Sunday Commentary: Which Populations Are Most Vulnerable under New Regime?

Long_border_fence

This week has been like nothing we have seen before.  The victory of Trump has impacted many people in profound ways, but the most remarkable part of it has been the fear in populations that were singled out by Trump during his election.

As I noted earlier, there are Latinos who have simply left, while others are thinking about leaving and still others have gone into virtual hiding, afraid of possible deportation and that mobs may be less than discerning between legal and illegal immigrants.  In Redding, a teenager handed out fake deportation notices to students of varying ethnicities a day after the election.

“The students involved are all friends and the act was meant as a joke,” though Shasta High School in Redding isn’t viewing it that way, Principal Leo Perez said in a message to parents, per the Record Searchlight.

One of the questions as we go forward – who are the vulnerable populations and what is likely to occur?

LGBT Community

Trump has already raised some red flags when he announced earlier this week that former Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell would be heading his domestic transition team.  Mr. Blackwell has compared LGBT people to animals and is a senior fellow at the Family Research Council – which has a strong anti-gay agenda.

It is also worth noting that it was then-Governor Mike Pence of Indiana who signed the state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) into law.  That law gave greater protections to businesses that chose to discriminate against the LGBT community due to religious beliefs.

In 2000, Mike Pence stated, “Congress should oppose any effort to recognize homosexuals  as a ‘discreet  and insular minority’ entitled to the protection of anti-discrimination laws similar to those extended to women and ethnic minorities.”

There were huge pushbacks in Indiana against the law, but the law remains.  The pushback in Indiana temporarily stalled other states from doing the same.   Meanwhile, North Carolina and Mississippi had similar backlashes.

The question is, what is the plan for the Trump administration and how vulnerable is the LGBT population?  The LGBT population is more affluent than other minority communities, and they won a lot of huge victories, particularly on the marriage equality front.

The  New York Times reported right after the election, “The election of Donald J. Trump to the presidency sent panic through much of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community, which for the first time in eight years will face an administration hostile to its civil rights goals and a president-elect who has expressed a desire to reverse many of its political gains.”

And, while Trump has some record of personal tolerance, the Republican platform has been called “the most anti-L.G.B.T. platform in recent memory.”  Among other things, it calls for “opposition to same-sex marriage, support for state laws limiting which public bathroom transgender people can use, and support for a parent’s right to subject gay and transgender children to ‘conversion therapy’ to change their sexual orientation or gender identity.”

Muslim Community

The big question is, does Donald  Trump want to ban all Muslims from entering the country?  His website calls for “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.”

USA Today reported a few days ago, “A spokesman for Donald Trump insists he doesn’t want to ban ‘all’ Muslims from entering the United States…”  “We never said ‘all’ Muslims,” Trump’s spokesman Steven Cheung emailed USA Today Thursday night.

Mike Pence said in an October appearance that “he was no longer calling for a ban on Muslims.”  But the Trump campaign “denied Pence’s claim that Trump had changed his stance.”

When asked to clarify their position, they issued a statement that said Trump planned on  “temporarily suspending immigration from countries with a history of exporting terrorism until proven vetting methods can be established and, in general, we are tightening screening standards including examining whether candidates for entry harbor any hostility to the United States, its people, or its values — something that is not currently done.”

The Muslim population as a whole is one of the more vulnerable minority groups in the country.   A high profile incident occurred this week where a Muslim woman was allegedly forced to remove her Islamic head scarf, or hijab.  A man threatened to set the Muslim woman on fire with a lighter near the University of Michigan campus in Ann Arbor unless she took off her hijab.

According to CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations), “That alleged attack is just the latest anti-Muslim incident reported since the election of Donald Trump as president.”

They released documents of at least nine incidents this week, which range from threats to physical attacks, harassment, and racial slurs.  These each occurred in separate states.

In Columbus, Ohio, for instance, a “Muslim woman who wears an Islamic head scarf (hijab), was in her car with her children and elderly parents when they were threatened and abused by a man when she stopped at a traffic light.

“A man allegedly approached the car at the traffic light and started banging on the window. He then reportedly started shouting abuse and obscenities at the Muslim woman driver. He allegedly told her, ‘C**t, you don’t belong in this country,’ ‘Go back to your f**king country,’ among other obscenities. The man also allegedly took pictures of the children in the car.”

Officials for CAIR stated, “We are alarmed by the nationwide rise in anti-Muslim hate crimes.”

In Georgia, a high school teacher said she was left a note in class Friday telling her that her Muslim headscarf “isn’t allowed anymore.”

“Why don’t you tie it around your neck & hang yourself with it…,” the note said, and was signed “America!”

Latino Community

Donald Trump put himself on the map during his campaign when he said, “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”

He has since called for a “deportation force” to deport 11 million undocumented immigrants from the country.  And, of course, he wants to build a wall and make Mexico pay for it.

While mass deportation is unlikely, given it “would upend parts of the economy, particularly in the agricultural sector, while dividing families and costing the government billions of dollars at a time of constrained finances. The wall would make a political statement but would do little to stop a major portion of new arrivals — those seeking asylum and overstaying their visas. It would also face enormous obstacles in being built, experts say, including environment and engineering problems and the huge topographical challenges of the border itself.”

That said, it is more likely that the president could scale back current efforts to “shield millions of immigrants from deportation,” and change the priorities of the Department of Homeland Security.

The Washington Post writes, “Trump initially indicated that any undocumented immigrant was vulnerable to deportation and then said that he would first target those with criminal records.”

“Day One, my first hour in office, those people are gone,” Mr. Trump said. “And you can call it deported if you want. The press doesn’t like that term. You can call it whatever the hell you want. They’re gone.”

The Post also notes, “Trump has said his deportations will be carried out in a ‘very humane’ way, but he has also spoken admiringly of the United States’ 1954 operation, authorized by Dwight Eisenhower, in which hundreds of thousands were rounded up and taken back to Mexico in overcrowded and sometimes-deadly trips.”

“I know it doesn’t sound nice, but not everything is nice,” Mr. Trump said.

In September Trump threatened to withhold funds to sanctuary cities.  San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee said that San Francisco will remain a sanctuary city despite the election.  He said San Francisco is “not going to change who we are.”

“Being a sanctuary city, for me, is the DNA of San Francisco,” Mayor Lee said at a Thursday morning news conference. “We’ll always be a sanctuary city.

