The fpotus is just deflecting talk about his cabinet picks, so he does his crazy dance verbal crap to put attention on nonsense. Expect daily doses of this. Also, he is certifiably bat shit nuts, so there's that.
A extremely well written article and with great detail here! All the 47-Git's imperialist ventures explained! Much appreciated. Trump from his insane take on Canada, Panama and Greeland is giving many Americans immediate cases of the ' Heebe-jeebies' over this expansion garbage talk.
As deflection goes trump overreached his stupid self !!!
Perfect timing Robert. A group of reddit I'm apart of was just talking about this and most of us if not all agree with you that Trump's just bullcraping to bring attention to himself and away from his terrible cabinet picks.
I'll make sure to share this with the group as a confirmation. Thank you.
Yeah one of the things the group and I have said os that Trump is gonna say a lot of crap these next four years or however long he lasts. But in Trump fashion, he'll say one thing and either do nothing or do another thing.
And I've said and the group also that we can't take him at his word for everything he says. We need to look at actions, not his words.
No, it's about the military respecting the UN Charter and the War Powers act of Congress and Article 1 of the NATO treaty etc and refusing to obey an illegal order as they are trained to do from a cadet onwards.
Believing the dovey, "he is not going to start wars" rhetoric is pretty credulous. Why would you believe that Trump means what he (sometimes) says?
Rhetoric aside, the idea that he would be constrained by Congress *more so* than the preceding handful of presidents have been? They all sent American military into action without Congressional approval. You really think Trump is going to be more reserved than any of his predecessors since the late Carter?
I cover that briefly with the short discussion of Panama. It was gray area. The difference is that if Trump attacked Greenland, say, there is not the slightest gray area rationale Not unless Greenland attacked the US first which ain't going to happen. Same also for Panama and Canada - though Trump himself said he wouldn't attack Canada.
I am curious, did George HW Bush get authorization from Congress when he invaded Panama in 1989? What about Reagan with Grenada? In my mind, those types of scenarios seem the most comparable to what Trump has mused about…
No he didn't. I wondered about whether to go into that here. What George HW Bush did was grey area though many would say it went against the War Powers act. Amongst other things in the rationale, a US marine had been killed and Panama had declared war with the US.
The main objection is that there was plenty of time to consult with the Congress unless the intent was surprise to kill or capture Noriega but if that was the objective it's not clear it's one that could be a basis for the War Powers exception case.
I read a bit about this before writing my debunk and wondered whether to do a section about it and then thought it would confuse people to go into that detail, that's all. Just touched on it. But probably I should cover it briefly.
So, for Trump to attack Greenland or Panama or Canada has no even gray area justification and is very illegal. Unless Greenland (or Panama) attacked the US as I said but there is no way that happens. As for Canada, Trump himself said he wouldn't do it.
To add to the Canadian absorption and representation dilemmas. If every province demanded statehood as a condition of amalgamation then that's at least 14 senators (assuming the small maritime provinces combining as one and excluding the territories.) Goodbye Republican party.
Trump cheated on his first wife with the woman who became his second wife. He cheated on his second wife with the woman who became his third wife. He cheated on his 3rd wife.
He married 3 women, promising to love and cherish them.
If he can't keep those promises, why would ANYONE BELIEVE HE'D KEEP PROMISES TO NOT ATTACK OTHER COUNTRIES ?!?!?
This is not about Trump. It is about the generals and soldiers he would order to attack these countries. Plus it is obvious that Trump is not serious about this. Just deflection and intimidation.
I appreciate your efforts, but some of your statements/assertions sound a bit like downplaying the harm Trump does when he runs off his mouth and threatens our allies. It doesn’t placate me at all despite your sincere-sounding intention of trying to help people to refrain from panicking.
This is not political. Never is. I helped people scared of Biden as well as people scared of Trump. I do do this just to help scared people. I am not downplaying anything. I just say things as they are using the most reliable sources available. Not trying to placate anyone just to help anyone scared. If you are scared it may help. If not scared then it may be hard to understand what the motivation is but that's why I do it.
I appreciate your response. I guess what I was partly saying is that I actually WANT to be placated, but I’m still upset and worried about Trump being in the WH again. 😕
Okay. I plan another blog post when I get time about his first 100 days. Will try to do it before inauguration day - about what to expect and what he can't do in his first 100 days. Most of the things that scare people are impossible. The things he will do like withdrawing from the Paris agreement have much less effect than most people think.
