The Weiner Component Vol. 2 #4: Part 1 – President Donald J. Trump

speaking at CPAC in Washington D.C. on Februar...

As of January 20, 2017 the United States had a new president and he certainly seemed different from any that had come before.  On his second day in office a good percentage of women in the county with the aid of some men held protest marches in all the major and a lot of minor cities, not only in the United States but also throughout the world.  Celebrities and female members of Congress came out with anti-Trump speeches.  One march was held within sight of the White House.   Instead of acknowledging this as a First Amendment right, Trump ignored the happening.  On a much smaller scale this has been repeated within the United States every day since, throughout Trump’s first two weeks in office.

 

At the Women’s Marches the women judged Trump, who had previously, over most of his life, judged them on a 1 to 10 scale according to his sexual preference, and found him as president on a scale of 1 to 10 rating below zero.

                             **************************

Now that Trump has been elected President of the United States he is a very nervous head of state.  He can’t seem to get it out of his head that Hillary Clinton received 2.8 million more popular votes than he did.  With absolutely no evidence but a hurt ego, he has stated that he believes that all those extra votes that Clinton got were cast by non-citizens, people registered in more than one state, or by people voting in the name of dead individuals.  He also stated that many people who are registered in two or more states, vote in each. 

 

His daughter, Tiffany is registered in two states.  So is one of his advisors, Steve Bannon. And so is one of his son-in-laws who he is now using as one of his advisors.   People reregister when they move out of a state or to different residences within a state.  There is no mechanism to unregister.  Apparently, one’s name is removed from the voting rolls if an individual does not vote for a number of years.  Somehow Steve Bannon recently got his name removed from a Florida registration.

 

But Trump seems to feel that all this is a plot that kept him from getting both the electoral vote and the popular vote.  He cannot believe that a large number of voters did not really purposely vote for him.  Instead they voted against Hillary Clinton.  The improper balance of votes and false or fake news brought about her defeat.  Trump just happened to benefit from these.  He is the least popular or most disliked candidate in the history of the United States to have run for president.

 

Now, as President, he has ordered an investigation of the voting practices in the last Presidential Election.  The results should be interesting.  All the current evidence implies that all the cheating on voting is a very small fraction of one percent, certainly not the almost three million votes that Trump did not get.  I suspect the public will never hear the results of this investigation if it is even carried out.

 

During the campaign one long-time reporter on the staff of the Wall Street Journal defined Trump as a perennial adolescent who never really grew up.  Apparently what he learned up to that time he still knows.  Anything that has happened to him since that time just reinforces what he already knows. 

 

For some unknown reason this reminded me that Trump, who has never been in the military, was sent by his parents to a Military High School for his education.  Why would New York City parents send their child to a military high school?  The answer would be to get rid of a child who was essentially out of control.  If he misbehaved there he would be sent to the guard house, something his parents could not necessarily do.  Trump is very proud of his high school years which, he believes, gave him a knowledge of the military, since he never served in the armed forces.

 

Most people if they find things in their lives that they don’t like try to change that aspect of their lives.  But Donald Trump does not do this.  Instead he lives in an alternate reality.  If he finds something he does not like he innately knows that it is wrong and takes action accordantly.  With a contractor he has hired for something he knows that he has paid him enough and stops paying him, usually on the last instalment.  With the popular presidential vote he knows that he really won it.  Therefore people must have cheated at the ballet box.  As President he can call forth the forces of the nation to discover his alternate truths.  As a result President Trump is unique and totally scary.  There is no telling what he might do with his alternate reality.

 

If we assume the Wall Street reporter’s analysis of Trump was correct then is the man today any different from the adolescent high school student?  He is thin skinned, generally verbally attacks anyone who criticizes him, ignores group protests protected by the first Amendment, and can be erratic with constantly changing decisions.  Like many adolescents he seems to be incapable of being briefed with by the Intelligence people or, for that matter, by anyone else.  His concentrative ability seems to be relatively short where he is not directly involved in what is going on.

 

Lynden B. Johnson, when he became President of the United States, after the assassination of John F. Kennedy, fulfilled what seemed to be his lifelong ambition.  He became the most powerful man on earth.  What he found was that even though he had the power he couldn’t use it.  He ended up losing the Viet Nam War even though he escalated that war.  Donald J. Trump may not be smart enough to realize that limitation.  And that is really scary as he will be President until 2020, unless he is impeached prior to that time.