Still, withholding funds could cost the city $1 billion a year.  As a sanctuary city, cooperation is limited between law enforcement in San Francisco and federal authorities.

Other cities, like New York and Los Angeles, do not hold undocumented inmates in jail at the request of the U.S. Department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement unless the detainer request is accompanied by a judge’s order.  The mayors in Los Angeles and New York said this week they would remain sanctuary cities as well.

Davis has a similar law on its books.

Of the three groups, Muslims are probably most vulnerable.  The war on terror and repeated terrorist attacks have left the group without the institutional support that either the LGBT community or the Latino community have. The anti-Islamic sentiment and continued wars with ISIS have taken a huge toll on that community already.

A big lingering question is how much of Trump’s campaign statements he intends to implement.  Will he take a path of least resistance or will he attempt to ram through legislation in the face of protests and pushback?  Those are key questions that remain.

—David M. Greenwald reporting

About The Author

David Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.

Related posts

111 Comments

  1. South of Davis

    David wrote:

    > Which Populations Are Most Vulnerable Under New Regime?

    Last week the Huffington Post said they were going to cut back on calling Trump names, but David is ramping things up.

    It is interesting to me that the first three “brownshirts” in the racist, homophobic, woman hating “regime” were Dr. Ben Carson, Peter Thiel, and Kellyann Fitzpatrick…

     

      1. South of Davis

        David wrote:

        > Where did I call people names?

        What “names” come to mind when you think of the head of a “regime” (serious question)?

        P.S. To anyone (except Frankly and BP) Have you ever called the Obama  “administration” a “regime”?

        1. David Greenwald

          So what you’re saying is that you didn’t read the article beyond the headline?

          Regardless, I’m not sure why you regard regime as pejorative, in political science parlance: “A political regime is a set of political structures that make up a state. These political systems range from direct democracies to totalitarian regimes, such as military dictatorships. Common systems in the modern world include democratic republics, monarchies, and representative democracies.”

        2. Tia Will

          South of Davis

          What names come to mind when you think of the head of a “regime” (serious question)?”

          Serious answer. With the word “regime” I think of dictators. A few examples, Pol Pot Saddam Hussein , Ferdinand Marcos, Pinochet to give you an insight into my interpretation of the term.

          However, this is not necessarily reflective of all possible meanings of the term “regime” which can be defined as :

          a government, especially an authoritarian one.” or

          a system or planned way of doing things, especially one imposed from above.”

          Now applying this to our current governmental transition, and using only his own words so as not to be accused of making things up, our president elect expressed the following”

          “I alone can fix it.”

          ” I know more about ISIS than the generals do.”

          This to me, certainly sounds as though his intent is to institute a system imposed “from above”. I sincerely hope that I am wrong. But regime certainly sounds like an appropriate appellation to me at this time.

          1. David Greenwald

            As I explain in my answer: in political science parlance: “A political regime is a set of political structures that make up a state. These political systems range from direct democracies to totalitarian regimes, such as military dictatorships. Common systems in the modern world include democratic republics, monarchies, and representative democracies.” Political science is often interested in regime change and that’s part of what I was looking at when I wrote today’s article.

    1. Barack Palin

      Not a chance, Obama was his guy.  In fact Obama has been for the most part a taboo subject on the V.  Interesting that David has probably had more presidential politics articles in the last week than he’s had in the last 8 years.

      1. quielo

        It’s unfortunate. Perhaps having done that would have identified those people who are now voting for Trump. I personally find Trump both despicable and unqualified. However I temper that with the knowledge that many of the people who avoid saying bad things have bad ideas and plans.

         

        Obama has made certain constituencies high priority, ie cross dressing grade school students, while completely ignoring others such as white working class people. HRC reaped what Obama has sown.

        1. Tia Will

          quielo

          Obama has made certain constituencies high priority, ie cross dressing grade school students, while completely ignoring others such as white working class people. HRC reaped what Obama has sown.”

          You seem to have completely forgotten that it was Obama who bailed out the auto industry and who wanted to institute a much larger infrastructure restitution program both of which would have benefitted working whites. Both were fought by the Republicans.

          I am not defending the current President blindly as I personally disagree with many of his policies. I was severely disappointed when he did not allow advocates for a single part payer at the health care revision conferences. I strongly objected to his deportation policy as someone far to the right of me correctly pointed out. And I strongly object to his use of drones.

          However, when he is wrongly accused of doing “nothing” for the working class, I really must disagree.

      2. David Greenwald

        I would say Obama was mostly a disappointment to me. However, you should note when I write these articles – what is it that I truly care about? I think I’ve been pretty consistent. Civil rights, civil liberties, criminal justice reform. Not going to see a lot of other topics from me.

        1. quielo

          Point noted. I would say in immigration there is a significant difference between people who come over the border and those that overstay.  People who were screened and admitted at least are not criminals who have been previously deported.

           

          I also question the sanctuary city policies. Immigration is national issue and we should have a consistent national policy. People in Southern California are aware that SF has had a policy of providing sanctuary to Salvadorean gang members and then sending them to SoCal where they have committed a number of murders as well as other crimes.

          1. David Greenwald

            I don’t agree much with your last comment. Sanctuary Status (LA has it too) simply means that a judge makes the call on whether someone has an immigration hold rather than ICE making the call. It doesn’t interfere with the prosecution of local laws.

        2. quielo

          “It doesn’t interfere with the prosecution of local laws.”

           

          San Francisco has shielded know gang members from deportation who then go onto kill others in various locations. Sometimes the relocation of these gang members has been paid for by the City of San Francisco and they have  committed murders in their new location.

          Trump will likely change the default to deporting people who have not been an asset to our country. The onus really should be on them to demonstrate why they should stay rather than the converse.

          1. David Greenwald

            “San Francisco has shielded know(n) gang members…”

            That’s on the federal government. Why do the feds refuse to use a magistrate here?

  2. Jerry Waszczuk

    David
    In God We Trust” first appeared on U.S. coins in 1864 and has appeared on paper currency since 1957. A law passed in a Joint Resolution by the 84th Congress (P.L. 84-140) and approved by President Dwight Eisenhower on July 30, 1956 declared IN GOD WE TRUST must appear on currency.
    In God We Trust or Gott Mit Uns are the principles on which this country was found and developed regardless  of separation of the state and  church .  You will not be able to rewrite the history does not matter who is the President of the United States . By articles like this you and your team soliciting for the new McCarthy Era instead of condemn riots and lawlessness instigated by Dems party instigators .

