The US Presidency 2019

[Remius]

Seems like the US economy is right where it should be.  not too hot and not too cold.

https://www.thebalance.com/how-is-the-economy-doing-3306046

 

[tomahawk6]

I found this article on the commander Salamander site and found it quite interesting. US isolation at a time when US leadership is needed I think is the thrust of the article.

https://cdrsalamander.blogspot.com/

 

[a_majoor]

Interesting how so many really important things are being drowned out by "the narrative"

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/the-democrats-impeachment-pseudo-event

The Democrats' impeachment pseudo-event
by Michael Barone
| November 20, 2019 11:59 AM

Print this article
The Image: A Guide to Pseudo-Events is the title of a 1960s book by historian and Librarian of Congress Daniel Boorstin. Pseudo-events, he wrote, are staged solely to generate news media coverage. Real events, in contrast, involve independent actors and have unpredictable outcomes.

It’s not difficult to say which category the House Democrats’ impeachment hearings belongs in. It’s a classic pseudo-event stage-managed to prod sympathetic media into running predictable stories. Inconvenient questions from Republican members are blocked. Even the name of the original “whistleblower” is concealed, though no law requires that, and the stage managers know who he is.

Yet on the front pages and cable news, this pseudo-event is crowding out two genuine events of potentially world-shaking importance and uncertain outcome.

President Trump is going to be impeached by the House and will not be removed from office by the Senate. But the potential for regime change — or regime rigidification — resulting from the prolonged rioting in Hong Kong and recent protests in Iran is hugely consequential and entirely unpredictable.

Foreign policy analysts classify nations as either upholders or disruptors of world order. The disruptors in the years after World War I were Germany, Italy, and Japan. The upholders failed to prevent them from triggering World War II. Since the end of the Cold War the major disruptors have been China, Iran, and Russia. Now the first two are facing vigorous protests and regime-change threats.

The six months of protests in Hong Kong reflect a rejection of China’s increasingly authoritarian state which, armed with artificial intelligence and face-recognition technology, threatens an Orwellian eradication of freedoms.

Will dictator-for-life Xi Jinping crack down violently in Hong Kong, as Deng Xiaoping did in Tiananmen Square in 1989? It's not clear. There would be costs internationally, but China today is growing less dependent on exports to the U.S. and advanced countries. That’s partly due to Trump’s tariff threats but also because Chinese wages are no longer rock-bottom and its labor force is shrinking.

So as China disengages from America, Xi may be willing to endure the backlash from a violent crackdown in Hong Kong. How does America deal with a more hostile and less economically connected — and potentially much more disruptive —China? Both houses of Congress passed unanimous resolutions backing protesters’ demands, but beyond that it’s not clear that anyone knows how to influence the regime’s behavior.

On Iran, Trump and the Democrats have opposite positions. President Barack Obama signed a nuclear agreement with Iran, which he hoped would lead to friendly cooperation in the Middle East — hopes that were never fulfilled. Trump renounced the agreement and has squeezed the Iranian economy, possibly giving rise to the current protests. They’re serious enough that the mullah regime has largely shut down Iran’s isolated internet.

Will this lead to regime change? Iran’s “green” protests of 2009, largely ignored by the Obama administration, didn’t. These may not either. But history shows that peaceful protests can sometimes topple a tyrannical regime, even though it’s hard to predict just when. Ronald Reagan envisioned the fall of the Berlin Wall and Daniel Patrick Moynihan the collapse of the Soviet Union, but neither knew those things would happen in November 1989 and December 1991.

It’s possible that the regimes of post-Mao communist China and the mullahs’ Iran might collapse after 40 years of tyranny. Or, less happily and more likely, these regimes may sweep aside the protests and last for centuries, like so many Chinese dynasties and Persian monarchies. Real events have uncertain and possibly momentous outcomes.

Not so for the impeachment hearings. Witnesses are heard complaining that Trump subverted the “formal interagency policy process” and that he pressured — “bribed” is the focus-group-determined but inapt verb that Democrats are now using — Ukraine’s government for political gain. But Ukraine is not a formal U.S. ally, and Obama refused to provide it even defensive weapons when Russia seized its territory in Donbass and Crimea. Now we’re told that Trump should be ousted from office for a two-month delay in delivering those weapons.