              

One thing Donald Trump does do is to project some of his own negative aspects upon any opponent.  For example, during his campaign struggle with Hillary Clinton, Trump called her “Crooked Hillary.”  It seems that he and the Clintons both ran altruistic Foundations.  His was run according to his rules which in many cases legally had nothing to do with the way a Foundation is supposed to function.  Much of what he did with the funds that were contributed by others benefited him directly.  Since the Foundation the Clinton’s had was ten or more times larger than his they must have been at least ten times more dishonest than he was.

                     *******************************

Trump believes in secret prisons outside of the country and that, in interrogating prisoners, torture inevitably works in gaining information from them, as was done under the President George W. Bush’s administration.  Even though the majority of military, CIA and FBI interrogators are against the use of torturing prisoners and do not believe it is an effective way to get information out of enemy prisoners.  The use of this type of “enhanced interrogation,” to quote former Vice President Dick Cheney, is now illegal.  I suspect both Donald J. Trump and Dick Cheney know it works because they feel if they were tortured they would tell the person questioning them whatever they wanted to know.  He is, however, willing to not push this point since his Secretary of Defense does not believe in the use of torture or secret prisons.  But he knows, without any evidence or experience, that torture absolutely works.

        ***********************************

During most of his presidential campaign Donald Trump boasted that as President he would build a high wall between the United States and Mexico to keep thieves, rapists, and murderers from coming into this country from Mexico.  He also boasted that Mexico would pay for the wall.  The Mexican government stated that under no circumstances would Mexico pay for such an enterprise.

 

On Wednesday, January 25, 2017, five days after Trump officially became President of the United State, he signed an executive order beginning work on this enterprise.  The Mexican president then cancelled an official visit to the U.S. and blatantly stated that under no circumstances would Mexico pay for the wall. 

 

Trump stated that it would be complicated getting Mexico to pay for the wall.  On Thursday, January 26 he announced his plan.  There would be a 20% tax on all imports into the United States from Mexico.  Whether this is his opening position or final position is unknown at this time.  In either case it would cancel out the NAFTA agreement with Mexico and make the United States a non-dependable trading partner since it would thereafter have a reputation for changing international trade rules arbitrarily by ignoring its own Trading Treaties.

 

It should be noted that the two countries share a twelve hundred mile border and while some areas in connecting cities where the two country’s border touch, currently have fences; these may not come up to Trumps expectations.  Depending on the fence or wall that Trump wants to build the costs will be anywhere from 3 billion to 33 billion or somewhere above that.  Imagine how much it cost to build a fence around a home property.  There the fence or wall will be, at most, six feet high.  The wall Trump is talking about would be fifteen to twenty feet high and extend for 1,200 miles. 

 

As of Wednesday January 26th the United States would pay for the WALL but will eventually get its money back from a 20% tax on all goods coming into the country from Mexico.  That was the plan on Thursday morning but by Thursday late afternoon the plan had disappeared.  However on the next day, Friday, it was being touted again.  It disappeared again the day after.

 

This so-called wonderful plan of Trump’s will firmly place the cost of building the Wall on the backs of the American taxpayers by placing the payment of the wall firmly on Americans in the U.S.  It will also significantly reduce the purchasing of Mexican products in this country by raising the price of all goods imported from Mexico twenty percent.  Mexico will reciprocate by placing a similar tax upon American goods coming into Mexico.  The result will be a trade war that freezes out a large percentage of purchasers in both countries for people who can no longer afford the assorted items being shipped from one country to the other and both countries will be harshly effected since today both have major trade with the other . 

 

This will be particularly troublesome because Mexico currently is the second largest export market for the United States.  One of the many types of products that comes to the United States from Mexico are fresh fruits and vegetables, particularly during the winter season.  With a twenty percent increase in cost many people will no longer be able to afford these products.  This will take the U.S. back thirty or more years when people had fresh fruits and vegetables in season only, instead of all year.  Not only Mexican farmers and American consumers will be hurt but the entire pattern of trade will be hurt negatively affecting people in both countries.  It may also disrupt trade with many of our other trade partners and destroy the NAFTA agreement between the two counties which has been highly effective for both sides.

 

In addition, once the wall is completed it will have to be constantly monitored.  This will require a large number of crews monitoring it over all twelve hundred miles.  It will cost billions to build and additional billions to care for it.  Even if the United States could get it built at no cost it would still cost vast amounts to maintain it.