- Do you have a source that says Trump's needling is contributing factor to Trudeau's resignation as Liberal party leader? I'm in Canada and have seen nothing like that on Canadian news.
- Canada as a whole is more politically left than right but it is not a monolith. Alberta and Saskatchewan are much further right politically than most of Canada. Alberta in particular has favoured similar policies to US Republicans: deregulation, low taxes, privatisation of goods and services provided by the government, favouring development over the environment, and that sort of thing. Republicans are not just anti gun control and anti universal health care.
Oh didn't know about table of contents missing from mobile view just checked that. I can make one with hyperlinks easily and embed it just below the intro.
On Trudeau's resignation, my source was the BBC on it as a contributing factor - I'll add that. It was some external expert but not sure who.
Yes I know the right wing in Canada with some things in common with Republican on deregulation and low tases. I can make that a bit clearer. But on most things they would caucus with Democrats.
The Democrat party is also diverse with some with views similar to Republicans - but I would imagine most likely even the most right wing in Canada would identify more as Democrats than Republicans if they had to campaign on removing universal health care and giving everyone access to AR-15 auto-reloading semi-assault rifles and no Federally required gun licenses or registry.
Why dignify this claptrap? Does it really require disabusing? Can Bannon sell lots in Greenland for development like the Wall in Mexico? Is that why this is necessary?
Yes it does. I fact check to help scared people. I am not doing this for any political reason. There are many people who are terrified that Trump will attack Greenland or Panama or even Canada and start a big war. They don't know these things that are likely obvious to you.
I am a voluntary fact checker and I help people who panic about such things and I have been typing away all night helping panicking people. So yes this is needed - I did it for them.
Yes it's sad there are so many scared people around and there's no way I'm reaching them all. But you do what you can with what voice you have to help them. And all that is a plus.
The fpotus is just deflecting talk about his cabinet picks, so he does his crazy dance verbal crap to put attention on nonsense. Expect daily doses of this. Also, he is certifiably bat shit nuts, so there's that.
A extremely well written article and with great detail here! All the 47-Git's imperialist ventures explained! Much appreciated. Trump from his insane take on Canada, Panama and Greeland is giving many Americans immediate cases of the ' Heebe-jeebies' over this expansion garbage talk.
As deflection goes trump overreached his stupid self !!!
Glad to help :)
Really appreciate this, Robert. Thanks for calming me and everyone down.
Glad to help thanks :)
Perfect timing Robert. A group of reddit I'm apart of was just talking about this and most of us if not all agree with you that Trump's just bullcraping to bring attention to himself and away from his terrible cabinet picks.
I'll make sure to share this with the group as a confirmation. Thank you.
Great glad to help :). We are having to debunk it frequently in our Facebook group right now which is why I did my debunk.
Yeah one of the things the group and I have said os that Trump is gonna say a lot of crap these next four years or however long he lasts. But in Trump fashion, he'll say one thing and either do nothing or do another thing.
And I've said and the group also that we can't take him at his word for everything he says. We need to look at actions, not his words.
Exactly :)
What's the reddit group's name?
Vote dems
As usual you assume a respect for the letter of law from Republicans that is just not in evidence.
No, it's about the military respecting the UN Charter and the War Powers act of Congress and Article 1 of the NATO treaty etc and refusing to obey an illegal order as they are trained to do from a cadet onwards.
Presidents order military actions without approval from Congress all the time.
Believing the dovey, "he is not going to start wars" rhetoric is pretty credulous. Why would you believe that Trump means what he (sometimes) says?
Rhetoric aside, the idea that he would be constrained by Congress *more so* than the preceding handful of presidents have been? They all sent American military into action without Congressional approval. You really think Trump is going to be more reserved than any of his predecessors since the late Carter?
I cover that briefly with the short discussion of Panama. It was gray area. The difference is that if Trump attacked Greenland, say, there is not the slightest gray area rationale Not unless Greenland attacked the US first which ain't going to happen. Same also for Panama and Canada - though Trump himself said he wouldn't attack Canada.
