten bodily harm — or death — to another fellow citizen who is doing his or her duty is repugnant on its face.

I get that emotions still are smoldering after a contentious and often insult-driven presidential election campaign.

These reports, though, of death threats against electors suggest a level of insanity that needs to be curbed.

https://patriotpost.us/opinion/46517

The media need to come down hard on those making such threats. While we’re at it, the U.S. Justice Department needs to unleash its investigative hounds to track down those who are making them — in violation of federal law.

Still waiting to turn the corner on the new president

I believe I need counseling.

Here’s my dilemma. I have declared my willingness to “accept” that Donald J. Trump has been elected president of the United States. I can count electoral votes as well as the next guy; Trump got more than enough of them to win. He’s likely to sew up the victory today as the Electoral College votes for president.

However — and this is where the dilemma gets really serious, in my view — I cannot yet write the words “President” and “Trump” consecutively. (Take note that I have just avoided doing so.)

I intend to comment frequently on the new president. I’ll be watching him closely. I won’t be alone, quite obviously. I cannot speak for others bloggers/writers/commentators out there. I only can speak for myself.

It has become something of an obstacle for me to refer to the 45th president the way I have been used to referring to every single one of his predecessors. I routinely type the words “President Obama,” or “President (George W. or George H.W.) Bush,” or “President Clinton,” or “President Reagan” and so forth. I didn’t vote for all of those men to whom I refer in that fashion.

This new guy who will take office on Jan. 20? That’s somehow different. I cannot quite get to the root of it.

trumpscandal_pageant

Perhaps it is Trump’s singularly repulsive temperament. It might well be the endless litany of insults he hurled along the way to winning the highest office in the land. Maybe it’s the way he denigrated so many individuals and groups of people. It well could be the notion that he has presented himself — brazenly — as the smartest man ever to inhabit Planet Earth.

I’ll be careful in the future always to refer to Trump as the president. I accept the outcome of the election. However, my instinct — or perhaps it’s the latent childishness that I cannot let go — instructs me to avoid attaching the man’s title directly to his last name.

I cannot go there. I might not ever get there.

Help!

‘Unpresidented’ event about to occur

suprun

OK, “unpresidented” isn’t a real word, even though the president-elect used it in a recent tweet.

Still, we are about to witness an unprecedented event on Monday: the once-routine vote of men and women in all 50 states to select the next president of the United States.

This one ain’t routine. Not by a long shot.

The 538 presidential electors are getting lots of pressure. Tons of it. Mountains of it. The integrity of this election has been called into question by allegations of Russian computer hackers tampering with its outcome.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/electors-under-siege-232774

Now we also have electors wondering if the right candidate won the electoral votes needed to become president. One Republican elector, Christopher Suprun of Texas (pictured with this post), believes Donald J. Trump is unqualified. He won’t vote for the guy who carried the Lone Star State. Suprun is now a “faithless elector,” which is legal in Texas.

There might be others.

Oh, man. This could be fascinating in the extreme.

I’ve been alive for 67 years. I have been politically dialed in to presidential elections since, oh, about 1968 … a most tumultuous year, to be sure. I cast my first vote for president in 1972 and I’ve voted every four years since.

My career in journalism enabled me to be an up-close observer of politics and government for 37 years.

Never have any of us seen anything quite like what we’re about to witness Monday. The nation will be watching with a fair amount of interest in what will happen in all the states.

The electors will vote at noon in each state. They’ll start voting along the East Coast and work their way west. The last electoral votes will be case by the electors in Hawaii.

Suffice to say that it’s far from a routine event.

Do you recall how often it’s been said how “unconventional” this presidential campaign has been? It’s been such at every step of the way.

From the candidacy of Donald Trump, to the GOP convention that nominated the first-time candidate for any political office, to the campaign that featured far more insults and innuendo than serious policy discussion, to Election Night when Trump won enough electoral votes to win, but who trails Hillary Rodham Clinton by 2.8 million popular votes.

Hey, the Electoral College vote we’re about to witness is just another step toward weirdness. Indeed, the public’s intense interest in the outcome is bizarre all by itself.

OMB boss-designate highlights Trump’s ideological conflict

ap_16265784494729

Do you need an example of the non-ideology that drives Donald J. Trump?

Here’s one. Take a look at who he has chosen to become director of the Office of Management and Budget … and then square that — if you can — with what Trump has proposed doing as president of the United States.

The OMB director-designate is Mick Mulvaney, a South Carolina member of the U.S. House of Representatives. Mulvaney is a fierce budget hawk, a founding member of the House Freedom Caucus, a TEA Party golden boy.

Mulvaney fights spending measures whenever he can. He says Congress spends too much money. Government is too big, too hungry for taxpayers’ money.

He’s a conservative’s conservative.

What does Trump want to do? He wants to spend a trillion dollars to improve the nation’s highway, bridge and rail infrastructure.