        1. Tia Will

          Jerry

          Everything  is God will including dollars which I believe you like to have as much as possible if possible . Is not true ?”

          Not in my world view. I am strongly spiritual, but I do not even believe in any “God” that you would probably recognize as such. I certainly do not believe that “everything is God’s will.” And neither did a number of the founders of our nation.

        2. Jerry Waszczuk

          Tia

          How could  yoy be highly  spiritual not believing in any God. This is contradiction> You must  believe in something if you are spiritual . Tree , sun ,  Mother Earth , your dog etc Come on Tia .

  3. MrsW

    I recommend the photography exhibit currently the de Young Danny Young: Message to the Future.  You may be able to get free tickets via the Yolo County Library’s Discover and Go program.

    The exhibit is mostly photos Lyon took in the 60’s and 70’s of folks on the margins: Native American, Latino, African American, poor White, prisoner, motorcycle rider, transgender ….  To paraphrase one of the captions, which spoke to me, were words to this effect: The subject of the photo is not asking for your help, the subject is acknowledging being seen.

     

  4. WesC

    Trump won because of his rustbelt strategy.  They have seen that the result of Democrat and Republican support for corporate America’s  globalization has been the offshore transfer of huge swaths of middle America blue collar manufacturing jobs.  The Democratic solution has been seen as to toss the laid off a few peanuts of an extra 13 weeks unemployment benefits while they try to pass the TPP which would offshore what few remaining manufacturing jobs remained.  The corporate Democrat leadership also promoted what was perceived as an open border policy on illegal immigration, which was seen as reducing blue collar wages even further by guaranteeing a never ending supply of very cheap labor.  The Republican solution was to publicly say all their woes were a result of illegal immigrants.  As an example real wages for meat packers adjusted for inflation during the period from 1947-72 rose 80% to reach almost $40K.  Wages for those same meat packers declined by 30% to about $27K from 1979-12. This is a pretty typical example of the race to the bottom that many blue collar rust belters experienced.

    In comes The Donald.  An outsider businessman despised by the Democrats and the Republican elites. Promises to bring back those good manufacturing jobs, kick out the illegal immigrants, and make America great again. Hillary’s solution to their woes was more offshoring via TPP, and immigration reform which was seen as an amnesty program.   Trump was the anti-establishment loose cannon who has no career political ambitions, is beholden to no political party machine, and who will do what is necessary  to bring prosperity back to middle America.

    I suspect the next step in the saga will be that Trump will fail to toe the Republican party line as he has already started to do by saying that some of Obamacare should be retained.  He can also be counted on to do something that will cause him to either resign or get impeached.  The Republicans will then have Pence in charge who will fully support the party plan of completer elimination of Obamacare, privatization of social security/medicare, deregulation of wall street, gutting environmental and other safeguards, and elimination of as much of the social safety net as possible. In the 2018 midterm elections their are 33 senators up for election, of which about 24 are Democrats, and only 8 Republican.  The only hope the Democrats have is that the Republican party somehow manages to self-immolate.

     

    1. Tia Will

      WesC

      The only hope the Democrats have is that the Republican party somehow manages to self-immolate.”

      I believe that you are oversimplifying this. I have another hope. That is that our new president will have that fate that both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama hoped for him in their final speeches on this subject. Both wished for him a successful presidency. I hope that he will stick to his last promise, to be a president for all the people. There is nothing in his presidential campaign that would make me think that he will keep his word on this given that he has lied about virtually everything else including his previous statements recording on tape in order to get elected. But I have hope and do see this as another possibility.

  5. Don Shor

    The most immediate threat is to the approximately 800,000 youth who are here under Obama’s executive order establishing DACA, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. With that executive order rescinded, as has been promised, those youth are immediately subject to deportation.

    Syrian refugees have been directly threatened by Trump. “They’re going back” is a direct, frequent quote. Those in the application process currently being vetted are also at risk of finding themselves in limbo as the process, already very extensive, is revised, broadened, or even suspended.

    People with pre-existing medical conditions are at serious risk of losing health insurance coverage.

    In the long run, reproductive freedom is at great risk.

    Farmers in California should be very concerned about Trump’s trade policies.

    1. quielo

      “Farmers in California” would do very well under a more business like I/O policy. The number of food exporting countries are relatively small and the US leads by a large margin. Previous administrations have been reluctant to form a food exporting cartel but perhaps Trump will be more amenable.

      The below table shows food exports in Billions of USD. A business approach would be to use the OPEC model and declare a 4X increase in price and then go up from there.

       

      United States
      175.57

      Brazil
      90.66

      China
      70.16

      Canada
      65.69

      India
      46.95

      Indonesia
      42.63

      Argentina
      41.47

      Thailand
      40.36

      Australia
      37.6

      Malaysia
      30.1

        1. Tia Will

          Cartels and trade wars are never beneficial in the long run.”

          And in my opinion with regard to food and other commodities necessary for life, completely despicable.

        2. quielo

          So cartels control pricing for material used for farming, such as petrochemicals, but to control the price of the resulting product is “completely despicable.”?

      1. Don Shor

        As it happens, I did sponsor a young man and save him from deportation. But I think we as a society can certainly take in some of the refugees from the Syrian crisis. If they are dispersed around the country it minimizes the impact on any one community. As we’ve done before with refugees from Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, and other regions of the world, we can welcome them to America and help them settle and become productive citizens.

        1. Marina Kalugin

          and some forget that is was the BO and the Dems policies as well as the Bush policies that unstabilized the middle east and still does every day.. hiding the crimes of Israel and so on….

          someone on my FB published a list of the number of countries BO is still bombing every day….while he is off on vacations, and enjoying good clean food and water at the white house… I doubt anyone here would know the number?

          I don’t see the White house lawns taking in the syrians, right?

          Syrian refugees are all over paris..the Champs Elysee…and elsewhere…

          The new SS right growing in Germany is because of many poor choices and decisions by the likes of BO/HRC and so on..