 

The entire plan is crazy.  The U.S. will be putting out multi billions of dollars, increasing the National Debt, which may or may not get all its investment back over an unknown number of years; meanwhile standards of living in both countries will drop with the rise in prices.  It is a sad use of resources while the U.S. has a fair sized homeless population of which just the city of Los Angeles, according to a recent count, had 47,000 homeless, many of whom will die of exposure during the winter season.  In addition there are far more things to be done in the U.S. particularly regarding its infrastructure that should take priority over a wall separating both nations.  

         **********************************

Donald J. Trump has been very busy during his first week in office signing executive orders, each neatly placed in a black leather folder.  The problem here is that the majority of these single page documents are not executive orders, they are, if anything, requests to Congress to pass laws that will put these statements into practice.  Of the smaller percentage that are executive orders many contain contradictions that make carrying out the order impossible.  The problem here is that Trump and his staff need to learn what the parameters of executive orders are before he or they start writing them.

 

President Trump has retired or fired the entire upper echelon of the career diplomats at the State Department who have served under both Republican and Democratic presidents.  When the new Secretary of State takes command of that department he will be missing a whole layer of career executives who run the departments on a daily basis as well as many of the trained negotiators.  Of course Trump, who considers himself the world’s greatest negotiator, may appoint a whole new cadre of people to run it but they would not have any experience at doing so.  It would be like bringing back the 19th Century Spoils System into the 21st Century.  These positions are too important to give to loyal amateurs.

 

In addition a large percentage of the individuals who work for the State Department have signed letters of protest against one of Trump’s executive orders baring the entrance of Muslims from entry or reentry into the United States.  They have stated that this order will do more harm than good.  Trump’s press secretary has stated that they can either carry out the order or leave the Department of State.  With the career leadership already having been removed from the State Department and a mass quitting or firing among the rest of the personnel Trump could well begin his tenure with a Secretary of State and a non-functioning Department behind him.  In either case the moral at the Department has never before been as low as it currently is. 

 

So far, after about two weeks in office, Trump would seem to be his own worst enemy as far as running the United States.

The Weiner Component #110 – Killing of Two Policemen: The Price of a Human Life

Most of the news media have recently wrapped up examining the murder of two policemen last year on the morning of December 21st   in Brooklyn. No one considers this act lightly but former mayor Of New York City, Rudy Giuliani and Patrick Lynch, current president of the Patrolman’s Benevolent Association both stated that there was “blood on the hands” of demonstrators and elected officials who criticized police tactics. Apparently they saw the response to the killing of 18 year old unarmed Michael Brown and the suffocation Eric Garner, in addition to the constant killing of essentially black teenagers and young adults, as well as a twelve year old playing in a park near his home, as the cause of this murder.

I have a problem with these idiot comments by men like the two above who should know better but insist upon taking a simplistic and political approach to life, going ballistic over an unfortunate event and attempting to gain political points for themselves in the process.

The murder of the two police officers in Brooklyn, New York by a lone assailant, Ismaaiyl Brinsley, who happened to be a black man that had a history of mental illness and police arrests going back over a number of years; who after he shot the police officers ran a block to a subway station and there shot himself through the head. If we ask why he did it? The answer would put him on a level with Giuliani and Lynch except that his reasoning was dark and irrational while the other two thinking would be aimed at political gain for themselves.

There is a protest movement going on in the United States about the killing of unarmed young black males by police and others. This currently seems to be at least a weekly event, if not more often, and in practically all cases is ruled, generally by a Grand Jury or District Attorney, as justifiable homicide. Strangely, in a society that is mostly white, I don’t find any cases of young white males or Caucasian children, while playing with toy guns, being shot by officials or others justifiably when unarmed. Something seems to be out of kilter.

The protest movement temporarily quieted down while the memorial and funeral for these two police officers was taking place. Meanwhile a number of policemen are going ballistic in frustration denouncing anyone who refused to absolutely blame the protest movement and any liberals like the President and Attorney General for this heinous crime. One of the leading Fox commentators, who likes to make God-like comments which have no basis in reality, Bill Reilly, has called upon the major of New York City, Bill de Blasio, to resign. I’m surprised he didn’t call upon the President and Attorney General to do likewise.

None of these officials or the police seems to be concerned with the endless number of deaths of unarmed black men caused in many cases by armed policemen. They don’t seem to matter compared to two murdered police officers.

