TRUMP AGENDA - Being Unconstitutional

"Trump Wants To Blame Judges For Terror Attacks" by Ben Dreyfuss, Mother Jones 2/5/2017

On Friday, a federal judge in Seattle put the brakes on Donald Trump's widely-reviled "Muslim Ban." The next day, Trump attacked the judge personally on Twitter.  Later Saturday night, an appellate court rejected the government's request to lift the earlier judge's stay.  So, as of Sunday, Trump's executive order is not being enforced because multiple judges have found it not to pass legal muster.

In response, the president took to Twitter with what may be some of his more ominous statements yet (Tweets):

• Donald J. Trump ? @realDonaldTrump
  The judge opens up our country to potential terrorists and others that do not have our best interests at heart.  Bad people are very happy!
  4:48 PM - 4 Feb 2017
  25,479 25,479 Retweets 112,775 112,775 likes

• Donald J. Trump ? @realDonaldTrump
  Just cannot believe a judge would put our country in such peril.  If something happens blame him and court system.  People pouring in.  Bad!
  12:39 PM - 5 Feb 2017
  18,525 18,525 Retweets 79,676 79,676 likes

• Donald J. Trump ? @realDonaldTrump
  I have instructed Homeland Security to check people coming into our country VERY CAREFULLY.  The courts are making the job very difficult!
  12:42 PM - 5 Feb 2017
  17,509 17,509 Retweets 83,901 83,901 likes

Needless to say, people are not "pouring in."  Only travelers who already had been vetted and issued visas are coming.  (It's really hard to get a visa!)  But if America suffers a terror attack, Trump will blame the judicial branch—which, with Congress largely standing pat, happens to be the one real check on his power, just as the founders intended.  He's telling us this in advance. 

As former Obama aide Jon Lovett put it (Tweet):

• Jon Lovett ? @jonlovett
  Trump signaling his intent to blame checks on his power for terrorist attacks is his most explicit threat against our democratic system yet.
  
  https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/828342202174668800 …
  12:56 PM - 5 Feb 2017
  7,002 7,002 Retweets 9,583 9,583 likes

Trump does NOT comprehend that the Judiciary is a separate, independent, branch of our constitutional government whose function is to tell EVERYONE when they have stepped over constitutional bounds, INCLUDING the President of the United States!  It's the Rule of law!

Mr Trump, you are NOT a king nor a dictator 😡

POLITICS - 'No Labels' Goals

NOTE:  I contribute to 'No Labels' but doubt that much will get done with today's Republican Party.  Also, any 'pledge' is not the same as what they will actually do once in office.

All politicians 'fib.'

"Can setting bipartisan goals disrupt political dysfunction?" PBS NewsHour 1/11/2016

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  As the presidential campaigns compete hard to win over voters, the bipartisan group No Labels is trying to bring the parties together, rallying candidates around a policy agenda pledge focused on jobs, Social Security and Medicare, balancing the federal budget and energy security.  Judy Woodruff talks to the group’s co-chairs, former Gov. Jon Huntsman and former Sen. Joe Lieberman.

JUDY WOODRUFF (NewsHour):  And while the candidates jockey for position and try to win over voters, the bipartisan group called No Labels is still hammering away at its goal of bringing the parties together.

Today, they announced Republicans Ben Carson, Chris Christie, John Kasich, Rand Paul, and Donald Trump, and one Democrat, Martin O'Malley, have all signed a pledge to work toward the No Labels policy agenda, which calls for creating jobs, securing Social Security and Medicare, balancing the federal budget, and making the United States energy-secure.

A short time ago, I spoke with the group’s co-chairs, former Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman and former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman.

Senator Lieberman, Governor Huntsman, thank you for joining us.

So, you have five Republicans and one Democrat who have signed this pledge.  What exactly are they pledging to do, Governor Huntsman?

JON HUNTSMAN, Former Governor, Co-Chair, No Labels:  Well, they are pledging to embrace a process for goal-setting and leadership in a bipartisan fashion, drawing from the elements of a national strategic agenda, which include four big policy categories, jobs, entitlements, energy, and a balanced budget.