How in the world is he going to do that? Where is he going to get the money? How will he get this past his budget director, the guy who hates government spending with a purple passion?

Well, Trump is going to be the president. Mulvaney will answer to him, not the other way around.

Still, this appointment speaks to the puzzle that is Donald Trump. He ran as a populist, then has named a large number of billionaires to his inner circle. He said he knows “more about ISIS than the generals,” then picks three general-grade officers to his national security team. He spoke of his desire to improve public education, then selects a known foe of public education as the nation’s education secretary.

Now we have Mick Mulvaney being nominated to run the White House budget office. Mulvaney is a fiscal skinflint who’s going to work for a president intent on spending lots of money while hoping to enact tax cuts that will favor the wealthiest of Americans.

Oh, wait! He’s a populist, too!

Go figure. Any of it!

Media getting it from both sides

imrs

The media can’t buy a break, they can’t get any love these days.

Republicans hate ’em. Now the nation’s top Democrat, the president of the United States, has gone after the media.

Barack Obama held his final press conference of the year this past week and became animated precisely one time, as he was chiding the media for their coverage of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s losing presidential campaign.

He didn’t like the way the media obsessed over the e-mail story, how they kept reporting over and over the controversy that just wouldn’t go away.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/12/16/president-obama-isnt-a-big-fan-of-the-medias-coverage-of-the-2016-campaign/?postshare=6221481923285992&tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.be51a74a5fb5

Democrats appear to be stealing some of the signals offered by Republicans. When things go badly for you, blame the messenger.

Donald J. Trump, I believe, actually loves the media. He is what we used to call politicians a “media whore.” He would use the media to his advantage whenever and wherever possible. He did so brilliantly during his winning campaign for president — even as he trashed the media for what he said was their failure to “tell the truth.” He called them “the most dishonest people.” Still, the media followed him around, giving him ample air time and print space.

Now he’s the president-elect and he’s still trashing the media.

At one level, I understand the president’s frustration with the media. Reporters did all the things he said they did with regard to covering Hillary Clinton’s campaign. However, the media didn’t make these circumstances up. They didn’t just fabricate them and then try to peddle made-up stories to the public. They were real.

The media were doing their job, just as they did when they finally began calling out Trump for lying continually about his foes, about what he allegedly witnessed.

The media are facing a changing environment. To be sure, they are full these days of opinion, commentary and punditry that is overtaking the straight reporting of just the facts.

There remain straightforward media organizations that do a good job of reporting the news fairly. The problem, though, develops when they become drowned out by the noise created among other outlets. Online “news” sites are putting “fake news” stories that the public is buying as real. The purveyors of fake news, moreover, are making money off the clicks they get from suckers who consume that crap.

If only the actual reporters who continue to do their jobs honestly, fairly and with integrity could be heard above the din.

I fear they’re being drowned out forever.

Trump rewrites English vocabulary

pile-of-words

I’ll hand it to Donald J. Trump.

He has rewritten the way a lot of us use the English language. Ever since he burst onto the political scene, Americans have been treated to some fascinating uses by the president-elect of the primary language spoken in this great country.

I’ll offer three quick examples, although I’m sure y’all will have more:

Yuuuge: This means “huge.” Simple enough. The way Trump uses it, though, it has become something of a slang version of the simple word that comprises just four letters. Comedians use it while mimicking Trump. Pundits and, yes, bloggers such as yours truly, use it to make some kind of political point, which usually is to illustrate that what’s yuuuge really isn’t such a big deal.

Bigly: Trump introduced this as an adverb. He told he was going to “win bigly.” He said he’d “bring jobs back bigly.” To be fair, some grammarians have said it’s actually a word. I looked in my American Heritage dictionary. I couldn’t find it there. I pored through the many variations of the word “big,” but didn’t see a single reference to “bigly.” But … it’s a word now.

Unpresidented: This is the latest Trump linguistic phenomenon. He tweeted this one out to refer to something the Chinese did when they captured a U.S. submarine drone. It was “unpresidented,” Trump said. I’ll take a leap and presume he meant to write “unprecedented.” Then again, Trump is “like, I’m a smart person,” so many he tweeted it intending to introduce it to the English language.

Trump will be with us now — he hopes — for at least the next four years. He’ll be on the air, in print, tweeting his brains out with comments that might make us wonder what in the world this guy is saying.

He’ll be inventing more words along the way. Look at this way: He’ll be expanding everyone’s vocabulary.

Let the election results stand — for better or worse

larger

You’ve heard it said that “elections have consequences.”

Americans, I believe in my bleeding-liberal heart, are about to endure the consequences of the 2016 president election.

With that said, I have concluded that the presidential electors who’ll meet Monday to make their choices for president should proceed with electing Donald J. Trump as the 45th president of the United States.