          Americans, of the non-immigrant USA kind are much more susceptible to believe the lies of the establishment…

          And, that is why you see us immigrants on these threads trying to wake some folks up…

          cya…

           

        2. Jerry Waszczuk

          Don

          I don’t really care either way if America will take Syrian refuges or not .  However I  believe that these refuges should  be placed in rich Arab’s countries instead of European countries   or  the   United States. Western countries should negotiate with rich Arab countries to take these  refuges with some help from US and European Countries governments .  We have here enough people on welfare and food stamps. I understand that it is a humanitarian issue  but  United States should look  a little harder to end the conflict there instead of competing   with Russia to remove or not to  remove Assad  from power . George Bush and Obama ‘s administration created disaster in the Middle East . This is terrible and it is not a issue of 1,000 or 2,000 refuges. This is war atrocities and countless  casualties of war.  I am hoping that Trump will put end to the  ISIS activities ,and to Iraqi and Syrian Conflict and provide relief to people there. Never ending Holocausts

      2. Tia Will

        As a good Samaritan you should sponsor a few families  and save them from deportation .  Talk is cheap .”

        And so are accusations made without any knowledge of the contributions of other posters.

        1. Marina Kalugin

          I have seen you be one of the most highly quoted and prolific accusers, Dr Will…especially on topics that are not within your area of education nor expertise…

    2. Marina Kalugin

      only the conventional and crap garbage farmers, right?    not the unsubsidized yet real aka organic farmers…

      those folks who had coverage before BO lost it…like at TJs..  and

      and others got way worse for way more cost…

      due to how it was done, many were worse off…especially in the states with no medi-cal type system

      what other opinion disguised as fact do you want to throw out , DS?

       

       

    3. Tia Will

      Don

      Thank you for mentioning this.

      As gynecologists, we are already starting to see a phenomena that I have not previously encountered. Women asking us if they should change from their current method of choice for contraception to an IUD or implant. They are considering this because of their ( not unfounded) fear that if they lose their health insurance they may end up losing their birth control and want to ensure that they have at least 3 and at most 10 years covered with means that can not be taken away from them since they are now self contained in their body. Worse still they are considering options that they did not previously want because they are afraid that if their current method fails them, they will not be able to get an abortion under the new policies.

      Many of you may, on the basis of your religious beliefs think that this is only right. But I would ask you to consider whether you would think it was right for a man to be told that he could not obtain a vasectomy by the state ?  Yes, I know, the religious right has defined human life as being at “conception” conveniently ignoring the scientific reality that we have no way of determining when that occurred except in cases of artificial insemination. So my question would be, why draw the line there ? Why not state that every sperm has the capability to join with an egg to start a human life, so why should we not mandate that every single one be allowed to live out its full life span uninterrupted ? Before you respond, please let me remind you that this is a religiously promulgated definition with no scientific evidence behind it.

       

      1. Marina Kalugin

        IUDs, but not the kind with the extra chemicals, are the safest and easiest and cheapest form of Birth control…but be sure to check regularly that it hasn’t moved on…..

        and do not wait until it is imbeded to see the doc to have it removed ….

        I am for choice but I would never have an abortion, and I would never recommend that anyone have an abortion either.

        During the communist era, most women had at least 9 or more abortions during their lifetime… in the soviet block…….condoms were not available and neither were other forms like IUDs…   it was way cheaper to do the abortions than providing prevention.

        Interestingly enough, it appears that the lesser educated and the poorer people are more likely to NOT have abortions….  not sure if it is because a baby means money from the government, or because they may not have the wherewithal to understand what is going on until it is too late…or it could be a combination of many, many reasons….including that many may be more religious and church going than those who studied at university about Darwin and genetics….

        1. Tia Will

          IUDs, but not the kind with the extra chemicals, are the safest and easiest and cheapest form of Birth control”

          In the interests of accuracy, there is no IUD on the market that has “extra chemicals”. I honestly do not know what you are talking about. Maybe the progesterone containing IUD called the Mirena ?

  6. Marina Kalugin

    those who are corrupt…..like corrupt cops, corrupt military police, corrupt Supreme court judges like Clarence Thomas…those who cover up real data and espouse the lies of the AMA and the ADA and the many other USA Fed gov…alphabet soup agencies.

    Those who killed the young investigators recently who were investigating the Detroit water issues.

    Those who killed the old man protecting his ranch land in OR or was it WA from the likes of Monsanto…

    Those who will sell out their family for a dime, and those who lie, steal and cheat everyday..

    Not those petty thiefs who are in jail, prison or dead due to the BO policies….

    Those who overturned Bernie’s VT state ban of GMOs….

    Those kind of criminals….not the black women who were set up …to take the fall for their medicare and medi-cal schemer docs….

    Those who are making things miserable for the native families at Standing Rock…..those are the ones who are going to be vulnerable.

    Follow the money and learn the truth…it ain’t the Donald’s money…right?  get a clue  .please?  perhaps?

     

    1. Tia Will

      Follow the money and learn the truth…it ain’t the Donald’s money…right?  get a clue  .please?  perhaps?”

      So, honest question, are you asserting that if is not corrupt to defraud individuals of their tuition by making promises that your private university does not live up to if you happen to be a billionaire and/or a presidential candidate that you prefer ?

       

  7. Marina Kalugin

    the FEDs bomb and then send the crap food that is nor fit for even animal consumption to “help”…stop bombing and interferring, and then one won’t need to ship and fly the garbage that the US subsidizes….

     

  8. David Greenwald

    Trump tells CBS 60 Minutes:

    “What we are going to do is get the people that are criminal and have criminal records, gang members, drug dealers, where a lot of these people, probably 2 million, it could be even 3 million, we are getting them out of our country or we are going to incarcerate,” Trump said in the interview. “But we’re getting them out of our country, they’re here illegally.”

    Note: In saying that 2 million to 3 million undocumented immigrants with criminal records live in the U.S., Trump was repeating a claim he’d made earlier in the campaign that The Washington Post fact-checked and determined was inaccurate.

    1. quielo

      Not necessarily.

      “The 2 million figure refers to the total number of “removable criminal aliens” as determined by DHS, and refers to convicted non-citizens in the country legally and illegally. ”

      The WP does not have any hard facts and is just looking at other estimates. In addition Trump is adding “gang members” and “drug dealers” (who may be not yet convicted of a crime) to those that have been convicted. You could also add those people that have permanent legal status but who he believes have engaged in activities incompatible with their status and therefore could be said to be “here illegally”.

