You've Been Trumped!

[Stavros]

Further to my post above, I should add that I see this as an example of Trump proving to his voters that he is delivering on his promises. That the policy is incoherent and doesn't actually work is irrelevant to Trump and his team who presumably take the view that the most important thing is to broadcast the decision first, then worry about the details later, and condemn anyone who opposes it by twitter, which is how most US policy seems to be delivered these days. In any case, they must believe their voters are not interested in the details which will as Flabbybody argues above, drag on through Congress and the Courts for the next year or so. For this reason Trump has not pointed out to his voters his administration has already modified the policy -on Green Card holders and UK citizens with dual nationality- but declared the policy is a success and should have been made years ago. One wonders what failure will look like when it is finally acknowledged, if it ever is.

[Stavros]

Since my post 6 hours ago, the US Embassy in London has issued an 'urgent notice' contradicting the change in policy announced by Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, it states-

“Per U.S. Presidential Executive Order signed on January 27, 2017, visa issuance to aliens from the countries of Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen has been suspended effective immediately until further notification,” the US embassy’s statement said.

“If you are a national, or dual national, of one of these countries, please do not schedule a visa appointment or pay any visa fees at this time.
“If you already have an appointment scheduled, please DO NOT ATTEND your appointment as we will not be able to proceed with your visa interview.”
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7552911.html

We have been Trumped. What is true at 8am is not true at 2pm. Thus will it continue.

[Laphroaig]

Further to my post above, I should add that I see this as an example of Trump proving to his voters that he is delivering on his promises. That the policy is incoherent and doesn't actually work is irrelevant to Trump and his team who presumably take the view that the most important thing is to broadcast the decision first, then worry about the details later, and condemn anyone who opposes it by twitter, which is how most US policy seems to be delivered these days. In any case, they must believe their voters are not interested in the details which will as Flabbybody argues above, drag on through Congress and the Courts for the next year or so. For this reason Trump has not pointed out to his voters his administration has already modified the policy -on Green Card holders and UK citizens with dual nationality- but declared the policy is a success and should have been made years ago. One wonders what failure will look like when it is finally acknowledged, if it ever is.

I agree that this is Trump showing his supporters that he's prepared to deliver on his ideals. However, I wonder if Trump and his team actually believe that they will get their policies through? In one sense, Trump can't lose. If he delivers, great (for him), if he fails, he can cite it as yet another example of being opposed by "the system, the establishment" and all those he claims to be against him and his supporters.

[Stavros]

I agree that this is Trump showing his supporters that he's prepared to deliver on his ideals. However, I wonder if Trump and his team actually believe that they will get their policies through? In one sense, Trump can't lose. If he delivers, great (for him), if he fails, he can cite it as yet another example of being opposed by "the system, the establishment" and all those he claims to be against him and his supporters.

You are right, because Trump has deduced that his core support pays no attention to 'the media' -which must surely also include Murdoch's various outlets as well as Breitbart- with an opinion poll claiming 56% of US citizens polled agree with the policy. You are also possibly right that as the policy is filtered through Congress and the Judiciary it may unravel, but the additional damage tha has been done is to the reputation of the USA. Banning refugees in the manner it has been done runs counter to the spirit if not the letter of those international agreements the US has been party to since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, it takes away hope from those people who might have seen the US as their last place of refuge, it does nothing to address the origin of the problem in a refugee crisis in Syria created by the government and it external backers, and thus presents the USA as a mean and unfriendly country, and, contrary to the almost constant reference to the Ministry of Christ and the Bible as a guide to living, smears Christianity with an indifference to distress it does not deserve.
But this time next week something else will grab the headlines. I guess the first 100 days will be going like this at 100mph, no brakes needed.

[flabbybody]

Acting Attorney General instructed her DOJ staff to forgo enforcement of Executive Action banning Muslim immigrants due to constitutions conflicts. Trump promptly sacked her....took him about 2 hours.
But don't get too comfortable with that story. We'll be getting a new Supreme Court appointee today @ 8:00 PM EST.
He'll likely make Clarence Thomas look like Ralph Nadir. (we know it's a he)
Buy gold, sell dollars, and make sure there's at least a year's supply of spirits in the basement. My choice is Canadian Rye.

[Stavros]

What is emerging is the shambolic nature of the new administration but also the determination of Trump's advisers, notably Steven Bannon, to use this transitional period to press forward with controversial 'change' before an established Washington network of officials and lawyers can delay decision making while checking for legal and moral issues in policy.
Obama made a point of inviting Trump to the White House and committing himself to the same smooth transition that he received from George W. Bush, yet the Trump approach has been to disregard the norms that used to prevail, as was evident in the State Department. There, senior officials -many of them women, incidentally- handed in their formal resignations expecting to be asked to remain in post while the White House replaced them -no, they were all told to leave immediately, just as Ambassadors around the world were, in effect, sacked on Day One and told to return home, even if there was no replacement.