“The executive power,” Article II of the Constitution states, “shall be vested in a president of the United States of America.” That president, as the career diplomats testifying have acknowledged, has no obligation to follow “interagency” processes or consensus. It’s hard to avoid concluding that Democrats who detest Trump seized on this weak pretext for impeachment when and because the charges of Russian collusion they brandished for three years turned out to be baseless.

Polls show support for impeachment declining. Americans, it turns out, don’t have to read Boorstin to recognize a pseudo-event when they see one.

 

[Altair]

Interesting how so many really important things are being drowned out by "the narrative"

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/the-democrats-impeachment-pseudo-event

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/impeachment-polls/

No real poll numbers saying less support for impeachment.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

Interesting how so many really important things are being drowned out by "the narrative"

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/the-democrats-impeachment-pseudo-event

You are right of course.  Corruption?  Not an important thing.  President acting like an Emperor and ruling by fiat?  Not really all that important.  The loss of any prestige, anywhere, whatsoever?  Not so much.  Allies?  Nah.  Standing up to tyrants (or even being one)?  Nope.

Tell me what is important again?  Tax cuts for the wealthy?  Destroying the environment?  Making the rich richer?  Further gerrymandering the vote?  Divided a country once united? Cheapening the gleaming city on the hill?  Pandering to tyrants?  Are those the important things?  I keep forgetting what I'm supposed to thing - guess I should check Fox / Breitbart / Infowars.

I think that the Impeachment show is silly, and that the Democrats have made a huge mistake...but let's not let their incompetence bestow even the slightest bit of legitimacy on the actions of this White House.

A pox on all of their houses.

 

[daftandbarmy]

You are right of course.  Corruption?  Not an important thing.  President acting like an Emperor and ruling by fiat?  Not really all that important.  The loss of any prestige, anywhere, whatsoever?  Not so much.  Allies?  Nah.  Standing up to tyrants (or even being one)?  Nope.

Tell me what is important again?  Tax cuts for the wealthy?  Destroying the environment?  Making the rich richer?  Further gerrymandering the vote?  Divided a country once united? Cheapening the gleaming city on the hill?  Pandering to tyrants?  Are those the important things?  I keep forgetting what I'm supposed to thing - guess I should check Fox / Breitbart / Infowars.

I think that the Impeachment show is silly, and that the Democrats have made a huge mistake...but let's not let their incompetence bestow even the slightest bit of legitimacy on the actions of this White House.

A pox on all of their houses.

There was once a time when we used to deal with 'that annoying kid' by just ignoring him. Unfortunately, everyone hopping on the outrage bus every 20 minutes is playing right into the hands of the Trump machine, which thrives on fear, and it's working:

"Studies confirm that mortal terror amplifies support for Trump. Prior to the election, participants reminded of being in pain had more favourable impressions of Hillary Clinton than Trump. However, impressions of Trump improved significantly if participants were reminded of their mortality. Moreover, Americans asked to think about the construction of a mosque in their neighbourhoods, or immigrants moving nearby, showed higher levels of nonconscious death thoughts – thus demonstrating that persistent efforts to demonise Muslims and immigrants had been quite successful. Americans also rated Trump more favourably after being asked to imagine a mosque or immigrants in their neighbourhoods." https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/23/secret-trump-success-existential-dread-populist-death

 

[PPCLI Guy]

That is not about mortality.  That is about racism....which is Trump's true clarion call.

 

[Brad Sallows]

I don't see any signs that anyone ever hopped off of the outrage bus.  Coverage is non-stop, with the dial permanently welded to 11.

 

[FJAG]

Worry rises in military over Trump's decision-making
By Barbara Starr and Nicole Gaouette, CNN
Updated 7:10 PM ET, Wed November 27, 2019

A long-serving military officer put it bluntly, telling CNN "there is a morale problem," and senior Pentagon officials have privately said they are disturbed by the President's behavior.

Dismay in the Pentagon has been building over Trump's sporadic, impulsive and contradictory decision-making on a range of issues, including his sudden pullback of troops in Syria. But now there are new and significant worries, as multiple military officials and retired officers say Trump's intervention into high-profile war crimes cases cannot be ignored.

Fired Navy Secretary Richard Spencer wrote Wednesday in a Washington Post op-ed that Trump's intervention was "shocking and unprecedented. ... It was also a reminder that the president has very little understanding of what it means to be in the military, to fight ethically or to be governed by a uniform set of rules and practices."