      Adding those groups into one bucket could easily yield 2-3M based on numbers I have seen.

    2. Jerry Waszczuk

      David

      How much inaccurate and why  the number is relevant . If it is less than 3 millions and is only half of million than is better . Less cost to keep them in prison or to deport them.  I am not sure what is your point in your  statement . Are you trying to say that Trump is liar?

      1. David Greenwald

        Well Trump is a demonstrated and repeated liar, but that wasn’t the point.

        My point is that trying to expel three million people is a huge and disruptive undertaking. It is not justified by the number of convicted criminals. We don’t have the resources or infrastructure to handle it. And a lot of innocent people are going to get caught up in this thing. Already getting reports that people of color are being yelled to go back where they came from – some of these people are native born – but there is no discerning going on. This is going to get ugly very fast.

        1. quielo

          “huge and disruptive undertaking” Agreed but the current situation is also disruptive. By not managing the immigrant population recent presidents of both parties have created more problems and resentments than necessary.

          1. David Greenwald

            Yeah but the solution is going to make it more, not less so. There are some fairly straight forward ways to fix the current system – they would start with amnesty and then allow a work program with recruiting near the border. What is proposed here is mass upheaval.

        2. quielo

          “amnesty”

          Did you notice the election held last week? What part of that indicates to you that the electorate supported amnesty? My biggest takeaway is that promoting policies that do not have support from the electorate results in unpleasant outcomes. 

          And how do you believe an amnesty would help anyway?

        3. Don Shor

          “What part … “. Possibly the majority that voted for Clinton. Evidently we’ll have to keep pointing that out, even as her margin of victory keeps increasing.

        4. Frankly

          This is going to get ugly very fast.

          I has gotten ugly pretty fast already.  That is one reason why your open borders candidate lost.  You seem to be making the case that it is too difficult and hence we should just ignore the problem.

          Democrats ignored the problem primarily because they were rushing to inject millions of poor and uneducated people into the voter ranks to help them win in their downward US death spiral to collectivism.  Elite Republicans support the constant flow of cheap labor.

          Now it is time to turn back the clock and return all the bad illegal element.

          And I reject this projected “tragedy” of people having to return to their country of origin because they are in this country illegally.  These are countries that US citizens take vacations to visit.  Unless there are legitimate claims of personal danger, a return to a home country is not a tragedy.  I would argue it should be celebrated.  If you are going to then argue that their access to prosperity is reduced as a result of them being deported, then I guess this gets us back your election failure when there are so many Americans seeing their access to prosperity destroyed.

          Those on the left really seem to be incapable of seeing or accepting the reaping of what they sow.  All these policies from the left that have contributed to a much more slowly-growing economy have resulted in greater competition for resources.  And this greater competition for resources has made immigrants less welcome because exiting Americans are seeing the opportunity pie shrink.  If the political left really wanted to help immigrants to be accepted, they would drop their anti-industrialist position and stop with the layering of more regulations and higher taxes that stifle job creation.  They would also support a complete reformation of the education system to crank out a more qualified American workforce.  When the economy is humping and more Americans are feeling optimistic about their economic future, they are more charitable for allowing migration into the country.

        5. Frankly

          Possibly the majority that voted for Clinton. Evidently we’ll have to keep pointing that out, even as her margin of victory keeps increasing.

          What in the hell are you talking about?  The electoral votes are not changing.

          Seems that you are having a hard time accepting political reality.   You are so used to the rigged system working to your advantage, it seems that you are holding out hope that somehow someone will come up with a procedural trick to put Hillary in the White House.

          Talk about riots if that would happen.

        6. Jerry Waszczuk

          David

          Trump did not deport anybody so far .

          Check these links and look  at Obama’s -Napolitano regime deportations /

          http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=3AD9F59C-D459-42C0-9DEB-3377C41C0855

          http://1tjy1il8myg2badl72uj53gv.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Sen-Feinstein-Letter-to-Dir-Morton-6-13-12.pdf

          http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/feinstein-in-the-news?ID=D63C2227-81FF-4033-A4F3-29C91C25362A

          On top this  Napolitano is UC Presdient who atempted with her friend Haag  to throw into prison Chancellor Katehi  under the 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d) — Conspiracy to Conduct the Affairs of an Enterprise Through a Pattern of Racketeering Activity

          18 U.S.C. § 1951(a) — Conspiracy to Obtain Property Under Color of Official Right-20 years in prison
          3 years supervised released
          $250,000 fine
          $100 special assessment
          18 U.S.C. § 1349 – Honest Services Conspiracy
          20 years in prison
          3 years supervised released.

      2. Tia Will

        Are you trying to say that Trump is liar?”

        What difference does it make if David asserts it ? It has been demonstrated repeatedly on multiple taped interviews with him in which he states that he “never said” or “never meant” things that he has previously been filmed saying. If that is not lying, perhaps we are not using the same definition of the word.

        1. Barack Palin

          I remember many of you lefties saying that all politicians lie and promise things during their campaign that they can’t deliver on.  Of course they were referring to Democrat politicians that they were so ready to give a pass to.

    3. Marina Kalugin

      interestingly enough the Feds know all …who is illegal and where they are…I have shared this before….the Donald was not privy to the secret statistics that the Feds keep…and likely now that BO is sharing info, he may change the numbers.

      BO has been getting rid of many illegals secretly..the difference is that the Donald is not a liar.

      When the Amnesty program was put into effect on Jan 1, 2015,  some elder abusers with a lot of evidence against them, but no proof as the Menlo Park police station wouldn’t even file a report, got theirs immediately.

      A very high % of the MX gang members with rap sheets, and MX gang members are a very tiny % of MX who live in CA, were getting there new identities at no cost courtesy of the BO administration.

      There were many exposes of that going on in the SAN and the LAX  areas…..on the mainstream media…

      In the meantime,  many many hard working farm laborers and others who were working 24/7 at jobs most white boys wouldn’t do if one paid them three times as much, who never committed a crime….missed their chance…

      The hardworking “undocumented” folks missed the boat while real criminals got a new start on life?

       

      1. Tia Will

        yes,  please provide evidence for your opinion “

        Just as you provide evidence or examples of you personal attacks ? See todays thread for most recent example.

        the difference is that the Donald is not a liar.”