The Bannon approach, to make swift, bold decisions means that the Department of Homeland Security had no idea the Executive Order on immigration had been issued, even though it is their primary responsibility. In addition, this meant that the precise legal force of the EO was not subjected to a critique before it was issued, setting up the confrontation with acting Attorney General Yates who is accused of 'betrayal' even though her position was quite precisely a legal not a political one, as her letter has shown. Moreover, the replacement, Dana Boente has not, unlike Yates, received confirmation from the Senate which makes one wonder if he has the right let alone the competence to make legal decisions before the nominated Attorney General takes office. Bizarrely, it was Jeff Sessions in her confirmation hearings who asked her if she would be prepared to stand up to a President and tell him a decisions was legally unacceptable. She said yes. The rest is history.

The focus is thus on Bannon and Stephen Miller -co-writers of Trump's inauguration speech- and son-in-law Jared Kushner, as the key agents of power, with Trump appearing in the role of TV host to make the speeches and sign the documents while the real work goes on behind him. Today's New York Times is particularly harsh on Bannon, whose role now extends to the National Security Council where the useless, know-nothing Generals are told only turn up when there is something important to discuss, while Bannon and the rest do the daily work of absorbing political and military intelligence in which they have zero experience at the top level.

Meanwhile in the UK, more than 1,653,000 people have signed a petition calling on the government to downgrade Trump's visit, so it will have to be debated in Parliament. Yesterday it was receiving more than 30,000 signatures an hour, this has slowed, but the text and result can be viewed here-
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/171928

[filghy2]

Since my post 6 hours ago, the US Embassy in London has issued an 'urgent notice' contradicting the change in policy announced by Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, it states-

“Per U.S. Presidential Executive Order signed on January 27, 2017, visa issuance to aliens from the countries of Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen has been suspended effective immediately until further notification,” the US embassy’s statement said.

“If you are a national, or dual national, of one of these countries, please do not schedule a visa appointment or pay any visa fees at this time.
“If you already have an appointment scheduled, please DO NOT ATTEND your appointment as we will not be able to proceed with your visa interview.”
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7552911.html

We have been Trumped. What is true at 8am is not true at 2pm. Thus will it continue.

There's a somewhat similar story in relation to Australia. Our government made a deal with the Obama administration for the US to take a number of refugees who were detained en route to Australia, many of them from the 7 designated countries. Our Prime Minister claimed that he had obtained Trump's agreement to proceed with this, but now it seems unclear http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-0...e-deal/8228336

The background is that under Australia's hard-line policy unauthorised asylum seekers are not allowed to enter the country - instead they are sent to detention camps in a couple of Pacific Island countries who we've bribed to take these people. However, the high court of Papua New Guinea (the largest destination) has declared this arrangement to be illegal, so if the government can't find other countries to take them the whole policy may unravel.

Unfortunately, our government has decided that craven appeasement is the best way to deal with Trump. Unlike the UK and many other countries, our PM has refused to make any criticism of Trump's executive order.

[Stavros]

But filghy2 among those there could be five year old boys. A 5 year old boy was handcuffed and detained at Dulles Airport in the US for four hours and this is what Calamity Sean had to say about it:

“To assume that just because of someone’s age and gender that they don’t pose a threat would be misguided and wrong.”

So it is official, the USA is terrified of 5 year old boys.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a7554521.html

[filghy2]

Further developments on the above story http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-0...e-deal/8235820

So our PM did Trump the favour of not publicly criticizing him, and in return Trump publicly dumped on him. Australia has probably been the US's most loyal ally over recent decades (we even went to Vietnam when the Brits refused). By the time this idiot is through the US may not have too many friends in the world.

[Stavros]

From The Guardian:
Kellyanne Conway, Senior Advisor to President Trump, 2nd February 2017
“I bet it’s brand new information to people that President Obama had a six-month ban on the Iraqi refugee program after two Iraqis came here to this country, were radicalised and they were the masterminds behind the Bowling Green massacre. “Most people don’t know that because it didn’t get covered.”

The Guardian, 3rd February 2017

It didn’t get covered, many are now pointing out, because there was no such massacre.
The two Iraqi men arrested in 2011 did live in Bowling Green, Kentucky, and are currently serving life sentences for federal terrorism offences. But there was no massacre, nor were they accused of planning one. The US department of justice, announcing their convictions in 2012, said: “Neither was charged with plotting attacks within the United States.”
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...never-happened