I am curious, did George HW Bush get authorization from Congress when he invaded Panama in 1989? What about Reagan with Grenada? In my mind, those types of scenarios seem the most comparable to what Trump has mused about…
No he didn't. I wondered about whether to go into that here. What George HW Bush did was grey area though many would say it went against the War Powers act. Amongst other things in the rationale, a US marine had been killed and Panama had declared war with the US.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_invasion_of_Panama#U.S._rationale
The main objection is that there was plenty of time to consult with the Congress unless the intent was surprise to kill or capture Noriega but if that was the objective it's not clear it's one that could be a basis for the War Powers exception case.
I read a bit about this before writing my debunk and wondered whether to do a section about it and then thought it would confuse people to go into that detail, that's all. Just touched on it. But probably I should cover it briefly.
So, for Trump to attack Greenland or Panama or Canada has no even gray area justification and is very illegal. Unless Greenland (or Panama) attacked the US as I said but there is no way that happens. As for Canada, Trump himself said he wouldn't do it.
Y
To add to the Canadian absorption and representation dilemmas. If every province demanded statehood as a condition of amalgamation then that's at least 14 senators (assuming the small maritime provinces combining as one and excluding the territories.) Goodbye Republican party.
Thanks for a great review of the realities.
Trump cheated on his first wife with the woman who became his second wife. He cheated on his second wife with the woman who became his third wife. He cheated on his 3rd wife.
He married 3 women, promising to love and cherish them.
If he can't keep those promises, why would ANYONE BELIEVE HE'D KEEP PROMISES TO NOT ATTACK OTHER COUNTRIES ?!?!?
This is not about Trump. It is about the generals and soldiers he would order to attack these countries. Plus it is obvious that Trump is not serious about this. Just deflection and intimidation.
I appreciate your efforts, but some of your statements/assertions sound a bit like downplaying the harm Trump does when he runs off his mouth and threatens our allies. It doesn’t placate me at all despite your sincere-sounding intention of trying to help people to refrain from panicking.
This is not political. Never is. I helped people scared of Biden as well as people scared of Trump. I do do this just to help scared people. I am not downplaying anything. I just say things as they are using the most reliable sources available. Not trying to placate anyone just to help anyone scared. If you are scared it may help. If not scared then it may be hard to understand what the motivation is but that's why I do it.
I appreciate your response. I guess what I was partly saying is that I actually WANT to be placated, but I’m still upset and worried about Trump being in the WH again. 😕
Okay. I plan another blog post when I get time about his first 100 days. Will try to do it before inauguration day - about what to expect and what he can't do in his first 100 days. Most of the things that scare people are impossible. The things he will do like withdrawing from the Paris agreement have much less effect than most people think.
A few things:
- There's no table of contents in mobile view.
- Do you have a source that says Trump's needling is contributing factor to Trudeau's resignation as Liberal party leader? I'm in Canada and have seen nothing like that on Canadian news.
- Canada as a whole is more politically left than right but it is not a monolith. Alberta and Saskatchewan are much further right politically than most of Canada. Alberta in particular has favoured similar policies to US Republicans: deregulation, low taxes, privatisation of goods and services provided by the government, favouring development over the environment, and that sort of thing. Republicans are not just anti gun control and anti universal health care.
Oh didn't know about table of contents missing from mobile view just checked that. I can make one with hyperlinks easily and embed it just below the intro.
On Trudeau's resignation, my source was the BBC on it as a contributing factor - I'll add that. It was some external expert but not sure who.
Yes I know the right wing in Canada with some things in common with Republican on deregulation and low tases. I can make that a bit clearer. But on most things they would caucus with Democrats.
The Democrat party is also diverse with some with views similar to Republicans - but I would imagine most likely even the most right wing in Canada would identify more as Democrats than Republicans if they had to campaign on removing universal health care and giving everyone access to AR-15 auto-reloading semi-assault rifles and no Federally required gun licenses or registry.
Why dignify this claptrap? Does it really require disabusing? Can Bannon sell lots in Greenland for development like the Wall in Mexico? Is that why this is necessary?
Yes it does. I fact check to help scared people. I am not doing this for any political reason. There are many people who are terrified that Trump will attack Greenland or Panama or even Canada and start a big war. They don't know these things that are likely obvious to you.
I am a voluntary fact checker and I help people who panic about such things and I have been typing away all night helping panicking people. So yes this is needed - I did it for them.
Deep down I know that to be true and it bothers me a great deal.
Yes it's sad there are so many scared people around and there's no way I'm reaching them all. But you do what you can with what voice you have to help them. And all that is a plus.
You’re doing yeoman’s work. I salute you.