The Trump Presidency

I think so.. perhaps yes..

The question that perhaps the Trump administration needs to ask it self and so too could the EU:
"How much money is currently invested in a stable international trading regime?"

By this I refer to all those investments, individuals and companies have made on the basis of status quo maintenance and stability.

Significant trading terms instability, uncertainty and change can seriously impact those investments. Forcing massive losses and breach of trust.

Basically the USA ( because of it's elected POTUS) is demonstrating a lack of good faith and can not be trusted to maintain or hold to it's agreements.

I would imagine that signing any contract with the USA with confidence at the moment would be very difficult indeed...
(including the purchase of any military hardware...ie. Recently announced proposed Japanese purchase of fighters and building of an air craft carrier etc)

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Maybe this is why Trump seems so pleased about Brexit.

He wants an Amerexit and ,like some of the Brexiteers is happy to inflict damage along the way to further his end.

His wish for American isolationism,though is tempered by his need for self agrandisment.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

In a deeper context it is really about a global push back against globalization that is happening way too fast for people to adapt adequately to with out the paranoia that any significant change inspires.

The only solution is to embrace globalization and get on top of it. Of course Trump is not the man for the job unfortunately IMO

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

...driven by his inherently low self esteem...
to artificially prop up his self esteem to compensate for a terrible base line...

'tis what happens when you get every thing by flashing the wallet....and not doing the hard work needed instead. (spoilt brat syndrome)

 

Unfortunately Trump NEEDS these tariffs on steel and alum'm etc to help pay for those tax cuts he gave out... and figures no one will notice...
He will fight to hold his position and take every one down with him...

 

Assigning any governing policy or ideological stance to any Republican - much less Trump - is a dubious venture. What Trump "wants" has nothing to do with governing the country except by coincidence.

 

That may be true of Trump as he is clearly a fine example of plain bad character as probably his supporters acknowledge.

I am not confident in my assessment of his aims but he ,like us is caught up in the on going and coming crises.

Normally I might wish him well as his office is so important for Americans and non Americans alike but in his case success feels like the clock that is right twice a day .

Fatally he was voted in seemingly legitimately and we may be condemned to suffer the consequences of his tenure since surely only constitutional measures can be envisaged to mitigate the effects of his so called Presidency.

 

Doesn't seem that way.

 

No but it seems that way to enough people (at the moment) to be a real (and monumental) issue.

If rules were broken then the side that broke them can claim the other side also broke rules....

I am not sure what the mechanism is for invalidating an election result so far down the line.

 

Impeachment.

 

If that is all then ,as I m sure you know impeachment does not remove a sitting President from office.

Should further safeguards be put in place ?

 

The nearest pathway for emergency vacation of office according to definitive electoral fraud would be a Supreme Court decision invalidating the vote, thereupon requiring the Speaker of the House to ascend to the presidency.

And that would likely be sufficient to trigger a war.

(It is almost extraneous to add the reminder that, for a long time—we can start by counting back at least twenty-five years—American conservatives have disdained the U.S. Constitution in a particular and relevant manner: Republican and conservative rhetoric, over the years, has required the tacit article of faith that Americans can vote to defy the "supreme law of the land". The underlying idea is that the Constitution empowers people to do whatever they want, provided they can muster a majority; this framework has increasingly fallen into crisis over the course of recent decades. In my time and experience, certain conservative, anti-government sentiment existed, but I also need to make clear that in 1992, voters countenanced laws including such effects as obliging medical schools to teach and inform dangerous practice, and preventing prosecutors from pursuing certain murders, and all on behalf of a person's right to be a Christian. When the courts said no over the next three years, conservatives pushed the argument that abiding the Constitution meant "legislating from the bench" and "usurping democracy". As empowerment majorities lose traditional, exploitative privilege, they have less and less use for slogans like "equal protection under law" or "Liberty and Justice for All". For the last fifteen years, at least, conservatives have explicitly fought for, and achieved, exclusion such that human rights are, functionally, considered some manner of American privilege. Say what one will about others accommodating and appeasing; once upon a time it was considered improper to accuse as such, but now that we are here, it is much easier to see that the problem is not compromise itself, but open compromise with evil. The motive of the American Revolution was not to abolish the Master class, but to usurp it. I wonder if we will learn, this time around, or if we will end up cutting each other's throats for the fun of it and blaming Hillary, because, really, either we learn this time or fail to make it around the circle again. The history of political struggle is a history of class struggle; nobody escapes the dictatorship of the proletariat because that is not what revolutions are about. Then there is the suicide pact that would assail the social contract in order to oblige its destruction, and if this movement is ascendant, the one thing we simply cannot do with any legitimacy is pretend surprise; they've been at it for a while, now.)​

It also occurs to note that, in order to reach the Supreme Court, we would need several state-level resolutions of electoral fraud. It would be faster to impeach.