        Oh, please. He denies having ever said what he is clearly recorded as saying and you still maintain that he is not a liar. And you say that others should “wake up” . Really ?

  9. Tia Will

    quielo

    The onus really should be on them to demonstrate why they should stay rather than the converse.”

    I agree with this point of yours. I would also add that the onus should also  be on their employers to demonstrate why they should be able to employ undocumented workers at lower wages rather than employ citizens at of above minimum wage.

    1. WesC

      The federal e-verify system has been in place since 1997. It is an internet based system that allows employers to instantly verify if an applicant for employment is legally allowed to work based on information filled out in a I-9 form (name, DOB, SSN, etc).  It is currently in use by only about 7% of US businesses.  Republicans generally support e-verify.  Democrats generally have opposed e-verify.  Interestingly enough the US Chamber of Commerce supports e-verify.

      California is 1 of only 3 states (along with Rhode Island and Illinois) that limit or discourage use of e-verify.  California went so far in 2011 to actually pass an act that prohibits municipalities from mandating use of e-verify.

      With the Republicans intent on destroying the social safety net and Democrats seemingly intent on suppressing wages by making sure their is a never ending supply of cheap illegal alien labor available is it any wonder why someone like Trump got elected.

      1. South of Davis

        WesC wrote:
        “With the Republicans intent on destroying the social safety net and Democrats seemingly intent on suppressing wages by making sure their is a never ending supply of cheap illegal alien labor available is it any wonder why someone like Trump got elected.”
        Great summary,  but don’t forget the Democrats are also destroying the safety net and Republicanslove cheap illegal alien labor…

      2. Marina Kalugin

        yeah right….e-verify has worked so so well…and the criminals are the ones who have stolen identities, right?   e-verify…what a joke and more and more work for the hardworking staff in most departments….

        UCD only started using it a few years ago after the Feds mandated it…for all on grants…

        The Gov Brown signed into law in 2013 that criminal background info on applications is illegal…and yet, the UCOP still discriminates…. there is a class action lawsuit brewing just due to that….

        1. South of Davis

          I have not seen anyone saying that the Dems or GOP want to “get rid” of the safety net but as an example not many elected officials in either party seem to care that rent is not included when they calculate the SS COLA increase every year.  I was recently talking to a Davis senior who memorized the last 10 tiny SS increases and actually has had his rent increase by ~50% in 10 years and had the Davis city services bill (that he pays) go up by MORE than 100%!

  10. Tia Will

    Jerry

    How could  yoy be highly  spiritual not believing in any God. This is contradiction> You must  believe in something if you are spiritual . Tree , sun ,  Mother Earth , your dog etc Come on Tia .

    You are misquoting and misunderstanding me. I did not say that I do not believe in any god. I said that I do not believe that I do not believe in any “God” that you would define as such. I do not believe in any specific origins story I do not believe that we are “created in God’s image.

    I believe that the best way that I could explain this to you is that I believe that all beings are a manifestation of the entirely of existence that I interpret as “god”. Our responsible is to recognize that we are a unique tiny part of the whole and  to make the best possible contribution to the whole that we can given our unique set of strengths and weaknesses.

  11. Tia Will

    “I know it doesn’t sound nice, but not everything is nice,” Mr. Trump said.”

    I cannot help but wonder if it is not the responsibility of all of us, especially our leaders, to try to make things as “nice” as possible for all whom we serve ?

    1. Jerry Waszczuk

      Mia

      Trump remain me the first Polish President Lech Walesa (who I know ) who was elected  after Soviet Union Soviet collapsed.  Nobel Peace Price Winner  and  electrician from  shipyard named by communists  “The Lenin’s  Shipyard”  .  On joke about him was that he went to see the  Ballet ; Swan Lake ”  but forgot the  fishing rod .  This how I could best  explain Trump’ to be nice or not to be nice .

    1. David Greenwald

      The article was written about three groups that live here locally and the impact of the new president on them. We don’t don’t live in a bubble unfortunately.

      1. Barack Palin

        did we live in a bubble during Obama’ presidency?

        Do you not think that his policies affected and bothered many people?

        If one questioned Obama’s policies they were called a racist.

  12. tribeUSA

    Trump gave a much-needed clarification of his position on immigration on the show “60 minutes” on Sunday eve:
    “What we are going to do is get the people that are criminal and have criminal records, gang members, drug dealers, where a lot of these people, probably 2 million, it could be even 3 million, we are getting them out of our country or we are going to incarcerate,” Trump said in the interview. “But we’re getting them out of our country, they’re here illegally.”
    What is there to object to here? If the numbers of such criminals are really somewhere in or even near the range 2-3 million; deporting these criminals will lift a huge burden off the country; and more resources for the law-abiding, including law-abiding immigrants.
    Trump went on to talk about first securing the border; and then after the border is secured, announcing a determination about what to do about the remaining law-abiding illegal immigrants. My suspicion is that this will consist of offering the illegals the option of a path to citizenship (such an option would be supported by the majority of americans and the majority of US congressmen; after the border is secured).
    So with respect to comments on this and other Vanguard articles regarding the plight of Hispanics: they can rest assured that, if they are law-abiding and do not have a serious criminal history and are not members of gangs or cartels; no action will be considered to deport them until at least the time the border is more fully secured, which will likely take several years. After the border is secured, they will most likely be offered the option of a path to citizenship. So Hispanics in America can rest assured that if themselves or their family members or friends who are here illegally are not criminals, they are safe from deportation. (As a side note; I would suggest counseling them to disregard the inaccurate hysteria put out by the mainstream media on this topic)

    1. David Greenwald

      “What is there to object to here?”

      For the most part, if you commit a series offense, you get an ICE hold and deported after serving your crime. So while it sounds good that we’re going to deport x-amount of people, what does that population actually look like? How are they planning to do it? IT’s one thing if they do it at the time of arrest, but if they have to go looking for people, how is that going to happen? Do they have the resources and infrastructure to do that? Are innocent people going to get caught up in it? Are they going to rip families apart? What do we with citizen children?

      So the objection is that it is something easy to say, and potentially difficult to achieve without a lot of collateral impact.

      1. tribeUSA

        Yes, I agree that it will be difficult, and there will be some level of collateral impact; perhaps approaching the level of collateral impact to the USA population incurred by letting them remain in the USA.