Trump had upped the ante at a rally on Tuesday by issuing an extraordinary declaration that he took action in the face of "deep state" opposition. In fact, senior Pentagon officials had been unanimously opposed to the President's intervention because they believed it would undermine military discipline and order.

The President's comments and his intervention -- at the urging of Fox News commentators -- reflect another worry among military leaders that Trump continues to be influenced by the network in ways that encourage him to politicize the military, an institution that is meant to stay above the political fray.
Top military leaders say they are concerned about Trump's divisive rhetoric and politicization of the military. They also tell CNN they worry the President's mercurial management style -- often expressed through tweets -- may be undermining national security by making military planning increasingly difficult.
...

See rest of article here:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/27/politics/pentagon-concern-trump-decision-making/index.html

:cheers:

 

[Journeyman]

There is no legal means to countermand a President's order to launch nuclear weapons.  LINK
I just thought I'd put that out there for anyone questioning Trump's sanity, and not having enough to worry about already.  op:

 

[Baz]

There is no legal means to countermand a President's order to launch nuclear weapons.  LINK
I just thought I'd put that out there for anyone questioning Trump's sanity, and not having enough to worry about already.  op:

There was a senate hearing in Nov 2017 that a former SAC commander, Gen Robert Kehler, said that if it was an illegal order it would be refused.  The current SAC commander at the time then informally supported that.  If I remember right part of the discussion was that a preemptive strike it would be an act of war, and only Congress has the authority to wage war.

However, following that it wasn't clear how the operational procedures would even give a chance for the order to be refused...

Edited to add: upon further reading, the Constitution Grant's Congress the power to declare war, and the presidency doesn't recognize that as a limit to it's power to wage war.  The War Powers Act of 1973 further muddies the waters. .

Notwithstanding the discussion, it certainly seems no one has the absolute right or duty to stop him...

 

[QV]

In the absence of any real evidence, there sure is a lot of carrying on what a racist and insane person President Trump is.  Are we measuring him by the high ethical bar of Clinton, Kennedy, or LBJ?  Or maybe perhaps the even higher bar of the SNC plagued, found to be unethical, blackfaced, alleged groper of a PM we have re-elected?

If he is such a racist, why does his approval keep rising among black Americans?  If he is so insane that on a Trumpian whim he will destroy the world with a launch of nukes, list me all the unnecessary wars he's committed US troops to.

CNN and CBC is not honest journalism.   

 

[Baz]

My concern is not that he is racist or insane, it's that he is claiming he has absolute power, and is blocking another arm of government from exercising their right and duty to conduct investigations into how he uses that power, including using it in questionable ways.  But yes, the Democrats are no better... no worse, but no better.

I have similar concerns wrt the PMO in Canada, which has seen increasing concentration of power with PE Trudeau, Cretian, Harper,  and now J Trudeau.

There is a difference between healthy dialog between left and right and allowing the extremes of left and right undermine the foundations of democracy.  We are drifting into the latter at our peril.

 

[Remius]

In the absence of any real evidence, there sure is a lot of carrying on what a racist and insane person President Trump is.  Are we measuring him by the high ethical bar of Clinton, Kennedy, or LBJ?  Or maybe perhaps the even higher bar of the SNC plagued, found to be unethical, blackfaced, alleged groper of a PM we have re-elected?

If he is such a racist, why does his approval keep rising among black Americans?  If he is so insane that on a Trumpian whim he will destroy the world with a launch of nukes, list me all the unnecessary wars he's committed US troops to.

CNN and CBC is not honest journalism. 

I won't call him a racist based on his approval rate among African Americans but since you mentioned it, his approval rating isn't exactly going up.  But it is stabilised at an awesome 10%...

Source: https://news.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/268517/analyzing-black-support-president-trump.aspx

 

[mariomike]

, why does his approval keep rising among black Americans? 

African Americans but since you mentioned it, his approval rating isn't exactly going up.  But it is stabilised at an awesome 10%...
Source: https://news.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/268517/analyzing-black-support-president-trump.aspx

For reference to the discussion,

November 8, 2018
Republican candidate:

Black 9%
Asian 23%
Hispanic 29%
Women 40%
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/11/08/the-2018-midterm-vote-divisions-by-race-gender-education/

Jewish 17%
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/11/07/how-religious-groups-voted-in-the-midterm-elections/

 

[QV]

I won't call him a racist based on his approval rate among African Americans but since you mentioned it, his approval rating isn't exactly going up.  But it is stabilised at an awesome 10%...