Man, I don’t say that with an ounce of joy. I say it through tightly gritted teeth. My jaw hurts. I can barely type the words without getting the heebie-jeebies.

The Albany (N.Y.) Times-Union’s editorial is a compelling read. It makes a strong case for the electors to toss aside Trump because, the paper posits, the president-elect is unfit for the job. Here’s the editorial; take a look:

http://www.timesunion.com/opinion/article/Electors-reject-Mr-Trump-10796574.php

That is the editors’ opinion. I respect them for stating it.

However, to toss aside the results of the election is to throw our democratic process under the bus. I understand Alexander Hamilton’s assertion that the Electoral College’s mission is to provide “a moral certainty, that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.”

Trump, though, won the requisite number of electoral votes to become president. He needed 270 of them; he received 306. It’s not the “landslide” that Trump has said of it, but it’s enough.

Do the electors, even those who cannot buck their own conscience, rescind the will of the voters? I don’t know see how they can go against the will of their states’ voters. A Texas elector — who took a pledge to support the winner of the state’s electoral votes — has decided that he cannot cast his vote for Trump, who carried Texas by 9 percentage points. A better option for him would have been to do what another elector did: quit his assignment as an elector and hand it over to someone who could cast a vote for the state’s winner.

The so-called “faithless electors” who want to throw aside the result of the election — in effect ignoring its consequences —  ought to reconsider the consequences of their potential decision.

I have virtually zero faith in Donald Trump’s ability to lead the nation. My vote went to someone else. Sure, nearly 3 million more of us voted for the other major candidate than for Trump. The U.S. electoral system, though, doesn’t always work that way. Trump won the votes he needed to win.

If he messes up while serving as president — which I truly believe is a distinct probability — then there are measures that can be pursued to correct the nation’s course.

Yes, elections have consequences. It pains me to say it, but the United States is obligated to face them.

Let’s hear some national unity talk, Mr. President-elect

Dear Mr. President-elect:

You’ve concluded your “thank you” tour in those states you won while scoring a stunning victory in the presidential election.

In just 34 days, you’re going to raise your right hand and take an oath to the very first public office you ever sought. Congratulations on your victory.

aalgtwt

But something was missing from your victory tour: that unity talk you said you’d deliver after you won the presidency. We could hear the chants way out here in places you didn’t visit about “Lock her up!” Didn’t you say you weren’t going to pursue criminal charges against Hillary Rodham Clinton, that the FBI had ruled correctly in declining to seek indictments over the e-mail matter?

What about your pledge to become “president of all the people”? None of us heard any high-minded rhetoric that sought to heal the wounds that tore the nation apart during this contentious election campaign. Where has the outreach been? Why didn’t you take your victory tour to places that Clinton actually won?

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/on-victory-lap-few-signs-trump-focusing-on-unified-nation/ar-AAlGS52?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp

Why didn’t you reach out directly to those folks who voted against you? Surely I don’t need to remind you, Mr. President-elect, that more of us voted against you than voted for you.

This phase of your victory lap has concluded. I presume you’ll take a break with your loved ones to celebrate Christmas.

After that, though, you’ve still got more time to bind the wounds. Oh, and you also have to start boning up on actual governing. You have inherited the complicated and very detail-oriented job. You’ll need to spend some time hearing from presidential briefers on all manner of things — even those silly old national security intelligence matters you seem so willing to blow off.

While you’re still prepping for this big new job of yours, some noble oratory would be good to hear from you. You ought to tell us how you intend to unify the country that — in case you haven’t noticed — is more divided than at any time since, oh, the Civil War.

We’re all ears, Mr. President-elect. Talk to us. All of us. Not just your loyal partisan base.

As president, you’ll be making decisions that affect every single American. It’s time to use that bully pulpit of yours to bring us together.

‘Unpresidented’ isn’t a word, Mr. President-elect

aalghwi

Donald “I’m, Like, a Smart Person” Trump has done it again.

Or maybe someone on the president-elect’s staff has done it.

A tweet went out with Trump’s name that contained a curious non-word. It stated: “China steals United States Navy research drone in international waters — rips it out of water and takes it to China in unpresidented act.”

Unpresidented? Hmmm.

Trump’s tweet referred to the hijacking of a U.S. drone craft by the Chinese navy.

The “unpresidented” reference has drawn plenty of scorn around the social media universe.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/unpresidented-trump-tweet-on-china-sets-off-deluge-of-mockery/ar-AAlGn8g?li=BBnb7Kz

Of course, it’s a non-existent word, and that forces me to wonder …

Either the president-elect is decidedly less literate than most of us have believed him to be, or someone on his staff — one of the “best people” he has pledged to hire — fits that description.

Someone has to yank the Twitter gun out of this guy’s hand.

Whoever it is — Trump or someone on his staff — these idiotic messages are not acceptable.