 

I must admit that prior to this election of Trump I was totally seduced by Hollywood style marketing of the Truth, Justice and the American way ideology. With the recent publicized election process and subsequent events both global and in the USA that delusion of optimism has some what lifted. The famous statue welcoming the world has been rendered impotent and obsolete.
I guess many in the world suffered in similar ways realizing that the American dream was just that - a dream, one that many, if not all, citizens of the USA shared and existed in but never actually lived.

To the naive, such as I was, this would be a rather outlandish statement, outrageously depicting an end to what is seen as a democratic utopia of rights and freedoms, one that is being used to inspire democracy world wide and one that is essentially still only a dream waiting to be fulfilled.

It is worth stating though that this is not a criticism but merely a reality check that has to take into account the massive gains humanity has made in social change since the somewhat draconian times of WW2 and prior. Suffice to say we as a race have come a long way in just a short time yet it still feels like we have gone nowhere mainly because, I guess, we all know we have a massive task ahead of us yet to be undertaken and hopefully mastered.

I believe the events in Charlottesville in August, 2017 were actually pivotal in determining whether America wished to go to actual war with itself or not.

• Unite the right rally.
• Counter protest.
  
• The State of Virginia per-emptively calls a state of emergency.
• Car driven into crowd killing one.
• 2 state troopers dead from accident(?) helicopter crash.
• Trump fails to realize the devastating potential by "fence sitting" on the issue

After some controversy and an apparent political survival, quick learning curve for Trump, Steve Bannon gets removed from the Whitehouse.

Bannon's employment in the White House ended on August 18, 2017, less than a week after the Charlottesville Unite the Right rally which degenerated into violence and acrimony.​

To me the potential for civil war, that S. Bannon MAY have been contriving in the USA was averted but not by much... It was a close call IMO.

Any one seriously interested in this subject would be advised to start their research with the events of Charlottesville and go from there.

The fact that civil war failed to take hold is significant cause for optimism. IMO

An eye opener for sure.

 

Mc Master out... Kelly next?

Gossip suggests that the world is going to go into wait and see mode when it comes to the trade war looming.. "Sit back and wait for the imminent end of the Trump administration before taking any solid action" sort of thinking...

 

They will be hard put to do nothing in the face of policies informed by John Bolton's thinking.

 

a sort of strange twist to the loss of the national security advisor is that apart from Fox news Trump is currently flying blind. Sure there are others to keep him up to date but it is a question of what a sick POTUS trusts and what he doesn't trust.
Perhaps Fox News propaganda could end up responsible for the next major war?

 

I tend to think the pending POTUS crisis is only a few days away, perhaps only a week or so, so there is not much time for any one to do anything...anyhow...

 

The Hawks have won, it looks now that it makes no longer a difference Clinton or Trump.

 

Clinton was only hawkish compared to most Democrats, she wasn't first strike let god sort 'em out Bolton. And she believes in diplomacy.

 

Clinton's enemies - enemies for decades now - have moved into power. The shallow State is now run by advocates of military violence rather than diplomatic pressure, military coercion rather than trade deals, and so forth - Republicans, not Clinton backers.
That would appear to be a difference. Completely different people, doing different things for different motives, than a Clinton administration.

What is happening is exactly what has been happening since Trump won the election, from his first week in office, and it is exactly what you were told would happen if Trump were elected, contrary to your uninformed guesswork.

Btw: did you catch last week's news break on the origins of the Libyan war? Clinton apparently was not even the main player on the diplomatic front, but rather a target of manipulation - the whole thing seems to have been promoted by corrupt French politicians trying to hide their Libyan dealings:
From this - https://news.vice.com/article/libya...idney-blumenthal-sent-hillary-clinton-in-2011
which is a puzzled speculation on French motives,
to this, the motive revealed:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/21/sarkozy-charged-libyan-cash-campaign/