        The details need to be thought out and planned very carefully; there are people in ICE, the NSA and FBI and other law enforcement agencies that can get together and combine their expertise for the best way to go about this.

        1. David Greenwald

          “perhaps approaching the level of collateral impact to the USA population incurred by letting them remain in the USA.”

          I think the collateral impact will far exceed the impact of the current situation. Moreover, as much as we have scrutinized the police, ICE is the worst of the worst with regards to abuse.

        2. South of Davis

          David wrote:

          > I think the collateral impact will far exceed

          > the impact of the current situation.

          I’ve noticed that other than the “we need to help everyone” people on the far left and the “open border” libertarians on the far right most people I know that have housekeepers, gardeners, eat out often and pay contractors to work on their home “think the collateral impact of sending (their $10/hour workers) back home will far exceed the impact of the current situation.” While most people I meet who don’t have a housekeeper and would be happy to work as a gardener, construction worker or in a restaurant kitchen (and did in the past before you needed to speak Spanish to even be considered for the job) “think the collateral impact of sending the illegal aliens (working at their old jobs) back home is a good idea”…

          P.S. With the DNC run by bleeding heart far left liberals “who want to help everyone” and limousine liberals “who want $10/hr gardeners and housekeepers” I’m not surprised that not a single person on Hillary’s team had any idea that a large number of people wanted to (enforce existing laws on the books) and send illegal aliens home.

           

        3. South of Davis

          David wrote:

          > I don’t have a housekeeper, so keep fishing.

          But you are on the “far left” (and want to help people)…

          P.S. Correct me if I am wrong if you have recently registered as a Republican and no longer want to help people…

        4. quielo

          “ICE is the worst of the worst with regards to abuse.” Not anywhere close to the way Central American immigrants are treated in Mexico. Perhaps you should ask immigrants rights advocates what they are doing here when migrants in Mexico are being raped and murdered with impunity? Why don’t they put their “Mexican Privilege” to good use?

  13. tribeUSA

    From article above: ‘When asked to clarify their position, they issued a statement that said Trump planned on  “temporarily suspending immigration from countries with a history of exporting terrorism until proven vetting methods can be established and, in general, we are tightening screening standards including examining whether candidates for entry harbor any hostility to the United States, its people, or its values — something that is not currently done.”’

     

    Sounds pretty reasonable to me. What, precisely, are the objections to this statement?

      1. tribeUSA

        By now, diplomatic efforts should have ensured that those refugees who are non-vettable (i.e. inadequate ID verification info. and other paperwork trail) from Syria and other middle east countries have a place to go to in refugee camps in other Muslim countries; with funding assistance from the USA and Europe. I don’t understand why such an effort hasn’t been amped-up to the max. I think with Trump in office it will be; alas too late for those 2016 and earlier refugees.

        1. Don Shor

          have a place to go to in refugee camps in other Muslim countries

          Millions of them are in refugee camps in neighboring countries. Why does a country have to be “Muslim” to help those displaced by a civil war in Syria? The “Muslim countries” are not some monolithic bloc of likeminded people. Many have no interest in, nor desire impact from, the war in Syria. They have their own problems. They may be of different sects in Islam. They aren’t any more or less responsible for the millions of refugees than you or I are; i.e, as citizens of the world, we should help to the degree that we can, and so, I would hope, should they. But Jordan alone is being overwhelmed by this exodus. And it will continue for so long as a genocidal dictator stays in power in Syria. Russia is helping to keep him there, and all the signs point to Trump working with Russia to continue to keep him there. So the problem will get much worse before it gets better. This is a problem for the whole world, not the “Muslim nations.”

          1. Don Shor

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugees_of_the_Syrian_Civil_War

            n 2016, the United Nations (UN) identified 13.5 million Syrians requiring humanitarian assistance, of which more than 6 million are internally displaced within Syria, and over 4.8 million are refugees outside of Syria.[29] Turkey is the largest host country with over 2.7 million Syrian refugees.[4][30][31] Assistance to internally displaced persons (IDPs) within Syria, and Syrian refugees in neighbouring countries, is planning largely through the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).

            Close to 1 million Syrians have requested asylum in various countries, especially Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey, and the European Union (EU).[1][10] In 2016, pledges have been made to the UNHCR, by various nations, to permanently resettle 170,000 registered refugees.[32]

            I’d say we can take in a small percentage of those.

        2. Frankly

          Too many of them are culturally incompatible with western cultures.  We see the results in Europe.   It is better that they are housed in Muslim countries that support Muslim culture and norms.

          1. Don Shor

            The Hmong, Cubans, Vietnamese and others managed. We can take in Syrian refugees. And there is a wide range within what you call “Muslim culture and norms.”

        3. tribeUSA

          Don–note I used the important qualifier ‘non-vettable (i.e. inadequate ID verification info. and other paperwork trail) ‘. My guess is that the majority of americans (not only myself) would oppose accepting such refugees; due to reasonable security concerns. For ones that are vettable; and are informed that in USA Civil Law will be enforced and will ‘trump'(!)  sharia law when the two conflict (and that they will be required to state oral and written pledges to that effect before being conferred citizenship), then I agree that the USA can accept a limited number of such compatable refugees.

        4. wdf1

          Frankly:  Too many of them are culturally incompatible with western cultures.  We see the results in Europe.   It is better that they are housed in Muslim countries that support Muslim culture and norms.

          A century or more ago it was thought that Irish and Italians were culturally incompatible with American norms and values.  We managed, and today it doesn’t seem to be an issue.  We have 3%-9% atheists in the U.S. and growing (more in Europe), depending on how you ask the question, and it doesn’t seem to be a big enough problem to talk about.

        5. hpierce

          Hope your ancestors were not refugees, economic or otherwise, as then you might well be a hypocrite… half my heritage comes from refugees from the potato famine in the 1800’s…

        6. hpierce

          Unless all your lineage is “Native American” (and all evidence says they are ‘newcomers’), your post is strange, to say the least… my family are “newbies”… ancestors came here between 1740 to 1880’s… what is your “litmus test”?

  14. tribeUSA

    Scott Adams wrote an interesting article on the continuing anti-Trump phenomena:

    “Earlier this week CNN.com listed 24 different theories that pundits have provided for why Trump won. And the list isn’t even complete. I’ve heard other explanations as well. What does it tell you when there are 24 different explanations for a thing?