Source: https://news.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/268517/analyzing-black-support-president-trump.aspx

Rasmussen Reports official Twitter account reports black voter approval for Trump is:

Rasmussen 34%
Emerson Polling 34.5%
Maristpoll 33%

https://www.theepochtimes.com/trump-approval-among-blacks-above-34-percent-emerson-polls-shows_3155737.html

 

[Blackadder1916]

. . .  Are we measuring him by the high ethical bar of Clinton, Kennedy, or LBJ?  . . .

How about measuring him by the expected ethical bar of a 7 year old?  I use age seven as the mark because, having been raised and educated in the Roman Catholic Church (Irish style, so that means I'm an atheist, though probably will start looking for salvation as end of life nears), that is the age the Church considered one to have gained "reason".  What should he have learned (and generally adopted as practice) by the time he was in Grade 2?  Don't lie, cheat or steal.  Respect your elders (and your maker for those who believe in that sort of thing) and treat all with respect and courtesy.  Don't be a bully.  So, the standard Ten Commandants stuff - lessons reinforced to us by Nuns, in the early years, by injudical application of the strap.  Some of the other things I had learned by that age was loyalty to the group and cooperating with others - we were from a tough neighbourhood and being part of the "gang" was not only a social compact but also one of personal defence (think more "Dead End Kids" rather than "Crips and Bloods").  Granted, one's life lessons aren't complete at that young age, but it should be the signpost pointing out the path one follows.

Much the same was said in a popular book All I really need to know I learned in Kindergarten.

ALL I REALLY NEED TO KNOW I LEARNED IN KINDERGARTEN

(a guide for Global Leadership)

All I really need to know about how to live and what to do and how to be I learned in kindergarten. Wisdom was not at the top of the graduate school mountain, but there in the sand pile at school.
These are the things I learned:
•Share everything.
•Play fair.
•Don't hit people.
•Put things back where you found them.
•Clean up your own mess.
•Don't take things that aren't yours.
•Say you're sorry when you hurt somebody.
•Wash your hands before you eat.
•Flush.
•Warm cookies and cold milk are good for you.
•Live a balanced life - learn some and think some and draw and paint and sing and dance and play and work every day some.
•Take a nap every afternoon.
•When you go out in the world, watch out for traffic, hold hands and stick together.
•Be aware of wonder. Remember the little seed in the Styrofoam cup: the roots go down and the plant goes up and nobody really knows how or why, but we are all like that.
•Goldfish and hamsters and white mice and even the little seed in the Styrofoam cup - they all die. So do we.
•And then remember the Dick-and-Jane books and the first word you learned - the biggest word of all - LOOK.

Everything you need to know is in there somewhere. The Golden Rule and love and basic sanitation. Ecology and politics and equality and sane living.

Take any one of those items and extrapolate it into sophisticated adult terms and apply it to your family life or your work or government or your world and it holds true and clear and firm. Think what a better world it would be if we all - the whole world - had cookies and milk at about 3 o'clock in the afternoon and then lay down with our blankies for a nap. Or if all governments had as a basic policy to always put things back where they found them and to clean up their own mess.

And it is still true, no matter how old you are, when you go out in the world, it is best to hold hands and stick together.

[Source: "ALL I REALLY NEED TO KNOW I LEARNED IN KINDERGARTEN" by Robert Fulghum.

While I hope that Mr. Trump "flushes", my take is that he didn't properly learn most lessons from kindergarten.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>My concern is not that he is racist or insane, it's that he is claiming he has absolute power, and is blocking another arm of government from exercising their right and duty to conduct investigations into how he uses that power, including using it in questionable ways.

Exactly.  It's high time Congress started taking its claims to court and re-asserting its powers thereby, instead of sounding off as though disputes over what is privileged and what is not are some kind of crime.

 

[mariomike]

How about measuring him by the expected ethical bar of a 7 year old? 

My ethical bar for leaders is they calm more chaos than they create.

 

[Blackadder1916]

My ethical bar for leaders is they calm more chaos than they create.

Not necessarily a measure of ethics.  It could be said that there wasn't a lot of "internal chaos" during the time of Stalin.  While life in the Soviet Union in his time was far from pleasant, it was a very structured society and any individuals/groups considered disruptive was quickly "calmed".