In Milwaukee a policeman who killed an black man in a confrontation  on April 30, 2014 will not have to face charges. The District Attorney called the case “justified self-defense.” The police officer, Christopher Manney, encountered the black man while he was sleeping in a park. He patted him down. The man, Dontre Hamilton, awoke. A physical encounter occurred. Hamilton got hold of Manney’s baton and began beating the officer with it. Manney fired 14 times killing Hamilton with shots to the chest. Hamilton was 31 years old; his family stated that he suffered from mental illness. The police officer was later fired for treating Hamilton as a criminal when he had known he had mental problems.

The issue that emerges here is firing 14 bullets. One shot should have been sufficient to stop him. Firing 14 times indicates a man who has lost control of himself and is blindly responding. In Ferguson the police officer fired even more shots at the18 year old, unarmed Michael Brown. Before the Grand Jury the police officer spoke of seeing the teenager at a living demon. The issue here is: Who hires these people? They seem to have a secret fear of all black males. They certainly don’t have enough emotional stability to be police officers. Isn’t there or shouldn’t there be a battery of tests, written and otherwise, that can at least determine if the individual is stable enough to be a police officer.

The issue here deals with the value of a human life, of all human beings. Are the police officers lives worth that much more than the black youngsters that are killed? Is the implication in the United States that white lives are very valuable but black ones are almost without any real value? What is happening throughout the country would seem to indicate this. And if this is true it is a definite breach of the Constitution which states that all men are equal. The whole system of values seems to be out of kilter.

A human life is a wondrous thing. Each and every individual has a potential for some great achievements, if only within his family. To deprive anyone of his life goes against what this country stands for. Even the perpetrators who are taking these lives diminish themselves in the process. Whatever they feel they are accomplishing they are actually diminished by their act of mayhem, be it legally justified or not.

In the case of the two police officers who were virtually ambushed the question that comes up is: How did the shooter get hold of a gun? To my knowledge no one has asked this question. The man had a criminal record and was mentally disturbed.  By what process could he legally or otherwise acquire a pistol?

I understand that the National Rifle Association, with its influence in Congress and the state legislatures, scores every lawmaker continually on his position toward guns, their sale and use, and will financially support those who favor their position with contributions. I also understand that they are against gun checks of persons securing weapons as, I imagine, this would lessen the amount of pistols and ammunition sold. To what extent are they responsible for the current gun culture in the United States? There are more concealed weapons being carried around today than there were in the wildest days of the wild-west in this country.

Are guns so easy to acquire on the East Coast of the United States that anyone, regardless of his background, can get one at will?  Has the NRA been successful in making the laws so inept that anyone can easily and legally acquire a pistol?  There’s certainly something wrong with the laws on the East Coast of the United States when a crazy with a history of mental illness and a criminal record can show up at his ex-girlfriend’s apartment and threaten to shoot himself and then shoot her the day before he goes to New York City and arbitrarily murders two policemen.

Just a few days ago a twenty-nine year old woman in Idaho was shot in the head in Walmart when her two year old son took her concealed pistol out of her handbag and fired it at his mother. I feel a great empathy for this baby who killed his mother; the act will haunt him from the time he reaches cognizance of what he had done to the end of his life.

If responsibility has to be placed at someone’s doorstep in these cases it should rest at the door of the NRA whose goal seems to be to put a weapon in the hands of everyone regardless of their mental state or their criminal history. Who is responsible for this outrage? Mostly the National Rifle Association and their continuing lobbying policies are. Unfortunately these episodes will play out otherwise.

*****************************************

A tragic incident has occurred.  No one will question that.  Will we continue to have reenactments of these tragedies? Isn’t it time for legislation both on the state and federal levels to bring about sensible laws concerning gun culture in the United States for both the perpetrators of these tragedies and for their victims?

I am reminded of John Donne’s 17th Century poem which is as valid today as it was when it was first written.

No man is an island,

Entire of itself.

Each is a piece of the continent,

A part of the main.

If a clod is washed away by the sea,

Europe is less.

As well as if a promontory were.

As well as if a manor of thine own

Or of thine friends were.

Each man’s death diminishes me,

For I am involved in mankind.

Therefore, send not to know

For whom the bell tolls,

It tolls for thee.

Photograph taken at the Gay Pride Parade in Ne...