    It tells you that someone just dropped a cognitive dissonance cluster bomb on the public. Heads exploded. Cognitive dissonance set in. Weird theories came out. This is the cleanest and clearest example of cognitive dissonance you will ever see. Remember it.

    This phenomenon is why a year ago I told you I was putting so much emphasis on PREDICTING the outcome of the election using the Master Persuader Filter. I told you it would be easy to fit any theory to the facts AFTER the result. And sure enough, we can fit lots of theories to the facts. At least 24 of them by CNN’s count.

    Generally speaking, the greater the persuasion, the more cognitive dissonance you get. Trump is – in my opinion – the greatest persuader of my lifetime. I expected this level of cognitive dissonance. Next time you see a persuader of this magnitude, you can expect the outcome to be cognitive dissonance in that case too.

    This brings me to the anti-Trump protests. The protesters look as though they are protesting Trump, but they are not. They are locked in an imaginary world and battling their own hallucinations of the future. Here’s the setup that triggered them.

    1. They believe they are smart and well-informed.

    2. Their good judgement told them Trump is OBVIOUSLY the next Hitler, or something similarly bad.

    3. Half of the voters of the United States – including a lot of smart people – voted Trump into office anyway.

    Those “facts” can’t be reconciled in the minds of the anti-Trumpers. Mentally, something has to give. That’s where cognitive dissonance comes in.

    There are two ways for an anti-Trumper to interpret that reality. One option is to accept that if half the public doesn’t see Trump as a dangerous monster, perhaps he isn’t. But that would conflict with a person’s self-image as being smart and well-informed in the first place. When you violate a person’s self-image, it triggers cognitive dissonance to explain-away the discrepancy.

    So how do you explain-away Trump’s election if you think you are smart and you think you are well-informed and you think Trump is OBVIOUSLY a monster?

    You solve for that incongruity by hallucinating – literally – that Trump supporters KNOW Trump is a monster and they PREFER the monster. In this hallucination, the KKK is not a nutty fringe group but rather a symbol of how all Trump supporters must feel. (They don’t. Not even close.)

    In a rational world it would be obvious that Trump supporters include lots of brilliant and well-informed people. That fact – as obvious as it would seem – is invisible to the folks who can’t even imagine a world in which their powers of perception could be so wrong. To reconcile their world, they have to imagine all Trump supporters as defective in some moral or cognitive way, or both.

    As I often tell you, we all live in our own movies inside our heads. Humans did not evolve with the capability to understand their reality because it was not important to survival. Any illusion that keeps us alive long enough to procreate is good enough.

    That’s why the protestors live in a movie in which they are fighting against a monster called Trump and you live in a movie where you got the president you wanted for the changes you prefer. Same planet, different realities.”

    Source: http://blog.dilbert.com/post/153080448451/the-cognitive-dissonance-cluster-bomb

     

    1. hpierce

      #3 point is flat out wrong.

      #2 point I categorically reject… Trump is no Hitler, nor Mussolini [although he employed their rhetorical tactics]… he is also no evangelical Christian, nor Republican (historically), nor “conservative”… yet he portrayed himself as such… he is an entrepreneur …  and a ‘media’ guy  [while saying the media is biased]… he is also the president-elect… he needs to put up or stand down… even conservative Republicans  have serious doubts… he and the conservatives have the field… Congress, President, and apparently the Supreme Court within a few months… he has yet to divest…

      #1… yeah, I egotistically assert I am intelligent and informed…

      Those who voted for the president-elect need to take responsibility for what happens… I did not vote for Clinton, but I voted…

  15. Tia Will

    South of Davis

     With the DNC run by bleeding heart far left liberals “who want to help everyone” and limousine liberals “who want $10/hr gardeners and housekeepers””

    This is interesting because you seem to believe that the desire for cheap labor is exclusive to those on the left. And yet, I was recently struck by an interview on NPR with a Trump supporter who had just had remodeling work done on her home and was decrying the fact that she felt that most of the crew was probably” illegal “because they spoke Spanish. However, she did not ask the contractor, and she did not choose to use a different contractor who could prove that he had no undocumented workers on his crew.

    This reminds me of the example set by our president elect who says that he will bring back manufacturing jobs that have gone overseas, much like his companies that manufacture men’s apparel. It would seem that his claim is that he was somehow forced to locate his companies overseas. His claim that our jobs were being “stolen” by other countries completely ignores the fact that our businessmen and women themselves chose to locate abroad since it benefitted them financially.

    1. quielo

      “chose to locate abroad since it benefited them financially.” Exactly. So if you reduce the financial benefit some of the jobs will come back. 

      I see the underlying problem being consumer culture. As long as we build our culture on buying lots of cheap crap that we don’t need this will continue to be a problem.

       

    2. South of Davis

      Tia wrote:

      > This is interesting because you seem to believe that the

      > desire for cheap labor is exclusive to those on the left.

      As I have written many times the reason we have so many illegal aliens in the US is that large numbers of the left AND right want lots of them here for the cheap labor.

      My quote above was talking about the DNC and Hillary campaign team (that probably does not have many far right libertarians or Republican farmers and slaughterhouse owners)…

      1. hpierce

        Actually, Libertarians, as I understand them, are not “far Right”… the “far Right” insist that everyone is compelled to conform to their views… much like the “far Left”… as I understand it, Libertarians are not into “dogma”, nor compelling others in any way…

        Nice ‘move’ to link Libertarians, farmers, and slaughterhouses, ‘tho…]

        1. South of Davis

          hpierce wrote:

          > Actually, Libertarians, as I understand them, are not “far Right”

          Most (but not all) Libertarians have BOTH “far right” and “far left” views.

          It is rare to find a Libertarian that does not have the “left wing” view that the government should not tell people what drugs they can buy AND the “right wing” view that the government should not tell people what kind of guns (or ammo) they can buy.

          P.S. It is interesting that the link below has Libertarians in BOTH the left and right:

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_politics

    3. South of Davis

      Tia wrote:

      > much like his much like his companies that manufacture men’s apparel

      Trump has never owned a company “that manufactures men’s apparel”.  He had some ties and other items made with his name on them but saying that he “owns a company that manufactures men’s apparel” would be like saying that Robb Davis and Will Arnold “own a companies that manufacture campaign signs” just because a sign with their name on it was made…

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$ USD
Sign up for