And, essentially, every one of the six candidates, a very diverse group, I might add, they are stating that they will support the national strategic agenda, and, number two, they will sit down and meet with a bipartisan group of congressional leaders within 30 days of being elected to the presidency, and, third, to establish a goal of drawing from one of those big issue categories and leading out in a bipartisan fashion in delivering what the American people really are looking for.

JUDY WOODRUFF:  Well, Senator Lieberman, hearing this, aren’t these, though, the kind of general goals stated in a broad-brush way that just about anyone could agree to?

JOE LIEBERMAN, Former Senator, Co-Chair, No Labels:  Well, that’s exactly the way we framed them, because we’re operating from the premise that we’re trying to disrupt the dysfunction in the Washington political system.

We’re trying to create some incentives for people to work together, and one of the best ways is to have people agree at least on commonly held goals.  That’s the four policy areas.  So, really, left, right, center, Democrat, Republican, should agree on the goals, and then for these presidential candidate to promise, if they get elected that, within the first 30 days in office, they will call members of Congress, both parties in, to begin negotiating to get something done on at least one of the goals.

Frankly, I’m surprised all that 15 of the current presidential candidates didn’t sign on to this.  I’m grateful that the six did, but I’m puzzled that the other nine haven’t, and we’re going to continue to pursue them to make our case that it’s not asking much for them to pledge, promise to work together across party lines, which hasn’t happened very much in Washington lately.

POLITICS - Do We Burden the Presidency with Impossible Expectations?

"Stop expecting American presidents to be great and allow them to be good, says author" PBS NewsHour 10/8/2014

Excerpt

JUDY WOODRUFF (NewsHour):  Do Americans expect too much from their Presidents?  And what makes a great commander in chief?

Margaret Warner explores those questions with the author of a new book.

MARGARET WARNER (NewsHour):  Aaron David Miller is known for his decades of work on U.S. diplomacy in the Middle East in four administrations.  But now he’s returned to his training in American history with a new book, “The End of Greatness:  Why America Can’t Have (and Doesn’t Want) Another Great President.”

He argues there have only been three truly great Presidents, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and Franklin Roosevelt, and that Americans should stop searching for another one.

We spoke about this at Mount Vernon, home of George Washington.

Aaron Miller, thanks for joining us.

AARON DAVID MILLER, Author, “The End of Greatness”:  Pleasure, Margaret.

MARGARET WARNER:  You write in this book that Americans, we Americans need to get over our obsession — you actually call it an addiction — in seeking out, also searching for a great President.  Why not?  Why not the best?

AARON DAVID MILLER:  Well, you could search, but what if you search — and it be ennobling — what if you search for something you cannot have?  That’s the predicament that we’re in.

We have created a sense of expectation in a job that’s already, some would argue, impossible.  Let’s just say it’s implausible, given the nature, the complexity of the presidency, the terrifying contingency about politics, so many factors beyond our control, and yet we want to turn the president into a kind of a combination between Harrison Ford in “Air Force One” and Superman.  And the realty is, we can’t have presidents like that anymore.

That’s the real issue.  We have to stop pining for the presidents, the great transformative ones, because those are not going to come back, it seems to me, and allow the presidents who we do elect to be good.  Stop expecting them to be great, and allow them to be good, in the meaningful sense of the word.

MARGARET WARNER:  What did the three greats, Washington, Lincoln, and FDR, have that the others didn’t or achieve that the others didn’t?

AARON DAVID MILLER:  Transforming a nation encumbering crisis.  That defines greatness.

Without crisis — and I’m not talking about marginal crisis or a serious crisis — I’m talking about a crisis that encumbers the nation for a sustained period of time.  That is what separates the capacity of the greats, the undeniable greats — I call them the indispensables — Washington, Lincoln and FDR, the three greatest challenges the nation faced produced, fortunately for us, our three greatest presidents.